Juvenile Accountability Block Grant Reauthorization and the Bullying Prevention and Intervention Act of 2013

I thank the Speaker for yielding, and I thank the leader, Leader Pelosi, for the time and, as well, the Speaker.

It is always appropriate when we rise in this wonderful holiday season to wish Americans of all faiths a wonderful and blessed time with their families, to wish my colleagues a wonderful time with their families, and to reflect a moment on the greatness of this country that has experienced its challenges, of which I believe the Members of this body and the other body are committed to solving.

But I thought it was important today, as we leave for the recess in our districts where we will be engaging with our constituents--and this coming Saturday I will hold the 19th annual Toys for Kids that I have hosted for the past 19 years at the George R. Brown Convention Center, a way of giving back, but a way of hearing the joys and sounds of children enjoying themselves.

So I would like to make this time that I have, these few minutes, a time of joy and happiness. But I also think we must be honest, and it should be a time of confronting reality and the truth. And so I wanted to go back for a moment on work that was just accomplished just a few hours ago, when this body voted on a proposal that was given by the negotiators to the House and will be given again to the Senate on the bipartisan Budget Act of 2013.

As many Americans know, we experienced a horrific shutdown just a few weeks ago, unwarranted, bearing no results, and hurting millions of people around the Nation. I remember coming to the floor some 56 times to ask my Republican friends to cease and desist and to open the government, open the government. So I understand the frustration and exhaustion of the American people and our hardworking Federal employees who could take it no more and asked for some minimal way to avoid the atrocious and catastrophic closing of the government on the basis of whim and opposition to an established law, the Affordable Care Act.

So what came of it was an additional $1.012 trillion that would be spent over fiscal year 2014 and 2015, and what would allow the restoration of Head Start seats that were lost, child care, housing assistance, educational dollars for higher education, research dollars, the same needs that I expressed during the shutdown that were being denied, the addition of these dollars, minimal that they were, but enough to give us a boost over last year's expenditures, and to save some of the needs that Americans had that were lost. I support that and congratulate that step made. And it got us past sequester, which was trickery that was offered as a hammer over a commission and committee that was supposed to design a grand bargain of moving America forward.

But what we also obtained in this Budget Act, although painful, was the maintenance of our Social Security and Medicare for our seniors and the assurance that those funds would not be tampered with, and that any reform would include the widespread opportunity for Members to engage their seniors and others who were receiving these benefits so that there would be a compliance with the commitment that many of us, such as myself, have made--continued protection of Medicare and Social Security.

In the course of that, this Congress has never abandoned the unemployed, and so it was proposed by the Democratic conferees to include unemployment insurance, and, yes, the SGR that would provide seniors with their doctors by fixing the sustainable growth rate.

That was supposed to be the proposal, Madam Speaker. And tragically, in the constructed, contradictory, conflicted, misrepresented bill that came to the floor through the Rules Committee, they, with the darkness of the night, included the SGR, but they left out the helping of the most vulnerable people.

Twice on the floor today I asked that we not go home so that we could go vote on the Levin-Van Hollen-Lee amendment that would have restored and would have been paid for, the unemployment insurance.

I continue to ask tonight that we not go home or that we be called back to ensure that that insurance continues. I intend to introduce legislation very quickly to require the Congress to come back and for there to be an independent up-or-down vote on actually restoring the unemployment insurance so that it would not expire on December 28 and, as well, for that legislation

to be passed by the Senate and signed by the President.

I would also respectfully ask, humbly in this holiday season, as the President has done often, to please continue to push the House and the Senate to return in order to make a difference.

Let me pause for a moment and share with you why this is so important. The uninsured are not criminals. And let me clarify, those who are not getting unemployment insurance are not criminals, as I heard a Member on the other side of the aisle, the Republican chair of the Budget Committee, indicating that they had stopped criminals from getting unemployment insurance. I thought that was the most dastardly statement that could ever be said in the history of the Congress.

I am shocked. I don't know and I have not run into criminals who are getting unemployment insurance, but I will tell you that 1.3 million jobless workers will lose their unemployment benefits on December 28, 2013.

Please remember that these are individuals who have worked. This is not a handout. They have worked and they paid for insurance, or they have benefits through their work that would warrant insurance that would cover them when they were unemployed and looking for work.

A number or a figure was given by my friend and colleague, Congressman Levin, who said when the Walmart opened in this area for 600 jobs, Madam Speaker, 23,000 people applied. Does that suggest they are criminals or people who don't want to work?

In 2014, 3.6 million workers will lose access to benefits because of the lack of action of this Congress. In Texas, 68,900 jobless workers will lose their unemployment benefits on the 28th, and an additional 106,900 in 2014.

The unemployment rates have improved, but nationally, they are 7 percent. And the minimum weekly benefits available in Texas are such that I can assure you it would not break the bank.

So I am committed. The pain is deep in many of us that we would close these doors and not, for a moment, have a solution to the unemployment benefits. So many Members have worked on it.

The hearing was held last week by the Democratic Leader and Democratic Members, listening to the pain of many. But I can move the numbers up to 50. If we went on the streets and found 50 unemployed, our stories would be so moving it would bring tears to our eyes.

It is not as if we had overdone it: for this Congress, led by the Republicans, who passed only 57 bills compared to 2010's 258, 2011's 90, and 2009's 125. So there is plenty of time to do some work. And the reason why I think this is so potent is because this is in the backdrop of my having the honor and privilege of joining my fellow colleagues, members of the Congressional Black Caucus, the Congressman from Illinois, the Senator from Texas, to go to the memorial of Madiba, Nelson Mandela.

We spoke about him just a few hours ago on the floor of the House, but I just want to make mention of him again, holding a candlelight service that was held in Houston, Texas, and to, again, thank of many of those involved in the apartheid movement. There are two names that I want to put in the Record, Representative Al Edwards and former council member Jew Don Boney. There were many others, but I wanted to express my appreciation to them, along with Deloyd Parker and the SHAPE community family who have been entrenched in issues of justice and freedom and were clearly wrapped around the issue of eliminating apartheid.

And to pay tribute to my colleague from Texas, the Honorable Mickey Leland, who as well worked with Bill Gray and then the Congressional Black Caucus to be the voice and conscience that lifted up the antiapartheid movement in Congress with the passage of the sanctions bill that was joined in by the United States Senate, the other body, as was mentioned earlier.

But I mention that because the service was so moving. The President's words were potent and eloquent and were cited by the South African press as the most significant tribute of that day. Thank you, President Obama.

But it also reminded us, in his words, that it called upon all of us to walk in his footsteps and to be reminded of the needs of the vulnerable and always, as John Lewis, my friend from Georgia, says, get in the way of what is not good to make it good.

It was not good for this Congress to leave and not do what was right, and that is the passage of the unemployment insurance. So I want to call upon my colleagues to push toward this floor and the Republican Speaker to find a way to undo the trickery of the Rules Committee to put in the sustainable growth rate, the SGR, and not put into the rule the opportunity to give unemployment insurance to the needy and the desperate and people who have worked who are not looking for a handout. And that would be the intent of my legislation, to make the point that we should be here, to make the point that we can pass it.

And I want to thank the Democratic leadership for putting in the previous question, the vote for us to go on record that we are appalled and outraged that December 28 will come without extending the unemployment insurance. It does not make any sense.

And for the spirited, emotional time that I have, it is well worth it to say, I was there and to be there and to watch head of state after head of state and to see the joy in that massive stadium and to listen to the songs of the people of South Africa in the dialect and language that is so beautiful and to match it with the voices of the choir behind Kirk Franklin, a Texan, to say that we are in your hands. To be able to put all of that together and then come back and not in the spirit of Nelson Mandela, who believed in the importance of being courageous, we find ourselves with no unemployment insurance.

So I believe that there are things that we left undone, and I look to have us come and to fix them, but I also want to join as the cochair of the Congressional Children's Caucus to be able to acknowledge the loved ones who now have come at almost a year. They will do so on December 14. And on December 14, in Houston, the mothers that demand action will, at 3:30 in the afternoon, be lighting candles and mourning the tragedy of Sandy Hook.

How unacceptable to note that we have not been able to pass comprehensive gun safety laws, that we have not been able to deal with the universal background check. In actuality, we have done nothing.

So maybe this will raise a concern of my colleagues to know that gun violence has killed children and continues to kill them every day in America. A .45 caliber pistol killed Lucas Higgins, 3, on Memorial Day last year in his Ohio home. It had been temporarily hidden under the couch by his father when he found it and shot himself through the right eye. His mother called 911 and said, It is bad.

A few days later, in Georgia, Cassie Culpepper, 11, was riding in the back of a pickup truck with her 12-year-old brother and two other children. Her brother started playing with a pistol his father had lent him to scare coyotes. He thought he had removed all the bullets; and, tragically, it fired and blood poured from Cassie's mouth.

In Houston, a group of youth found a Glock pistol and shot a 15-year- old; or at a party, 19 were shot, and two teenagers were dead; or the tragedy of the killing of Braveon Terry, who was shot a few weeks ago, a Jack Yates High School student.

So I mourn with the Sandy Hook families for those that they have lost because tragically 31,537 people die from gun violence annually. Those injured, 71,000. It looks as if we can find a way to be able to stop this violence.

So I want to, in tribute to those families who mourn--maybe someone looking will look at this heart that is on the Web site, the Sandy Hook families where it names every one of those who lost their lives through a crazed gunman with guns, guns, who shot his mother and emphasize the need for mental health and the need for the securing of guns, the need for universal background checks, not gun control but gun regulation to be able to save lives. To those families, I pray with you and mourn with you.

That is not all that was left undone. For I have, over the years, introduced legislation every year on reauthorizing the juvenile block grant, as well in preventing bullying and intervening. The

bill, H.R. 2585, the Juvenile Accountability Block Grant Reauthorization and the Bullying Prevention and Intervention Act of 2013, to allow under the juvenile block grants pointedly directing communities across America to address the question of the prevention of bullying and, as well, intervention.

One in seven students in grades K through 12 is either a bully or a victim of bullying; 90 percent of fourth to eighth grade students report being victims of bullying of some type, and 90 percent of students have personally witnessed some type of bullying. And 70 percent of students report incidents of bullying.

I believe that we are called upon. There is a cry to help the families in Sandy Hook and to be able to intervene in a child's life to ensure that they do not suffer from the siege of gun violence or the siege of bullying that occurs in the Nation's schools and community.

I must take note that on December 10, the same day as the memorial for our dear Madiba, was Human Rights Day. As a member of the Human Rights Commission here in the United States Congress, I want to acknowledge that human rights have become essential to the global conversation regarding peace, security, and development. And tying it in to all that I have said, human rights in America calls for us to be as concerned for the vulnerable who are unemployed without unemployment insurance. It calls for us to do more in terms of a budget that looks to lift America, to create jobs, to provide for child care and Head Start and education.

Human rights calls for us to stamp out the cancer, if you will, the devastation of gun violence and violence by children, against children, using guns. It calls for us to act with a greater humanity toward our seniors. It calls for us as well to respond to the call by the families, the families who are fasting and immediately move to passing comprehensive immigration reform. That is what human rights is all about.

And over the years--almost two decades--I have introduced a comprehensive immigration reform bill. But I am ready to be able to ask that H.R. 15, which is a bipartisan initiative proposed by the members of the Democratic Caucus and, as well, the bipartisan legislation that has been signed onto by Republicans and Democrats that has been introduced with over 180 to 190 sponsors, a simple bill that has the Senate language and H.R. 1417 combined to make a parallel bill, H.R. 1417, a bipartisan initiative passed out of homeland security that I helped author and drew Republican and Democratic votes.

The question is, are we going to leave behind mothers who are torn away from children who are being deported because we have not passed comprehensive immigration reform? Every day in my office, there are those who desperately call and show up for very meritorious cases, cases that, because of the backlog, because of the inability to get into the courthouse, they would have been rendered to be nondeportable. They would have been able to stay with their families. But, one, we don't have a matrix of laws. And these people are vulnerable because they don't have the access to the courts, the representation that is necessary to plead their case.

Today in the Judiciary, we held a hearing on whether we were abusing asylum. Asylum is for people who are fleeing persecution. There is no evidence that any of those people in large numbers of any kind are abusing the asylum request; but if we could get a comprehensive approach that we would include H-1B visas, we would help out DREAMers, the very same young people that come into my office who are brilliant, valedictorians and leaders of their community, and yet they are being denied. We are losing the brain power of America because we do not have comprehensive immigration reform.

So it is a crisis long overdue that should be addressed. And the families that were fasting that have dismantled their tents today, who came to this Congress on the steps, the east steps pleading with this Congress, pleading. It disturbs me that it seems that we can't listen to the pleading hearts. We have turned our shoulders, turned our backs. I would simply hope that in the litany of things that I have offered that we could come to some solution.

Let me quickly mention the issues of education and needs in my own district. I want the children of our school districts to come and feel welcomed and loved. And one instruction that I have to my friends who work so hard in education in my own community--listening to a principal that was arrested from Shady Dale Elementary School for theft, tragically. But that principal replaced a good principal that was not retained by the school district.

Or two individuals involved with Wheatley High School--the same high school that Barbara Jordan went to--and, tragically, they were arrested for drug possession, cocaine and marijuana. I make no judgment on that, except it removed them from the very same school that the principal that the children loved was fired from, or removed from.

And look what we came to. Individuals who were arrested for drug possession who had to be removed from the school--one who was the principal, one who was over principals. And another individual who had to be removed from an elementary school whose beloved principal was taken away.

Madam Speaker, the list of challenges that I have given is not without the recognition that we live in the greatest country in the world, and we are able to do most of what we put our minds to.

I want my colleagues to have a wonderful holiday season; but at the same time, I did not want to leave here without expressing the commitment of so many and myself that we must have a love of humanity. We must live the Human Rights International Day that was celebrated on December 10. We must be the defender of human rights.

We must ensure that the economic, social, cultural, civil, and political rights around the world and in the United States are protected. We must reach out to those souls who languish here in the United States--11 million--who need to have us address the issue of their dignity and their status.

We must stop the unending deportation that is unfairly ripping children from mothers and fathers.

We must pay attention to the mourning families at Sandy Hook and respond to their pain in their name and the many others who have died by gun violence. Pass the universal background check.

And we must ensure, again, that we protect those who cannot speak for themselves.

My closing words are, again, let us come back to extend the unemployment insurance. Let us move quickly to pass comprehensive immigration reform. Let us protect our seniors and our soldiers, and let us go home to register and enroll as many uninsured Americans who need health care as possible. Congratulations on the now 1 million-plus that are enrolled.

Let us be sure to remember that there are others who suffer during this season. We can be tasked with making their lives better by coming together as a Congress and answering their call from the array of issues that I have brought to this Congress and this body tonight. I ask for us to act.

With that, Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, today I rise to honor and remember each of the 26 victims of the tragic shootings at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut one year ago on Saturday, December 14, 2013.

As the Founder and Co-Chair of the Congressional Children's Caucus and a senior Member of the Judiciary Committee, I have listened to the tragic testimony of individuals who have survived or lost loved ones as a result of gun violence.

The community and the families directly impacted continue to reel from the inconceivable tragedy that took place at Sandy Hook Elementary on December 14, 2012.

The story of Sandy Hook was particularly frightening and heartbreaking for those of us who are parents or grandparents.

Our hearts still ache with sadness and disbelief for the families and loved ones of the children and women who lost their lives in this senseless act of violence.

This remembrance of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting one year ago should recognize and applaud the heroic efforts made by the teachers, administrators, and law enforcement officials who acted quickly to secure and protect the lives of the children who survived this deadly encounter.

This tragedy unlike any other in recent memory touched so many hearts and minds both in the United States and around the world that this remembrance is particularly poignant.

The parents and grandparents who dropped off their children and grandchildren in the early morning hours of December 14, 2012, could never have imagined that by 10 a.m. on that morning they would face this tragedy.

The deaths at Sandy Hook as well as those at Aurora and Columbine will be etched in our collective memories.

The Nation was united in grief one year ago over the Sandy Hook tragedy and many of us who have strongly advocated for sensible gun safety laws throughout our service in Congress thought that the time had arrived when policymakers, parents, teachers, and law enforcement could work to reduce gun related deaths.

We could all agree that the tragedy should not have occurred; unfortunately we could not find agreement on a new national gun policy to reduce gun related violence in the United States.

We must join together in recognizing that gun violence on the scale of Sandy Hook can happen in any community and delaying tactics by the gun lobby will only allow another tragedy to occur.

We must immediately begin to address the underlying problems of gun violence that would lead a young man to take up arms against defenseless women and children.

Finding solution to gun tragedies.

We must look at the tragedy of gun violence and the need for mental health services.

The lack of accessible and affordable mental health care is something that is being addressed by the Affordable Care Act, but more needs to be done to reduce and prevent gun violence. However, this is not to equate mental illness with violence.

The Affordable Care Act takes a positive step forward to address the issue of mental illness and access to care by making it a requirement that all healthcare plans contain care for mental illness and substance abuse.

Because of the health care law, for the first time insurance companies in the individual and small group market are required to cover mental health and substance use disorder services as one of ten categories of essential health benefits. Additionally, they must cover these services at parity with medical and surgical benefits (which means things like out-of-pocket costs for behavioral health services must generally be comparable to coverage for medical and surgical care).

The Affordable Care Act expands mental health and substance use disorder benefits and parity protections for approximately 60 million Americans. That's one of the largest expansions of mental health and substance use disorder coverage in a generation.

Further, the White House announced a $100 million commitment to improve access to mental health services.

The Affordable Care Act will provide $50 million to assist community centers to provide more mental health services. The Department of Agriculture will provide $50 million to finance rural mental health facilities.

The health care law requires most health plans to cover recommended preventive services like depression screenings for adults and behavioral assessments for children at no cost to consumers.

Beginning in 2014, the Affordable Care Act prohibits insurance companies from denying coverage or increasing charges to people due to pre-existing health conditions, including mental illnesses.

In the State of Texas it is expected that 5,189,000 people will now have access to mental health and substance abuse assistance programs.

The link between certain mental illnesses and violence is rare, but the work to provide people in need of care should not be solely motivated by concerns regarding violence.

Often those who suffer from mental illness are more likely to be victims of violence or cause harm to themselves.

The real threat of gun violence comes from those who have guns in their lives and in their homes.

The tragedy of Sandy Hook took us all by surprise, but there are hundreds of other tragedies around the nation that involve children who become victims of gun violence.

Annually in the United States there are over 30,000 gun related deaths, but too often we do not focus on how many of these deaths are children.

No other nation has this level of gun violence per-capita as the United States unless they were actively engaged in a civil war or conflict with another nation.

The total number of deaths associated with 13 years of war in both Afghanistan and Iraq is 6778 service men and women.

Each of their deaths we mourn as a nation as we work to bring to an end military action.

These men and women died to keep us safe. We should work to make them safe when they return home.

I read with heartache the September 28, New York Times article, ``Children and Guns: The Hidden Toll,'' published in September of this year.

Some of the stories were tragic as they were familiar to those of us who work to reduce gun violence.

Lucas Heagren, 3 years old, killed by a gun he found where his father temporarily hid it under a couch.

Days later, Cassie Culpepper, age 11, who was shot and killed by her brother who thought a gun his father gave him to scare coyotes was unloaded.

A few weeks later Alex Whitfield, age 11 was killed by a Glock pistol found in a closet by a 15-year-old.

These children are the hidden victims of a nation obsessed with guns at almost any cost.

The children of gun violence may be any child or grandchild-- including your own.

They may be from any home found in any neighborhood or rural community in this nation.

The tragedies of gun deaths of children are not just what your child knows about gun safety, but more often what another child with access to a firearm does not know.

More important is the lack of gun safety knowledge among adults which is a factor in far too many gun related child deaths.

Many deaths of children who are victims of guns are not part of official federal records.

The New York Times report found over 259 accidental firearm deaths of children under the age of 15 spanning several years.

These numbers are about twice as many as were reported in federal statistics for the same time period.

For example, gun related federal death statistics would not include Caroline Starks age 2 who was killed by her 5-year-old brother who was playing with his ``Cricket'' .22 rifle a gun designed specifically for children.

[From the New York Times, Sept. 28, 2013]

Children and Guns: The Hidden Toll

(By Michael Luo and Mike McIntire)

The .45-caliber pistol that killed Lucas Heagren, 3, on

Memorial Day last year at his Ohio home had been temporarily

hidden under the couch by his father. But Lucas found it and

shot himself through the right eye. ``It's bad,'' his mother

told the 911 dispatcher. ``It's really bad.''

A few days later in Georgia, Cassie Culpepper, 11, was

riding in the back of a pickup with her 12-year-old brother

and two other children. Her brother started playing with a

pistol his father had lent him to scare coyotes. Believing he

had removed all the bullets, he pointed the pistol at his

sister and squeezed the trigger. It fired, and blood poured

from Cassie's mouth.

Just a few weeks earlier, in Houston, a group of youths

found a Glock pistol in an apartment closet while searching

for snack money. A 15-year-old boy was handling the gun when

it went off. Alex Whitfield, who had just turned 11, was

struck. A relative found the bullet in his ashes from the

funeral home.

Cases like these are among the most gut-wrenching of gun

deaths. Children shot accidentally--usually by other

children--are collateral casualties of the accessibility of

guns in America, their deaths all the more devastating for

being eminently preventable.

They die in the households of police officers and drug

dealers, in broken homes and close-knit families, on rural

farms and in city apartments. Some adults whose guns were

used had tried to store them safely; others were grossly

negligent. Still others pulled the trigger themselves,

accidentally fracturing their own families while cleaning a

pistol or hunting.

And there are far more of these innocent victims than

official records show.

A New York Times review of hundreds of child firearm deaths

found that accidental shootings occurred roughly twice as

often as the records indicate, because of idiosyncrasies in

how such deaths are classified by the authorities. The

killings of Lucas, Cassie and Alex, for instance, were not

recorded as accidents. Nor were more than half of the 259

accidental firearm deaths of children under age 15 identified

by The Times in eight states where records were available.

As a result, scores of accidental killings are not

reflected in the official statistics that have framed the

debate over how to protect children from guns.

The National Rifle Association cited the lower official

numbers this year in a fact sheet opposing ``safe storage''

laws, saying children were more likely to be killed by falls,

poisoning or environmental factors--an incorrect assertion if

the actual number of accidental firearm deaths is

significantly higher.

In all, fewer than 20 states have enacted laws to hold

adults criminally liable if they fail to store guns safely,

enabling children to access them.

Legislative and other efforts to promote the development of

childproof weapons using ``smart gun'' technology have

similarly stalled. Technical issues have been an obstacle,

but so have N.R.A. arguments that the problem is relatively

insignificant and the technology unneeded.

Because of maneuvering in Congress by the gun lobby and its

allies, firearms have also been exempted from regulation by

the Consumer Product Safety Commission since its inception.

Even with a proper count, intentional shooting deaths of

children--including gang shootings and murder-suicides by

family members--far exceed accidental gun deaths. But

accidents, more than the other firearm-related deaths, come

with endless hypotheticals about what could have been done

differently.

The rifle association's lobbying arm recently posted on its

Web site a claim that adult criminals who mishandle

firearms--as opposed to law-abiding gun owners--are

responsible for most fatal accidents involving children. But

The Times's review found that a vast majority of cases

revolved around children's access to firearms, with the

shooting either self-inflicted or done by another child.

A common theme in the cases examined by The Times, in fact,

was the almost magnetic attraction of firearms among boys. In

all but a handful of instances, the shooter was male. Boys

also accounted for more than 80 percent of the victims.

Time and again, boys could not resist handling a gun,

disregarding repeated warnings by adults and, sometimes,

their own sense that they were doing something wrong.

When Joshua Skorczewski, II, took an unloaded 20-gauge

shotgun out of the family gun cabinet in western Minnesota on

July 28, 2008, it was because he was excited about going to a

gun safety class that night and wanted to practice.

But for reasons that he later struggled to explain to the

police, Joshua loaded a single shell into the gun and pulled

the hammer back. He decided he should put the gun back, but

his finger slipped. It fired, killing his 12-year-old sister,

Natasha, who was standing in the kitchen with him. When his

mother called from work to check on them, a shaken Joshua

told her he had just called 911: ``Mom, I shot Tasha.''

Christina Wenzel, the mother of Alex Whitfield, had tried

to make sure he did not visit anyone's house if guns were

present. What she did not know, when Alex went to his

father's apartment last April, was that a family member had

stored three loaded guns there.

``I always thought I had Alex protected from being killed

by another child by a gun that was not secured,'' Ms. Wenzel

said. ``Unfortunately, I was mistaken.''

Undercounting Deaths

Compiling a complete census of accidental gun deaths of

children is difficult, because most states do not consider

death certificate data a matter of public record. In a

handful of states, however, the information is publicly

available. Using these death records as a guide, along with

hundreds of medical examiner and coroner reports and police

investigative files, The Times sought to identify every

accidental firearm death of a child age 14 and under in

Georgia, Minnesota, North Carolina and Ohio dating to 1999,

and in California to 2007. Records were also obtained from

several county medical examiners' offices in Florida,

Illinois and Texas.

The goal, in the end, was an in-depth portrait of

accidental firearm deaths of children, one that would shed

light on how such killings occur and might be prevented. In

all, The Times cataloged 259 gun accidents that killed

children ages 14 and younger. The youngest was just 9 months

old, shot in his crib.

In four of the five states--California, Georgia, North

Carolina and Ohio--The Times identified roughly twice as many

accidental killings as were tallied in the corresponding

federal data. In the fifth, Minnesota, there were 50 percent

more accidental gun deaths. (The Times excluded some fatal

shootings, like pellet gun accidents, that are normally

included in the federal statistics.)

The undercount stems from the peculiarities by which

medical examiners and coroners make their ``manner of death''

rulings. These pronouncements, along with other information

entered on death certificates, are the basis for the nation's

mortality statistics, which are assembled by the National

Center for Health Statistics, a division of the Centers for

Disease Control and Prevention. Choosing among five options--

homicide, accidental, suicide, natural or undetermined--most

medical examiners and coroners simply call any death in which

one person shoots another a homicide.

Gun Statistics

Number of persons killed by guns in the 12 months after Newtown

31,537 people die from gun violence annually:

11,583 people are murdered.

18,783 people kill themselves.

584 people are killed accidentally.

334 are killed by police intervention.

252 die but intent is not known.

Number of Persons Injured by Gun Violence

71,386 people survive gun injuries:

51,249 people are injured in an attack.

3,627 people survive a suicide attempt.

15,815 people are shot accidentally.

694 people are shot by police intervention.

Homicide is the second leading cause of death for young

people ages 15 to 24.

Homicide is the leading cause of death for many minorities

in this country.

82.8 percent of young people who are killed are killed with

a firearm;

Every 30 minutes, a child or teenager in America is injured

by a gun;

Every 3 hours and 15 minutes, a child or a teenager loses

their life to a firearm.

Let me thank the Speaker for his courtesies and the leader for her courtesies for the opportunity to share on the floor of the House.

Mr. Speaker, I would offer to say to my colleagues who spoke earlier that we all recognize that the Affordable Care Act has generated opportunities for 9 million Americans, and it is growing. Let's find common ground. We have a law that is legal and affirmed by the United States Supreme Court, but it is affirmed by what is most important: hungry Americans needing good health care to save their lives and the lives of their families.

Frankly, I believe that there needs to be security for all of the Web sites of Federal agencies, rather than have bills that appear to be attacking the Affordable Care Act again, after 46 attempts to repeal it. Let's find a way that we can work together to secure extensively the entire Web sites carefully that are utilized by the Federal Government.

But I have the opportunity and I want to cover, Mr. Speaker, an array of issues that I think are important as we begin this new year. I do want to wish everyone a happy new year. But as I do so, since I come from Houston, and have been a member of the House Science Committee for 12 years before moving to Homeland Security, I want to congratulate NASA and the White House.

First, NASA, for the miraculous and unbelievable space walk just about a week or so ago by two outstanding astronauts. Space walks are not often done. They are much more difficult--in fact, extremely difficult--than one might imagine, as you watched what seemed to be a beautiful effort of activity in space.

I want to congratulate them. That is science. That is genius. That is what these astronauts trained for. They are our neighbors. I was with them over the holiday. I want them to know on the floor of the House that this was outstanding work.

I want to congratulate the White House because, as many of us have advocated over the years, my colleague who is no longer in the House, Congressman Nick Lampson, and myself signed many letters to extend the life of the space station. I am very pleased that it is now to extend the space station for 4 years. I am optimistic when that 4 years is nearing, there will be another assessment that there is more life in the international space station--opportunity for major research, including, when I was on the Science Committee, cancer research in particular, heart disease, stroke, aging. Our former Senator, John Glenn, took a second ride into space as a member of the United States Senate to test space travel on those who are aging.

Congratulations to NASA and the international space station. It speaks to the genius of America. It speaks to the aspirations and hopes of children around the world. It focuses on the emphasis in the United States on science, technology, engineering, and math, or STEM. Teachers continue to emphasize to our children the importance of those disciplines, and it gives us great hope.

And that is a lot of what I will talk about tonight: hope. For when we think of hope, we must have a broad definition that it includes all Americans. In fact, I believe from the very moment of the dumping of the tea in the Boston Harbor, the Founding Fathers of this Nation, in spite of all of the possible inequities like the holding of slaves, had hope. They left their places of persecution because they had hope.

And we have grown through the ages, from the 1600s, 1700s, 1800s, 1900s, the 20th century, and the 21st century. It has all been around hope. We were hopeful the turn of the century, even as World War I was flaring. We were hopeful even as the 1928-1929 collapse was happening. We were hopeful even with the horrific, heinous acts of World War II, with the interment and the Holocaust. But people were hoping that we would save people and get out of the dastardliness of that.

We were hopeful in the fifties. We as African Americans were hopeful as we marched in the 1950s and 1960s. We were hopeful with the Thurgood Marshall argument before the United States Supreme Court on Brown v. Board of Education. We were hopeful.

Now we come to a situation of wealth inequality. We must assure those who fall in that gap of where they are not where they should be, through no fault of their own, but because of this increasing gap.

For example, the wages of those in the top 1 percent--those making $352,900-plus--their income grew 281 percent from 1979 to 2007. For the bottom 20 percent, their income grew 16 percent, those making less than $20,000. For those making $34,000, it grew 23 percent. For those making $34,000 to $50,000, 25 percent.

There is wealth inequality in this Nation.

Some would argue some of that is inherited wealth, some of that is capital gains, some of that is stock revenue. It is wealth inequality.

I am moved by the words of Justice Brandeis:

We can either have democracy in this country, or we can

have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we

can't have both.

That is not snatching wealth from someone who has worked hard. It is to even up the opportunity for that gap--281 percent growth for the 1 percent, and numbers like 23 and 25 and 38 percent for the working middle class. We need to do better.

And so I think we need to start by stop quarreling about the unemployment benefits extension. We did it under President Bush, with no offsets, and, as well, for about 5 years with President Bush even acknowledging that when people work and invest in this Nation and they fall on bad times, give them a transitional bridge.

Some would say our unemployment is going down. My friends, on the chronically unemployed, it is the highest it has ever been, at 2.6 percent. Now that is growing to 1.3 million in 2013. It will go up to 3.64 million.

So I am not asking for the whole piece. I had a bill that said 1 year. Let's extend it for 3 months on an emergency basis and then begin to discuss how we can fund it.

There are 68,000 jobless workers that are in Texas, and we expect that as it grows in 2014 to 1.9 million and more--as I said 3.6 million and growing--it will be 106,900 Texans.

I have spoken to some of those Texans, and I have heard the stories of a welder who liked his job, was laid off, through no fault of his own, and needs this transitional funding so that he can be presentable for a job. Or a person in technology, administrative assistant, or somebody who worked in home health.

I believe that we have a legitimate basis for the creation of 200,000 jobs--a real dent in the economy and an acknowledgment that the unemployment rate in the United States in 2012 was 8.1 percent. States range from 3.1 percent, to Texas, which is 6.8 percent. Missouri is 6.9 percent. We have 5 percent and 5.7 percent. We have 7 percent in Alaska. Delaware is 7.1 percent. It goes all over the gamut. The individuals are not able to find work because for every job, there are three persons looking.

It generates into inequality of wealth. There is nothing that will refute this except for a transitional hand-up for those unemployed. And, yes, job creation.

My good friends, the Republicans, say they passed a bill on job creation last year. Yes, they did. And we have a bill on job creation, the Jobs bill. That seems to me a compromise in the making. That seems to me an opportunity for us to sit around the table and talk about technology and then talk about other aspects of job creation, because people have to be trained and retrained.

This week I will introduce a bill that is studied not as a bill introduced by a Democrat, but studied for the substance of the bill, called the New Chance for a New Start in Life Act of 2014. This is where you invest in people. It creates an opportunity for someone who is unemployed and still on their unemployment benefit--remember, they have worked and this is unemployment insurance--to get a stipend for certain accredited specific job training that ties to the market.

My friends, all of us are going to say, Well, they are going to take their money and they are going to be on the basket weaving training program; or they are going to take a truck training program, but they have no license. Accredited programs so that person can provide for their family and their training can be paid for.

And we are going to work through accredited social service agencies. We are going to partner with cities and nonprofit agencies for apprenticeships and internships. Every job is not an apprenticeship. We want to work with our friends in the trade and the labor community.

Unions have done well for America. Thank you for increasing our minimum wages and conditions in the workforce. Let's find a way to work together, but sometimes it is an internship in an office or an engineering company.

And then we have to provide training and employment enhanced for veterans. There are 22,000 veterans included in that large number of those who are needing transitional funds. We need to work with community colleges and Historically Black Colleges and Hispanic-serving institutions to be able to find a way to get chronically unemployed persons in the workplace, investing, paying taxes, and loving it every moment.

I have talked to folks who said that the most they want for Christmas and the new year is to have the alarm clock go off at 6 a.m. and jump out of bed to go to work. How are we going to cut these people off? What sense does it make?

And then it is important to note that added to the component of problems that we have is that poverty in America still exists. The 49 million poverty rate for African Americans and Hispanics greatly exceeds the national average. In 2010, 27.4 percent of Blacks and 26.6 percent of Hispanics were poor, compared to 9.9 percent of non-Hispanic Whites and 12.1 percent of Asians.

That is not targeting quotas. It is going where the problem is.

You know where else the problem is? Single women of any race, head of households. In 2010, 31.6 percent of households headed by single women were poor, while 15.8 percent of households headed by single men and 6.2 percent of married-couple households are in poverty.

In my district, 18 percent of households in the State of Texas, first in 2009 and 2001, ranked second in the highest rate of food insecurity. In my district, 151,000-plus families live in Poverty.

To the extent that we can't solve that problem, that is not shameful. We have seen the poverty gap close nationwide, even though we know children still live in poverty. President Lyndon Baines Johnson, who spoke on the war on poverty on January 8, said, We must live for hope, as I paraphrase.

And I worked diligently with programs from VISTA to Medicaid to Medicare to job-training programs to infrastructure programs to programs allowing young people to go to college. I am a witness of all of those programs. Frankly, I worked in the President's summer youth program in the hard rumble area of my youth.

And I have seen Members mention in the last 24 hours how they participated in the same programs. They happen now to be Members of the United States Congress. I would like to know how many Americans would call in the Congress and say, I am a beneficiary of the war on poverty, the Great Society.

Why can't we find common ground to recognize that we can be efficient, but we can also invest in people?

So I raise an ancient philosopher in my remarks on this question:

Any city, however small, is in fact divided into two, one

the city of the poor, the other of the rich; these are at war

with one another.

Plato said that.

And the question is can we now, in the 21st century, rebut that. Can we find a way to have hopeful people who are poor work with hopeful people who are rich and find a way to enrich both of them, to give them work and to make them shining examples of what America is all about?

Laying that groundwork, I hope my colleagues will join me on the Second Chance Job Act that I have just introduced that will go alongside the kinds of incentives in the jobs bill that President Obama has offered and the bill that was passed here in the House.

Why can't we both be on the same page of caring about getting a bill passed that both bodies will look at favorably, taking pieces? Why can't we get back to legislating again, giving and taking, making amendments, finding out what my friend on the other side of aisle wants, finding out what we want here, having amendments being accepted, making the bill one that is not only through the regular order of the committee, but here on the floor of the House, getting amendments that would satisfy and work with all of us?

I think there is more work to do in many, many areas, Mr. Speaker, and I would like to continue now to be able to offer some of my concerns.

Last evening, on CNN, there was a recounting of a young lady, tragically, who attempted suicide, a young bullying victim, first tragically being raped, not being believed, and ultimately coming forward. I am sort of summarizing the facts. And then because this person was a star athlete in one of the Midwestern States, the town turned on this young girl and her friend, bullying everywhere.

And I think it is time for America and the Congress to make a statement on it, a simple statement. I am not asking for much, but I have introduced H.R. 2585, the Juvenile Accountability Block Grant Reauthorization and the Bullying Prevention and Intervention Act of 2013. You will be surprised how simple it is:

To be able to allow groups from all over America, 501(c)(3)s that may be under the jurisdiction of faith institutions, youth groups, Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, tennis clubs, social service agencies, schools, to put their best practices forward and how they believe they can stem the tide of bullying, what kind of intervention, and add to that, cyber bullying. It also provides for gang prevention programs, turn our children toward socially beneficial pathways.

I had one Member say to me, What would be wrong with the Congress making a unified statement that they want to prevent bullying and they want to intervene?

That is the simple process, four corners of the bill. And research studies have shown that approximately 25 percent of school bullies will be convicted of a criminal offense in their adult years.

I believe in intervention. And I would say to my friends who are experts, all of the advocacy groups, I believe it would be very important if we came together and had this one statement that came out of the Congress, that we want parents and schools and communities and baseball clubs and basketball clubs and football leagues to understand that we have all got to pour our energy into letting children know that to live healthy and free of intimidation is a good thing, that have your fun somewhere else.

I don't know whether bullying led to this absurd game of knockout, but we have got to take a stand alongside of the personal intervention that comes about through the normal community ways.

Just for the record, it is important to note, 30 percent of U.S. students in grades 6 through 10 are involved in moderate or frequent bullying as bullies, victims, or both. According to the results of the first national survey on this subject, bullying is increasingly viewed as an important contributor to youth violence, including homicide and suicide. One out of four kids is bullied. The Justice Department says that in this month, one out of every four kids will be abused by another youth.

Surveys show that 77 percent of students are bullied mentally, verbally, and physically. We have to find a way to make a national statement. What better way than a Congress that is the symbol of the most powerful Nation in the world and the most powerful lawmaking body.

Why is it so difficult to pass something as simple as that?

It does not stop us from looking down the future when we have many more resources to deal with to put a huge amount of funding in it once best practices--once we give the spark plug and get people excited about our Federal Government is concerned about this, let's look for enhanced best practices. Let's make a statement on this,

which I think is enormously important.

I want to quickly, and I hope, as we debate these issues on the floor, that there will be Members who will want to have a conversation. I want to say, as well, that many of us have experienced violence in our communities. I am going to discuss that a little later, but I want to say it now. I have had a number of incidences of violence, through knives, through guns, in my own school districts in Houston.

Even though we know that does not define our school districts, I say to them, when you have an incident like that, it is not a reflection on you, but it is a signal and a sign that the community must come together. We will look forward in Houston to putting together a Stop Violence Commission under the 18th Congressional District, bringing people from the faith community, bringing other leaders, working with the Mothers Demand Action, MDA, who have come out every moment to stop gun violence, working with mothers and fathers who have had to bury their children, funerals that I attended over the holiday or before that time frame. I want to tell that mother whose son's funeral that I attended, I have not forgotten. We will embrace you, and we will find a way that we can sit together and make a difference.

Let me switch now for a moment--I will come back to that issue--and remind us of the humanity of comprehensive immigration reform. I said that I had any number of issues that I think are weighing on many of us as Members of Congress, weighing on those of us who are doers and want to do, and I would venture to say that that is this entire body. But we are getting stalled, and for what reason, I don't know.

But my hometown paper was eager to review H.R. 1417, which is a bipartisan product that has come out of the Subcommittee on Border Security and Maritime Security, my colleague from Michigan, and out of the full committee, with the chairman and ranking member of the full committee, a bill that has now been joined under H.R. 15, to put a bill forward in the House.

And I would just ask, why can't we end the suffering of so many, end the divide and deportation of so many families, in the thousands, and begin to look, as the faith community and business community, educational community, health community, research community, business community wants us to do?

Comprehensive immigration reform, Texas is a prime example: 16.4 percent of Texans are foreign born; 42 percent are Latino or Asian; 33.2 percent of immigrants in the State are naturalized U.S. citizens; 11.8 percent are registered voters or new Americans; 87.7 percent of children with immigrant parents are U.S. citizens; 75 percent of children with immigrant parents are English proficient; 70 percent of naturalized citizens have a high school diploma; 61,511 foreign students contribute $1.4 billion to the State economy, and they make up 21 percent of the workforce; 9 percent of the workforce is unauthorized.

We need to get people from underneath the underground economy. We need families able to walk the streets together, mothers not being dragged out of homes. We need the DREAM Act children to be able to raise their heads as U.S. citizens. We need access to citizenship.

This coming Monday, I will gather at Catholic Charities with people from all over the community in Houston, Texas, and we will be standing together, raising our voices as humane Americans. We will be speaking about Latinos and Asians. We will be speaking about Africans. We will be speaking about people from the Caribbean, people from Europe, people from Canada, people from Ireland. We will be speaking about people from all over the world that happen to be in Houston, Texas.

It is time to pass comprehensive immigration reform and pass it now.

I mentioned very quickly that I would be going through a number of issues, but let me just turn to the issue of guns.

Let me pause for a moment and find out how much time I have, Mr. Speaker.

Let me quickly mention that we must stop the violence of guns. When we think about 5,740 children being killed by guns, I would like, again, for this Congress to look at H.R. 2812, which is a bill that deals with stand your ground that we have not addressed from the Trayvon Martin case.

And I would like them, also, to quickly look at gun safety and gun access prevention, H.R. 65. I find that a way of being able to come together and keeping guns out of the hands of underage children and teaching gun safety to parents and children.

I want to also join with my colleague on the Foreign Affairs Committee and mention human trafficking is a major issue. It will be commemorated on January 11, but I will be hosting, with the Homeland Security Committee, a hearing on human trafficking in Houston, Texas.

Quickly, I want to make mention of the Congressional Gold Medal that I have for Malala, who is a voice of strength, a young teenager gunned and shot--I wouldn't say gunned down because she lives in Pakistan, only because she wanted girls to have education.

I ask my colleagues to join myself and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen to insure that we do have, if you will, the honor of presenting this to her, nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize, spoke before the United Nations, and I hope that we will do that.

Let me close, Mr. Speaker, by mentioning two quick things, and that is, let us not forget our veterans, enormously important, and let us also move quickly for NSA reforms.

As a member of the Judiciary Committee that helped write the Patriot Act, section 215, that was not our interpretation. That was not legislative history for trolling mega-data collection. We can be safe and secure, and we will be presenting a briefing on privacy and security next week in the Judiciary Committee, 2226, at 10:30. I hope all of the colleagues will come.

But I have introduced legislation to make sure that there is a people's advocate in the FISA Court, but more importantly, that we restrain and find a way to restrain the mega-collection. And I hope the President, in the reports that he has just received, will be able to do that as well.

Let me also indicate that internationally, I think this Congress should deal with where we are in Syria and where we were in South Sudan, two places that I am concerned about, the human cost, if you will.

We have a lot to do, Mr. Speaker. I just gave just small bits this evening, but we have a lot to do that we can do together in a bipartisan manner.

And we can look at the Affordable Care Act, just as a point, in closing, because it has been so divisive, and look at it that it is working. People want insurance. We can do that, and we can make sure that, as we do so, Mr. Speaker, then America will see us working together. That is what I would like to see happening.

I have given an array of an agenda that touches the lives of people. Let's get to work.

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

I thank the gentlelady from North Carolina for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, we had the opportunity to have a clean rule around a bill that I had the opportunity to work on, along with the gentlelady from North Carolina and with our ranking member and chair, with regards to taking what we can agree on in education, which is reauthorizing the Federal Charter School Program.

We had similar language in both the Republican ESEA reauthorization, as well as in the Democratic substitute. Most Republicans voted for the version that they had, and almost every Democrat, except for two, voted for the Democratic version.

We were able to then work out the very small differences between the two pieces of language with regard to charter schools, present it before the entire House under a reasonable rule that allows for a broad variety of amendments--12 amendments--from both sides of the aisle, many of which improve the bill and some of which I oppose, but which are, by no means, fatal to the bill. The process fundamentally works.

Unfortunately, in this rule, we have now had to alter the way that we are dealing with another unrelated, unpaid-for effort, namely, a bill that could add $155.5 billion to our deficit because of the extension of the R&D tax credit.

Essentially, under the initial effort, the Republicans failed to waive their statutory PAYGO rules. What that means is that they failed to say: we don't have to pay for this bill. They failed to say: this bill will add to the deficit. In a few moments, my colleague, Mr. Van Hollen, will explain what that means.

What the American people need to know is that this rule prevents Congress from doing fake math, and it essentially acknowledges that the Republican proposal to extend the R&D tax credit would be a deficit buster and increase our deficit by $155.5 billion.

It takes away any pretension that somehow this bill would be paid for by some other mechanism; so while the amendments allowed in the content of the bill with regard to charter schools, which I will talk about in a moment, are largely noncontroversial and enjoy support from both sides of the aisle, the budgetary pretense that is removed from this bill, which reveals that the Republican proposal on the R&D tax credit increases our deficit by $150 billion, is a controversial element that now occurs in this same rule.

I now want to talk about the Success and Opportunity through Quality Charter Schools Act. This important bipartisan bill improves and modernizes the Federal Charter Schools Program.

We essentially established a 2.0 version 14 years later, in having learned a lot about what works and doesn't work in the field with regard to public charter schools. We promote equity in opportunity for our students across our country.

I am very pleased and honored that many of the important aspects of the bipartisan bill that I have had the honor to lead, the All-STAR Act, have been included in this underlying bill, as well as almost all of the priorities for the Democrats and Republicans.

When Congress first authorized the Charter Schools Program in 1994, charter schools were very early in their existence. They were an emerging effort to encourage innovation in our public schools.

Public charter schools with the ability to make site-based decisions--and that is essentially what charter schools are, they are public schools with site-based management--now serve more than 2 million students in 42 States and in the District of Columbia.

Sadly, there are over 600,000 students who remain on public charter school waiting lists, unable to attend the schools of their choice.

The promise of public charter schools is that they are free to be innovative when it comes to instruction, scheduling, time-on-task, policies, mission, and hours. Because they have site-based management, rather than being run by a larger entity like a district or a State, they have the flexibility to do what it takes to meet the needs of parents in their communities.

Public charter schools don't charge tuition, nor do they have any entrance requirements, nor are they allowed to discriminate against students on any basis. This bill goes a step further in ensuring transparency and accountability for charter schools to allay the concerns of some on my side of the aisle that they are not fully compliant with many of these areas.

The Charter Schools Program is a crucial lifeline for growing and replicating successful models. Charter school programs are critical to ensuring that every child in this country, regardless of ZIP code or economic background, has access to a free, quality education, which is more important than ever in order for one to succeed in the 21st century.

I am proud to say that H.R. 10, which will be considered under this rule, passed the Committee on Education and the Workforce with a very strong, bipartisan vote of 36-3. This is an example of a bill that has gotten better every step of the way.

A similar bill in the 112th Congress passed overwhelmingly with over 350 votes. Better language with regard to charter schools was included in both the Republican version of the ESEA reauthorization, as well as in the Democratic substitute.

Now, we have a stand-alone bill before us which takes the very best of both, the bill that was in the Republican version and in the Democratic version. It builds on it, and it creates a Federal charter school program that, truly, Democrats and Republicans can be proud of as a legacy for the next decade.

Having founded two innovative public charter schools before I was elected to Congress, I understand firsthand how the freedom to innovate and having the flexibility to pursue a unique mission can truly help serve all kids.

Without the Federal charter school program, many charter schools across our country wouldn't even be able to get off the ground. We owe it to kids who are being underserved or who are unserved today to be able to upgrade this program and ensure it can meet the challenges of the 21st century.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Van Hollen), the distinguished ranking member of the Committee on the Budget.

I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).

(Ms. JACKSON LEE asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

I yield the gentlelady an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

How exciting that in a week here of partisan division with regard to Benghazi, with regard to Lois Lerner, with regard to a deficit-busting $155 billion tax expenditure, how exciting that Democrats and Republicans can come together around something that is so important for the next generation of American children--that is, making sure that our limited investment in public charter schools has the maximum positive impact on student achievement across our country.

A 2013 study conducted by Stanford University's Center for Research on Educational Outcomes found that public charter schools often outperform their peers in traditional public schools, and many have demonstrated substantial progress in closing the achievement gap.

The study's findings were particularly impressive for low-income students. The study found that low-income students gained 14 additional days of learning in reading and 22 in math--compared to traditional school peers--and English language learners gained 36 days of learning in reading and in math.

What is clear, however, is just how public charter schools with site- based management have the ability to innovate and succeed. They also have the ability to fail and do poorly.

Not all charter schools are serving students well. Not all charter schools meet their goal of serving at-risk students. That is why this bill improves transparency and accountability for the public charter school sector as a whole, as well as for authorizers--that is, the entity, usually a school district, sometimes a State or special entity--that grants the charter, which is another word for contract, to the provider of educational services at the site-based level.

Mr. Speaker, all public schools, regardless of their governance structure, whether they are public magnet schools, whether they are neighborhood schools, whether they are public charter schools, whether they are schools of choice operated by a school district, every public school should live up to our promise of providing a quality education; and every child should have access to a quality education that allows them to succeed in the workforce, in college, and in life.

In this era of constrained public resources, we need to maximize the impact of every dollar spent by making sure that what we invest in works, and that is exactly what this bill does.

It allows for investment in proven models to expand and replicate success, to serve more kids, many of whom were already on waiting lists and forced to attend a school that is worse than the one that they seek to attend. This bill will help alleviate those waiting lists.

It is important to focus our resources and double down on public charter schools that get great results and ensure that we don't squander our limited resources on public charter schools that fail to meet the needs of their students.

We want to make sure that charter school operators with a strong evidence of student achievement and strong management capacity are able to replicate and expand. That is why, under this bill, we create incentives for schools to achieve and replicate excellence by awarding grants directly to some of the highest performing public charter schools in our country that are helping to allow more and more kids from at-risk backgrounds to achieve the American Dream.

This particular program, which was an important part of the bipartisan All-STAR Act, helps to seed the growth of high-performing public charter schools in States that might otherwise not meet the criteria.

The gentleman from Washington State mentioned that his State and some others have a cap. Well, very importantly, even where a district or State policy environment is not ideal and, therefore, they might not be a priority for receiving grants that they administer, nevertheless, charter schools serving kids in those areas can receive grants because of the networks of charter schools that are high performing in States that might not have policies that are as open to charters as they should be.

Mr. Speaker, what Democrats and Republicans coming together shows the country, shows the public charter school movement, shows the school districts, is that a multistakeholder approach can work for our country.

I want to thank the many individuals who provided input on this important bill, ranging from school districts to States to teachers' unions, to charter school board members, to families who are in charter schools, and families who languish on waiting lists, wanting their child to attend a better school.

The result of this multiyear process is a bill that reflects the very best policies to upgrade the existing charter school authorization program, improve transparency and accountability for public charter schools, ensure that our limited Federal resources are invested in schools that work and ensure that more kids, regardless of their geography and economic background, can attend a school that prepares them to succeed in life.

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

Mr. Speaker, I would like to inquire if the gentlelady has any remaining speakers.

Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close. I yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I want to talk a little bit about some of my experiences in the charter school movement before joining this body. I had the opportunity to found a public charter school, New America School, now which has five campuses in Colorado and New Mexico. I also had the opportunity to cofound Academy of Urban Learning in Denver, Colorado.

New America School seeks to meet the needs of English language learning students who are a little bit older--15,

16, 18, 19--and far too often didn't have a place in the traditional public school system.

Many of these students work jobs--might work a day job, might work a night job. That means, if they work a day job, the only school that would be a viable option for them would be an evening school. That is why New America school has flexible scheduling, allowing students to attend day or night, depending on their real-world life circumstances.

In addition, many of the young women attending the school have young children of their own, and that is a real-life need that, absent some kind of daycare reimbursement or daycare, many of them would not be able to attend.

So New America School offered daycare reimbursement--in some cases, daycare--so that these young women could continue to attend school and get a high school diploma.

First and foremost, the focus of New America School is to ensure that students can learn to be fluent and literate in the English language, which is so important to be able to succeed in today's economy.

As a result of this innovative approach and the focus on meeting student needs, thousands of students have enrolled in the various campuses of the New America School. I was proud to not only found them, but to have served as superintendent for 2 years.

I can honestly say that, absent this Federal program, the title V grant, we would probably not have been able to get New America School off the ground. Like so many charter schools across the country, until the doors open--and in that first year or two, when you are just beginning to add students, it is absolutely critical to be able to have this investment to open the doors.

Over the medium and long term, the schools need to stand or fall on their own. They need to succeed on their own and meet a market niche. We need to make sure that they are sound from a budgetary perspective, and this bill includes language that ups the bar on authorizers to do just that.

This bill passed the Education and the Work Force Committee with a 36-3 vote. I honestly can't remember another bill that had such strong bipartisan support recently on that committee. It is similar to and actually represents an improvement from H.R. 2218, which passed last Congress, 365-54.

This bill will improve charter school access and services for students; ensures that our limited Federal investment supports the expansion and replication of the very best high-quality charter schools; requires more transparency and accountability for charter schools; gives charter schools additional tools to continue to serve at-risk kids pursuant to their mission, including free and reduced lunch; as well as ensuring that they have the tools they need to serve a pro rata number of special education kids.

Almost every Democrat and Republican in this entire body has already voted for this bill. A very similar, almost identical bill was in both the Republican ESEA reauthorization and the Democratic alternative.

This takes very few differences between those versions, irons them out, and has language that both Chairman Kline and Ranking Member Miller agree builds upon the consensus that was reached in each of those bills.

That is why I hope that this bill passes with strong bipartisan support. There is a reason that we need strong bipartisan support. Unlike far too many bills that we call single chamber bills that are considered in this body and languish in the Senate--I understand much of the frustration of the majority party--this bill, with a resounding bipartisan vote, can be sent to the Senate, where a very nearly identical bill has a growing number of bipartisan cosponsors with the message that this body overwhelmingly supports improving our public charter school program; and we encourage the Senate to take it up.

That is why every Member of this body's vote, Mr. Speaker, is so important on this bill. This bill will pass. This bill will have bipartisan support.

For any of my friends on the fence, this is our last great opportunity to leave a positive legacy of improving quality of and accountable for public charter schools.

AFT and NEA have acknowledged that the stronger accountability in this bill will improve the quality and accountability and transparency of charter schools, supported by charter school advocates as well as authorizers, like school districts.

The multistakeholder approach that Chairman Kline and Ranking Member Miller have presided over is a model of how this body can come together around legislation that improves our country. I hope that not only this bill is taken up by the Senate after a strong bipartisan vote in this body, but I hope it serves as a model not only for what we can do in education, but what we can do on a number of pressing issues that address this country, whether it is balancing our Federal budget, whether it is reauthorizing Federal transportation programs or establishing an infrastructure bank. There is, in fact, a bipartisan way forward. That is the opportunity that my friends and colleagues on both sides of the aisle have before us now.

Public charter schools are making a difference for kids across our country every day. With a limited Federal role, we can ensure that they make an even bigger difference. The families that are languishing on waiting lists have the opportunity to send their kids to expansion of an existing successful charter school or the replication or a second campus of a charter school that we know works, that we know can transform lives, that we know can help that young kid attend college, get a good job and, guess what, maybe even serve in this august body someday.

The most exciting thing about public education in this country is that there are examples of what works. You could take any at-risk demographic group, whether they are English language learners, whether they are low-income earners, whether they are in the most remote rural part of our country or in the poorest inner city area, and find an educational model that works. Some of them are run by school districts, as in neighborhood schools; some are run by school districts as schools of choice or magnet schools; and some are run as public charter schools under a contract in the school district or other authorizer.

What we need to do to help make sure that more kids have access to opportunity is expand and replicate what is already working in public education. That glimmer of hope, those shining islands of success and excellence with the passage of this bill, can serve more children in our country to ensure that more kids have access and more families have access to choose the public schools that work for them.

I want to thank Ranking Member Miller, Chairman Kline, and the majority and minority staff of the committee for working hard to craft a bipartisan bill without poison pills, without gotchas, without partisanship, that recognizes the vital role that strong, accountable, high-performing public charter schools can play in educational success. I was honored to work with them and with the staff on this legislation to improve, upgrade, and modernize this critical program.

I encourage my colleagues to understand that this vote matters. We want to ensure that this bill is not a single Chamber bill. We want to make sure that this bill does not languish in the Senate. And the best way to do that is to send a resounding vote, even stronger than the vote in the last Congress, that in these times of partisan discord, Democrats and Republicans can come together around commonsense legislation that helps kids succeed and helps America's neediest families send their kids to a quality public school. This bill will help maximize the impact of every dollar invested by focusing on the highest quality educational providers.

I strongly urge my Democratic and Republican colleagues to vote ``yes'' on H.R. 10 and ensure that our limited Federal dollars go only to quality programs.

As we mentioned earlier, unfortunately, I cannot support this rule. The rule contains a budgetary fix on an unrelated item. I am confident this rule will pass and allow for consideration of the charter school bill and a reasonable set of amendments, and I wish that I could support a rule that did just that. But this bill does include $150 billion in deficit spending which Democrats have not agreed to.

Public school choice is effective and empowering. Families know what is right for their children better than politicians do and better than school district officials do; therefore, parents should have the opportunity to choose the public school of their choice that meets the parents' and the family's need.

H.R. 10 represents the very best promise of bipartisanship in education. For those that embrace school choice, H.R. 10 rewards State policies that contribute to public charter school success. For those who are skeptical of public charter schools, H.R. 10 builds in stronger protections for charter school oversight, transparency, and accountability. There is something for everybody in this bill.

I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this rule but ``yes,'' ``yes,'' ``yes'' on the underlying bill. And I look forward to continuing this tradition of bipartisanship, hopefully extending beyond education to the other pressing national challenges we face. Through this bill, we can improve access to great schools for our Nation's children.

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

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Let me thank the proponents of this bill.

Mr. Chairman, this is a very important bill, and I believe it opens the doors of opportunity for quality and excellence in charter schools. I hope, as we move forward as to the issues dealing with charter schools that are located in minority communities and

that are created by minority members of the community, like in Texas, where in some instances there is an unfair process, H.R. 10 will bring an evenness and a quality in excellence and also opportunity for the creativity of charter schools that can lift up at-risk children. I think that is one of the key elements of, hopefully, this legislation.

I want to cite in my own district that we have, yes, KIPP and Harmony that are well-known across the country and somewhat around the world. It is my understanding that KIPP is now moving to Israel, but we also have a school like Pro-Vision, its work of which I have known for over 20 years. It lifts at-risk children up to the levels of opportunity.

My amendment is an amendment that directs the Web site publication of materials on the Web sites of charter schools regarding student recruitment, orientation materials, enrollment criteria, student discipline policies, behavior codes, and parent contract requirements.

It would also include any financial obligations, such as fees for tutoring or extracurricular. That is transparency. That is allowing, if you will, the opportunity for parents to have full information in a different setting from public schools.

My children went to public schools. I went to public schools. I believe in public schools--I strongly believe in them--but I believe this new idea, that of the partnership of charter schools with public schools, should include a format of transparency.

I should be clear that public schools have a challenge with transparency as well. As I interact with my constituents, many parents don't know the opportunities that they may have in a public school-- vanguard or the special classes that they may have or sufficient arts and music and which school has it; yet as this is going to be a federally funded program, it is important to ensure that our parents have information.

Certainly, they should have information regarding the kind of discipline atmosphere that is there. They should also know whether or not there are serious commitments to making sure that their children's holistic futures are in front of them and that they are not subjected to policies that would intervene on issues dealing with bullying or with the prevention of bullying.

This is a very good amendment to H.R. 10, and I ask my colleagues to support it.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, it is not often that we mention our great disappointment on the floor of the House. We usually battle it out. I know I am right on this amendment, and I am highly disappointed in the majority's representation.

I would like to submit for the Record a letter from the AFT, which is supporting the Jackson Lee amendment extremely enthusiastically, and a letter from the National Education Association, which is endorsing the Jackson Lee amendment.

It is strongly supported by the NEA, which gives me pause as to why this amendment is an amendment that is not agreed to.

American Federation of Teachers,

Washington, DC, May 8, 2014.

House of Representatives,

Washington, DC.

Dear Representative: On behalf of the more than 1.5 million

members of the American Federation of Teachers--including

individual AFT members who teach in charter schools and who,

with me, wrote to you this week--I offer our collective views

on H.R. 10, the Success and Opportunity through Quality

Charter Schools Act, as well as our position on several

important amendments that will be considered during today's

debate on the underlying bill.

The bill combines a number of existing charter school

programs into one that would provide federal funds for new

charters; expand and replicate existing charters; acquire,

construct and renovate facilities; establish and administer

per-pupil facilities-aid programs; and, fund national

activities. H.R. 10 provides important accountability

measures for charter schools but, primarily, provides for

their expansion.

Since our former President Albert Shanker first promoted

them, the AFT has believed that publicly financed charter

schools have a role in public education. The best charters

have served as incubators of good practice and have helped

provide parents and students access to high-quality public

education. For example, in 2013, University Prep, a unionized

public charter school started by Steve Barr, founder of Green

Dot Public Schools, and me several years ago in New York

City, graduated every single child, all of whom were admitted

to college.

The reality in communities across the country is a mixed

bag--while many charter schools are well-managed and serve

the children who are accepted and decide to attend, many

others do not provide equitable access for all students, are

poorly managed, and are not transparent with their finances.

Further, there are unfortunately too many instances where

charters are used as a tool to destabilize or compete with

other public schools.

H.R. 10 includes many provisions to bring charter schools

closer to the standards of accountability, equitable access,

and transparency that traditional public schools must meet,

but there are still real gaps. Improved accountability and

transparency is owed to the students who attend charter

schools and to the taxpayers who financially support these

schools. In requiring these new standards, Congress would in

no way be limiting charter schools' potential to serve as

laboratories of innovation. It would, however, be ensuring

that those innovations are transparent, sustainable, and

scalable, and that all our public school students and their

schools are treated equitably.

The AFT is pleased the bill includes some improvements over

current law in the areas of ensuring equitable access to

charter schools for all students; in seeking to prevent

charter schools from allowing barriers to enrollment that

result in the exclusion of English language learners,

students with disabilities, and other disadvantaged students

from enrolling; and, in ensuring that charter schools are

appropriately monitored in the areas of student safety and

financial management. We also appreciate the bipartisan

acknowledgement that charter schools need better oversight by

state entities.

However, we believe that H.R. 10 can be strengthened by

approving the following amendments aimed at improving the

overall bill. To this end, we urge you to support:

Moore: This amendment would require states receiving

charter school grants to set aside 2 percent of the grant

amount for financial oversight of charters. It would also

ensure that charter schools include private and public

contributions in their audits.

A report from the Center for Popular Democracy and

Integrity in Education outlines $100 million in losses to

taxpayers in 15 of the largest charter markets since charter

schools entered these markets. This is a problem that needs

to be addressed.

H.R. 10 would provide $300 million annually in support of

charter schools. The Moore amendment would help ensure that

these funds are being properly spent and that charters are

incubators of innovation, not enablers of waste, cronyism, or

fraud. It would also help monitor the influence of private

investors by requiring the disclosure of private

contributions.

Wilson / Davis / Duckworth / Grayson / McKinley / Fudge:

This amendment would require that information about each

charter school be made available, including disaggregated

enrollment and academic performance data. This amendment will

better ensure that parents have information on how charter

schools are educating students, and will shine a light on

enrollment rates of populations that have often been excluded

from charter schools.

Additionally, the AFT urges your support for the following

additional amendments:

Jackson Lee: This amendment requires charters to publicize

their information on student recruitment, orientation

materials, enrollment criteria, student discipline policies,

behavior codes, and parent contract requirements, which

should include any financial obligations such as fees for

tutoring and extra-curricular activities.

Langevin: This amendment would provide for comprehensive

career counseling, a much needed resource in all schools.

Castor: This amendment would develop and enforce conflict

of interest guidelines for all charter schools receiving

federal assistance.

Bonamici: This amendment requires states to report on the

sharing of best practices by charter and traditional public

schools.

Sincerely,

Randi Weingarten,

President.

Mr. Chairman, let me conclude my remarks by saying that, across America, children are bullied every day, and across America, parents are baffled by the educational system.

Any time that you can reinforce this idea of transparency, I believe that it is an important step forward, and I would hope that my colleagues would be able to support this amendment. I believe it is a strong, but positive amendment.

I yield to the gentleman from Minnesota for an inquiry, please, to the chairman of the committee.

What modification could occur with this amendment? It is a strong amendment that is supported by educational groups, and it just reinforces, I believe, in a more specific manner the intent of H.R. 10.

I yield to the gentleman from Minnesota.

Mr. Chair, I would like to offer my thanks and appreciation to Chairman Kline and Ranking Member Miller for all of their work in their stewardship in bringing this strongly bipartisan bill to the House Floor for consideration.

They have both worked hard on ways to improve education for our nation's youth and I have had the pleasure of working with the Chair on many issues of mutual interest for the improvement of education.

Mr. Chair, thank you for this opportunity to explain my amendment to H.R. 10. My amendment directs State Education Agencies that award Federally funded grants to charter schools under this bill to work with those schools so that they provide information on their websites regarding student recruitment, orientation materials, enrollment criteria, student discipline policies, behavior codes, and parent contract requirements, which should include any financial obligations such as fees for tutoring, and extra-circular activities.

My amendment has the support of the National Educational Association and the American Federation of Teachers. I have letters from both organizations that I would like included in the Record along with my statement.

Charter schools were new--but today they have become for many parents an important public education option. Not all public charter schools have been successful, but the work of those that have been successful have led us to this point of considering legislation to provide additional Federal funding for the creation of additional charter schools.

This amendment is a pro-education consumer amendment that would educate parents who are investigating the public charter school option for their child's education.

The Jackson Lee Amendment will make it possible for parents to learn more about how schools deal with important education issues such as academic performance, enrichment programs, anti quality of education life issues programs for children with learning disabilities like dyslexia are taught.

Many public charter schools provide this information online, and the amendment would support this good transparency practice. The Jackson Lee amendment is good for parents and for charter schools because parents would have access to information that helps them make education decisions for their children; and charter schools would speak to a larger audience regarding their education programs.

This information being provided on Charter School websites would help us better understand what public charter schools are offering to parents and students. It would also bring additional transparency regarding the drivers of higher enrollment in public charter schools and promote greater public awareness regarding polices on such as discipline, counseling, drop-outs, bullying, as well as programs that impact of education on children with learning disabilities like dyslexia on student retention.

In Houston, I have had the benefit of seeing the work of public charter schools at work: Harmony Public Schools, YesPrep Public Charter Schools, and KIPP Public Charter Schools have made tremendous advancements.

It is my hope that charter school districts and charter schools will take up the challenge of providing hard data to make the case for their approaches to education.

I offered two amendments for consideration by the House Rules Committee that would strengthen the legislative goals of H.R. 10.

I also offered a second Jackson Lee Amendment in the form of a ``Sense of the Congress'' on the promotion of, and support for anti- bullying programs in charter schools, including those that serve rural communities not supported by the Rules Committee. I regret that this amendment was not made in order for consideration of this bill because the prevention of bullying is one of the most challenging problems facing school officials.

Bullying is not a new behavior. Kids have been exposed to bullying in school for generations. Now, however, bullying has taken on

new heights and sometimes victims of bullies suffer severe and lasting consequences.

For victims of bullying, they go to school every day facing harassment, taunting, and humiliation. Studies show that 25-35 percent of teens encountered some type of bullying in their lifetime. Bullying is a form of violent behavior that happens not only in the schools but everywhere.

The National Center for Educational Studies reports show that 14 percent of 12- to 18-year-olds surveyed report being victims of direct or indirect bullying. 1 out of 4 kids is bullied. The Department of Justice reports that 1 out of every 4 kids will be abused by another youth.

I introduced H.R. 2585, the Juvenile Accountability Block Grant Reauthorization and the Bullying Prevention and Intervention Act of 2013. This bill amends the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 by expanding the juvenile accountability block grant program with respect to programs for the prevention of bullying to include intervention programs. The bill's objective is to reduce and prevent bullying and establish best practices for all activities that are likely to help reduce bullying among young people.

This year a million children will be teased, taunted, and physically assaulted by their peers. Bullying is the most common form of violence faced by our nation's youth.

The frequency and intensity of bullying that young people face are astounding:

1 in 7 students in grades K-12 is either a bully or a victim of bullying.

90 percent of 4th to 8th grade students report being victims of bullying of some type.

56 percent of students have personally witnessed some type of bullying at school.

71 percent of students report incidents of bullying as a problem at their school.

15 percent of all students who don't show up for school report it to being out of fear of being bullied while at school.

1 out of 20 students has seen a student with a gun at school,

282,000 students are physically attacked in secondary schools each month.

Consequences of bullying:

15 percent of all school absenteeism is directly related to fears of being bullied at school.

According to bullying statistics, 1 out of every 10 students who drops out of school does so because of repeated bullying.

Suicides linked to bullying are the saddest statistic.

Statistics on gun violence:

Homicide is the 2nd leading cause of death for young people ages 15 to 24 years old.

Homicide is the leading cause of death for African Americans between ages 10 and 24.

Thirteen young people from ages 10-24 become victims of homicide every day.

82.8 percent of those youths were killed with a firearm.

Every 30 minutes, a child or teenager in America is injured by a gun.

Every 3 hours and 15 minutes, a child or teenager loses their life to a firearm.

In 2010, 82 children under 5 years of age lost their lives due to guns.

One of four high school males reportedly carry a weapon to school, with 8.6 percent of reportedly carry a gun.

87 percent of youth said shootings are motivated by a desire to ``get back at those who have hurt them, and 86 percent said, ``other kids picking on them, making fun of them or bullying them'' causes teenagers to turn to lethal violence in the schools.

In 2011, over 707,000 young people, aged 10 to 24 years, had to be rushed to the emergency room as a result of physical assault injuries.

Victims of bullying often suffer in silence and parents are the last ones to know that their child is being bullied or may be a bully. What once was thought to be a childhood ritual has been proven by school psychologists, law enforcement officials, parents, and students to be much more serious.

Anti-bullying programs can help children understand the seriousness of bullying; and assist parents in learning the signs of bullying as well as learning how to speak to their children about the issue of bullying.

Mr. Chair, I ask my colleagues to support my amendment to make information available on publicly funded charter school websites so that parents are afforded the opportunity to make the best education decisions for their children.

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 576 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Polis), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.

General Leave

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.

Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 576 provides for a structured rule providing for the consideration of H.R. 10, the Success and Opportunity through Quality Charter Schools Act.

My colleagues on the House Education and the Workforce Committee and I have been working to reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act; and to that end, the House passed H.R. 5, the Student Success Act, last July.

Our efforts in reauthorization have centered on four principles: reducing the Federal footprint in education, empowering parents, supporting effective teachers, and restoring local control. H.R. 10, the Success and Opportunity through Quality Charter Schools Act, takes a small bipartisan step in the reauthorization process and ensures that local communities have the flexibility needed to meet the needs of their students.

While H.R. 5 is languishing in the Senate, the House remains committed to continuing its work and has broken out the charter school programs as an area of agreement between House Republicans and Democrats.

Despite good intentions, there is widespread agreement that the current

law is no longer effectively serving students. My hope is that, after the House passes H.R. 10 this week, our Senate colleagues will follow our lead and will provide the same opportunity to their Members to work together in a bipartisan, bicameral fashion and pass this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, a few weeks ago, I had the opportunity to visit a remarkable public school in Kernersville, North Carolina. In addition to preparing students academically for college, the North Carolina Leadership Academy, a charter school, is publicly committed to giving students ``the opportunity to develop true leadership qualities and become creative thinkers and problem-solvers while retaining a sense of responsibility for their families, their community, and their country.''

It was a privilege to spend time with the remarkable students and faculty of this public charter school. I was truly impressed by their commitment to scholarship, by the leadership skills of the students and by the remarkable academic progress that was on display.

All NCLA students in grades 7-12 participate in Civil Air Patrol, a program established by Congress in 1946 that uses military-style uniforms, customs, courtesies, ceremonies, and drill in order to improve students' leadership skills, fitness, and character.

This program is working. NCLA places a strong emphasis on family involvement, and the level of commitment demonstrated by parents, families, and the Piedmont community at large was impressive.

H.R. 10 will empower States and local communities to replicate the success of high-quality charter schools like NCLA and encourage choice, innovation, and excellence in education. I urge my colleagues to support this rule and the underlying bill.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I want to take the opportunity to thank my colleague from Colorado for the work that he has done on charter schools, for understanding the very important nature of charter schools and for bringing his expertise to this issue.

I also want to thank him for acknowledging the bipartisan effort that has gone into bringing this legislation to the floor and for the very good way

that we have gone through regular order to bring this bill to the floor. I appreciate that little history that he has given us.

I now would like to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Reichert), my classmate and colleague.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Yesterday, our Democratic colleagues in the Rules Committee properly notice that had the R&D bill would have inadvertently triggered automatic cuts to other programs to offset the bill. We appreciate the spirit of comity that existed and that brought that to our attention.

H. Res. 576 ensures that the bill operates the way it was intended to operate. It was an inadvertent error. Excluding this bill from the PAYGO scorecard will ensure that other programs are not affected, which is consistent with the treatment of other tax bills.

I would like to point out to our colleagues on the other side of the aisle that the PAYGO amendment made by H. Res. 576 is substantially identical to section 401 of Senator Wyden's extenders bill, S. 2260, the EXPIRE Act. However, they have failed to point that out.

Statutory PAYGO was created by the Democrats when they controlled Congress. Statutory PAYGO maintains a running tally of the cumulative deficit impact for bills signed into law. If the threshold is exceeded, a sequester is triggered to offset the excess.

When Republicans took control of the House, we adopted a new rule known as CUTGO, which requires that any new direct spending be offset by cuts to other direct spending programs.

We should reduce spending and reform our entitlement programs, Mr. Speaker. House Republicans have shown we are willing to do so, and we earnestly desire a partner in the Senate and the White House to do just that. But we should also grow our economy. This bill will help us do just that, and we hope we will find partners on the other side of the aisle.

Again, I want to say that the PAYGO amendment made by H. Res. 576 is substantially identical to section 401 of Senator Wyden's extenders bill, S. 2260, the EXPIRE Act. My guess is my colleagues will be supporting that.

I now would like to turn our attention back to the subject at hand, charter schools, and I yield 2 minutes to my distinguished colleague from North Carolina (Mr. Holding).

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

As my colleague from North Carolina points out, support for school choice is growing. A 2013 public opinion survey found that 73 percent of Americans supported school choice, whereas 67 percent of Americans supported school choice in 2010.

Forty-two States and the District of Columbia have passed legislation to support the funding of public charter schools. They are becoming more popular. In the 2012-2013 academic year, more than 500 new charter schools opened across the country, which means there are now 6,200 charter schools in America and 2 million charter school students.

If recent growth continues, they will double in number by 2025 and will educate 4.6 million children. That amounts to 10 percent of all public school students.

Another sign of their popularity is that charter schools have over 1 million students on their wait lists.

H.R. 10 modernizes and streamlines the current Charter Schools Program authorized under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act to ensure that States can support the replication and expansion of high- quality charter schools.

These schools empower parents to play a more active role in their child's education, open doors for teachers to pioneer fresh teaching methods, encourage State and local innovation, and help students escape underperforming schools.

H.R. 10 is a commonsense approach to updating the Charter Schools Program by streamlining multiple charter school programs, improving quality, and promoting the growth of the charter school sector at the State level.

This bill benefits children, their parents, and--ultimately--our economy. By increasing the number of high-quality charter schools, more children will acquire the skills they need to succeed in a competitive global economy.

We owe it to our children to provide them with the best education possible, and that is what this bill was designed to do.

For these reasons, I urge my colleagues to support this rule and the underlying bill.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Unfortunately, over the last 4 decades, the Federal Government's role in elementary and secondary education has increased dramatically. The Department of Education currently runs more than 80 K-12 education programs, many of which overlap.

As a school board member, I saw how the vast reporting requirements for these Federal programs tie the hands of State and local school leaders and prevent them from making the best education available to their students.

Since 1965, Federal education funding has tripled, yet student achievement remains flat. More money is clearly not going to solve the challenges we face in education.

Unfortunately, the Obama administration has refused to work with Congress to address these challenges and has, instead, taken unprecedented action to further expand its authority over America's schools.

Through the President's waiver scheme and pet programs such as Race to the Top, the Secretary of Education has granted himself complete discretion to use taxpayer dollars to coerce States into enacting the President's preferred education reforms.

Adding insult to injury, President Obama continues to push for more Federal education spending, requesting a staggering $82.3 billion in mandatory and discretionary funds for the Department of Education in his fiscal year 2015 budget.

Our children deserve better, Mr. Speaker. It is past time to acknowledge more taxpayer dollars and more Federal intrusion cannot address the challenges facing schools.

H.R. 10 recognizes that local communities know their needs better than any bureaucrat in Washington and supports the sharing of best practices among charter schools and traditional public schools. Our students do better when educators work together to put in place the best strategies to help students learn.

Additionally, H.R. 10 specifically encourages charter schools to reach out to at-risk students in their communities, as well as those who have disabilities or are English learners.

Again, the local officials know best how to serve their communities, and the Federal Government should not tie their hands as they work to make the best decisions for their students.

I urge my colleagues, therefore, Mr. Speaker, to support this rule and the underlying bill.

I reserve the balance of my time.

We do not have further speakers, Mr. Speaker, but I do intend to share some additional information on this bill and the rule.

Mr. Speaker, I want to truly thank my colleague from Colorado for his eloquent words of support for charter schools and for his past efforts in this area. I particularly want to thank him for urging the Senate to take up this legislation. As he well knows, we have a lot of good legislation over in the Senate that has not been acted upon, and I hope this bill will have a better fate in the Senate than other bills have had.

Mr. Speaker, it would be imprudent to have a conversation about education and the use of taxpayer money without discussing the need for accountability. Hardworking taxpayers want to see their tax dollars being used in the best way possible and expect the Federal Government to be a wise steward of their dollars.

H.R. 10 builds on the principle of local accountability by modernizing the Charter Schools Program to authorize States to use the funding to replicate and expand high-quality charter schools. The schools with proven student success will have the opportunity to offer those advantages to more students.

States and local educators know their students best, and I urge my colleagues to modernize Federal school programs and respond to these needs by supporting both this rule and the underlying bill.

Mr. Speaker, many of my Republican colleagues and I would prefer we abide by the Constitution and take the Federal Government out of education altogether, but that is not what we are recommending here today because we know we can't achieve that goal. My assumption, though, is that all Members of Congress--all Members of Congress--agree that as long as taxpayer money is being used by the Federal Government to fund education, that Congress has a responsibility to make a strong effort to ensure that those who receive hardworking taxpayer money are being held accountable for how they use it. Washington should live within its means, just as families all across this country do, and limited resources require wise stewardship.

This bill consolidates multiple funding streams and grant programs that support charter schools into the existing State grant program, eliminating a separate authorization for charter school facilities funding. It reduces the overall authorization for charter school programs from $450 million to $300 million. By consolidating the funding streams into the existing State charter school program, the bill removes authority from the Secretary of Education to pick winners and losers and control the growth of the charter school sector. This authority is placed largely in the hands of States, where it belongs.

H.R. 10 promotes high-quality charter schools by updating the Charter Schools Program to reflect the success and growth of the charter school movement. States are authorized to use funds under the program to support the replication and expansion of high-quality charter schools in addition to supporting new innovative charter school models.

Mr. Speaker, my background as an educator, school board member, mother, and grandmother reinforces my belief that students are best served when people at the local level are in control of education decisions. I also believe that education is the most important tool that Americans at any age can have.

I was the first person in my family to graduate from high school and went to college, where I worked full-time and attended school part- time. It took me 7 years to earn my bachelor's degree, and I continued to work my way through my master's and doctoral degrees. From my own experience, I am convinced this is the greatest country in the world for many reasons, not the least of which is that a person like me, who grew up extremely poor in a house with no electricity and no running water, with parents with very little formal education and no prestige at all, could work hard and be elected to the United States House of Representatives.

No legislation is perfect, and that is why I look forward to working with my colleagues to address their concerns and improve this legislation through the amendment process. However, I have never been one to let the perfect be the enemy of the good. And while H.R. 10 isn't perfect, it is a step in the right direction of empowering parents, teachers, and local school districts, and increasing school choice and giving other young people the same opportunities that I and others have had to improve our lot in life. That is why I am a supporter of this legislation, and I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this rule and the underlying bill.

Mr. Speaker, with that, I offer an amendment to the resolution.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the amendment and on the resolution.