Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman, my good friend from Florida, for yielding me the customary 30 minutes.

Just last week, I found myself standing here, managing a rule for two very similar bills. At the time, I thought we were on a merry-go-round, aimlessly moving in useless circles. I will stand by that analogy again today.

When similar bills came before Congress last session, the Senate didn't pass them. The President said he would not sign them, as he has this particular legislation. It seems to me that these measures are a foregone conclusion.

Ultimately, the same tired talking points might be a fun ride for some, but they will never actually take you anywhere. This kind of spinning in circles is a favorite tactic, it seems, of my friends on the other side of the aisle.

For example, this Congress has already taken 109 antienvironmental votes. Last Congress, it was 247. These were votes against clear air, against clean water, and to destroy our planet for future generations.

Under Republican leadership, we have also voted to repeal, as we did a day or so ago, the Affordable Care Act 50 different times, a law that, in many respects, has led to millions of Americans signing up for health insurance that didn't have it before.

And I will continue to ask my colleagues: If you don't like that particular measure, where is yours that would replace it? And apparently, nothing is forthcoming, at least until this time.

Based on the frequency of these quixotic votes, it is obvious that my friends across the aisle have given up or are not interested in governing or addressing any of the issues that are most pressing to this Nation.

Consider, for instance, that there are 2 million Americans relying on Congress to extend unemployment insurance, with close to 200,000 of them being unemployed veterans who have sacrificed time and again for our country.

Last week, I said the following:

We should be spending the House's time on extending

unemployment insurance, working on comprehensive immigration

reform, and raising the minimum wage.

My friends on the other side of the aisle have continued to ignore the plight of middle class and working poor Americans, immigrants hoping for a better life for their families, and denying the undeniable impact of climate change, just to name a few.

We should be raising the minimum wage in order to give millions of hardworking Americans the pay they have earned. Nearly 5 years have passed since the last increase in the Federal minimum wage. Currently, a full-time minimum wage worker makes less than $16,000 per year, which is below the poverty line for a family of two or more.

My friends did not take my suggestions last week, and I doubt they will take them this week. Instead, we are considering two more pointless bills that will go nowhere. One of them, the acronym for it is RAPID. That is correct. Rapidly and fastly, it will go nowhere.

The first of today's bills, H.R. 2641, ignores the fact that, for more than 40 years, the National Environmental Policy Act has provided an effective framework for all types of proposed actions that require Federal approval pursuant to a Federal law, such as the Clean Water Act.

H.R. 2641 is based on the assumption that the NEPA environmental review and permitting process results in project delays.

However, when we considered this measure last Congress, the Congressional Research Service reported that delays in construction project approvals ``are more often tied to local, State, and project- specific factors.'' These factors include ``primarily local/State agency priorities, project funding levels, local opposition to a project, project complexity, or late changes in project scope,'' not to mention the litigation that goes on surrounding these measures.

CRS goes even further, reporting that even most environmental project delays are not the result of NEPA, but actually due to ``laws other than NEPA.'' The measure undermines current regulatory protections and could jeopardize public health and safety by prioritizing speed over meaningful analysis.

Now, turning to H.R. 2824, the other measure included in today's rule, which, like the 50 times that we voted to repeal the Affordable Care Act, my Republican friends have done that, they have also offered 50 rules which are not open rules in spite of the fact that we began this session by the Speaker of the House saying that this would be the most open House that we have had.

H.R. 2824 included in this rule is no more productive than the previous legislation offered. The legislation would overturn a court decision in order to block a buffer requirement designed to prevent damage to waterways from surface coal mining operations. These are protections that President Ronald Reagan put in place.

The Environmental Protection Agency estimates that over 500 mountains have been destroyed by the practice of mountaintop removal mining, more than 1.2 million acres of forest has been eliminated, and nearly 2,000 miles of streams have been buried or polluted by these mining projects. I wonder what part of knocking a mountaintop off do people not understand as destruction, and if it is to be, that it should be done carefully.

These are protections for all of us in our society. As many as 60,000 additional cases of cancer in central Appalachia are directly linked to mountaintop removal, and more than 700 additional deaths from heart disease occur each year.

Last month, West Virginia University scientists published a study confirming high air pollution levels around mountaintop removal coal mines, suggesting a link to the higher rates of cardiovascular disease, birth defects, and cancer that is seen in these communities.

Instead of addressing these issues, H.R. 2824 would reinstate a George W. Bush administration rule that essentially prohibits the United States Department of the Interior from implementing any protections for streams against mountaintop removal and coal mining.

Let me lift the comment of Judge Charles Haden in a case called Bragg v. Robertson. The judge says:

When valley fills are permitted in intermittent and

perennial streams, they destroy those stream segments. The

normal flow and gradient of the stream is now buried under

millions of cubic yards of excess spoil waste material, an

extremely adverse effect. If there are fish, they cannot

migrate. If there is any life form that cannot acclimate to

life deep in a rubble pile, it is eliminated. No effect on

related environmental values is more adverse than

obliteration. Under a valley fill, the water quality of the

stream becomes zero. Because there is no stream, there is no

water quality.

The Bush rule in '08 was vacated by the District of Columbia District Court on February 20, 2014. The Obama administration started to draft new stream protections upon taking office, into which the minority has conducted a long, fruitless investigation. Indeed, the years of investigation have uncovered no misconduct. The only results of the investigation are wasted time and taxpayer money, sending over 13,500 pages of documents, 25 hours of audio recordings, 19,000 staff hours, and costing the United States Department of the Interior and Office of Surface Mining approximately $1.5 million.

We saw an example yesterday in one of our committees investigating the Internal Revenue Service for something that just simply has not occurred in any partisan fashion. And I can demonstrate that because, if one believes that the IRS only went after conservative organizations within the time period that was being investigated by the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, then it was not during that period that my church, Mt. Hermon AME Church in Fort Lauderdale, received the same kind of notices that are being complained about; and what we did was what everybody has every right to do, which is make the necessary appeal, and we were successful in that regard.

All of these partisan witch hunts need to stop. We are a better people than this, and we should be about the business of the people of the United States of America.

Mr. Speaker, today's measure exists as partisan talking points, bumper sticker talk by my Republican colleagues, rather than serious legislation to move this country forward.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I would advise my good friend from Florida that I have no additional speakers at this time and would be prepared to close. So I reserve the balance of my time if you have additional speakers.

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

Mr. Speaker, one of the sages of America who is often quoted is Will Rogers. One of the things that I paraphrase that he said was: Buy land, because we are not making any more of that. And I use it as an analogy for mountaintop mining, knocking off the tops of these mountains. We ain't making no more mountains. Although I guess we can because in Florida we have what we call trash mountains. So I guess we can build something up, but I doubt very seriously that the quality of it will be of the kind that we see with the mountain ranges of this great America.

Mr. Speaker, these bills are about protecting special interests that happen to be near and dear to some of my friends across the aisle. We are here voting on tired, discredited, and destructive policies that have absolutely no chance of becoming law. This is a failure of leadership by my Republican colleagues and, quite frankly, a waste of time. We should not be considering measures that will help destroy this planet for our children and grandchildren. We need strong environmental protections to ensure that we have clean air, clean water, and clean food.

Mr. Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to the rule to bring up H.R. 3546, Mr. Levin's bill to extend emergency unemployment insurance for the long-term unemployed across this country for whom it has run out.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of the amendment in the Record along with extraneous material immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.

Mr. Speaker, it is a very sad thing that we continue to let people languish without fulfilling our responsibility to them with reference to unemployment insurance. It is a detriment to this Nation, and it serves us no useful purpose to continue delaying this particular effort.

While I do have the floor for a moment, I do wish to address legislation that I hope does come here with reference to our offering assistance to the people in Ukraine who should have an opportunity to make their own determination regarding their future and that we should stand with and, I am sure, are prepared to do so in an effort to assist them.

Mr. Speaker, I had the good fortune of being the president of the Parliamentary Assembly for the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe. During that time, I went to Ukraine on three different occasions, and during that time, I had the good fortune to be the lead monitor after the Orange Revolution; so it is not that I don't have a clear understanding of much that is going on. But what I hope my colleagues here will do is recognize that the Baltics, the Balkans, and the near abroad of Russia and Europe are in need of clarity with reference to matters and not simpleminded, noncomplex answers to very difficult problems that Ukraine is now faced with. It is a nationwide, continuing problem for us.

Mr. Speaker, apparently, we do have some other speaker en route, so I am required to reserve the balance of my time, as I anticipated I might be.

Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close, and will. I will close with what I said yesterday. When I was a child, Tennessee Ernie Ford sang a song about coal mining. It was that you load 16 tons and what do you get? Another day older and deeper in debt.

I have been in Appalachia, as have many of my friends. I went to school in Tennessee, and often had an opportunity to travel to Kentucky and other areas during that period of time, and I have been in West Virginia. I have seen the conditions that many people work in.

I would only hope that they know that there are voices here who believe, just like throughout the rest of this Nation, in spite of the awesomeness of the work that they do in coal mining--and I might add as a footnote, there has been no deterioration in the job market with reference to coal mining--all that is being sought is that coal mining be done in a safe manner, and that the people living in those surroundings have the same kind of quality air, quality water, and quality food that is desperately needed by everybody.

We need look no further than West Virginia and accidents that have occurred there. Nobody wanted that to happen. Indeed, what we saw were corporate dodges of people who had taken advantage of smaller communities. That needs to stop.

I believe my colleagues here want to see to it that we have a situation where those who are working in these environments have an opportunity for safety and have an opportunity for clean air in their regions as well as water and food.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' and defeat the previous question, and to vote ``no'' on the underlying bill.

I yield back the balance of my time.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in very strong support

of this legislation, which is a beginning step, and which I hope we will follow with all that we can to assist those Ukrainians who are courageous and forward leaning to be about the business of determining their own fate. I had the good fortune of being an election monitor immediately after the Orange Revolution, and I spent a lot of time talking to the people there. What I learned, if nothing more, is that they do have the courage of their convictions.

What I want us to do, and what I beg my colleagues that speak about this matter to understand, is that it is extremely complex. It is nothing that you can put on a bumper sticker, and it is unfair to President Obama for people to take to this floor and allow that he is ``leading from behind,'' as I just heard a Member say. What that Member needs to understand is that it is not easy to make a determination in these kinds of matters. Whereas Putin is a dictator, Obama is in a democracy.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Mr. Monroe Udell and Ms. Linda Zakeheim, the owners of Jaxson's Ice Cream Parlour located in Dania Beach, Florida.

Jaxson's has long been a staple in Dania Beach and this cultural landmark currently employs more than 70 people. Now, Monroe and Linda have taken it upon themselves to improve the standard of living for their employees. On February 24, 2014--the day of Monroe's 86th birthday--Jaxson's raised their minimum wage from $7.93 to $10.10 an hour.

Monroe and Linda have always appreciated the work their employees do to create a top rated restaurant. This higher minimum wage will allow their employees to enjoy a better standard of living and improved economic security. It will allow them to contribute more to the South Florida economy. And, it will show other businesses in the region that paying a higher wage is possible, profitable, and the right thing to do.

In 1965, Boisey Waiters, Dania's first African American City Commissioner, told me about Jaxson's, and I instantly became a fan. Monroe first opened the restaurant in 1953, and even then, it was a beacon. At that time, most establishments in Broward County did not serve colored people. Yet, from the very beginning Monroe took a stand against segregation by hiring and serving all restaurant patrons, regardless of race. That is why I was not surprised to hear that Monroe and Linda acted on their own conscience to help their employees afford a better lifestyle. Sixty-one years later, Jaxson's is still showing the way with their actions to better support their employees.

The employees of Jaxson's have worked tirelessly to develop the reputation of a restaurant that provides excellent food, great ice cream, and a family friendly atmosphere.

Mr. Speaker, I am so pleased to acknowledge and thank Monroe Udell, Linda Zakeheim, General Manager Jerry Smith, as well as all the employees working at Jaxson's. I wish them many more years of success.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life and legacy of Dr. Gwendolyn Louise McCord Hankerson, who sadly passed away on February 13, 2014.

Born in White Springs, Florida to the late William Quinton McCord and the late Allie Mae King McCord, Gwen dedicated her life to giving back to her community. A graduate of Dillard High School's Class of 1949, she went on to receive a Bachelor's Degree in Education from North Carolina Central University in Durham, North Carolina in 1953.

Gwen taught third grade at Carver Ranches Elementary School and later became the first principal of Dillard High Community School. In addition, she worked at numerous schools throughout the county, such as Lauderdale Manors, Nova Blanche Forman, and Norfolk Elementary.

After retiring from Broward County Public Schools in the mid 1980s, she taught at Phyllis Wheatley Elementary in the Dade County School System. Building on her teaching career, she received her Master's Degree in Education from Florida Atlantic University (FAU) in Boca Raton, Florida, as well as a Doctorate in Social Psychology and Physiology from Eastern Pennsylvania University.

Gwen made many significant contributions to her community through her passion for education. As a pioneer change agent, she was ``the first'' many times over in the political realm. Gwen was the first African American appointed to the Judicial Selection Board by Governor Lawton Chiles, the first African American appointed to the Personnel Advisory Board by Commissioner John Hart, the first African American female to run for office in the City of Lauderdale Lakes, the first female swimming coach for Dillard High School, and the first principal of Dillard High Community School.

When Gwen retired, she continued to be a staunch educational advocate. She was one of the founding members and one of the original incorporators of the Sistrunk Historical Festival and the Lalee Terrace Rebuild Foundation. Furthermore, Gwen founded the Broward Branch of the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. Southern Christian Leadership Conference.

She initiated the Elders Council of the African American Research Library and Cultural Center to gather stories about African American pioneers of Broward County for her book entitled, Across the Tracks. Additionally, Gwen was a board member for the Literacy Coalition of Broward County, chairperson of the Lauderdale Lakes School Advisory Board, Vice President of the Northwest Democratic Executive Board, Treasurer of the Pride of Fort Lauderdale Elks Lodge, Temple #395, a member of the Order of Eastern Stars, an advisor to the Dillard High School Alumni & Friends Association, Inc., and a member of the Planning and Zoning Board for Broward County.

Gwen was the recipient of numerous awards and honors. In 2011, she received the Rosa Parks Award and the Mildred Hastings Tenacity Award, which was named in honor of my late mother.

A long-time member and officer of Mount Hermon AME Church, Gwen had the very first wedding there on June 11, 1954. She was happily married to Tommie Lee for almost 60 years. She is survived by her husband; four adult children, Charles Holiday, Sr., Kenneth Hankerson, Sr., Evangelist Allison Hankerson-Harris, and Attorney Terri Lynn Hankerson; 11 grandchildren; and 12 great grandchildren.

Mr.Speaker, the Hankerson family and friends, our nation, Florida, and Broward County have lost a remarkable person who made life better for humankind.

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

I thank the gentlewoman from North Carolina, my friend, Ms. Foxx, for yielding me the customary 30 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, we continue down this path of considering bills that are going nowhere. I sincerely wish my friends on the other side of the aisle would stop this Conservative merry-go-round.

The majority leader called this week ``stop government abuse week.'' Abuse? Really?

My friends on the other side of the aisle have continued to ignore the plight of middle class and working poor Americans, immigrants hoping for a better life for their families, and denying the undeniable impact of climate change, just to name a few.

This is even after shutting down the government for purely political purposes and playing a game of chicken with the debt limit; and yet, my Republican friends are calling routine government work ``abuse.'' That seems like a stretch to me.

Abuse is when underregulated industries spill unknown chemicals into the West Virginia water supply. Abuse is when coal ash pours into the waters of North Carolina, when Wall Street bankers crash our economy after taking advantage of underfunded and overworked regulators; that is exactly the kind of abuse that the government needs to stop.

You want to talk about abuse? Let's talk about today's measure.

This bill will not make the regulatory process more balanced or transparent. It will strangle it in red tape. It will not make rulemaking more fair. It will tip the scales in favor of businesses with the most resources.

Under this measure, improving access to health care and restraining the financial institutions that have unleashed havoc on our economy will become even more difficult.

It is nothing more than poorly disguised political fodder aimed at stymieing the executive branch's rulemaking power in favor of some corporate interests that run amuck on the environment and American workers.

Most egregious is the requirement for agencies to provide the private sector early consultation on major rules.

This would give well-funded industry an unfair advantage not afforded to the general public and other stakeholders like public interest, taxpayer, and environmental groups.

Clearly, the interest in amending UMRA only extends to certain privileged parties.

If my friends on the other side of the aisle want to see what happens when you allow private interests to run rampant without any government regulations, they need only look to the smog-filled skies above China.

This bill also politicizes independent agencies designed to protect the rights of hardworking Americans. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Securities Exchange Commission, National Labor Relations Board, Consumer Product Safety Commission, as well as the Federal Communications Commission--I might add they kind of left out the Federal Reserve for some reason I don't understand--but all of those other agencies will all have to answer to the whims of politics.

It also forces agencies to choose the cheapest regulatory option over the

best. This is legislating the answer to the same kind of question that a homeowner has to decide when hiring a contractor: Do you want it done cheap, or do you want it done right?

Look, I get it. I understand where we are in the Congressional cycle; but I think that it is unfortunate that my friends across the aisle would rather score political points and write bumper stickers than actually legislate.

While I think it is a good thing that most of these partisan measures will never go anywhere, I can't help but point out that we should be making better use of our limited time here.

We should be raising the minimum wage in order to give millions of hardworking Americans the pay they have earned.

Nearly 5 years have passed since the last increase in the Federal minimum wage.

Currently, a full-time minimum wage worker makes less than $16,000 per year, which is below the poverty line for a family of two or more.

This is unacceptable. It is time for Republicans to end their relentless obstruction and to join Democrats in an effort to provide for the middle class.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I would advise my good friend from North Carolina that I have no further requests for time and that I am prepared to close or to reserve as she sees fit.

Mr. Speaker, does my colleague want me to go forward and close or does she want me to reserve?

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

I thank the gentlelady.

I indicated I was prepared to close, but I have been advised that we need to occupy a little time as well. So I yield myself such time as I may consume, and we will try to be slow about it.

Mr. Speaker, in this particular legislation, the minority views that were developed allow, among other things, the following:

The Unfunded Mandates Information and Transparency Act would be an assault on health, safety, and environmental protections. This legislation would erect new barriers to slow down the regulatory process, and it would give corporations an unfair advantage in the regulatory process;

Section 5 of the bill would repeal language that excludes independent regulatory agencies from the reporting requirements of the Unfunded Mandate Reform Act, with the exception of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve and the Federal Open Market Committee. I spoke to that earlier. I found that passage strange.

The Office of Management and Budget is responsible for overseeing the UMRA process. Since the independent agencies would be under the direction of OMB for purposes of UMRA compliance, this could compromise the independence of those agencies.

Section 7 of H.R. 899 would create a new point of order in the House of Representatives for legislation containing an unfunded mandate, making it more difficult to enact legislation.

Section 8 would incorporate a cost-benefit requirement from Executive Order 12866, but it would not include language from the same executive order directing agencies to perform these assessments to the extent feasible.

Section 10 would require agencies to provide impacted parties in the private sector--but not other stakeholders--with an advanced opportunity to provide input on proposed regulations. It would require agencies to conduct consultations with private sector businesses as early as possible, before the issuance of a notice of proposed rulemaking. Expanding this consultation requirement only to the private sector could allow businesses to have an advantage over other stakeholders, as I mentioned previously, such as taxpayers and environmental groups, with reference to the development of regulatory proposals.

During consideration of this bill by the committee, one of the Members offered an amendment that stated that any opportunities or rights afforded to a corporation under this section shall also be afforded to any interested individual. The amendment was rejected.

My good friend on the other side mentioned the fact that I pointed out that we continue to have one House legislation that goes nowhere in the Senate. And she pointed correctly to the fact--and I stand with her if it needs to be corrected--that there were 76 measures that reached the President's desk, and that 64 of them came out of the House of Representatives. Not knowing all of the statistical imperatives, my belief would be that of that 64 that came out of House of Representatives, a substantial number of them had companion legislation. I questioned whether or not this particular measure that we are addressing today has companion legislation in the Senate, and that is why I feel that it is not going to go anywhere.

Listen, one side is arguing that we need to start the 2014 election right now and don't do anything else that is going to allow for both bodies--it is true, as my colleague said, that the Constitution mentions the House of Representatives first, but it does not give the House of Representatives autonomy in the sense that they, and they alone, can pass legislation. So there is a requirement here that has not been being met, and that is that the Senate and House confer on matters of legislation and then offer it up to the executive branch.

We seem to have circumvented that process. And what we are doing, rather than pass, or at least address--I am fascinated by the fact that I don't believe my colleagues have the courage of their convictions. If we were to put a flood insurance measure on the floor not on suspension, I doubt very seriously that it would not pass. It will pass if it were to come to the floor that way.

I believe that if we offer up a reasonable minimum wage, I don't think anybody in this country can say that $16,000 for a family of two or more people is sufficient in order for them to be able to meet requisites having to do with food and rent alone, let alone educating their children or providing daycare.

I don't think anybody really is against those who paid into the employment system receiving unemployment compensation, and yet we find ourselves here repeatedly addressing a significant number of matters.

Someone wrote the other day, if they got a stain on their tie, it would be because of ObamaCare. My goodness gracious, people, we are a legislative body. We could be about the business of serious legislating. That kind of legislating would require, among other

things, not just bipartisan activity as this legislation has manifested itself as being bipartisan, but it would allow that we would really sit down and talk through the things that are needed in this country.

There is nobody around that doesn't believe that we have bridges that are in disrepair. I haven't found anyone that said that if we invested in infrastructure, that it would not create more jobs in this country. The people want us to do this, and not to do one-sided, one-way measures that are not going to go anywhere anytime soon.

I reserve the balance of my time.

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

I will insert in the Record the Statement of Administration Policy, and I will only lift one paragraph, and that is the last paragraph and sentence.

``H.R. 899 would unnecessarily add to the already robust analytical and procedural requirements of the rulemaking process. In particular, H.R. 899 would create needless grounds for judicial review, unduly slowing the regulatory process. In addition, it would add layers of procedural steps that would interfere with agency priority setting and compliance with statutory mandates.''

I guess, not surprisingly to my friends on the other side, ``If H.R. 899 were presented to the President, his senior advisors would recommend that he veto the bill.''

Mr. Speaker, contrary to my friend's favorite rhetoric, the free market does not solve all problems. Markets fail. We have seen that, have we not? Government is the actor of last resort when the market does not create the necessary incentives for businesses and individuals to protect the public good.

What is more, Federal regulations are not strangling the economy or preventing growth. In fact, it is quite the opposite.

As the Office of Management and Budget has reported, major Federal regulations issued over the last 10 years resulted in annual benefits from $193 billion to $800 billion, while costs are only between $57 billion to $84 billion.

It seems to me that an $84 billion investment with an $800 million return is not a bad thing.

Mr. Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I am going to offer an amendment to the rule to bring up legislation that would raise the minimum wage to $10.10 an hour and give at least 25 million Americans a well-deserved pay raise.

A business in the constituency that I serve did this on their own. Jaxson's Ice Cream Parlour in Dania Beach raised it because they said they feel the pain of the people that work with them and that they made a fair profit and wanted to share it with them.

The American people are calling for an economy that works for everyone, not just those at the top.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of the amendment in the Record, along with extraneous material, immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' and defeat the previous question. Vote ``no'' on the underlying bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Statement of Administration Policy

H.R. 899--Unfunded Mandates Information and Transparency Act of 2013

(Rep. Foxx, R-NC, and 4 cosponsors, February 27, 2014)

The Administration is committed to ensuring that

regulations are tailored to advance statutory goals in a

manner that is efficient and cost-effective, and that

minimizes uncertainty. By layering on additional, burdensome

judicial review and other unnecessary changes to the

regulatory process, H.R. 899, the Unfunded Mandates

Information and Transparency Act of 2013, would introduce

needless uncertainty into agency decision-making and

undermine the ability of agencies to provide critical public

health and safety protections. Accordingly, the

Administration strongly opposes House passage of H.R. 899.

When a Federal agency promulgates a regulation, the agency

must adhere to the robust and well-understood procedural

requirements of Federal law, including the Administrative

Procedure Act, the Regulatory Flexibility Act, the Unfunded

Mandates Reform Act, the Paperwork Reduction Act, and the

Congressional Review Act. In addition, for decades, agency

rulemaking has been guided by executive orders issued and

followed by administrations of both political parties. These

require regulatory agencies to promulgate regulations upon a

reasoned determination that the benefits justify the costs,

to consider regulatory alternatives, and to promote

regulatory flexibility.

The President's regulatory approach has been consistent

throughout his Administration. We don't have to choose

between protecting the health, welfare, and safety of

Americans and promoting economic growth, job creation,

competitiveness, and innovation--we can do both. To this end,

Executive Order 13563 requires careful cost-benefit analysis,

increased public participation, harmonization of rulemaking

across agencies, and flexible regulatory approaches. Through

executive orders and other presidential directives, agencies

must ensure that they take into account the consequences of

rulemaking on small businesses. And, through Executive Orders

13579 and 13610, the Administration has also taken important

steps to promote systematic retrospective review of

regulations by all agencies, including encouraging

independent agencies to conduct such a review. Collectively,

these requirements promote flexible, cost-effective

regulation.

H.R. 899 would unnecessarily add to the already robust

analytical and procedural requirements of the rulemaking

process. In particular, H.R. 899 would create needless

grounds for judicial review, unduly slowing the regulatory

process. In addition, it would add layers of procedural steps

that would interfere with agency priority setting and

compliance with statutory mandates.

If H.R. 899 were presented to the President, his senior

advisors would recommend that he veto the bill.

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

Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the European Parliament's February 20, 2014 public hearing on Afrophobia, as well as the critical importance of continuing to work with the European Union (EU) to address racism and discrimination against Black Europeans. It has been organized by the Green Party in collaboration with the European Network Against Racism (ENAR) and the European Coalition of Cities Against Racism (ECCAR).

An estimated seven to ten million individuals of African descent currently live in Europe, particularly in France, the United Kingdom, and The Netherlands. These populations form an influential part of the African Diaspora. From labor and scholarship to politics and civil rights, they have contributed greatly to European history and culture over the past several centuries. However, the story of Black Europeans remains widely untold, rendering many of their past and present contributions to the political and social life of Europe invisible or forgotten. Furthermore, similar to the experiences of many African Americans, they have increasingly become the targets of discrimination, pernicious racial profiling, and violent hate crimes impacting equal access to housing, employment, education, and justice.

I commend Members of the European Parliament Jean-Jacob Bicep, Jean Lambert, and Philippe Lamberts of the Greens/European Free Alliance (EFA) for building upon previous efforts and hosting a public hearing on Afrophobia in the EU. As the Ranking Democratic Member of the Helsinki Commission, I have long worked with European policymakers, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and community leaders to help address inequality and discrimination facing persons of African descent.

In November 2013, the U.S. Helsinki Commission hosted an Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe Office of Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (OSCE/ODIHR) delegation of Black European Rights Leaders representing 10 countries.

During a Commission briefing, entitled ``Europeans of African Descent `Black Europeans': Race, Rights, and Politics,'' members of the delegation shed light on the challenges encountered by many Black Europeans due to ongoing racism and discrimination, including barriers to greater political representation and leadership opportunities. Furthermore, they drew attention to the need for increased cooperation between Europe and the United States to combat racial discrimination and continuing racial disparities.

In conjunction with the Delegation's visit, I introduced H. Res. 421 ``Recognizing People of African Descent and Black Europeans'', which outlines concrete steps that the United States can take to help address racism and discrimination in Europe. It calls for the adoption of a Joint U.S.-European Union Action Plan to develop transatlantic solutions to combat racial discrimination and promote racial equality in Europe.

In addition, I sent a letter to President Obama on December 20, 2013 urging him to sign a Presidential Memorandum on ``International Initiatives to Advance Human Rights, Social Inclusion, Equality, and Empowerment of Peoples of African Descent.''

Mr. Speaker, Europe is currently grappling with complex questions at the intersection of national identity, decreasing birth rates, increasing immigration, security concerns, and a rise in extremist political parties. Cooperation between the United State and the EU is key to addressing the global challenges of racism and discrimination, and we should recognize the efforts made by the EU to address them.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor and pay tribute to the life of Dr. Leslie M. Collins, a lifelong educator, writer, and academic. Dr. Collins was a well respected professor who was always available to guide his students as they embarked on their careers. I was deeply saddened to hear of his passing this week.

For more than 50 years, Dr. Collins taught English and African- American literature at Fisk University in Nashville, Tennessee. Even after his retirement in 1979, he continued to teach several courses every year for nearly three decades. His dedication to education speaks for itself.

A graduate of Dillard University, Dr. Collins was awarded an M.A. from Fisk University in 1937 and a doctorate from Western Reserve University's Department of American Culture in 1945. His studies of the relationships between the peoples of the world through literature took him across the globe, to the Universities of Havana, Oslo, Florence and Madrid, as well as Africa, Europe, and the Mediterranean.

In 1945, Dr. Collins joined the English Department at Fisk University, where he taught courses ranging from Composition to Black Literature, Milton, and the Harlem Renaissance. For nearly 50 years, he reviewed books for the Nashville Tennessean, and in 1990, received an honorary doctorate of humane letters from Fisk University. The same year, his work One Hundred Years of Fisk Presidents was published, and later, his poem the Creole Girl was set to music and performed by the Black Music Repertory Ensemble of Chicago.

Mr. Speaker, we have lost a great academic and a gifted educator. Dr. Collins dedicated his life to reviving students' relationships with literature, and I feel blessed to have known him as a mentor. This week, my thoughts and prayers are with his family and friends, the Fisk University community, and the countless students whose lives he undeniably touched.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce the Community Gardening and Nutrition Act of 2014, legislation that creates a new pilot program within AmeriCorps VISTA focusing on creating and improving access to community gardens in areas with high poverty rates.

Community gardens have been shown to be very beneficial to the communities they serve. They improve quality of life, encourage self- reliance, and reduce family food budgets--all while producing highly nutritious food for participants. Additionally, community gardens create opportunities for recreation, social interaction, exercise, education, and economic development.

Providing new avenues for nourishment like the one in this legislation has become even more important since the recent cuts of $19 billion to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).

A report released in August 2013 by the Union of Concerned Scientists concluded that if Americans ate one extra serving of fruits or vegetables daily, there would be approximately 30,000 fewer deaths from cardiovascular diseases and $5 billion saved in health care costs in our nation every year. Nearly 130,000 deaths would be prevented and $17 billion saved in medical costs if that amount was increased to an additional two and a half cups of vegetables and two cups of fruit daily. These figures highlight the importance of making healthy foods more easily available for those who would benefit from them the most.

Mr Speaker, my legislation is very straightforward. It requires the creation of at least 40 new community garden projects in both urban and rural areas suffering from high poverty rates. AmeriCorps VISTA volunteers in this program will work with members of these communities to establish new gardens, which will help to expand general anti- poverty efforts, teach basic nutrition, and help provide affordable healthy food options. Within 90 days of the completion of the program, the Director will submit to Congress a report describing the projects that were created, information about the volunteers that were placed, and a recommendation regarding continuation and expansion of the program.

I can think of no better way to mark the 50th anniversary of the war on poverty than to rededicate ourselves to the principle of improving people's lives. We can do this by increasing access to healthy foods and fighting health crises like the obesity epidemic. Just last year, President Obama announced an expansion of the AmeriCorps program, led by the Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS), to develop new strategies for expanding national service. This legislation could play a significant role in these efforts. The pilot program created within the Community Gardening and Nutrition Act of 2014 will help to educate about the importance of nutrition and empower Americans living in impoverished regions to be more self-reliant while increasing access to healthier foods. I urge my colleagues to join me in support of this legislation.

I thank my friend.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to first say and credit the chairman of the Rules Committee for having addressed this problem. He has spoken about it to me and to others. The same holds for my cochair of the Florida delegation, Vern Buchanan. All of us on the Florida delegation, minus one person, are supportive of this particular measure.

Here is an opportunity then for us to defeat the previous question and bring this matter up now. Enough already of continuing to discuss it. We have had ample time to deal with this problem. Don't forget: Florida, among other States, is a donor-state in this business.

Mr. Speaker, it is my distinct honor to rise today in order to celebrate the service and accomplishments of Mr. Dan B. Kimball, Superintendent of Everglades National Parks. After 10 years, Dan will be retiring in March 2014.

During his tenure as superintendent, Dan consistently demonstrated his expertise and unwavering commitment to the preservation of our national parks. Upon his arrival in 2004, he was entrusted with managing the park's involvement in the restoration of the Everglades, the largest ecosystem restoration project in the world. He and his team faced complex challenges with skill and resolve, making invaluable contributions to the ongoing defense of the Everglades and to the balance of Florida's ecosystem.

A 20-year veteran of the National Park Service (NPS), Dan also served as the Chief

of National Park Service Water Resources Division. He was instrumental in the successful settlement of park water rights issues in the western United States, and in the continued protection of Yellowstone National Park. In addition, he has held positions at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Office of Surface Mining (OSM), as well as in various environmental consulting firms. His accomplishments have earned him a number of awards, including the U.S. Department of the Interior's (DOT) Superior Service Award (1989), the Stephen Tyng Mather Award for resource conservation given by the National Parks Conservation Association (1995), and the Pacific Northwest Regional Directors Award for Professional Excellence in Natural Resources (2002).

Mr. Speaker, I am so pleased that I had the opportunity to work with Mr. Dan Kimball. I want to offer my sincerest congratulations and heartfelt gratitude to him for all that he has done for the state of Florida and this nation. I wish him the very best on his retirement, and much success in his future pursuits.

Mr. Speaker, it is my great privilege to rise today and honor the Rev. Pamela Cahoon on the occasion of her retirement. The Rev. Cahoon has led for more than 30 years Christians Reaching Out to Society (C.R.O.S.) Ministries, as its executive director.

Her passion to end hunger began many years ago, when, as a child she noticed that some of her classmates did not have the benefit of a simple brown bag lunch. She persuaded her own mother to start packing extra lunches to share with classmates who had none of their own.

Today, her family and many others have joined her efforts to ensure that no one goes hungry. In one year alone, C.R.O.S. Ministries, under the Rev. Cahoon's leadership, provided emergency food to more than 40,000 individuals, more than 40 percent of whom were children; served 85,000 meals to hungry families in the ministries' kitchens; distributed 28,000 afterschool snacks to hungry kids; and sent home 16,000 brown bag lunches to ward off hunger for families during the long weekends.

C.R.O.S. Ministries also led efforts to gather food, salvaging more than 218,000 pounds of fresh produce from harvested fields, and then distributed the food to 100 nonprofit agencies across the county.

Although the Rev. Cahoon is retiring, I am sure that she will continue to be involved in local efforts to help people in need for many years to come.

Mr. Speaker, the Rev. Pamela Cahoon is someone with whom we can all admire and respect. I commend her for her selfless efforts to end hunger, and wish her the very best on her retirement.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Mr. Tom Kaiser, a veteran and member of America's Greatest Generation. Tom is a resident of Delray Beach, Florida, and has helped more than 500 South Florida veterans receive government awards and medals for their military service.

Thanks to Tom's dedication, veterans who helped to liberate France in WWII regularly are presented the Legion of Honor in special ceremonies by France's Consuls General from Miami. One of the men receiving this prestigious award is a Holocaust survivor who, after making it out of France, moved to the United States and served America in the Korean War.

Aside from helping veterans, Tom has also been instrumental in getting 22 war monuments placed at Boynton Beach's Veteran's Park. There are monuments dedicated to the Tuskegee Airmen, Korean War and other famous veterans and battles. Tom chairs the Boynton Beach Veteran's Council. Together with Ray Carter, the city's Fire Chief, he recently unveiled a memorial to the victims of 9/11 at the park. Tom noted at the ceremony that, ``it makes the park a history lesson, so that anytime of the year people can come and reflect.''

A humble man, Tom would be reluctant to accept the title of hero, but that is what he is to all the veterans who have gotten the recognition they deserve due to his efforts.

Mr. Speaker, the term Greatest Generation was created to describe Tom and others like him, who served our country so bravely. I am very pleased to honor him on this day.

I thank my friend, the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Bishop), for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, we have real problems facing our Nation. The measures before us today are partisan and have no chance of becoming law. My friends across the aisle would rather pick political battles than propose real solutions. We worked together on the farm bill, on the budget, and on the omnibus appropriations bill, and I hope that soon we will pass a bipartisan Water Resources Development Act conference report. Instead of continuing in a bipartisan manner, however, we are here once again considering partisan bills that will not become law. For example, H.R. 3964 is a far-reaching measure of drastic and immediate consequences for its chosen winners, yet the bill was introduced only a week ago and with only Republican cosponsors.

California is in the middle of a terrible drought. Some Californians are already reporting that no water comes out when they turn on their taps. They need a real solution. We have got our water issues in Florida. There is not enough of it in places that need it and too much of it where it is not needed. Yet my friends across the aisle have decided to handpick when states' rights don't matter and to take the opportunity to blast California's prerogative.

California has a plan--the Bay Delta Conservation Plan--that has been worked on in a unanimously important way. Instead, this legislation has turned a legitimate crisis into a justification for a power grab, prioritizing junior water rights holders over those with senior rights. I respect my colleagues from California, but the Governor is responsible for the entire State, and he expressly rejects the measure before us today.

Mr. Speaker, Californians already have, as I have said, a water use plan in place. The plan is a result of long, detailed discussions and carefully crafted policy. Yet this bill would substitute--indeed, preempt--the will of the people with a reactionary Federal policy. Specifically, the bill preempts California law, eliminates Endangered Species Act protections for salmon and other fisheries, overturns existing Federal law, as well as undermines existing agreements and court orders related to water use in California.

Moreover, this bill will not fix the problem, which is simple--there is not enough water. H.R. 3964 will not end the drought. It will not create more water. Simply put, it will only decide who will go thirsty.

California's secretary for natural resources, John Laird, wrote to the relevant committees:

The bill falsely holds the promise of water relief that

cannot be delivered because, in this drought, the water

simply does not exist.

How and when to direct water is very similar to problems we face in the Everglades. Without an ongoing flush of water into the ocean, seawater intrudes upon the delta. You then wind up with saltwater inland, and then you might as well not have any water at all.

I didn't have to deliberate long to decide against this bill. California, the State the bill supposedly helps, is strongly opposed to it. Let me be very clear. That means the Governor and those who are critical to it are opposed. I understand that there are members of the California delegation who do support this matter, and I respect that. I can't say it any better myself. The only way we are going to help California is to realize that you can't play politics with a person's drinking water.

Turning now to the other piece of legislation, H.R. 2954 is no better either substantively or procedurally. My friends across the aisle continue to play fast and loose with their pledge to address one issue at a time. That is what they said. H.R. 2954 is 10 unrelated bills stitched together. Some of the provisions we are looking at today are not controversial, but rather than pass noncontroversial provisions through less contentious means, my friends have packaged them together with partisan measures for rank political purposes.

It is Frankenstein's parliamentary monster.

The other day at the Rules Committee, my friends across the aisle talked about how much they love national parks, and shared their experiences hiking and visiting the parks with their families. Yet they are still bringing H.R. 2954 to the floor, a bill that would greatly hamstring the National Park Service, Bureau of Land Management, and the United States Forest Service in their capabilities to protect public land and endangered species.

These 10 bills are designed to influence or dictate management decisions about the conveyance or disposal of Federal lands. They tie the hands of public land managers and give away millions of dollars worth of Federal land to local governments without ensuring the land is used in the public's best interest.

They include drastic changes to regulations related to grazing policy and waive or undermine existing environmental law. Some of these provisions would be significantly less controversial were it not for the unnecessary provisions waiving environmental protections. It is no secret my friends across the aisle look to undermine, if not eliminate, the National Environmental Policy Act at every chance they can.

These are the kinds of policies that leave 300,000 West Virginians without

water to drink or bathe. We don't know the effects of the chemicals that spilled into the drinking water for 300,000 West Virginians. We don't know yet how much or even specifically what was spilled. The lasting damage to West Virginia's water supply can't be predicted. That is why it should be an exemplar for why we need to have careful environmental regulations everywhere.

Mr. Speaker, week after week, my Republican colleagues continue to bring up partisan bills that offer no relief to hardworking Americans. I believe that this institution is better than that and must change course.

I am astounded that we haven't authorized unemployment insurance.

Let me repeat that. I am astounded that we have not reauthorized unemployment insurance for now what is 1.6 million Americans. With each passing day, more families face the threat of losing their homes. With each passing day, our roads, bridges, schools, parks, ports, airports, and railways continue to degrade due to lack of adequate investment. With each passing day, Americans burdened by long-term unemployment see little, if any, action in the House of Representatives to give them hope.

With so many Americans and their families enduring difficult times, we cannot afford to wait any longer. Americans deserve peace of mind and a government that functions.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased at this time to yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from California (Ms. Matsui), a former member of the Rules Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased at this time to yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. McNerney), a member of the Energy and Commerce Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentlewoman from California (Ms. Eshoo), with whom I served previously on the Intelligence Committee and who is as a member of the Energy and Commerce Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Huffman), a member of the Natural Resources Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller), who is a member of the Education and Workforce Committee and a former chair of the relevant committee having to do with the environment.

Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, we gave the House an opportunity to consider flood insurance reform which the Senate has already adopted, but unfortunately it was denied. As incongruous as it might be, we consider it such an important issue, while we are here talking about an equally important issue, drought, to bring up this measure having to do with flood insurance. It is an important issue for families across the Nation, so today we will provide that opportunity again.

If we defeat the previous question, I am going to offer an amendment to this rule to bring up a bill that will delay flood insurance premium hikes and provide financial relief to thousands of American families and, specifically, families in Florida.

To discuss our proposal, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Nevada (Mr. Horsford), my good friend.

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased at this time to yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Courtney), my good friend.

I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased at this time to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Langevin), my good friend.

(Mr. LANGEVIN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, at this time, I am very pleased to yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters), who is the ranking member of the Committee on Financial Services.

I wish to make clear to my friend on the other side who continues to say that he wants to bring us back to the subject matter of this underlying bill that the minority has been granted a motion to recommit, and that motion to recommit is just as relevant as the underlying bill.

To speak to this issue, then, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California.

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Garcia) who is a dear personal friend of mine. He and I share concerns about issues related to Florida as well as this Nation, as it pertains to flood insurance.

I yield the gentleman an additional 15 seconds.

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 30 seconds to my good friend from Texas (Mr. Al Green).

I yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I am surprised that my friends across the aisle have failed to recognize the irony in bringing these bills together to the floor at the same time.

The California water bill is an acknowledgement of how important clean water is, while the public lands bill undermines our ability keep that water clean. It would be funny if it weren't the absolute truth of the matter.

Finally, Mr. Speaker, meteorologists are calling the high-pressure zone at the root of the drought in California ``the ridiculously resilient ridge.'' In that spirit, one could say that the Republicans' resistance to extending unemployment insurance, fixing our aging infrastructure, raising the debt ceiling, fixing flood insurance, and passing comprehensive immigration reform is also a resilience worthy of the same adverb.

I believe that it is time for Congress to get serious about moving our country forward. The motion to recommit is particularly relevant to all of us in this Nation as it pertains to flood insurance, and this underlying bill, as the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Eshoo) said earlier, is horrible.

I ask unanimous consent, Mr. Speaker, to insert the text of the amendment in the Record along with extraneous material immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' and defeat the previous question. I urge a ``no'' vote on the rule, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to

insert my statement into the Record in support of extending unemployment insurance for 1.6 million Americans instead of this radical Republican assault on women's health care rights.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the Health Care District of Palm Beach County. This organization is renowned in the South Florida community for its excellent work in providing comprehensive planning, funding, and health care service delivery to residents of Palm Beach County.

In the 25 years since its founding, the District's staff and volunteers have greatly contributed to the health and well-being of the citizens of Palm Beach County. In 1987, the Florida Legislature wisely recognized the need to provide ample access to health care services in the county, which worked as an impetus for the establishment of the Health Care District.

The Health Care District has since grown to encompass a wide variety of safety-net programs. These programs include the newly constructed Lakeside Medical Center for treating acute-needs patients, school health clinics that serve over 170 public schools, the Edward J. Healy Rehabilitation and Nursing Center, as well as a variety of other coverage programs for uninsured residents of this predominantly rural and agricultural county.

As the operator of the sole public hospital in Palm Beach County, the District has provided lifesaving care to over 3,000 severely injured trauma patients. It also provides health coverage to over 40,000 uninsured county residents, enables uninsured expectant mothers to receive over 70,000 services, and continues to assist over 170,000 county students, where nearly 683,000 visits have been made during the school year. In addition to this critical work, they have also treated over 23,000 visits to the Emergency Room at Lakeside Medical Center.

I am very proud of the Health Care District's work, and privileged to have such a phenomenal organization serving in my Congressional district. I want to personally commend all the hardworking and dedicated staff, along with the countless volunteers of the Health Care District for their service to the community.

Mr. Speaker, it is my distinct pleasure to recognize the Health Care District of Palm Beach County, and express my most sincere gratitude for all that they have accomplished. I wish them many more years of continued success.