Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the memory of Dr. Effie C. Grear, who died on May 16, 2012. Dr. Grear, a widely known and greatly beloved figure in her home town of Belle Glade, Florida and the other communities surrounding Lake Okeechobee, dedicated more than 50 years of her life as an educator. She earned her B.A. in Music Education from West Virginia State University, her M.A. in the same major from The Ohio State University, and her Doctorate in Educational Leadership from Nova Southeastern University.

Highlights of her career included organizing the first bands at Florida A&M University High School in Tallahassee and Smith-Brown High School in Arcadia, Florida. She later became Band Director at Lake Shore High School in Belle Glade and then Assistant Principal at that school. After moving to the Assistant Principal position at Glades Central High School, she eventually became Principal in 1976, a position she held until retiring in 1976.

Dr. Grear had a long record of community involvement as a member of the Advisory Boards of Glades Central High School's Criminal Justice Academy and the Glades Community Development Corporation, the Florida and National Associations of Secondary School Principals, the Palm Beach County Criminal Justice Commission, and the Association of School Curriculum Development. At the time of her passing, she was serving as a Commissioner on the Health Care District of Palm Beach County and its representative to the Glades General Hospital Advisory Board.

Among her many awards and honors are Belle Glade, Florida Chamber of Commerce Citizen of the Year (1982), Martin Luther King, Jr. Humanitarian Award from the Urban League of Palm Beach County (1988), Palm Beach County NAACP Community Service Award (1989), and the Florida Association of Women's Clubs Hattie T. Dorah Woman of the Year Award (1990). In 1991, she was named Florida Secondary School Principal of the Year. The following year, Dr. Grear was honored with the Ida S. Baker Distinguished Black Educator Award by the Governor and the Cabinet in Tallahassee.

In 2000, the Palm Beach County School Board recognized her long record of service to the boys and girls of the Glades area by naming the athletic field at Glades Central High School after her. That same year, I honored her myself with my Educational Leadership Award for Commitment to Boys and Girls in Palm Beach County, Florida. She was recognized again by Palm Beach Community College in 2004, when they gave her their Community Leadership Award during their annual Martin Luther King, Jr. Birthday Observance.

Mr. Speaker, Dr. Grear was married to the late William A. Grear, the first African American to serve as a City Commissioner in Belle Glade, Florida. The couple had two children, Rhonda Grear, a Registered Nurse, and William Grear, Jr., a digital technician with Bell South Corporation and former Belle Glade City Commissioner. Dr. Effie Grear enjoyed enormous respect among everyone in the educational field and all those familiar with her devotion to children and her love for her community. She was a good friend and mentor to many and she will be dearly missed.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the Dillard Center for the Arts Jazz Ensemble of Fort Lauderdale, Florida for their continued achievements and excellence, in winning of the Essentially Ellington Jazz Band Competition and Festival, for two consecutive years.

In addition to these back-to-back championships, the Jazz Ensemble in 2012 also took second place in the ``Essentially Ellington'' competition. Furthermore, they won first place at the ``Swing Central'' jazz competition in Savannah, Georgia in both 2011 and 2010.

Unlike many other programs which have ample resources and funding, private donations are scarce to Dillard's Jazz Ensemble. Therefore, these students' achievements go beyond their musical talent but also speak to their dedication to perform and compete through fundraising to support their own program.

This resolve proves there are no limits to the creative spirit of Dillard's Jazz Ensemble and there are no limits to the success that these students can achieve. I would like to take this opportunity to honor the 26 members of the band as well as Jazz Ensemble director Christopher Dorsey, all of which have contributed to this program's continued successes. Members of Dillard's Jazz Ensemble are: Liza Honorat, Shanice Richards, Ben Stocker, Christian Cummings, Markus Howell, Demonn Sands, Johnathan Hainsworth, Kirby Fellis, Cameron Fegers, Jordan Davis, Sam Gellerstein, Max Boiko, Christian Dorsey, Anthony Hervey, Bryan McCall, Armando Zamora, Zach Auslander, Anthony Morrison, Zach McKinney, Charlie Steiner, Sydney Henry, Russell Hall, Sean Blair, Jake Ricke, Akeem Green, and Eric German.

Dillard High School was founded in the early twentieth century with funds from noted philanthropist James Hardy Dillard. The music program at Dillard High School gained fame when the legendary Julian ``Cannonball'' Adderley served as an instructor of applied music in the 1940s. To this day, the school still focuses on the performing arts and music, serving as a Performing Arts and Technology magnet school in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. Both Mr. Dillard and Mr. Adderley would be very proud to see the accomplishments of the program today.

Mr. Speaker, I am extremely proud of these young musicians. I wish them all the best in their future endeavors, and wish Dillard's jazz program continued success. It is an honor to give the Dillard Center for the Arts Jazz Ensemble the recognition it rightly deserves.

Mr. Speaker, I am truly honored to recognize the second inauguration of President Ma Ying-jeou, which will take place on May 20, 2012. I join with the people of Taiwan in celebrating this historic occasion.

Since the Taiwan Relations Act of 1979, the United States and Taiwan have focused on creating a harmonious bilateral relationship. While our two countries have continued to share strong relations, we have been able to further strengthen our ties under President Ma's leadership.

I am pleased to note several positive developments that taken place over the course of President Ma's first term, including being recognized by the World Health Organization as an observer to the World Health Assembly. This important recognition has given Taiwan an avenue in which to address the health issues affecting its country.

Furthermore, the United States has increased trade relations with Taiwan, and U.S. agricultural and food products now account for over 30 percent of Taiwan's agricultural imports. These gains could not have been achieved independently, and such positive outcomes would not be possible without the collaboration and cooperation of President Ma's government.

Mr. Speaker, again I want to congratulate President Ma on his second term in office. I look forward to continuing my work with the President and his government to ensure a peaceful and prosperous Taiwan.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to express my disappointment that this House is once again considering a short-term extension to the National Flood Insurance Program.

It has been nearly ten years since the program was last reauthorized, and the need for reauthorization has only grown more pressing. While a lapse in the program would be detrimental to countless homeowners, the program cannot continue to be sustained through a patchwork of short- term extensions.

Last July, the House of Representatives passed a long-term extension of the program with broad bipartisan support. Shortly after, the Senate Banking Committee reported its own reauthorization which is now simply gathering dust in the Senate. With the start of hurricane season only weeks away, now is not the time for the Senate's typical complacency.

Floods affect every state in the Union, and all Americans deserve the comfort of knowing they will be able to continue to benefit from the security that the National Flood Insurance Program has provided homeowners and lending institutions since 1968.

This program must be modernized and reformed to meet the realities of American homeowners and taxpayers. I urge my Senate colleagues to swiftly bring their reauthorization bill to the floor so that we can finally move a long-term reauthorization forward.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to celebrate the life of my dear friend Ruth Tinsman. Mrs. Tinsman, beloved wife of the late Jerry Tinsman, passed away on April 28, 2012, at the age of 81. My thoughts and prayers go out to her family and friends at this most difficult time. She is survived by her daughters Katheline Tinsman and Leann Tinsman, sister Patricia O'Rork, three grandchildren, and one great-grandchild.

It was a pleasure to work with Mrs. Tinsman when she served as my District Administrator from the time I first assumed office in 1993 until September 2001. Ruth was a hard-working professional with strong morals and values, impeccable work ethic, an undeniable compassion for others, in addition to a warm and loving personality. Prior to joining my office, Mrs. Tinsman was a Congressional Aide for Congressman William Lehman of Florida for 10 years. ``Ruth was great with people and my father's constituency. She always looked out for his best interest,'' said William Lehman, Jr., son of the late Congressman Lehman.

Mrs. Tinsman has devoted her life to helping others in her community. As a resident of the City of Hialeah, Florida for over 50 years, she worked tirelessly to improve the quality of life and well-being of all. Mrs. Tinsman has served as a dedicated and loyal member of the Hialeah Housing Authority Board of Commissioners since January 9, 1990. On November 18, 1999, she was elected Chairperson of the Board of Commissioners, which she served on for 10 years. The Ruth A. Tinsman Pavilion, an elderly development facility, was built and named after her in 1996 to honor her work and dedication to the community. Additionally, Mrs. Tinsman served on the board of Citrus Health Network, as well as President of ``Kids in Dade Society,'' developing programs to educate and keep children safe.

Mr. Speaker, Mrs. Ruth Tinsman will be remembered in South Florida for her love of and dedication to her community. Her legacy of care and compassion will live on for generations to come in the lives she has touched. Ruth was a dear friend and I am truly honored to have known her. She will be missed.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life of Wayne L. Nelson, who died on April 30, 2012. Mr. Nelson was a deeply committed environmentalist. Throughout his life, he fought tenaciously for the protection of Florida's ecosystems. He always had a special concern for Lake Okeechobee, which is the seventh largest freshwater lake in the United States and the largest in the State of Florida. Mr. Nelson was widely respected by everyone of like mind who knew of his love for Florida's natural resources. Younger environmentalists trusted him for his knowledge and learned much from his advice.

An avid angler with a passion for conservation, Mr. Nelson founded Fishermen Against the Destruction of the Environment (FADE) as well as Clean Lake Environment and Recreation (CLEAR). Additionally, he was an active member of Greenpeace and Public Citizens.

Mr. Speaker, Wayne Nelson left a fine legacy of caring for our environment and teaching younger generations all that he knew. Wherever he went, he spread awareness of the importance of saving the earth, and he will be greatly missed by family, friends and everyone in the environmental community. My thoughts are with Mr. Nelson's loved ones during this most difficult time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor of the 150th anniversary of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). Founded by President Lincoln in 1862 as ``the People's Department,'' the USDA has helped modernize and advance American agriculture to the point where Americans now enjoy a safe and abundant food supply at a cost of less than ten percent of their disposable income. The USDA has been critical in protecting the farmers and ranchers who are the stewards of our land and essential to ensuring that our nation maintains an independent and secure food supply.

Over the course of its 150 years, the USDA has repeatedly been vital in solving the many agricultural challenges facing our nation. For example, a rapidly declining pollinating species population currently threatens the sustainability of our agriculture across the country. With one out of every three bites of food we eat the result of the intervention of pollinators like birds, bats, bees, and butterflies, the USDA has taken a lead role in addressing this looming disaster through programs like the Agricultural Research Service's research on the cause and treatment of Colony Collapse Disorder. The importance of the USDA is reflected in the fact that without pollinators, our country would not be able to grow food.

The USDA also does much more than just work with our local agriculture. It is a key player in addressing the changing needs of agriculture across the globe. The world's population is estimated to be nine billion people by 2050. Consequently, the world will need to produce more food in the next 50 years than has been produced during the past 10,000 years combined. The USDA, America's farmers, ranchers, and research scientists will answer this challenge together through programs such as Food for Progress, McGovern-Dole International Food for Education and Child Nutrition, the USDA National Hunger Clearinghouse, and the Norman Borlaug Commemorative Research Initiative.

One hundred and fifty years ago, President Lincoln recognized the potential of America's farmers to resourcefully cultivate our land to provide an ample food supply. Today, we must use the same innovative spirit in approaching agricultural production. By supporting USDA programs and initiatives, we are able to link research and scientific innovations to effective adaptations in order to successfully address the food security needs of our country. I am pleased to honor our country's farmers and ranchers, and acknowledge the work of the USDA on this historic occasion.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the heroic actions of Raoul Wallenberg, a Swedish citizen and diplomat, who, together with other courageous individuals, helped 100,000 Hungarian Jews escape Nazi authorities during World War II. As we continue to honor the memories of all those who suffered and perished during the Holocaust, we cannot forget the extraordinary men and women who risked their very own lives to take a stand against injustice and save their fellow man. This year marks the centennial of Wallenberg's birth, and although his ultimate fate remains unknown, we must ensure that this and future generations know of his great deeds.

Wallenberg was born on August 4, 1912 in Lidingo, Sweden, to a prominent Lutheran family. He studied architecture at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor, and graduated with honors in 1935. The following year, Wallenberg went to work at a bank in Haifa, Palestine, and was deeply moved by the stories of Jews who had escaped Nazi persecution in Germany. After returning to Sweden, he became associated with Koloman Lauer, a Hungarian Jew who owned an import and export firm. Wallenberg traveled freely through Germany, Nazi-occupied France, and Hungary, where he witnessed the plight of European Jews firsthand.

On March 19, 1944, Hitler invaded Hungary and began a massive deportation of Hungary's estimated 700,000 Jews to the concentration camp Auschwitz-Birkenau. Earlier that year, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt established the War Refugee Board in order to help Jews and other groups persecuted by the Nazi and Axis powers. Working together with the Swedish government and prominent Swedish Jews, including Lauer, the War Refugee Board sought to send a special envoy to Budapest to rescue as many Hungarian Jews as possible. Wallenberg, then only 31 years old, was appointed first secretary at the Swedish Legation in Budapest with full diplomatic privileges and the financial support of the War Refugee Board.

Wallenberg used all means necessary to protect Jews from the German and Hungarian authorities, employing several hundred Jews under the protection of the Swedish Legation, redesigning the so-called ``Schutzpass,'' and securing approximately 15,000 such protective passes. On October 15, 1944, the fascist Arrow Cross Party seized power in Hungary and installed a pro-Nazi regime that terrorized, deported, and murdered tens of thousands of people. Still, Wallenberg remained in Budapest to continue his efforts and established ``Swedish Houses,'' which served as places of refuge for over 25,000 Jews.

On November 20, 1944, Adolph Eichmann began the ``death marches,'' the deportation of thousands of starving and tortured Jews by foot along the 125-mile-long road between Budapest and the Austrian border. Wallenberg directly confronted German soldiers along the way in order to provide protective passes, food, and medicine to Jews. In January 1945, he saved the remaining Jews living in Budapest's largest ghetto from massacre with the help of Pal Szalay, an Arrow Cross senior official.

When the Russian army arrived in Budapest on January 17, 1945, Wallenberg disappeared after being taken into Soviet custody. He was reportedly imprisoned in Lubyanka prison in Moscow, and died on July 19, 1947 from a heart attack. However, reports from former Soviet prisoners as recent as 1981 suggest that

Wallenberg may have survived after 1947, and his fate remains shrouded in mystery to this day. He has since become the subject of numerous humanitarian honors, including that of Yad Vashem's ``Righteous among the Nations;'' has been named an honorary citizen of the United States, Canada, and Israel; and has been memorialized through countless monuments, statues, works of art, social institutions, and street names around the world.

Mr. Speaker, Raoul Wallenberg and his colleagues in the Swedish Legation saved at least 100,000 Jews in Hungary from extermination, including the late Congressman Tom Lantos and his wife Annette. As we celebrate the centennial of Wallenberg's birth, let his story inspire and embolden our ongoing efforts to bring an end to discrimination and hate-inspired violence in our communities through greater leadership and cooperation among all peoples.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. And, again, I thank my friend and colleague, Mr. Woodall, for yielding me the customary 30 minutes.

I also appreciated his comments about the fact that we are borrowing from the next generation. I gather that the previous generation borrowed from us. I don't know when the borrowing stops, but at least that seems to be the way of the world until we get to a point where we can be self-sustaining, as rightly we should be.

This rule provides for consideration of Commerce-Justice-Science appropriations for fiscal year 2013.

Many of my Republican colleagues have been patting themselves on the back for the open rule associated with this bill. They claim that this effort demonstrates transparency and their commitment to regular order. Putting aside for the moment whether a single open rule in 304 days makes for an open legislation process, the fact is that now the Republicans are using this rule to correct a mistake they made in their previous effort to deem and pass the Ryan budget.

It seems, Mr. Speaker, that the deem and pass didn't work the first time around. It was supposed to break the spending agreement made by my friends in the Republican Party in the Budget Control Act, but they bungled that effort a couple weeks ago and now have to try to go back on their word. It seems to me that if you're going to break an agreement that you made in good faith, you ought to get it right the first time. Doing this twice just calls attention to what little regard there is for bipartisan cooperation and agreement.

I heard my colleague, Mr. Woodall, comment about this coming out of the subcommittee and the committee by voice vote, and there is no disagreement in that regard. I guess to some that is to be a commendable effort. But he also suggested that we may very well, if we were to choose, carry this on voice vote. I would disabuse him of that notion. That is not going to happen. The deem and pass was wrong the first time around, and it's still wrong the second time around--and shouldn't have been placed in here--and it will be wrong the third, fourth, and however many more times around there are, in spite of open rules, if you put it in it, until the Republicans have repudiated every last promise they made.

If breaking the Budget Control Act agreement wasn't enough, the Republican majority is also using this rule to silence Members on the upcoming reconciliation legislation being considered by this body later this week. Rather than using regular order--and I stick a tack in that to compliment my colleague on the Rules Committee, who does believe and has made it manifestly clear that he believes in regular order--but rather than using regular order to debate the merits of breaking their promises, Republicans are imposing martial law to prevent Members from properly considering the legislation and having their say.

Forcing same-day consideration--that's what we mean when we say ``martial law''--of the legislation simply reinforces the majority's intent to use this legislation for partisan gain. Instead of working with Democrats on a bipartisan process, Republicans want to jeopardize funding for essential government programs so they can both go back on their agreements and force the House to consider the legislation sight unseen.

This is an unfortunate situation because Democrats would have been pleased to support this open rule. Had the Republicans followed regular order, Democrats would support this rule; and I, for one, would argue that we should do so by voice if it had been that way. If the Budget Committee Democrats end up taking the entire 3 days that they are entitled to under the rules of the House before they finish their

views, we could consider the reconciliation bill on Monday instead of Thursday.

This is no way to run a budget process and no way to conduct the business of the House. I'd be amused at the Republicans' failed efforts here, Mr. Speaker, except that I'm dismayed to point out that millions of Americans depend on the programs considered under the appropriations process.

An agreement was made with the Budget Control Act, and under the agreement the Republicans promised certain levels of funding for essential programs. That funding is now in jeopardy because the majority wants to spend time trying to go back on what they promised. Let me remind this body that the House and Senate both passed the Budget Control Act. The Senate has not passed the Ryan budget.

And deeming and passing does nothing but force this body, as I say all the time, to pretend that the budget, as offered, is in effect.

As I said in the Rules Committee when the Republicans tried to do this the first time around, if we're going to pass legislation that pretends things exist, then I guess we don't need either the Senate or the President of the United States since we can just pretend that the laws have passed when, in fact, they have not.

I don't have my copy of ``I'm Just a Bill,'' and my colleague wasn't here when I read it in committee at one point in time, but I'm pretty sure it doesn't mention that the way to pass legislation is to first pass one agreement and then try twice to pretend it never happened.

I don't know what that looks like in a cartoon version, but probably less like ``Schoolhouse Rock'' and more like Wile E. Coyote falling straight off a cliff, because if we're going to get out of the business of reality and into the business of pretending, let's just pretend that every American has a job, that every student can go to college, and that no child goes to bed hungry. Let's pretend that the billions we wasted on unnecessary wars were, instead, actually invested right here in the United States of America. Let's pretend that Thanksgiving is in June and Christmas is in July and the election season is over and the deficit is gone.

And since we've now pretended that everything is fine in our great country, let's go tell all of the unemployed, the middle class, the hungry and the poor that their problems aren't real. Or better yet, let's just pretend those people don't exist, because that's exactly what I believe the majority's budget does.

Rather than using the power of the Federal budget to lead this country into a new era of economic growth, Republicans want to cut taxes for those that are wealthy among us, including those of us that serve in the House of Representatives, cut services for everyone else, and then feel like they've set the country on the right track.

Instead of spending our time debating the merits of the appropriations legislation before us, we're, again, trying to convince the majority to stick with the promises they made in the first place.

Rather than uniting in bipartisan fashion to support an open and transparent legislative process, Republicans are using partisan gimmickry to silence debate.

Rather than debating this legislation under the Budget Control Act, we have to debate whether the Republican majority should even have to keep their promises.

And rather than considering whether the inadequate levels of funding in this legislation, particularly in certain arenas--let me use one: the COPS program that I thought it was wrong when Democrats cut that program, and I think it's wrong now that Republicans are talking about less money for a program that all of us know is desperately needed in our various communities.

We have to consider doing more for struggling Americans, and we have to consider whether we ought to be cutting even more, as my colleagues would have it.

I reserve the balance of my time.

General Leave

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

If we defeat the previous question, I am going to offer an amendment to the rule to make sure that we bring up the bill by Mr. Tierney of Massachusetts in order to prevent a doubling of student loan interest rates, which would be fully paid for by repealing tax giveaways for big oil companies.

To discuss our amendment to the rule, I am very pleased at this time to yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from California, the ranking member of the Education and the Workforce Committee, Mr. Miller.

I yield the gentleman an additional minute.

Mr. Speaker, I'm very pleased to yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Connecticut, my good friend, Mr. Courtney.

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 2 minutes to my very good friend, Mr. Tierney from Massachusetts.

I yield the gentleman 1 additional minute.

I would inform my colleague that I am the last speaker. I don't know whether he is, but I am prepared to close.

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

Mr. Speaker, the majority tried once 2 weeks ago to go back on what they agreed to. It did not work. So now here we are again, trying to ``re-deem'' ourselves. But this is no way to run an economy, no way to run a budget process, and no way to stick up for the millions of struggling Americans who need us to focus on improving the economy.

We can ``pretend'' that the Ryan budget has passed when, in fact, it has not. We can deem it or come here to re-deem it. But while we are living in legislative fantasyland, millions of other Americans will still be struggling to find jobs, to pay off their student loans, to access affordable health care and decent housing, and, really, in the final analysis, just to survive in an economy that--not just this year or last, not just in the last decade or the decade before--but in an economy that favors those who have the most, rather than look out for those who have the least.

In the celebrated cartoon that carries Wile E. Coyote, he used to pretend that there was going to be some kind of rubberized floor mat when he landed off a cliff, only to find that soon after that, he was in a very long and painful fall to the bottom.

I've said before and I will repeat: we are better people than what's happening here. I agree with my friend from Georgia (Mr. Woodall) that we see things differently. And in our heart of hearts, both of us and many of the Members of this body are in agreement and want things to be better.

As long as Republicans insist on replacing substantive debate with partisan gimmicks, broken promises, and misplaced priorities, the fall to the bottom is going to seem very long and is likely to be very painful for millions of Americans.

I would urge my colleagues to oppose this rule for the reason that it is deeming something that is being pretended to be passed. I'd ask them to oppose this rule for the reason that it includes in it martial law that disallows the open discussion that my colleague rightly points to in an open rule. But this particular provision disallows that as it pertains to the reconciliation. And that is just no way for us to go about trying to come to terms with the enormous consequences and circumstances that we face by not having faced them many, many, many years ago.

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.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in recognition of Israel Independence Day. Sixty-four years ago, after 2,000 years in exile, the Jewish people declared their independence and established a nation in their ancient and sacred homeland.

Since then, the Israeli people have developed a vibrant democracy, a vigorous economy, a dynamic cultural life, and an admirable commitment to the environment.

In the Jewish tradition, even joyous occasions are mixed with sorrow, to honor past history and to acknowledge the debt owed to those who came before us.

I have always admired the confluence of Israel Independence Day with Remembrance Day, when the day before the celebration of independence Israelis stop to remember their fallen soldiers, and those who gave their lives in service to the nation. It is a reminder of the heavy price of freedom, and of the burden on future generations to uphold the ideals for which Israel's sons and daughters gave their lives.

Beyond the conflicts that seem to dominate the news, Israel has made extraordinary achievements in every field imaginable. From agriculture and medicine to environmental sustainability and literature, Israelis offer a steady stream of improvements to global challenges.

One of my most memorable visits to Israel was to a desalinization plant in Ashkelon, where I saw firsthand how Israel deals with some of the same water challenges that confront South Florida. This is just one example of how the close relationship between our two countries benefits both Israelis and Americans.

Israel Independence Day is a celebration of renewal, and this year Israelis have much to be proud of in the remarkable nation they built from the desert. For 64 years Israel has stood as a symbol of hope for millions of people around the world. For 64 years Israel has modeled a society where determination and passion, and an emphasis on social progress and education, can build a productive nation.

Mr. Speaker, I have been to Israel 14 times as a Member of Congress, and every time I go I encounter ordinary citizens and government officials alike who are genuinely dedicated to living up to the ideals of Israel's independence. I am always impressed by the Israelis' intense desire to persevere. Israel deserves to be secure and prosperous, to live in peace with its neighbors, and to live free from fear and violence.

Mr Speaker, I rise today to remember the life of Mrs. Janie Bell Wilson Stewart, who passed away recently at the age of 76. As an educator, loving mother and wife, and faithful member of her church, Mrs. Stewart was an exemplary member of her community. I would like to take this time to express my deepest condolences to everyone who knew Mrs. Stewart, especially her family and friends.

Mrs. Stewart was born on April 15, 1935 in Wayneshoro, Georgia. Six years later, she moved to Fort Lauderdale, Florida, attending Walker Elementary School of Broward County Public Schools. A vivacious student, Mrs. Stewart was the first to receive a scholarship from the Zheta Rho Omega Chapter of Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority, Inc. This scholarship paved the way for her to attend Florida Memorial University, then called Florida Normal College, where she graduated in 1958 with a degree in Education and later became a teacher.

While in college, Mrs. Stewart gave back to her community through her work with the Zeta Rho Omega chapter of Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority, Inc., and continued her alliance with her sorority well after she graduated, becoming a golden soror for her service of over 50 years to the organization. This dedication to her sorority and alma mater earned her the Fountain of Excellence Award from Florida Memorial College (University) decades after she graduated.

It was also during college that Janie met her future husband, Milton Stewart, to whom she was married for 48 years. Together, they raised a son and one of their nieces, whom they treated as their own daughter. As a teacher, Mrs. Stewart helped countless children. Her devotion for both her students and career was evident in her long workdays, recognitions for her exceptional teaching, and friendships with other educators.

Always passionate about knowledge, Mrs. Stewart received her Master's in Administration and Supervision from Nova Southeastern University while holding a job as a teacher. With her graduate degree, Mrs. Stewart went on to become a principal. She served dutifully in this role at three different Broward County elementary schools. Mrs. Stewart continued to serve as a mentor for other teachers and maintained a presence in her former students' lives even after her retirement. Her thirty three-year career as a teacher and principal touched the lives of innumerable children and colleagues in South Florida.

Aside from her family, career, and sorority, Mrs. Stewart was also devoted to her faith. She was a member of First Baptist Church Piney Grove for 69 years, having joined in 1943. There, she served as the Director of the Red Circle of the Society of Missions. Even with her numerous activities, Mrs. Stewart still found time for fun. She enjoyed golfing and received the Palmview Women's Golfing award in 1979.

Mr. Speaker, it is my distinct honor to pay tribute to Mrs. Janie Bell Wilson Stewart whose commitment to education, her students, family, and the community will be truly missed. My thoughts and prayers are with Mrs. Stewart's family during this most difficult time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commend Armisha Roberts of Boynton Beach, Florida, for being named one of the first four winners of the 2012 Buick Achievers Scholarship Program. The Buick Scholarship is bestowed upon students nationwide who have continually demonstrated an ability to excel in the classroom as well as have an interest in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics, STEM, education; along with a willingness to serve the community.

Armisha has displayed an extraordinary commitment to community activism, volunteering for a variety of important projects such as Toys for Tots, Relay for Life, and Education Rocks. Furthermore, through her community involvement Armisha has participated in efforts to clean debris from a local inlet in addition to planting a community vegetable garden. Due to her dedication to community service, Armisha was appointed to the Education and Youth Advisory Board for Boynton Beach as a student voting member.

Armisha will be attending Howard University where she plans to major in mathematics and then seek a career in electrical engineering. In this field, Armisha hopes to be involved in the development of electric vehicles. I am proud that Armisha and other students recognize the value and importance of STEM education as well as the importance of giving back to the community.

Mr. Speaker, I am truly honored to represent such a driven student and young leader who lives in my Congressional district. I wish her the best of luck in her future endeavors, where I know she will go on to do great things. Armisha Roberts is the definition of a role model, and she is truly deserving of this most prestigious award.

I thank my friend for yielding the time.

I would begin a little bit unusually by asking a few questions of my friend and then yielding to him for any response that he may have.

A gentleman named Bruce Bartlett was the former Department economist for President Ronald Reagan. He makes this comment: The serious point here is that the term ``small business'' casts a very wide net.

Indeed, since the only test for being a small business under the legislation, as my good friend proposes, is the number of employees, the ultimate beneficiaries of the Republican bill will be some large and profitable businesses that just happen to have few employees.

What is my friend's response to that?

Then I ask my friend first to just listen, and then I will ask yet another question.

Mr. Bartlett also said this:

The Republican tax plan will do nothing whatsoever to

increase employment. It is nothing more than an election-year

giveaway to favored Republican constituencies and should not

be taken seriously.

But I ask my friend, after hearing what Mr. Bartlett said, and listening to you, as well, saying that it's suggested that there will be jobs, is there a requirement in the legislation as is proposed that requires the creation of jobs?

Can you give me a ``yes'' or ``no''?

Let me offer to my friend a complaint: the fact that this matter didn't go through regular order, did not have hearings. It did have one question period during the Ways and Means Committee markup, and the person that was being questioned on the Committee on Taxation was the chief of staff, Thomas Barthold. And when he was asked about the effects of H.R. 9--and the question was put to him by our colleague, Mr. Becerra: Is there a requirement that you create jobs? Mr. Barthold says: There's no requirement on the result of the tax relief.

I go back to you and ask you again: Is there a requirement that jobs be created in the measure as offered?

My friend says that no one would do anything that would not necessarily work. Well, why are we spending the time on this when my friend and I know that this measure is not going to become law for the reason, whether we like it or not, that the United States Senate is not going to pass it?

Last week, contrary to what you said, in the United States Senate the President's plan and the Democrats' plan was offered where there would be an alternative minimum tax for people that pay a million dollars or more in taxes. It's been referred to as the Buffett rule. You said that it didn't pass. It had a majority. But it didn't come up because Republicans didn't allow for it to have a majority. Whereas, had it come up, it likely would have passed because some Republicans would have caused it to pass, also.

You don't create jobs with your 20 percent. And now you need to answer for me: What if somebody, after they get the 20 percent, rather than hiring somebody, fires somebody; do they still get the tax cut?

All of what my friend says is most regrettable. One of the things that I'm sure Members in your Conference are concerned about is the fact that this is a 1-year measure.

Am I correct about that?

Tell me then, how many times have we passed anything 1 year that's a tax something or another that cuts taxes? Let's take the Bush tax cuts that lasted 10 years that are soon to expire. How is it then that you expect that this is not going to go beyond 1 year? One year already is going to cost $46 billion.

Now my friend is a deficit and a debt hawk, and I like to think that I'm conservative enough to feel that the deficit and the debt are matters that we should address in order to give Americans opportunity. Toward that end, what is a $46 billion measure going to do, other than blow a hole in the deficit, since it's not paid for?

I yield to my friend.

Reclaiming my time, we can point back. I'm talking about what you're trying to do today. What you're trying to do today is blowing a $46 billion hole in the deficit, which will destroy opportunity.

I thank my friend, and let me move on, now that I've had the opportunity to talk with you.

I rise in strong opposition to this rule and its opportunity- destroying under the underlying bill. When it comes to small businesses, Congress should work to create chances for smart, savvy, small business owners to thrive so that hardworking Americans can get a fair shot at a good paying job for an honest day's work and thereby ensure that our economic recovery continues.

Instead, the Republican bill creates only one opportunity, and that is the opportunity for those that are better off, including those of us in the United States Congress, to pay less than we could and can as our fair share in taxes.

Make no mistake: H.R. 9, despite its name, is not going to level the playing field so that American businesses can create the kinds of opportunities that the average American needs. That's because House Republicans have made the benefits of this bill available to a wide range of enterprises owned by wealthy people, including lawyers. I'm one of the lawyers, not one of the wealthy. But when I was a lawyer and had three secretaries as a single practitioner, if you had given me a 20 percent tax cut, I may have shared some of that with those three employees. I assure you I would not have hired anybody. Had you, when I was a lawyer, given me a 20 percent tax cut and required me to hire somebody, then I would have hired somebody, and it may have done some good. But other wealthy people--lobbyists, hedge funds, private equity fund managers, as well as many professional sports teams, without a single requirement to expand employment or invest in the United States.

In fact, under this bill, a business owner could fire, as I asked my friend,

U.S. workers, hire full-time workers in foreign countries and still be eligible for the full deduction.

According to an analysis of the Tax Policy Center, approximately 49 percent of the benefits of H.R. 9 would go to 0.3 percent of people with incomes exceeding $1 million in 2012--each receiving an average tax cut of more than $44,000.

That's not creating an opportunity environment in which small businesses can create jobs. As I've said before and will say again, I have no quarrel with millionaires and billionaires and the wealthiest of us in America. And like my friend from Texas, I want everybody to be able to have significant wealth if that were to be possible. I do, however, have a problem with legislation designed to tip the scales in favor of the best among us in this country masquerading as tax cuts for small businesses.

Furthermore, Madam Speaker, the Republican justifications for this kind of ``trickle down'' tax policy are inaccurate and debunked by history. In actuality, tax rates have little bearing on economic productivity. Some of the fastest economic growth of the post-war period came in the 1950s, when the top tax rate was above 80 percent. The slowest growth came in the 2000s, when the top tax rate was 35 percent--which I pay, and which some of you do not because you are in better circumstances than mine, but all of us in the House of Representatives are better off than the people we want to really help, other than those that are better off like us.

Furthermore, Madam Speaker, the Republican justifications allow that this occurrence, that the change from the 1950s to the 2000s, is easy to explain. Businesses do not make decisions based on tax rates. They make decisions based on factors specific to their business, like their number of competitors and larger macro- and microeconomic factors.

Bills such as the one before us today ignore this reality in favor of pushing Republican pet policies that ignore the actual difficulties facing hardworking small business owners. In the Rules Committee, I cited Betty's Restaurant in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, where I eat breakfast and sometimes lunch or dinner. Betty's doesn't have more than nine employees. If we were to target our relief to 20 percent, Betty would be in better shape. But if Larry Flynt at ``Hustler'' is going to be in better shape because he has less than 500 employees, I'm taking Betty.

I get my clothes cleaned at Spring Cleaners. They've been in business for over 25 years. The owner of that business, after he retired, left it with his daughter. They don't have more than 10 employees in 2 of their cleaning plants. This kind of measure, if targeted to her, would help her. But a law firm here in Washington or a lobbying firm with 49 lawyers that's making $500 million a year will qualify for this tax cut, and I'm taking Spring Cleaners over those lawyers and lobbyists here in this town.

Simply put, what we have before us is the exact opposite of a jobs bill. It's a boon for the rich, the very antithesis of smart tax reform, and does nothing to create opportunities for middle class, let alone, poor Americans. Instead of this misguided legislation before us today, Madam Speaker, we should pass policy initiatives that stimulate economic growth and job creation such as public-private partnerships.

When compared to measures such as infrastructure spending, today's bill would have a relatively small effect on strengthening our economy and helping businesses create even more jobs. In comparison, for every $1 billion invested in infrastructure construction projects, 18,000 jobs--and nobody controverts that, and if you do, say 15,000 jobs--are supported nationwide. And my Governor turned down a billion-plus dollars for a rail project that had been appropriated and that Republicans and Democrats had sought, and it would have created 18,000 jobs. And yet we find ourselves in Florida, just like other places in this country, suffering job diminution. This wasn't money that did not go to Illinois, California, and the Northeast Corridor for rail; it just did not come to Florida.

There are other circumstances. We yesterday passed a measure here to extend the transportation measure for 3 months. Cut me some slack. Jim Oberstar had been begging us before he left Congress to do a $400 billion infrastructure bill that probably would have put us in the position of not having to have done the stimulus had we done it when he asked for it, and we need to do a better bill than the 3-month extension. This was the 10th extension of the transportation measure that we have done. We are better than that, and we could have done what the Senate offered, MAP 21, and we would kick-start this economy rather than kicking this can down the road.

Let me tell you something about the can. It's getting ready to run up against a wall or a cliff, and there ain't going to be nowhere else to kick it. Some day, Republicans and Democrats, liberals and conservatives, are going to have to stand up and face the fact that we must address this in a significant way, and we can't have this gridlock, and we can't have this continuing standoff.

This is supposed to be the ``land of opportunity,'' Madam Speaker. Let's make sure that it's the land of opportunity for rich people. Let's make sure that it's the land of opportunity for middle class and poor people. Let's make sure that it's the land of opportunity for small and large businesses. In short, opportunity for all Americans.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to the rule to ensure that the House votes on the Buffett rule, which Representative Baldwin has introduced--and I'm a cosponsor of--as H.R. 3903, the Paying a Fair Share Act of 2012. This bill would ensure that people making over $1 million a year do not pay a lower tax rate than middle class Americans. To discuss our amendment to this rule, I'm very pleased to yield 3 minutes to my good friend, the gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Baldwin).

Madam Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee), my good friend.

I yield the gentlewoman an additional 30 seconds.

Madam Speaker, I would urge my friend from Texas that I'm going to be the last speaker, and I'm prepared to close if he has no further speakers.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of the time.

H.R. 9 is not about creating jobs or helping small businesses increase hiring. It is another in a long line of Republican proposals that benefit those of us, including those of us in the House of Representatives, that are the better-off Americans at the expense of the middle class.

My Republican friends rejected an amendment offered by our colleague, Representative Crowley, which I offered in the Rules Committee in his stead, which would have prevented businesses from eliminating jobs in the United States while creating jobs overseas under this bill.

Procedurally, it is also disconcerting that, contrary to my Republican colleagues' self-professed commitment to an open process, Democrats have been allowed only one substitute in an otherwise closed process. Nor was H.R. 9 the subject of any hearing before either the full Ways and Means Committee, or the Select Revenue Measures Subcommittee, with the exception of a brief question-and-answer session with Joint Committee on Taxation staff during the markup.

Finally, instead of taking real steps to address the very real need to create opportunities for businesses to succeed in a still nascent economic recovery, House Republicans are more than willing to rush through another tax bill that could, if it were to pass--and it is

not going to, and they know that--only help those of us that are better off in society, while sticking middle- and lower-income families with the bill and creating exactly zero jobs.

And you call this opportunity?

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

Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this opportunity-destroying measure and to defeat the previous question. I urge a ``no'' vote on the rule, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Madam Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

I thank our good friend and colleague for yielding, and I thank him and Ms. Hayworth for their extraordinary work in causing us to recognize Raoul Wallenberg.

I came in contact with the name Raoul Wallenberg and with the official portrait that the Lantos Foundation and others have put together, and I just stand to say to you all that I vigorously support and was a cosponsor of this measure. But more importantly, I know that Tom would be looking down today and thanking all of us, and later, I'm sure with Mrs. Lantos, those that gather would assuredly recognize the extraordinary work that you did in bringing this to the body. And as Gregory said, Raoul Wallenberg's fate may be unknown, but his fate today is known, and that is that he saved a lot of people, and he is rightly recognized by us for that.

I thank my good friend for yielding the time, he and Mr. Luetkemeyer for bringing the measure forward.

I especially want to acknowledge Chairman Spencer Bachus and Ranking Member Barney Frank, as well as their respective staffs, for helping us in this matter. And a special shout-out to Tim Scott. Like Ms. Hayworth helped you with Raoul Wallenberg, Tim and Jennifer DeCasper, from his office, helped me to gain the number of signatures, as well as to acknowledge my young staffer, Erin Moffet, who learned an awful lot about Lena Horne along the way.

Mr. Speaker, obviously I'm in strong support of H.R. 1815, the Lena Horne Recognition Act, a bill to posthumously honor Lena Horne with a Congressional Gold Medal in recognition of her many achievements and contributions to American culture and the civil rights movement.

I personally felt that I could not allow time to pass without honoring the life and legacy of Ms. Horne, who passed away on May 9, 2010, at the age of 92. Throughout her lifetime, Ms. Horne used her talent and fame to become a powerful voice for civil rights and equality.

It was quite a journey to get this legislation to the floor given the requirement that at least 290 Members of the House must cosponsor the bill. I introduced this bill on May 10, 2011, with the support from 23 other Members, and I'm proud to say today that there are now 308 bipartisan cosponsors, and the measure is also offered in the United States Senate.

While asking my colleagues to support this legislation to award Lena Horne with the Congressional Gold Medal, I was, in some respects, a little disappointed to see that too many people, both Members and staff, were not aware of who this remarkable woman was.

I hope that we can pass H.R. 1815 today and that the Senate will then subsequently pass this legislation and the President will sign this bill into law so that Lena Horne's legacy will finally be given the recognition it rightly deserves by posthumously awarding her with the Congressional Gold Medal. I know her daughter and members of the family--her daughter, Gail Lumet Buckley, I promised that I would call when it passed, and I shall.

Lena Horne was the recipient of the Kennedy Center Honor for her lifetime contribution to the arts in 1984, and in 1989 she received a Lifetime Achievement Grammy Award. She has two stars on the Hollywood Walk of Fame for her work in both motion pictures and recording. Additionally, she has a footprint on the International Civil Rights Walk of Fame at the Martin Luther King, Jr. National Historic Site.

Although these and other monumental awards and honors were bestowed upon her, Ms. Horne's life was not a story of smooth sailing. Her life was too often plagued by stormy weather, which ironically was the title of her signature song and one of the major films that she starred in. Footnote there: I was in the third grade in Jersey City, New Jersey, and my mother let me stay out of school to see my first motion picture, and I have a memory of it today that stayed with me throughout that time.

Born on June 30, 1917, in Brooklyn--not in Queens, Gregory--Lena Mary

Calhoun Horne broke racial barriers through her career as a singer, dancer, and actress for 60 years.

Ms. Horne got her start at the age of 16 when she was hired as a chorus dancer at Harlem's famous Cotton Club. Then, at 19, she made her Broadway debut in dancing a feature role in ``Dance With Your Gods.''

Her path to stardom then led her to tour with Charlie Barnett's jazz band in the early 1940s, when she became one of the first black women to tour with an all-white band.

A few years later, after starting her career as a singer and a dancer, Ms. Horne was discovered by a Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer talent scout, and moved to Hollywood to be an actress, becoming the first black artist to sign a long-term contract with a major studio.

Even given her extraordinary beauty and elegance and talent, she was often limited to minor acting roles because of her race. Among many lost opportunities was the role of Julie in the film adaptation of ``Show Boat.''

Ms. Horne had previously played this role in an adaptation of act 1 of ``Show Boat'' that was featured in the 1946 film ``Till the Clouds Roll By.'' But due to the Motion Picture Production Code not allowing the depiction of interracial relationships in film, the distinguished and famous Ava Gardner was cast in this role instead of Lena Horne.

Her fame in films was also limited due to the fact that during that time, many films were shot so that scenes in which black performers were featured could be easily edited out for Southern audiences. Even facing such discrimination, Ms. Horne's perseverance allowed her to overcome such obstacles and led her to dazzle audiences and critics in a number of major films.

Her lead roles included those in the musical ``Cabin in the Sky'' and the box office hit ``Stormy Weather,'' where Ms. Horne's remarkable performance of the title song in ``Stormy Weather'' became one of her most notable songs throughout her career. On her last tour, I saw her in Ft. Lauderdale, and she sang three iterations of that song; and the last one, indeed, as she said, was the most powerful. These two roles increased her visibility as well as sealed her legacy in the music and film industry.

The struggle for equal and fair treatment became an inseparable and increasingly political part of Ms. Horne's life even outside of the film industry. She toured extensively with the United Service Organizations in support of U.S. troops during World War II, where she was a major critic of the unfair treatment of black soldiers. Outspoken on the issue, Ms. Horne refused to sing for segregated audiences or to groups in which German prisoners of war were seated in front of the black U.S. servicemen.

Due to her civil rights activism on issues such as these, as well as her friendship with Paul Robeson and W.E.B. DuBois, Ms. Horne found herself blacklisted during the period of McCarthyism.

While she continued to face discrimination in the film industry in the fifties, her career flourished in television and on nightclub stages across the country. During this time, she returned to her roots as a vocalist and established herself as a major recording artist.

In 1957, she recorded ``Lena Horne at the Waldorf-Astoria,'' which became the best-selling album by a female singer in RCA Victor's history. Ms. Horne used the talent and fame she achieved through such acclaims to become a powerful voice for civil rights and equality. In 1963, she participated in the historic March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom at which Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. delivered his immortal ``I Have a Dream'' speech.

She also performed at rallies throughout the country for the National Council for Negro Women, and worked with the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, the NAACP, of which she was the cover girl for their monthly bulletin at age 2.

Following her blacklisting from film in the fifties and disillusionment with the industry, Ms. Horne only returned to the screen three more times following the McCarthyism era, one of which was the film adaptation of ``The Wiz,'' in which she was cast as Glinda the Good Witch.

Then in 1981, Ms. Horne finally received the big break she had waited for her whole life, a one-woman Broadway show. ``Lena Horne: The Lady and Her Music'' was the culmination of her triumphs and struggles. It enjoyed a 14-month run before going on tour and earned her a special Tony award for distinguished achievement in theater and two Grammys.

At the age of 80, Ms. Horne made the following statement, which I believe appropriately captures her legacy; and, Gail, this one is for you.

She stated that:

My identity is very clear to me now. I am a black woman.

I'm free. I no longer have to be a credit. I don't have to be

a symbol to anybody. I don't have to be a first to anybody. I

don't have to be an imitation of a white woman that Hollywood

sort of hoped I'd become. I'm me, and I'm like nobody else.

Mr. Speaker, Lena Horne was an extraordinary woman who refused to give up her dreams because of the color of her skin, and used her beauty, talent, elegance, and intelligence to fight racial discrimination. Her perseverance and accomplishments are truly inspirational, having taught us all how to weather the stormy periods of our lives.

I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of H.R. 1815, the Lena Horne Recognition Act, so that we may honor the life and legacy of Ms. Lena Horne with a Congressional Gold Medal and through this recognition inspire others with her story.

Someone wrote today, what do Lena Horne and Jack Nicklaus and Raoul Wallenberg have in common? It's my hope that what they will have in common today is each will be recognized for their distinguished achievements and heroic acts on behalf of our society.

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