Debbie Wasserman Schultz

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Chairman, at this time, I yield such time as she may consume to the distinguished gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey), the ranking member of the full Appropriations Committee as well as the ranking member of the State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Subcommittee.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I want to begin by congratulating Chairman Graves on his maiden voyage as a chair of an appropriations subcommittee. I know that he was diligent and focused, and we found agreement where we could, and where we could not agree, I appreciate his willingness to discuss it in a congenial and thoughtful manner. Today, we consider the smallest of the appropriations bills; and, while that is the case, it is one that does fund an entire branch of our government. The bill provides, as the chairman mentioned, $3.3 billion to the legislative branch, without Senate items, and is equal to the amount provided in fiscal year 2015. Unfortunately, this represents the third year in a row of flat funding for the overall legislative branch. Certain agencies--the Architect of the Capitol and the Government Publishing Office--are cut below fiscal year 2015 to support increases in other agencies. I know if there was overall relief in the budget allocation, we would see more investment in the staff and facilities in the legislative branch, but we are starting to cut into bone in some places, and it is truly unwise. It is regrettable that this bill is, as are all of the other appropriations bills, bound by spending limits set by the Republican budget resolution that continues sequestration. The President put forward a plan that will avoid sequestration's harmful budget cuts and reduce the deficit in a balanced way. Unfortunately, the Republican budget does not at least meet the President's plan halfway. As we look to conference with the Senate later in the year on appropriations bills, I am hopeful that both parties and the President can come together for another reasonable bargain that gives us more room for discretionary programs. This bill is being considered under a structured rule, as is tradition. Twenty amendments were filed, seven of which were filed by Democratic Members. Regrettably, the Rules Committee only made three Republican amendments in order, all of which would further erode the Legislative Branch bill's funding. No Democratic amendments were made in order, even though several were aimed at improving the lives of our restaurant workers whose plight was played out in very public display in the last several weeks. Last night, in the Rules Committee, I asked the committee to attempt to find some parity, Mr. Chairman, between the majority and minority with regard to amendments made in order; instead of parity, the minority was completely shut out of the process. As a result of the allocation, several infrastructure projects with life and safety elements are not funded in this bill, even though we have been committed to funding those in past years. Cutting necessary upgrades to our elevators will not get us out of debt; what it will do is get people stuck in our elevators. We should not be surprised if an accident happens because we didn't address important life-safety projects. This bill, as I have said many times before, is not the sexiest of the 13 appropriations bills, but it is one that is incredibly important, and it is important that we keep the people who visit the Capitol and work in the Capitol safe, and this bill makes it less likely that we will be able to do that. There are not many new initiatives in the bill, given the allocation, but I am pleased that the bill recognized the importance of the Nation's copyright laws by providing some of the requested increase. The Copyright Office must improve the backlog of registrations, as well as their business processes. Currently, customers can only submit documents on paper, which the Copyright Office turns into a digital format, which is a glaring inefficiency. It is 2015, the 21st century. Our Copyright Office should not be conducting 21st century business in a 20th century format. The Copyright Office said it best itself in a report released in February of this year: There is a widespread perception that our licensing system is broken. Songwriters and recording artists are concerned that they cannot make a living under the existing structure, which raises serious and systemic concerns for the future. Music publishers and performance rights organizations are frustrated that so much of their licensing activity is subject to government control, so they are constrained in the marketplace. Record labels and digital services complain that the licensing process is burdensome and inefficient, making it difficult to innovate. I am glad to see that this bill is beginning to address necessary upgrades. Mr. Chairman, I am also concerned with the cut to the Government Publishing Office in the underlying bill. This office was formerly known as the Government Printing Office. Congress changed the name in December to reflect what the agency actually does in this digital world. The office publishes information online and plays a vital role in Congress' transparency. Unfortunately, GPO's request to continue to improve its online site, as it has been allowed to do each year before this one, even under full sequestration, was denied in the bill. The cut to GPO's online site continues to raise the concern from some that GPO could ultimately decide to charge the public for access to legislative documents, as was recommended to them by the National Academy of Public Administration in 2013. I agree with Representatives Candice Miller and Bob Brady, the chair and ranking member of House Administration, who wrote to GPO, stating: ``Charging the public to access legislative data and documents would be a colossal setback to the progress Congress has made to improve transparency and access to legislative information.'' They also said charging the public ``would be a direct assault on our ability to engage Americans in a process that is of great consequence to their livelihoods.'' GPO indicated at the time of the Miller-Brady letter that it had no plans to charge users for what should be public information; but what choice are we leaving them if we don't continue investing in their online systems? Also included in the bill is a requirement that the Architect seek approval, as the chairman described, from the House Committee on Appropriations and the Government Accountability Office for any project or phase of a project over $5 million. I support strong oversight, as I have demonstrated many times over the last 8 years, but I do question whether or not the low threshold would unnecessarily hold up the progress of essential projects. We should require the assistance of GAO to review projects on the scale of the Cannon building restoration. I have asked GAO to come in and get involved very specifically in a number of things where accountability was a concern, but I question the use of GAO's resources on projects as small as $5 million. That begins to micromanage beyond what is reasonable. To end on a more positive note, I am pleased that we were able to provide $10 million to add to the House historic buildings revitalization trust fund. We have been banking funds for our large projects over the last several years, which is imperative to help ensure we avoid getting caught flatfooted if we experience unexpected costs in the future. As I conclude, I want to, again, thank Chairman Graves for an open dialogue as he crafted this bill. I did have a lot of opportunity to talk with him about the details of this bill and offer suggestions, many of which he took. Again, I look forward to continuing to work with the chairman as the bill moves to the Senate and then on to conference. I particularly want to thank our incredible staff, one of whom is sitting next to me, Shalanda Young, and the rest of our staff, Liz Dawson, Chuck Turner, on the majority side; and Jenny Panone, as well as Jason Murphy, with Chairman Graves' personal office; and Rosalyn Kumar, on my personal staff. Thank you so much. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Chairman, at this time, I yield 5 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Farr).

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Chairman, let me just point out that the chairman is right: we do have to lead by example. Leading by example, as we have in the past, like last fiscal year-- after the President submitted his budget, we certainly could have and should have, as a Congress, sat down with the President and negotiated an adjustment to the sequester, which we were able to successfully do last year, and that was to the betterment of making sure that people who are simply trying to succeed have the opportunity to do so in this country instead of living under the severe cuts and caps that sequestration forced us into. That is Congress' job, which we abdicated. That was not the choice of the minority; it was the choice of the majority. With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Price), the ranking member of the Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations Subcommittee.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. While I intend to claim time in opposition to the amendment that addresses Open World a little bit later, which I know will come as a surprise to the chairman, I do want to point out now that what the chairman says is not quite accurate, which is why I am going to oppose the amendment. Because were we--and there were a number of options available to the Rules Committee--taking the $5 million that is going to Open World in the Legislative Branch bill now and putting it in to some other place in the Legislative Branch bill, life safety programs, restoring the cuts to GPO, or doing something that is going to make sure that the legislative branch can be competitive and has the ability to get our work done, then that would have been fine, because I agree that Open World is actually a square peg in a round hole and shouldn't be funded out of this bill, and I have made that case for many years. Instead, what the majority did is they took an amendment that takes that $5 million and puts it into the spending reduction account. We are already $106 million below 2010 levels in our MRA, in our office accounts. This bill is flat-funded for 3 years in a row. We are doing ourselves a disservice and making it difficult for us to do our jobs when we had a ripe opportunity to take that $5 million--which I would have been for--and put it somewhere in the Legislative Branch bill instead of sending it out of here. That is not responsible. Additionally, I will point out that perhaps the chairman's comments about sequestration demonstrate that he thinks that Congress' hands are tied and that we don't have the ability to actually make changes. The President has proposed what he believes we should do as an alternative to the sequester. That was his proposed budget. Like last year, we also have the ability to set aside and work with the administration--set aside at least part of the sequester--so we could provide improved allocations for each of these appropriations bills and make sure that we can make life better for more Americans. Unfortunately, the majority continues to act as if somehow we are frozen in time and that we are paralyzed by sequestration as the law. The last time I checked, the Founding Fathers in the Constitution gave Congress the ability to change the law, which we should do. Mr. Chairman, I will look forward to discussing some of the amendments that we will be debating in a few moments. Again, I want to thank the chairman for, really, the opportunity to spend some time focusing on the needs of the legislative branch and giving us the ability to at least move forward in some ways towards addressing our role as a coequal branch of government. I think this bill could have been far better. It has made several positive changes, but as I have outlined, we have places where we disagree, but we did it without being disagreeable. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to House Joint Resolution 43 to overturn the D.C. Reproductive Health Non-Discrimination Amendment Act. To be clear, this Resolution is not about protecting freedom of religion and beliefs. No, House Joint Resolution 43 is about allowing discrimination. Despite misleading rhetoric, this Resolution would allow an employer to discriminate against an employee based on the employee's personal health care decisions--decisions which have nothing to do with the employer. Everyone should have the ability to make private health decisions including whether, when, and how to start a family, without fear of losing their jobs or facing retribution from employers. The D.C. Council understands this and, by passing the Reproductive Health Non-Discrimination Amendment Act, seeks to ensure fair and necessary employment protections for the people of the District of Columbia. The Council deserves our respect when protecting the rights of their constituents . . . the people who elected them. The oversight of this body should not extend to overturning legislation passed by democratically-elected representatives of the people of D.C. The freedom of religion is a fundamental freedom established by our founding fathers that we should fiercely protect, but to suggest that it extends to employers imposing their beliefs on the people that work for them, as this Resolution does, is just plain WRONG, particularly when it comes to something as personal as reproductive health.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Speaker, I rise to commend the Senate's action yesterday on the passage of the Justice for Victims of Trafficking Act, and I urge the House leadership to bring this legislation up for final passage. The measures included in this trafficking package will provide survivors of human trafficking the desperately needed resources and services to recover and rebuild their lives and to put traffickers and buyers behind bars. I am thrilled this package of bills also includes three pieces of legislation I am proud to be leading in the House, including the HERO Act, which trains wounded military veterans to aid law enforcement in investigating child exploitation; the Rape Survivor Child Custody Act, which encourages States to allow a woman to terminate the parental rights of a rapist; and my friend Representative Renee Ellmers' bill, which I am proud to colead, to train health care providers in identifying and assisting victims of trafficking. Survivors of child exploitation, rape, and trafficking have waited long enough. They need health, housing, and legal services now. They need legal and civil protections now. I urge the House to bring the Senate's Justice for Victims of Trafficking Act up for a vote without delay.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Speaker, it is with great pride that I rise today to recognize the 100th anniversary of the city of Miami Beach in Florida's 23rd Congressional District. Incorporated on March 26, 1915, Miami Beach took its place on the map with only a handful of residents. Now home to nearly 100,000 people, the city of Miami Beach has not only grown in population, but in reputation. This vacation paradise is an internationally recognized tourist destination visited by millions each year, a hub for business, and a trendsetter in the areas of arts, culture, fine dining, and entertainment. This week, Miami Beach celebrated its centennial with 100 hours of showcasing its history and all that the city has to offer, culminating in an oceanfront concert by Miami Beach residents and cultural icons Gloria Estefan, Barry Gibb, and Andrea Bocelli. It is a great honor for me to represent the city of Miami Beach in our Nation's Capitol. I thank Mayor Philip Levine, the members of the city commission, and the city's staff for their many accomplishments that have made the city of Miami Beach a wonderful place to work, live, visit, and raise a family.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Speaker, it is with great pride that I rise today to recognize the 100th anniversary of the City of Miami Beach in Florida's 23rd Congressional District. Incorporated on March 26th, 1915, Miami Beach took its place on the map with only a handful of residents. Now home to nearly 100,000 people, the City of Miami Beach has not only grown in population but in reputation. This vacation paradise is an internationally recognized tourist destination visited by millions each year. However, for as much as Miami Beach is known for its fun and sun, it has evolved into a hub for business and is a trendsetter in the areas of arts and culture, fine dining and entertainment. More than 100 years ago, Miami Beach pioneers Carl Fisher, John Collins and the Lummus brothers had a vision to develop a small island that could stand as a city in and of itself. Combining their efforts, the Collins Bridge, the longest wooden bridge in the world at that time, was constructed to connect Miami's mainland with this new island community. And with just 33 registered voters, John Newton Lummus was elected the city's first mayor. Soon thereafter, the building boom of the 1920's helped create the now historic and famed Art Deco district, known to the world as ``South Beach.'' As a matter of fact, Miami Beach is home to numerous sites in the National Register of Historic Places, from the Venetian Causeway to the Fountainebleau Hotel to Beth Jacob Congregation which now houses the Jewish Museum of Florida. The city's various neighborhoods are as distinct as its residents, from South Beach to Mid Beach to North Beach, Miami Beach radiates a true sense of community. Miami Beach has served as a cultural playground for entertainers such as Jackie Gleason, Frank Sinatra and even The Beatles who performed on the Ed Sullivan Show live from the Deauville Hotel. This month Miami Beach will celebrate its Centennial with 100 hours of showcasing its history and all the city has to offer, including a performance by Miami Beach residents and cultural icons Gloria Estefan, Barry Gibb and Andrea Bocelli. Mr. Speaker, it is a great honor for me to represent the City of Miami Beach in our nation's capital. I thank Mayor Philip Levine, the Members of the City Commission, and the city's staff for their many accomplishments that have made the City of Miami Beach a wonderful place to live, work, visit and raise a family.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life of a leader in our South Florida community, Mr. Al Roth. It is with a heavy heart that I learned of his passing and I join other Floridians in mourning his death. Mr. Roth was a longtime Florida citrus farmer, hotelier, grocer and pioneer of both Broward County and the Town of Davie, which is located in the heart of Florida's 23rd District. His life is now part of the fabric of our South Florida history and he will be long remembered. As Al's son Bob, of Bob Roth's New River Groves, said, ``He was an icon, a machine. He just didn't give up. He was like three people. Nobody worked like him . . . He would set up a display and come back the next day and change it. He said you have to let people know things are changing.'' For as much as things changed throughout the decades, some things always remained the same, like Al's friendly smile, his kindness and his generosity. His personality was larger than life, and always reflected the wonderful man that he was. And I know firsthand that he always made his customers and my constituents feel welcomed, happy and valued. He genuinely cared for all those around him, whether family, a customer or a passerby. At 104 years young, Al was a mainstay of our South Florida landscape. Although Al is no longer with us, his legacy lives on in his family and the institutions he helped found for all who live in and visit Florida. I hope they will long serve as a tribute to him and the indelible mark he left on our community.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New Jersey and my colleague Congresswoman Ellmers from North Carolina and rise today in strong support of the Trafficking Awareness Training for Health Care Act of 2015, a bill on which I was honored to join as the Democratic lead with my colleague and good friend, the gentlewoman from North Carolina. I thank Congresswoman Ellmers for her leadership on this bill and her willingness to shine a light on the scourge of human trafficking. I was telling my staff the other day, Mr. Speaker, that it is a truly remarkable and sometimes too rare a thing in our Congress to find a Member who not only reaches across the aisle but who is also willing to work tirelessly to fight for what she believes in and has a staff willing to match that effort. It has been a pleasure working with you and your team on this legislation, as well as on my EARLY Act signed into law just a month ago, on which you served as the Republican lead on that legislation, and I look forward to what we may do together in the future. Mr. Speaker, after passing legislation that made human and sex trafficking a State crime in my home State of Florida, I knew that, while that was an important tool to combat traffickers, we were just scratching the surface. I joined Congresswoman Ellmers on this bill because, though there is still much that we need to learn about the way human trafficking works in the United States, we know enough to know that it is far too prevalent, it preys on the most vulnerable in our Nation, and addressing it requires a comprehensive approach that encompasses prevention, treatment, and going after criminals. We know that best guesses estimate there are 100,000 to 300,000 American youth currently at risk of being trafficked in the United States. We know that those most likely to be targeted are low-income women, foster youth, younger girls, and girls and women with a history of abuse and estrangement from family. And we know that once a girl is sex-trafficked, she has a life expectancy of just 7 years, during which she will be raped on average by 6,000 different buyers. If the horror of human trafficking is not a problem that deserves a comprehensive response from all legal, social service, and medical sectors, then I don't know what is. Health care providers are often the first line of defense in these situations, sometimes being the only interaction with an outsider that a victim's trafficker may allow. The Trafficking Awareness Training for Health Care Act of 2015 develops evidence-based best practices for, and training of, health care providers to be able to identify and properly respond to victims of trafficking, training that means when a girl 12 to 14 years old, the age range that is most at risk of being trafficked, when she is brought into a health care provider for a routine checkup by an older man who is not related to her, that a red flag goes off in a nurse's head or a health care provider's head. Best practices will mean when a woman comes into an ER for a broken arm but a doctor discovers bruises and scars indicating a pattern of abuse, that that doctor doesn't just simply treat her broken arm and send her home. And resource knowledge means doctors and nurses cannot only identify potential victims but can respond appropriately to ensure that victim will one day become a survivor. This bill joins several other trafficking bills being heard today on the House floor, including Representative Bass' bill to support youth most at risk for trafficking and Representative Noem's bill to encourage intra-agency and effective human trafficking intervention and prevention strategies. These two bills, as well as Representative Ellmers' and my bill, are all pieces of a larger puzzle, initiatives that, when put together, create a comprehensive and cross-sector response to human trafficking. We all stand up together today, regardless of political party, to say we do not want to raise our children in a world or a nation where a person can be sold as if she is property to be used by anyone to whom the trafficker offers her. I am proud to join my colleagues and Congresswoman Ellmers in the battle to eliminate human trafficking, for my daughters, who are 11 and 15, for my constituents in south Florida, and for the betterment of our world. I might add, as a member of the House Committee on Appropriations, I can assure the gentleman that while I share and understand his concerns on the process, as far as the appropriations, we are going to pursue unobligated funds so that we can make sure that there are the resources available to make sure that this program is funded.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act, a bill falsely advertised as pro-family and supporting American values. If they actually care about defending the values of our Nation and of the well-being of American families, I ask my colleagues across the aisle to offer legislation that reflects the priorities of American families instead of debating a bill that the Republican leadership just threw on the calendar at the last minute because their original abortion bill was too extreme, even for them. Today, we should be discussing ways to ensure every woman can put food on the table by raising the minimum wage, like 29 States have done, and by passing equal pay for women. We should be discussing how to ensure that every person who dreams of a higher education has access to it by working with President Obama on his community college proposal. We should be discussing legislation to allow 43 million workers to take time off when they are sick and to make sure parents can take time off with their new babies. These are the family-centered priorities that reflect our values as a nation, and these are, certainly, the challenges that my constituents in south Florida sent me here to tackle. Instead, we are debating a bill with an underlying principle that has already been codified. Our colleagues on the other side of the aisle know that a regressive policy of banning taxpayer funding for abortion, which only serves to punish our Nation's poor and most vulnerable women, already exists. As the President said Tuesday night, while we may not agree on choice, we can at least agree that the best people to make these decisions for women are not politicians. Building on the zeal to interfere in the health decisions of women, this bill goes even further by tying a woman's health options to her income. A strong majority of Americans agree, including 62 percent who identify as Republicans, that abortion is the wrong issue for Congress to be spending its time on. I agree with them. When my colleagues are prepared to work on legislation that truly addresses the concerns of the American people, we stand ready to work with them. Listen to your Members who sounded the alarm bell on the original bill that was pulled off this floor, and get your priorities straight.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Madam Chair, I rise in strong opposition to the FY 2015 Homeland Security Appropriations Act because House Republicans are littering the bill with provisions that have nothing to do with homeland security but have everything to do with harming families and keeping our immigration system dysfunctional, risking our national security in the process. I too serve as a ranking member on the Appropriations Committee and craft a bill and work in a bipartisan spirit, and I had an opportunity to work in a bipartisan spirit on this bill as well. So it is truly unfortunate that this bill is being poisoned by amendments that are really going to jeopardize our national security. I reluctantly stand in opposition because the overall bill is ``must- pass'' legislation, and it includes very important measures to bolster our national security, including additional funding that I fought for and secured to protect children from online predators. Many of my colleagues are in a similar situation; too many poison pills are set to be slipped in that make this legislation's passage unacceptable. House Republicans are willfully driving us toward a partial government shutdown that jeopardizes our security at home, all just for the chance to further destabilize our immigration system, make it harder to secure the border, punish young people who have known no other country other than this one, and separate families in the process. Now, how did we get here? Because the extreme elements of the GOP became apoplectic when the President announced that he would move ahead with his legal executive actions to fix our broken immigration system. And everyone will recall, of course, that he did so due to this body's repeated unwillingness to pass comprehensive immigration reform legislation. Now, as we debated the so-called CR/Omnibus legislation last year, House Republicans put their cards on the table with temporary DHS funding. And with this bill being debated today, they are ready to gamble on our Nation's security and America's safety to satisfy their rightwing base. This is not governing in good faith at the outset of a new Congress, with the opportunity we have to set aside differences and work together for the betterment of the country. And this isn't just politics as usual from the other side of the aisle. Some of it is alarmingly personal and targeted. Part of the President's executive action is intended to keep families together and support the educational and employment aspirations of millions of undocumented individuals. Some of the amendments attached to this bill would, in fact, tear families apart, deporting thousands of so-called DREAMers and even revictimizing women already subjected to domestic violence by targeting them for removal. The point of these games is to satisfy the anti-immigrant, extremist elements within the Republican party. But to what end? Where is the sense of reality? Though he has flip-flopped several times on the issue, even former Governor Jeb Bush, from my home State of Florida, has said as far back as 10 years ago that a policy that ignores that they are here is a policy of denial. So where is the thoughtful policymaking our constituents sent us to Washington to engage in? And quite frankly, where is the compassion? I have held numerous meetings and events in south Florida recently, and to say that we are past due for comprehensive immigration reform is a gross understatement. I have met so many workers and students who have made meaningful contributions to our community but who live in a constant state of uncertainty about their future, ranging from questions about their schooling and jobs to fearing deportation and separation from their loved ones. Leoni, a high school valedictorian; Maria, a mother of DREAMers who has formed a support group for people in similar situations; and Cosmin, a father only seeking a permanent work permit to be able to better provide for his young daughter who is a citizen--these are real people with real stories, and our actions and inactions in Washington have real consequences for them. Madam Chair, it is not too late to engage in bipartisan and comprehensive immigration reform. We can reintroduce and debate the legislation that was passed by a strong bipartisan majority in the Senate in 2013 and supported by diverse business, faith, legal, and community groups across the Nation. That is the most effective way to legally and morally respond to the needs of immigration reform. It is practical. It is wide-ranging, and it speaks to our values as a Nation. Or we could even sit down together and come up with a new comprehensive bill. But this is immoral and wrong, and we should reject it so that we can come together and do something that is reflective of the values of this country.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Speaker, I rise to lead my colleagues on both sides of the aisle in a moment of silence to honor the victims of the Tucson, Arizona, mass shooting that took place 4 years ago today. On that bright winter day, a gunman struck directly at a cornerstone of American democracy by murdering six innocent people and wounding 13 others during a Congress on Your Corner event. Among the injured were our dear colleague and friend, Congresswoman Gabby Giffords, and her aide and future colleague, Ron Barber. In spite of her near-fatal wounds and with the memory of her constituents and staff whom she lost that day guiding her, Gabby has moved this Congress, this Nation, and arguably the world with her remarkable recovery, her poignance, and her passion. She has also channeled her poise, her strength, and her determination into an effort with her husband, Mark, by her side to ensure that similar episodes of violence do not befall other mothers, fathers, husbands, sisters, daughters, sons, friends, and neighbors. How very extraordinary, how very bold, and how very Gabby. It is not easy work, and we all have our differences. Mr. Speaker, I know I am joined by so many of you in asking, hoping, and praying in Gabby's name that we can set aside some of our deeply-held differences and find a way to work together on this very challenging and difficult subject of gun violence and keeping people safe and make a commitment this Congress to find common ground finally. In doing so, we will be more pragmatic, more thoughtful, and more engaged citizens in this great and enduring experiment that we call American democracy. It would be a fitting tribute to those individuals whose lives were lost and irreparably altered that Saturday in Tucson. In that spirit, in the spirit of working together, in the spirit of reaffirming our commitment to American representative democracy, and defying against violence against this great institution, I ask you to please rise and join me for a moment of silence to honor the lives of Gabe Zimmerman, Dorwan Stoddard, Phyllis Schneck, Judge John Roll, Dot Morris, and Christina-Taylor Green.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize the outstanding accomplishments and extraordinary career of Steve Sauls, the outgoing Vice President for Government Relations at Florida International University. There are many of us who just a few decades ago remember a much more nascent FIU. Today, serving over 50,000 students and helping to anchor a thriving South Florida, Florida International University has rapidly grown into the first-class research university and flagship public institution that this community has always deserved. I am proud of today's FIU, and in short, much credit is deserved by Steve Sauls for helping make that a reality. Our paths first crossed as young staffers in Tallahassee, where I encountered a thoughtful, personable, and whip-smart colleague. From there, Steve's drive and commitment to service propelled him onto a distinguished career. Fortunately, he took FIU on that rise with him. From the establishment of its medical and law schools, to building its federal research portfolio, to its mission of training the next generation of high-skilled STEM graduates, to its acquisition of the Wolfsonian Museum, Steve has had a hand in nearly every major expansion and success of the university. On behalf of each of my constituents who have ever stepped into an FIU classroom, whose lives have been touched by one of their research innovations, or who have ever worn the blue and gold, I thank Mr. Sauls for his leadership and decades of public service. As this chapter of his career draws to a close, I hope he enjoys a joyous and restful break in the company of good friends and family, and wish him the best of luck in all his future endeavors.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Speaker, I, too, want to thank my colleague and the gentlewoman from south Florida, who has really been a passionate advocate and whom I have stood in solidarity with on this and so many other issues. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Venezuela Defense of Human Rights and Civil Society Act of 2014. I do so as the proud representative of Westonzuela, my hometown, and one in which we have an incredibly rich and vibrant community of Venezuelans and Venezuelan Americans. As the representative of one of the largest communities of Venezuelans and Venezuelan Americans in the United States, I am here to strongly speak out against the continued, unconscionable abuses of the Maduro government against innocent citizens. Earlier this year, facing a repressive government and crushing economic conditions, thousands of Venezuelans peacefully protested to demand their basic human rights and dignity. In response, President Maduro and his security forces brutally suppressed their own citizens in the streets and used the judiciary to squash voices championing freedom of expression and democracy. Although President Maduro has tried to further silence these voices by limiting media coverage of the ongoing oppression and repression and terrible economic conditions of his country, we can still hear the demands for justice and for dignity. This bill would impose sanctions on those individuals in Maduro's regime who have ordered the arrest or prosecution of anyone exercising their right to peacefully assemble or protest, or those who supported those actions. Through our action here today, we signify the determination of the American people to stand for freedom and democracy, and this bill reinforces the sentiments and actions of the U.S. Congress and the Obama administration. Along with my colleagues, I stand in solidarity with those brave Venezuelans continuing to advocate for their rights, including opposition leader Leopoldo Lopez, who outrageously remains in prison. I look forward to this measure's passage and to President Obama's signature, and working with the Obama administration and our allies to hold these perpetrators of the injustice accountable for their crimes.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 5185, the reauthorization of the Breast Health Education and Awareness Requires Learning Young Act, or the EARLY Act. The EARLY Act, which I first introduced in 2009 with my good friend and former colleague Sue Myrick of North Carolina, was cosponsored by a humbling 378 Members of the House and became law in 2010. This law, which has been capably implemented by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, must now be reauthorized so we can ensure the good work being done by the CDC can continue. I am very thankful to my good friend, Congresswoman Renee Ellmers, for leading the reauthorization effort with me this year. I also deeply appreciate the support and assistance of Chairman Fred Upton and Ranking Member Frank Pallone in helping bring this reauthorization bill to the floor today. It would not have happened without their willingness and their support. Lastly, but certainly not least, thank you to Senators Amy Klobuchar and David Vitter for sponsoring the Senate version of this important reauthorization bill. The EARLY Act focuses, Mr. Speaker, on a central tenet, that we must empower young women to understand their bodies and speak up for their health. Too many women and their health practitioners think that breast cancer is not something that happens to younger women, but the hard truth is that more than 26,000 women under age 45 are diagnosed with this deadly disease each year, and too often, their breast cancer is a more aggressive form and is caught later than it should be. The EARLY Act created a crucial education and outreach campaign administered by the CDC and highlights the breast cancer risks facing young women while empowering them with the tools they need to fight this deadly disease. It is also designed to help education and sensitize healthcare providers about the specific threats and warning signs of breast cancer in younger women that lead to early detection, diagnosis, and survival. The EARLY Act also created the Advisory Committee on Breast Cancer in Young Women within the CDC, made up of breast cancer medical professionals and advocates from around the Nation. The advisory committee is hard at work developing evidence-based messages for groups at high risk, from genetic testing to fertility preservation and the basics of insurance coverage. The CDC is rolling out a number of targeted media outreach strategies to reach specific groups of young women who are more at risk for developing breast cancer. Understanding these risks is critical, Mr. Speaker, because the statistics are sobering. One in eight women we know will get breast cancer in her lifetime. Breast cancer strikes women from all backgrounds, races, and ethnicities. It strikes the rich and the poor, those with access to quality health care and those with little or no health care. I was a young woman at high risk, but I didn't know it. Just months after a clean mammogram in late 2007--I know my colleagues here have heard me tell my story--I heard those terrible words, ``You have breast cancer.'' Thinking of my children and their future, I underwent seven surgeries, including a double mastectomy, and for as much as I thought I knew as an advocate in the fight against breast cancer throughout my legislative career, there was so much I didn't know. I did not know that as an Ashkenazi Jew, I was five times more likely to have a genetic mutation that drastically increased the likelihood of getting breast or ovarian cancer. I did not know that I am in fact a carrier of the BRCA gene, which gave me up to an 85 percent lifetime chance of getting breast cancer and up to a 60 percent chance of getting ovarian cancer. I was fortunate that I had the resources I needed to learn about my risks and got the help I needed, but I didn't find my tumor through luck, Mr. Speaker. I found it through knowledge and awareness, which is what the EARLY Act has been able to give so many young women. After I was diagnosed with breast cancer and experienced the importance of early detection firsthand, I knew that I had to introduce legislation to help other young women facing this terrible disease. In the first few years of this law, the CDC has already accomplished incredible work: identifying where the gaps exist in education and awareness among young women and healthcare providers about breast health; supporting young survivors through grants to organizations focused on helping these survivors cope with the many unique challenges that they face as young survivors, including fertility preservation and long-term survivorship challenges; and in implementing a targeted media campaign, including innovative social media efforts to reach women at the highest risk. The EARLY Act has also supported specific statewide initiatives. In Georgia, the State established a statewide breast cancer genetics services network for referrals of women at high risk and to help collect baseline and post-implementation data. In 2012, Michigan distributed over 14,000 Michigan Department of Community Health cancer family history guides to assist providers in identifying high-risk patients for referral to genetic specialists. In addition to the 30 bipartisan cosponsors here in the House, the reauthorization of the EARLY Act has the support of the Susan G. Komen foundation, the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, Livestrong Foundation, Young Survival Coalition, Living Beyond Breast Cancer, Cancer Support Community, FORCE, the Black Women's Health Imperative, and the Tigerlily Foundation. I know these groups have a deep understanding of both the amazing work we have accomplished so far but also the challenges that lie ahead. We must continue these important efforts and empower more women with the knowledge and tools they need to fight this disease, not just to survive, but to thrive. Together, we can save more of our moms, sisters, grandmothers, daughters, and sister friends. Please help us keep up the momentum and stand with Congresswoman Ellmers and myself and countless young women in support of reauthorization of the EARLY Act. Mr. Speaker, if I might add, on Sunday, I marked a celebration of 7 years as a survivor of breast cancer, so this is particularly poignant and significant, and I am so appreciative of the leadership of the House on both sides of the aisle for giving this bill the full attention that it needs and deserves.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life of Michele Marlene Venable and extend my condolences to her family. Michele, a resident of Florida's 23rd Congressional District and a long-time constituent of mine from the city of Hollywood, tragically passed away on November 8th after a battle with stomach cancer. All of us that knew Michele could tell you that she represented the very best in our community. She was dedicated to selflessly helping others, putting her community first, and empowering the most vulnerable. She was a beacon of light for so many. She will be tremendously missed, but never forgotten by our South Florida community. I will remember Michele most for her work as Director of Social Services at the Jubilee Center of Broward County. In this position, Ms. Venable coordinated delivering food, clothing, and vital personal items to Broward County's homeless and needy. She also worked to connect countless numbers of South Floridians with legal aid, veteran's services, Medicaid assistance, and emergency shelters. She has capably led the Jubilee Center over the past decade and raised it to new heights. It is worth noting that Volunteer Broward recently honored the Center as the ``Agency of the Year'' for all volunteer groups serving Broward County. This is a tribute to Michele's tireless and fierce leadership. She always demanded the best from herself and those around her in the service of others. Poverty and despair can be powerful forces in society, but they certainly met their match when confronted by Michele's force of will to bring hope to others. It is also not surprising that before her tireless efforts at the Jubilee Center, she served our community through her ministry work as a pastor. Anyone who has ever worked with her will tell you that Michele was driven by an astounding love for people. I and many of my Congressional District Office staff as well as my children, have had the honor of joining Michele every year to help the Jubilee Center serve Thanksgiving dinner to the less fortunate in our community--a job Michele did with grace and pride. This year on Thanksgiving we will again gather to help our community--Michele Venable's community. I am sure that we will all be missing Michele's warm smile and bright disposition. But we honor her memory if we carry on her amazing commitment to helping those less fortunate in our community. In this way her spirit of compassionate altruism lives on and inspires others to walk in her footsteps. In this time of Thanksgiving, I give thanks for Michele Venable and a life well lived in service to our South Florida community.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to urge my colleagues to support H.R. 744, the Stopping Tax Offenders and Prosecuting Identity Theft Act of 2014 or, simply, the STOP Identity Theft Act. Over the past several years, we have all witnessed the crime of tax return theft explode into a nationwide epidemic. It is time for Congress to act and let would-be thieves know that there will be serious consequences if they engage in this crime. Thank you to Congressman Lamar Smith for leading this effort with me over the past 3 years. I hope that we can finally get this legislation over the finish line so law enforcement has more tools in the fight against crime. Working with our Senate sponsors, Senator Amy Klobuchar and Senator Jeff Sessions, I know that we can get this done. Thank you to Chairman Goodlatte and to his intrepid staffer Caroline Lynch for your support and your leadership to help bring this bill to the floor today. We have all heard stories of tax refund thefts. An unsuspecting taxpayer goes to file their tax return only to be told by the Internal Revenue Service that someone else has already filed their return and claimed their hard-earned tax refund. Tax return identity theft wreaks emotional and financial havoc on hardworking taxpayers and costs the Federal Government billions of dollars. According to a recent Treasury Department report, the number of stolen tax return refunds skyrocketed in just the last year--going from approximately 1.1 million stolen returns in 2011 to more than 1.8 million in 2012--a 69 percent increase. And the cost to the U.S. Treasury and the American taxpayers is staggering--nearly $9 billion in just the last 2 years and $21 billion in the last 5 years, Mr. Speaker. We cannot allow billions of taxpayer dollars to be stolen from hardworking Americans and from our Treasury. This will only get worse unless we act. We also must protect the thousands of taxpayers that fall victim to this crime, many of whom are vulnerable groups like seniors, veterans, and minors. Seniors in my south Florida community have been particularly hard-hit by this crime, and I simply couldn't stand by and let it continue. Even though victims of tax return theft eventually are reimbursed by the U.S. Treasury, it can take many months and a lot of frustration to set things straight. Many of these victims rely on a timely tax return just to pay the bills. These tax return identity thieves hide behind a veil of technology by stealing Social Security numbers and filing false electronic returns where the payoffs are almost instantaneous. Right now, more thieves and criminal organizations are turning to this lucrative crime because law enforcement lacks the kind of stiff criminal penalties afforded many other forms of identity theft. In this instance, technology has simply outstripped the enforcement tools currently on the books. The STOP Identity Theft Act brings together several measures to strengthen criminal penalties and increase the prosecution rate of tax return identity thieves. First, this bill amends the identity theft statute to increase the maximum penalties for the crime of tax return identity theft. Right now, this crime is seen as low risk and high reward for would-be thieves. Toughening sentencing for tax return identity thieves will help deter this kind of crime. The legislation also expands the definition of ``identity theft victim'' to include businesses and charitable organizations. Often, these organizations have their identities stolen and they are used in ``phishing'' schemes to extract the sensitive information from unsuspecting taxpayers used in tax return thefts. These thieves then use the harvested information to file thousands of fraudulent tax returns. This amendment to the identity theft statutes will ensure that thieves who misappropriate the identities of any business, be it a small business or a nonprofit organization, can be prosecuted. The STOP Identity Theft Act also calls for better coordination between the Department of Justice and State and local law enforcement to make the most efficient use of the law and resources. My own local law enforcement agencies in south Florida have been inundated with crime reports of tax return identity theft, and they need all the help we can provide. This legislation is not the end-all, be-all to the congressional efforts to combat tax return identity theft, but it is a strong, bipartisan beginning. It is intended to provide targeted tools to law enforcement right away so that they are better prepared before next tax season rolls around. Finally, the legislation also calls for DOJ to report back on trends in tax return identity theft, on progress in prosecuting these crimes, and recommendations for additional legal tools to combat it. Information and data on trends about tax return identity theft can be valuable tools to detect and prevent future fraud, and it will inform Congress of additional legislative actions that will help in the effort. I also send a big thank you to the various organizations that have supported and helped craft this legislation, including the National Conference of CPA Practitioners, the Committee for Efficient Government, the American Coalition for Taxpayer Rights, the Council for Citizens Against Government Waste, and the National Association of Counties. Together, we all must ensure that Federal laws keep pace with emerging crimes such as tax return identity theft. It is time to make the prosecution of this crime a greater priority. The STOP Identity Theft Act is an important step towards this goal, and I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Speaker, I rise this evening in strong opposition to this resolution that would propose to have the House sue the President of the United States. With only a few hours left before Congress adjourns for the August district work period, we have a full plate of responsibilities left unfinished. When I go back home to my district, I highly doubt that many constituents will be running up to me to thank me for Congress passing a resolution to sue the President of the United States. I know what I will hear instead: Why hasn't the House passed comprehensive immigration reform to fix our broken immigration system? Why hasn't Congress raised the minimum wage so people who work full time don't remain in poverty? Why haven't we renewed emergency unemployment insurance for more than 3\1/2\ million Americans, including nearly 300,000 veterans? The only answer I will be able to give them is that Republican leadership in the House cares more about scoring political points against this President than they do about helping America's middle class families. This is a question of priorities. The American people sent us here to respond to the pressing needs that face our Nation. It should be a given that we would use our time to focus on the most important issues. Instead, we waste time on suing the President of the United States while failing to address commonsense measures to ensure economic security for every American. Not only does this resolution reflect a very different set of priorities from the majority of Americans, we are yet again wasting millions in taxpayer dollars, just like the $3 million wasted in defending the indefensible and unconstitutional Defense of Marriage Act and billions of dollars wasted by shutting down the government to try to take away Americans' health care benefits. It is unconscionable that when this do-nothing Republican Congress finally decided to do something, it is suing the President for doing his job when they refuse to do theirs. I wish I could say that this was politics at its worst, but I have heard too many in the Republican majority raise the specter of impeachment not to know better. Mr. Speaker, I urge opposition to this time- and taxpayer money- wasting resolution and urge Republicans in the majority to join Democrats and address the serious challenges facing our Nation.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. I thank the gentlewoman from New York, particularly for her leadership in stepping up and bringing to the floor of the United States House of Representatives the incredibly important topic of anti-Semitism, not just nationally but globally, because much of the conflict that exists worldwide today, unfortunately, stems from poisonous anti-Semitism. The gentlewoman from New York represents the district that my parents grew up in and neighborhoods and communities with a proud Jewish immigrant tradition. And she also represents the Asian American community that has come and joined that crowd and vibrant ethnic community of immigrants who have contributed so much to the United States' rich tapestry of diversity. And it is diversity that we celebrate. But, unfortunately, it is not a difference that everyone celebrates, as we have seen with the precipitous and poisonous rise in anti-Semitism. So from the bottom of my heart, as a Jew, and as the representative of a significant Jewish population, myself, thank you so much for your leadership and bringing this important issue to the floor of the House of Representatives, because it is only through shining a light on anti- Semitism that we are going to be able to help educate people and fight back. And I rise today, Mr. Speaker, to condemn the alarming increase of anti-Semitism that we have witnessed over the last few weeks. The Anti- Defamation League released a terrifying report just last month about anti-Semitism growing throughout the world. Tragically, my own constituents have personally experienced terrifying and heinous crimes against them just this past week. On Monday morning, congregants and neighbors were horrified to find that swastikas had been spray painted on the walls of Torah V'Emunah synagogue in Miami-Dade County. In Miami Beach over the weekend, a Jewish couple found their car had been egged and the words ``Hamas'' and ``Jew'' had been smeared on their cars. These deplorable acts are atrocious and despicable. For all of us who care about the rights of minority populations in this country, who celebrate the rich diversity that makes up our great Nation, we cannot and we must not be silent. It is amazing to many of us that these actions are occurring in 2014, not in 1930s Nazi Germany. But, unfortunately, we are also witnessing what Anti-Defamation League director and holocaust survivor Abe Foxman recently called the worst anti-Semitism since World War II. As the gentlewoman from New York detailed, in France, in an episode that is chillingly reminiscent of Kristallnacht, we witnessed angry rioters throw firebombs at synagogues and ransack and destroy Jewish- owned businesses. In Belgium, a cafe actually publicly displayed a sign saying dogs were allowed in the cafe, but Jews were not. Thankfully, we have seen the leaders of European countries, including Germany, France, and Italy, condemn this kind of behavior. There are countless voices across Europe speaking up in the face of this barbarism. But this anti-Semitism is real. This hatred is real, and the violence is real. Many not close to this issue may ask why. To us, it is very clear. This recent surge of anti-Semitism is born out of knee-jerk vitriolic reaction to the conflict raging in Israel and Gaza. But this conflation of anti-Semitism with the recent actions of Israel in defense of her people is completely misplaced. Israel's actions are a direct response against rocket attacks from a terrorist organization whose stated mission is Israel's destruction and that thrives on a continuing narrative of anti-Semitism and hatred. Unfortunately, we only see a few lone voices around the world protesting against a Hamas government that knowingly and willingly puts its citizens, its children, in harm's way, placing them in jeopardy and sacrificing their lives to engender sympathy for their evil cause. We hear little from much of the world against a terrorist organization that chose to invest in rockets and building tunnels for plotting murderous attacks against innocent civilians instead of investing in homes and schools and hospitals for its citizens. Instead of condemning these cowardly practices by Hamas, we have, however, seen people rage equally against Israel, Israelis, and Jews anywhere. The words and phrases that these protesters are using cannot be spoken on this House floor. They have been dug up from the worst episodes of human history. That is why I am proud to stand with my colleagues tonight, to stand with President Obama and Secretary Kerry, and send a clear message that these actions will not be tolerated. We must stand by the commitments we made as a community and as a world to never again stand silent in the face of this kind of horror, this kind of bigotry, this kind of injustice. We will not stand idly by as vitriolic speech turns into violence against innocent people. Never again.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Speaker, first, as the prime sponsor of this legislation, let me thank Chairman Kline, Ranking Member Miller, and the talented staff on the Education and the Workforce Committee for their leadership and guidance in bringing forth this bipartisan piece of legislation. This is a project that has been bipartisan from the start, and I think it is unfortunate that my colleague, although speaking in favor of the bill, has chosen to stray from the bipartisan commentary that we should be working together on this legislation. The bill before us, the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act, would reinstate the intent of Congress to ensure that workers in the recreational marine repair industry have adequate workers' compensation coverage. That is the crux of the matter that is before us. In 2009, Congress passed section 803 of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, which expanded an existing exception that allowed more recreational marine repair workers to receive workers' compensation coverage under State law, rather than under the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act. This was necessary because repair workers were simply not buying the more expensive policies and, thus, they were left undercovered. Businesses found that it was difficult for marine underwriters to determine what law their employees fell under. Therefore, section 803 expanded the exception for the recreational marine repair industry from the requirement to purchase higher cost workers' compensation insurance under the Longshore Act. And as part of this provision, a repair worker was required to be covered by the lower-cost State compensation insurance in order to take full advantage of the exception. As a result, more workers would be covered--a good thing. The Recovery Act, signed into law in 2009, provided the clarity for workers to get the coverage they needed under State workers' compensation laws. And marine insurance underwriters began to write State policies because of this clarity. Unfortunately, new regulations were issued in 2011 that adopted a definition of recreational vessel which was far more complicated and onerous than the existing law. In so doing, this new regulatory definition ran counter to what Congress intended. It contracted the exception, rather than expanding it to ensure that we could get more employees covered. It muddied the waters of when longshore coverage was required and when the new congressionally mandated exception to use State law applied. And as a consequence, these new regulations caused the underwriters to simply stop writing policies under State law, leaving many recreational workers in the same predicament that they were in before passage of section 803. The bill that we are considering today establishes a workable definition for a recreational vessel. In doing so, it restores the intent of Congress in the original 2009 enactments to get coverage for these workers under less expensive State workers' compensation insurance. Put simply, this bill is about protecting jobs and keeping workers covered. In Broward County, Florida, alone, there are over 90,000 jobs in the recreational marine industry. We are the yachting capital of the entire world in Broward capital, particularly in Fort Lauderdale. These jobs allow workers to buy homes, provide for their families, and contribute significantly to local economies. And 95 percent of these marine businesses have fewer than 10 employees, Mr. Speaker. Congress intended in 1984 and in 2009 to make sure these workers and their families were covered. And this bill keeps that promise. It does so in a bipartisan way. I urge my colleagues to support this bill. At this time, I have no further requests for time. So in closing, I will, again, simply say that I appreciate Chairman Kline and Ranking Member Miller's support and the work of all of the Members who have significant marine industries in their congressional districts. I am really pleased that we are going to be able to finally make sure that the intent of Congress is carried out and that these marine workers, who are vital and a part of the backbone of so many economies, will have the coverage that they need, rather than forgoing that coverage, and that we will be able to make sure that the employers who employ them will be able to provide less expensive coverage. It is a win-win, and I look forward to seeing it become law. With that, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize Shirley Harold for her hard work and determination in the fight to keep young kids safe around water. In March 2008, Ms. Harold experienced the pain no parent or grandparent should ever have to. Her 2-year-old grandson J'Mari drowned in a swimming pool. Since then, her goal has been to educate her community on the importance of swimming lessons, CPR and layers of protection to prevent drowning. In 2007, I ushered through Congress the Virginia Graeme Baker Pool and Spa Safety Act, the first federal pool and spa safety law on the books in our country. This law has a specific focus on public swimming pools, which is a key component in the fight against accidental drowning. But we all know that many of these tragedies are occurring in residential swimming pools as well, which VGB does not cover. Despite our best efforts to find common sense solutions to these preventable tragedies, we are collectively frustrated and disappointed that we haven't been able to get a better handle on how to resolve what we believe is a preventable crisis. We have already experienced 7 drowning deaths among children 0-4 years of age in Broward County this year. And that doesn't include the near-drowning victims. It pains me to say that Florida is leading the nation in drownings under age 14, with 32 deaths between January and May occurring statewide. At this time last year there were 14 deaths. Since J'Mari's death in 2008, Shirley has become a fierce advocate for pool safety. On Saturday, July 26, her foundation, J'Mari and Friends is holding a community forum. Parents and children will learn CPR and drowning prevention tips. I commend Shirley's commitment in her dedication to teaching young children to swim.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Speaker, as Ranking Member of the Legislative Branch Appropriations Subcommittee, it is my distinct pleasure to congratulate the diverse workforce of Congressional Research Service analysts, attorneys, information professionals and support staff on the 100th anniversary of CRS service to Congress. Since its creation in 1914, CRS has developed expertise and services to Members, committees, and congressional staff as a shared resource. From a handful of staff to today's nearly 600 employees, CRS is known for its unique role in serving Congress and bolstering our democracy. Congress expanded that role in 1946, after World War II, and in 1970 to include close support for Members of Congress and committees. In recent years, CRS evolved as a forward thinking organization and provides products and services across multiple formats to facilitate and expedite the work that we do on behalf of our constituents in Congress. We depend on CRS expertise for confidential, authoritative, objective, and nonpartisan research and analysis in assisting us in shaping legislation and addressing key regional, national and international issues that challenge us today in a complex world. I join my colleagues in recognizing CRS for its achievements on its centennial anniversary.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Speaker, I rise today on behalf of my constituent, Sergeant Andrew Tahmooressi, who is currently in jail in Mexico. I urge the government of Mexico to bring his case to trial and do all that they can to ensure he comes home safely and quickly. Mr. Tahmooressi has nobly served our country during war. He served two combat tours in Afghanistan including winning a combat field promotion to Sergeant in Helmand Province. He was honorably discharged in 2012, but remains on reserve duty until 2016. According to his family, he suffers from severe PTSD and had traveled from our hometown of Weston to California to seek treatment from a VA facility there. But he is currently in trouble and needs our assistance. Andrew was arrested on April 1st of this year in Tijuana, Mexico after crossing the border with several firearms in his automobile as well as ammunition for these weapons. He was then charged with possessing firearms and ammunition in violation of Mexican law. Andrew, according to his signed statement, was traveling to visit a friend near the Mexican border on the night of April 1 when he made a wrong turn and accidentally crossed the border into Mexico. It is also our understanding that the weapons in his possession at that time were purchased legally in the United States. After being held for two days in temporary holding, Andrew was transferred to La Mesa Penitentiary. Since his incarceration, Andrew has continued to suffer from PTSD. Yesterday I spoke to Andrew's mother Jill. As a mother, my heart goes out to her, her family and Andrew during this scary and uncertain time. As a fellow mother, her neighbor and her Representative, I committed to Jill that I will continue to do all that I can to bring Andrew home. I have raised Andrew and his situation personally with Vice President Joe Biden and with Mexican Ambassador Eduardo Medina Mora. I commend the State Department for their efforts to ensure that Andrew is being treated humanely by Mexican authorities, and for their efforts in helping secure an attorney for Andrew. My staff and I have been in regular contact with the State Department since Andrew's arrest. I call on Mexican government officials, specifically the Attorney General of Mexico to ensure that Andrew's case moves as quickly as possible. I urge my colleagues to work collaboratively to find productive ways to bring Andrew home. There is absolutely no reason this important endeavor should be a partisan exercise.