Bonnie Watson Coleman

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Madam Speaker, we are particularly grateful for both Representative Kildee and Representative Lawrence for having elevated this discussion to the point that we are giving it serious consideration. I yield to the gentlewoman from Michigan (Mrs. Lawrence), a cosponsor of this Special Order hour.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Thank you very much, Congresswoman. I now yield to the distinguished lady from New York (Ms. Slaughter).

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I had no idea that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle were such great fans of the movie ``Groundhog Day.'' If I had a little more time right now, I would give the exact same speech I gave just 1 month ago, because nothing has changed. The facts remain that Planned Parenthood is a health organization serving 3 million Americans each year; that one in five Americans will receive care from Planned Parenthood; that despite arguments to the contrary, there are simply not enough health centers to fill the gap; that defunding Planned Parenthood snatches care away from millions of families; and that today's bill says to women once again how and when they get health care is not their choice. Like then, this has no chance of becoming law; and, like then, I urge my colleagues to abandon the merry-go-round of attacks on women and families. Enough attacks on health care, enough attacks on women, and enough attacks on families.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. I thank the gentlewoman from Oregon very much for her work, for her resolution, and for her advocacy. Mr. Speaker, I now yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Fattah).

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania for his wise words and the wisdom that has come with this experience. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker, a couple of decades ago support for child care fell under conservative attack. At the time, the argument went that offering low cost or free child care to working families would create an incentive for women to leave their homes and their traditional roles as caretakers. That argument attempted to capitalize on panic about the collapse of the so-called traditional families. But to be honest, I don't think it ever had teeth in the first place. The reason most women left home to enter the workforce, the real reason that countless women work today, is to make ends meet. In an economy that is built to work for corporations and their CEOs, working families have found themselves trying to stretch every dollar. The leadership of this House seems content to keep that struggle going. It is time to take a second look at policies that will help our middle class. It is time to stand up for high-quality child care, accessible and affordable for every family, and a childcare workforce that earns the pay they deserve. Mr. Speaker, I want to make something very clear. This is neither an isolated problem, nor is it one with limited impact. This is the new normal. In addition to outrageous costs, limited access to quality child care and pre-K means stunted development for children and further division between those with means and those without. If you have got the resources, child care that costs more than the median rent isn't a big deal. If you have got the resources, child care that costs more than tuition at a public college across more than half of the country isn't a big deal. If you have got the resources, you can give your child a leg up with pre-K and child care that sets them up for academic success, higher wages, and better jobs and careers. If you don't have these resources because you are working minimum- wage jobs or your wages have been flat for years or you are one of the hundreds of thousands of Americans still unemployed, leaders in Congress say: Well, too bad about that. That is unacceptable. Mr. Speaker, the average cost of child care for a family with an infant and a 4-year-old is $17,755. In my State of New Jersey, the average cost for the same family would be $21,000. That price tag is outrageous, and it probably has quite a bit to do with why only 35 percent of pre-school-age children are currently enrolled in pre-K programs despite the benefits that pre-K offers. Ninety percent of brain development happens before the age of 5. Every dollar invested in early childhood education returns in public benefits. There are few better ways we can spend our money. Mr. Speaker, there is one more reason we are making this a priority. The teachers responsible for our youngest minds earn salaries that cannot cover the expenses of their own families. While first grade teachers earn roughly $45,000 annually, pre-K teachers earn only $27,000. These men and women hold one of the most important roles in our society and make some of the greatest impacts on our kids. They deserve pay that matches the value they offer. This issue has waited long enough for attention from this Nation's leaders. It is time for Congress to make sure that every family has access to child care and early childhood education. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Bass).

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. I thank the gentlewoman from California for all of the advocacy she represents for those young people, those children, who are most vulnerable to us. Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield to the gentlewoman from Oregon (Ms. Bonamici), who is the sponsor of the Progressive Caucus' universal childcare resolution.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the subject of my Special Order.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Congressman, thank you for taking your time and sharing with us. We are all familiar with the phrase, ``putting your money where your mouth is.'' Mr. Speaker, a few weeks ago we voted for a bill to fund government programs and extend tax cuts. While that bill was an important step forward compromise, it was far from perfect. It put our environment at risk by selling petroleum overseas and made countless tax breaks for multinational corporations and special interests permanent. Although it did extend programs like the child tax credit, it didn't do nearly enough to protect working families or ensure a bright future for our Nation. We are in a new year, and we have got a chance for a fresh start, so let's make affordable child care part of that new start. Mr. Speaker, I want to switch gears now and discuss an equally important topic that those in control of this House have tried to ignore, a topic that the President took action on this week. Gun violence is one of the greatest challenges this Nation faces. Over the past 10 years, we have lost more than 100,000 people to guns. Millions more have been victims of assaults, of robberies, and of other crimes where a gun was involved, and many of the individuals in possession of these weapons shouldn't have had them in the first place. Three years since Newtown, just over a month since San Bernardino and Colorado Springs, and with the dark memories of shootings of every scale in every city hovering over us constantly, it is time for change. Gun violence in the United States runs the gamut of motivations--from mental illness, to religious extremism, to political extremism, to disastrous accidents--but they all involve a firearm. Many of these incidents are suicide, but they are all linked by the simple fact that they involve a firearm because in the United States of America a group of ideologues have hidden behind misguided readings of the Constitution and make guns available to everyone imaginable, even folks on the terrorist watch list. The reality is that gun violence is an epidemic, and the NRA, along with those who blindly follow it, are deeply out of touch. When another tragedy strikes, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle reliably call for moments of silence right here on the floor. While I support remembering victims, I cannot support silence where action is needed. Silence, Mr. Speaker, is what keeps weapons on our streets. Silence is the reason we have lost friends, sons, daughters, brothers, and sisters. Silence is why we are the only developed nation in the world with this problem. The President has put forward a set of executive actions that make sense at the most basic level, from strengthening background checks and bolstering enforcement to improving mental health services and research on gun safety. The simple, commonsense measures President Obama announced this week will save countless lives. It is now up to us here in Congress to take the baton. Mr. Speaker, it is common sense that someone who is not allowed to fly because they are a suspected terrorist shouldn't be able to get a gun. It is common sense to ensure a standard uniform background check before someone can purchase a weapon. It is common sense that you should have to present identification to buy bullets, and it is time for our colleagues to stand up for common sense. As the President said, we need to do it with the fierce urgency of now. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Texas for her leadership and her commitment to every child in this country. I yield to my colleague from Virginia (Mr. Scott), who is ever vigilant and diligent as it relates to preparing, educating, and ensuring our better generations to come.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding to me. Mr. Speaker, I rise today against another handout to corporate interests, this time needlessly limiting access to courts for American consumers and workers. The bill we would consider under this rule is the second blow in a one-two punch for American families. We kicked off 2016 by defunding Planned Parenthood and, effectively, repealing the Affordable Care Act. Now we are considering legislation that would limit class action lawsuits, and needlessly threaten the privacy of asbestos victims, as well as other victims of faulty product designs, negligence, and dangerous environmental occurrences. The end goal is obvious: enable corporations to avoid both blame and accountability when they have harmed consumers or knowingly exposed workers to toxic chemicals. I wish that I were more surprised, but I am not. The truth is clear in this bill. It is just the next step in Republican efforts to lift corporate interests above any level of scrutiny, endangering citizens and consumers in the process. Our courts are a cornerstone of justice for everyday Americans. We need to find ways to expand, not restrict, access to our legal system for victims. Class actions have cleaned up the environment after oil spills, banned cigarette ads aimed at children, and policed price-fixing on Wall Street, among many other things. Other nations allow big corporations to run amok, harming people through dangerous products, fraud, and dishonesty, virtually unchecked. But here in the United States of America, class action lawsuits are a vital tool that hold even the very powerful accountable for their malfeasance. Mr. Speaker, it is time to get to work on policies for the American people, not against them, and I urge my colleagues to vote against the rule and the underlying bill, H.R. 1927.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. I thank the gentleman for yielding time to me. Mr. Speaker, it is a brand-new year, but you wouldn't know it if you look at what we will be voting on this week. Across the investigations of three separate committees in this body, eight States, and four Federal court cases, not a single shred of evidence has been found indicating that Planned Parenthood has broken any laws. In fact, the Oversight and Government Reform chairman, Jason Chaffetz, has admitted that he found no evidence that Planned Parenthood did anything wrong. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle continue to ignore the facts here. Planned Parenthood is a healthcare organization serving 3 million Americans each year. In the course of their lifetime, one in five Americans will receive care from Planned Parenthood. Despite arguments to the contrary, there are simply not enough health centers to fill the gap. If we defund Planned Parenthood, we will be denying care to millions of families. We will be taking away options from underserved communities across the country--rural, urban, and otherwise. We will be saying to women, once again, that how and when they get health care is not their choice; it is the choice of a body overwhelmingly run by men. When I got to Congress last January, I thought I would be voting on legislation that would improve the lives of my constituents, Mr. Speaker, giving them better wages, jobs, stronger education, and an economy that started at a level playing field. Instead, I have been on the floor more times than I want to count urging my colleagues on the other side to give up the attacks on women's health. It is a new year, Mr. Speaker. We have a new Speaker. Enough is enough. I urge my colleagues to vote against this rule and the underlying bill. I thank the gentleman for giving me this opportunity.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker, if a funding bill is a reflection of priorities, then the omnibus that we are considering right now is the clearest snapshot of what is wrong with our Nation. We are talking about lifting a 40-year ban on the export of crude oil, risking thousands of jobs and rising gas prices for working families immediately after joining the most important climate agreement ever created. We are expected to swallow tiny increases to the programs working families need and rely on while we make permanent tax cuts for corporations and millionaires that we have not paid for. We are expected to cheer the extension of vital programs, like the child tax credit, when that credit has not been indexed to cover the rising costs families face. Mr. Speaker, these are games. After only a year in Congress, I am tired of playing them. We like the word compromise. It implies that we have done something good, that we have worked together. If we pass this bill, we will have worked together to keep America down for generations to come. We are patting ourselves on the back for making it out of sequester, but the incremental spending increases in this omnibus funding package do nothing to make up for the past 5 years of cuts. We have spent so much time digging ourselves deeper and deeper into a funding hole that this omnibus seems like level ground. The fact is it is not. It is far from it. Regardless of how nice funding increases may sound, the foundations of the American Dream are crumbling beneath our feet right now with stagnant wages, struggling schools and a wealth gap that is only getting bigger. Working families need funding that supports their needs. They need a Tax Code that promotes the middle class. They need tax credits and funding for programs to help cover the outrageous cost of child care and preschool education, costs that outstrip tuition at public colleges in 31 of our 50 States. They need funding for higher education that would allow them to graduate without debt. They need more support for our highways, our bridges, our rail systems, and broader infrastructure, the kinds of projects that create good-paying jobs and make every community stronger, the kinds of projects that cause people to feel confident that they have enough security in their future and enough money in their pocket to spend some of it and help to stimulate the economy and to create many, many, many ancillary jobs and small business needs. They need a lot more than what is being offered in this legislation. A funding bill compromise should not compromise the needs of families across the country who are relying on us to get this right. Any extension of tax credit needs to be protected and uplift every American. We can't afford to pass them without a plan for them. Mr. Speaker, we have labored over many things in this House. We have spent a long time talking about less important issues. But we are being confronted right now with a humongous bill that has broad implications on communities that are vulnerable for the next several generations. We are asked to support a piece of legislation that does not seem to address, from a proportionally equal perspective, those needs. I want to take a moment now to just draw the House's attention to this front page story in Politico. It headlines ``Congress' half- trillion-dollar spending binge.'' What is fascinating about this is that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, the folks that are responsible for this spending binge, are always the first to condemn government spending. Now they want to spend billions of dollars on special interests without supporting Pell grants, without supporting our Historically Black Colleges and Universities, without supporting the programs that combat poverty like WIC, without supporting the working families in this country and supporting the needs that they have in order to prosper. Their prosperity helps guarantee the economy's prosperity because the revenues generated from the things that we do to uplift our working families gets put back into the economy and creates a better, fairer, and larger economy. The numbers in this omnibus lie. They sound like increases, but they do nothing to pull us out of the rut that the past 5 years have left us in. I know that there are many of my colleagues who feel this same way. We look at the modest increases that may be associated with the childcare tax credit. We look at modest increases that may be applied to a housing program. We look at modest increases that may be applied to several programs that, if there were sufficient revenue associated with those programs, would indeed make a difference in these communities. But the proportionality of priority in this omnibus bill and in our effort today and tomorrow does not speak to our acknowledgment that it is the majority of people, that it is the middle class, the working class, and, yes, even the most vulnerable that we are leaving behind. We can do better than that. Mr. Speaker, we need to do better than that because we are better than that. There are several glaring omissions in the omnibus bill, but none are more illogical than our failure to support Puerto Rico. It is unfathomable that we are unwilling to support a U.S. territory in a financial meltdown just as we offer permanent tax breaks for corporations and special interests who don't even need our help. We are leaving the citizens of Puerto Rico woefully in need. This is not fair. This is un-American. This is not who we are. What is our responsibility to the citizens of Puerto Rico who won't have access to good hospitals and medical care and Medicare? What about the children, almost 56 percent, who live in poverty? What are we saying to them? What we are saying in this bill that is before us this day coming forth that is expected to move forward in this House is that we are still only concerned with elevating the status, the well-being, the security, and the happiness of those who already have a lion's share of all of it. Mr. Speaker, we are better than that. We have a responsibility to speak up, protect, preserve, and ensure opportunity for all. That is what we have been elected to do. I want to take a moment to talk about the giveaway to oil companies that we have in this omnibus. There is nothing positive about this for working families. Ending the 40-year ban on crude oil risks our energy security here at home. It threatens our environmental leadership, and it takes away jobs from American workers. We didn't pass legislation to create more access to oil in this country simply to be able to provide wealthy companies the opportunity to sell it abroad at a higher price, to bypass our refineries, to sell crude oil in other countries and have them benefit from the jobs that we fought to create through legislation that we passed. That is illogical. That is counterintuitive to why we did what we did in the first place. But yet it is in this bill. Yet the glaring priority of the wealthy multinational corporations versus the interests of the everyday working families is just in your face--unacceptable, totally unacceptable. It serves no purpose that I can identify other than to further appease another of the special interest groups so dear to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, but it does nothing for the economy of the United States of America and for the working families here. I guess I shouldn't be surprised because it is not the first time, and I doubt that it will be the last time. Mr. Speaker, we can go on and on and on, and I will have additional points that I would like to raise with regard to this omnibus bill, but my friend, my colleague from the great State of New York, Congressman Hakeem Jeffries, has come here to share his perspective on the impact of this omnibus bill. With that, I yield to my colleague.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. My colleague has spoken so eloquently about the impact of the omission of Puerto Rico in the omnibus bill and what it does to the territory of Puerto Rico and the citizens that are there. My colleague has spoken eloquently as to the proportionality questions in this omnibus bill, in general, that would not only negatively impact Puerto Rico but Puerto Rican and other citizens here in the United States of America; whole communities, whole cohorts of working class families. Would my colleague just use a little bit of his time to talk about that issue of fairness and proportionality that I have heard you so eloquently speak about. I yield to the gentleman from New York.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to include any extraneous material on the subject of my Special Order.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. I thank the gentleman very much for sharing his wisdom with us and his perspective on those issues that we are confronting in the very near future. Mr. Speaker, could you tell me how much time I have left?

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to my colleague from Georgia (Mr. Johnson).

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. I want to thank the gentleman from Georgia. I appreciate his comments and thank him for sharing his wisdom and experience with us. Mr. Speaker, I yield to my classmate and colleague from Arizona (Mr. Gallego).

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. I appreciate that and I thank my colleague and friend. I appreciate your perspective on the proportionality issue. Who is going to pay? We are going to pay. Who is going to pay when the bill comes due? It is the working families. It is the most vulnerable. And let us not get so excited about a $30 billion increase when we recognize we have been under sequestration. What does that mean? I thank the gentleman for sharing his time with us. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Ellison).

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA). It has been 14 years since the last reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, and we have desperately needed an update to this critical law. The 2001 No Child Left Behind Act included unworkable provisions and led to the proliferation of high-stakes testing. In order to manage the impact of the law's strict provisions, the federal government has granted waivers to 40 states, resulting in unpredictability and unequal application of the law. The ESSA will correct our previous mistakes by maintaining high standards while giving states and local school districts greater flexibility in achieving them with evidence-based strategies. At its core, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act is a civil rights law that reflects our society's consensus that every state and school district must provide a quality education to all children. In order to fulfill this promise, we must have sufficient information to measure inequities in educational achievement for all groups, and we must ensure states and local governments are taking the steps necessary to close those achievement gaps. For that reason, I am very concerned that the ESSA lacks data disaggregation for Asian American and Pacific Islander (AAPI) students. The AAPI community is extremely diverse with over 48 distinct ethnic groups that face varying challenges in educational achievement. The lack of data disaggregation will prevent us from determining what gaps exist and how best to address them. Additionally, I am concerned by the lack of key provisions from the Safe Schools Improvement Act and the Student Non-Discrimination Act. I have cosponsored these important pieces of legislation because more must be done to address the harmful effects of bullying and discrimination, particularly for LGBT students. No child should be denied a quality education due to his or her race, ethnicity, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, or socioeconomic status. This bill takes important steps in the right direction, but the lack of AAPI data disaggregation and important LGBT protections shows there is much work to be done to achieve this goal. I look forward to working with my colleagues to address these flaws.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. I thank the gentlewoman for yielding and for organizing, coordinating, this opportunity for this discussion. I thank the gentlewoman because she is the most vibrant and is the strongest voice for those who are the most vulnerable in our communities across this Nation. Mr. Speaker, poverty isn't just a problem in America. It is a crisis. We are not doing enough about it. In September, the Census Bureau released the newest data on the number of Americans living below the poverty line. The report further confirms what my colleagues and I have been trying to get the majority in this body to acknowledge, and that is that poverty may be one of the greatest challenges facing our Nation right now. The median household income stayed the same. The poverty rate remained the same as well. Women and minorities did worse than the average. Overall, nearly 15 percent of American families--almost 47 million people--earn less than $24,000 a year. The fact that terrifies me the most is that the way we calculate the poverty rate has several inherent flaws, and when you dive deeper into the numbers on this issue, you come up with a picture of an America that is deeply broken. The poverty rate is just a snapshot of a single year. Last year, for example, 22 percent of all children lived in families that fell below the poverty line, something we should be embarrassed by in not devoting more resources to fixing. But childhood lasts more than 1 year, and when you look at the span of childhood, you find that nearly 40 percent of our children have spent at least 1 year in poverty, double what we see in a single year. We have more children who are living in poverty than in most developed nations. That alone should serve as a wake-up call to all of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle who so frequently invoke the need to protect our children's futures when they are debating bills here on the floor. In case that is not enough, here is another indicator: The number of people who are living in high poverty areas--better known as slums-- doubled between 2000 and 2013. That is a very big deal because living in an impoverished community fundamentally changes the futures of children. Study after study has found that they are more likely to be poor later in life, less likely to achieve in school, less likely to find jobs, less likely to achieve the milestones that are necessary to change their trajectories, like graduating from high school and attending college, and they are more likely to end up in one of our penal institutions. The biggest problem, Mr. Speaker, is that we are not doing enough to fix poverty. In fact, in some cases, we are making it worse. Take housing assistance programs, for example. We leave it up to the States to dole out funds for low-income housing programs. These States then place the overwhelming majority of low- income developments in already low-income areas, depriving those families of quality schools, of access to jobs, and of a variety of social services that more affluent communities benefit from. At home in New Jersey, I have fought hard against just such discrimination with legislation that required all communities to build affordable homes. We need the same kind of initiatives at the Federal level, laws that will ensure affordable housing exists beyond urban and lower income boundaries, that will give working families access to child care, that will lower the cost of college, and that will increase wages. We also need to think about what it really means every time we deny a cost-of-living increase or refuse to give Federal workers the pay they deserve. Groceries still cost more every year. Rent still goes up. Bus fare gets higher. We are asking them to do more with less because we are unwilling to enact policies that actually work. That is flat out wrong. Mr. Speaker, for many of the challenges facing our Nation, we have yet to find a clear solution. Poverty isn't one of those. With the willpower to act, we could eradicate poverty and build a stronger future for generations to come. I thank the gentlewoman from California.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to urge my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to end their calls for shutdown and to work in a bipartisan manner to pass a funding measure without riders. This body has gotten into the habit of using last-minute Hail Mary votes to save us from one manufactured crisis after another, and it is taking our attention away from the list of things we need to get done-- things like reforming our criminal justice system, addressing gun violence, or creating jobs. There is just 1 week left before funding runs out, and it looks like we are heading into yet another crisis. In the midst of growing threats to national security, we need to take politics out of this equation. We need to take poison pills that threaten working American families off the negotiating table. Mr. Speaker, I am ready and willing to work to keep the government of the greatest nation in the world open, and I know my Democratic colleagues will as well. I hope every Member of this body is ready to do the same. I want to express my condolences to San Bernardino and its families on their loss. I urge Congress to get moving on gun safety legislation.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from New York for yielding to me. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Tonko amendment and strongly urge its adoption. Section 1101 of this misguided energy bill includes a critical provision that I would like to highlight. This language would allow big energy companies to use aerial and remote surveying to circumvent key FERC environmental reviews. This troubling provision flies in the face of the rights of local governments and even private landowners to make decisions about the use of their own property. This provision allows Big Energy to bypass more comprehensive and appropriate on-the-ground surveys to assess the environmental impacts of energy infrastructure. Mr. Chairman, there is one such project that New Jerseyans know all too well--the PennEast pipeline. PennEast is the proposed 108-mile natural gas pipeline that would run from Pennsylvania, across the Delaware River, and terminate in Hopewell Township in my district. If built, this pipeline would threaten some of the most environmentally sensitive areas in the Delaware River Basin, farmland, watersheds, and uninterrupted natural areas. Virtually every local government along the PennEast route has officially lodged their opposition or disapproval. Concerned citizens have packed scoping meetings to make their voices heard to stop this pipeline. These are diverse communities across two States represented by Members of Congress on both sides of the aisle. Areas I represent, like Mercer County and Hopewell, and scores of private property owners have exercised their right to deny PennEast access to their property to carry out their surveys. Mr. Chairman, my constituents sent me to Congress to fight for the environment and to stand up against ill-conceived projects such as this one.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in adamant opposition to H.R. 8. I don't have much time, so I can't go into all the terrible provisions included in this legislation. To be clear, there are many. I do want to address language that would give the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, or FERC, what amounts to fast-tracking power for pipeline approvals. Setting arbitrary deadlines for the studies, research, and public comment periods for dangerous and volatile pipeline projects, regardless of how complicated the proposal or how sensitive the land these projects cuts through, doesn't give us what my colleagues across the aisle call energy security. What it will do is put private, public, and protected land, clean water, and our environment at risk. In my district, where we are already fighting just such a project, my constituents will be the first to tell you just how preposterous a provision of this nature is. This bill deserves a resounding and unilateral ``no,'' and I hope my colleagues will join me in defeating it.