Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the extraordinary life and career of Bay Area community leader and tireless advocate for the expansion of healthcare to the underserved, Dr. Frank Eugene Staggers, Sr. Dr. Staggers was known throughout the Bay Area as someone who believed that the health of the individual is directly tied to the health of the community. With his passing, we look to Dr. Staggers' tremendous legacy and the outstanding quality of his life's work.

Born in Charleston, South Carolina, Dr. Staggers served as a Sergeant in the U.S. Army in Belgium during World War II. After returning home, Dr. Staggers attended Virginia State College in Petersburg, Virginia earning a Bachelor's degree in Zoology. He enrolled in Meharry Medical College in Nashville, Tennessee where he earned his degree in Medicine. Upon graduation, Dr. Staggers put his extensive knowledge to use as a medical resident in the Navy as a Lieutenant Commander with a surgical subspecialty in Urology. He eventually retired from the Navy with the rank of Commander in 1963.

Dr. Staggers worked tirelessly to ensure equality in healthcare, and the organizations he helped to found continue to carry out his vision, specifically the St. Luke's Society, an organization dedicated to creating an alliance between African American doctors and ministers, and the Alta Bates Summit Ethnic Health Institute, a community service focused on promoting community health awareness, organizational alliances, and health-provider training to underserved and minority populations that experience disparities in healthcare.

As an advocate for equality in healthcare, Dr. Staggers actively served in many leadership roles. Notably, he served as Chairman of the American Medical Association's Advisory Committee on Minority Physicians. He was also President, Vice Chair, and Chair of the California Medical Association Foundation, as well as President of the Alameda-Contra Costa County Medical Society. In addition, he was President and a member of the Golden State Medical Association, the National Medical Association, and the Sinkler Miller Medical Association.

For his many contributions and dedication to furthering minority access to healthcare, Dr. Staggers was recognized numerous times, including by the California State Legislature, the Golden State Medical Association, the National Medical Association, the Meharry Medical College, and the American Medical Association Foundation.

Dr. Staggers was a mentor to many, including myself. I benefitted from his wise counsel and input on my health care legislation and agenda while in the California State Legislature and in Congress. He was steady, focused and passionate as he shared his knowledge and clarity regarding what I needed to know and do to address health care disparities in communities of color. For that, I am deeply grateful.

As a board certified urologist, Dr. Staggers mentored minority medical students all across the United States, and he supported and was involved with many historic black colleges. This reflects Dr. Staggers belief in, and commitment to nurturing the next generation to continue to build on the progress made by the previous generation.

On a personal note, I had the privilege to spend time with Frank and his beloved wife, my friend and colleague while serving in the California State Legislature, the Honorable Teresa Hughes. Frank and ``Terrie'' loved each other deeply. They were able to pull both of their very busy lives together, never neglected each other and gave their friends a glimpse of ``true love'' even in their golden years. The love he exhibited toward Terrie and his family was unconditional and inspiring.

Today, California's 13th Congressional District salutes and honors a great friend of the Bay Area and a true champion for equality, Dr. Frank Eugene Staggers Sr. His steadfast commitment to ensuring that minorities have access to better healthcare and quality of life will forever live on in the legacy that he leaves behind. I offer my sincerest condolences to his many loved ones and to all of those whose lives he touched over the years. He will be deeply missed.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the extraordinary life of Susan Rasky, former political reporter for The New York Times and lecturer at the Graduate School of Journalism at the University of California, Berkeley. Known throughout the nation as an accomplished reporter, Ms. Rasky has left an indelible mark on the national discourse. With her passing on December 29, 2013, we look to the outstanding quality of her life's work and the inspiring role she played in shaping the nature of political reporting and inspiring future journalists.

Born on June 10, 1952, Susan Rasky was raised in the Los Angeles area. Her passion for politics grew out of discussions at family dinners, where it was common place for her to bring up the most salient political issues of the day. Her drive and enthusiasm for political discussion propelled her to study History at UC Berkeley, where she received her Bachelor of Arts degree in 1974. Ms. Rasky went on to earn her Master's degree in Economic History from the distinguished London School of Economics.

Arriving in Washington, D.C. with an academic background in economics and an interest for journalism, Ms. Rasky began her career as a reporter. She covered issues concerning the economy and economic policy for different news organizations, including the Bureau of National Affairs and Reuters. After just five years, she began reporting for The New York Times as a Congressional correspondent. At The New York Times, she wrote more than 1,700 articles for both New York and Washington, D.C., exploring issues relating to the tax code and the Federal Reserve.

Renowned for her insight and powerful voice, Ms. Rasky received the George Polk Award in 1990. Acknowledged for her coverage of the Congressional budget crisis, she and her colleagues shared recognition for this prestigious award for their critical and insightful research and reporting on these complex issues facing the nation.

Later, as a UC Berkeley senior lecturer, Ms. Rasky effortlessly moved from the newsroom to the classroom. Ms. Rasky left an imprint on a generation of students, specializing in teaching political and government reporting. Through her mentorship, students were continuously inspired and challenged to ``twist the lens'' and find a more nuanced perspective in journalism. Her teaching was so influential that students began to refer to themselves as ``Rasky-ites'', illustrating their devotion to her and her style of political reporting.

In addition to her prolific career, Ms. Rasky established and supervised the J-School's California News Service, offering students the opportunity to cover government and politics for news organizations throughout the country. She enjoyed being able to guide younger generations of journalists on how to cover presidential and other campaigns. Even after her students graduated, she was known to advise them well into their professional careers. She will be remembered as a distinguished reporter, a supportive leader, and a dedicated mentor.

Today, California's 13th Congressional District salutes and honors an outstanding individual and stalwart journalist, Susan Rasky. As a constituent and UC Berkeley professor, Ms. Rasky inspired many future journalists and impacted so many lives throughout the nation. I join all of Susan's loved ones in celebrating her incredible life. She will be deeply missed.

Mr. Speaker, as one of two congressional representatives to the United Nations, I rise to recognize and talk about the continued human suffering in Syria.

According to the United Nations, there are over 2 million registered refugees from Syria, including 1.4 million children. Last September, the United Nations Security Council urged Syria to take immediate steps to grant aid organizations full access to conduct relief operations. Yet, today, there are reports that the government continues to block aid to victims desperately in need of relief, causing needless hunger and suffering among Syria's civilian populations. These actions are not just an offense against our conscience; they are also offenses against international law and United Nations' obligations.

As world leaders gather next week in pursuit of a political solution, we must hold all parties to the Syrian conflict accountable and find a negotiated settlement to ending this crisis once and for all through the hard work of diplomacy.

I am proud that the United States is the leading donor of humanitarian aid, and I am pleased that the omnibus bill we passed yesterday included increased funding to support our ongoing humanitarian response.

Mr. Speaker, I was not present for roll call votes 12 and 13. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes'' on both.

Madam Speaker, first let me thank our ranking member, Nita Lowey, for yielding, and also I want to thank her for her tremendous leadership on this committee. And also I want to thank Chairman Rogers. Both of these great individuals really have worked together day and night to bring this bill forward on a bipartisan basis, and I have to salute and thank you both for that because I know it was very, very difficult. But we did it. And also to the staff, I, too, want to salute and thank the staff, including my staff, for their tremendous work in trying to balance all of the priorities so that we can have a bill that all of us can support.

While I voted against the budget resolution, I am encouraged that this bill will restore a majority--not all, but a majority--of the harmful sequester and bring some relief to struggling communities and families who are living, quite frankly, on the edge.

As a member of the Budget and the Appropriations Committees, I am encouraged that passing this bill will get us out of this cycle of governing by crisis.

This bill makes important investments in early childhood education, environmental protection, HIV-AIDS, and law enforcement. It increases our support for the United Nations and humanitarian relief efforts in Syria. And even with these increases, funding for these critical programs, if you ask me, still remains much too low. Yet this bill provides $5 billion more than what the Pentagon asked for, while failing

to extend the emergency unemployment insurance for the 1.3 million individuals who lost, on December 28, their unemployment. This is just wrong.

Finally, as a member of the Labor-HHS Subcommittee, I really think it is shameful that our subcommittee failed to receive a proportionate increase in our total allocation. Mind you, Labor-HHS is the largest subcommittee after Defense and supports programs that impact nearly every household, every community in every congressional district. But this bill is a step forward in our appropriations process. Hopefully, we can come together and fully repeal the sequester and restore order in our budget and appropriations work in fiscal 2015.

Let me just close by saying I really hope, though, that we don't settle in accepting this new norm, quite frankly, that this spending bill sets because it is really far too low for too many people to really achieve the American Dream. But I thank you both for coming together and doing the best you can do, given the fiscal circumstances.

Let me thank the gentleman for yielding and for his kind remarks.

Let me thank you for your tremendous leadership on so many issues which address and affect the American people across the board. I also thank you for being here every week during these Special Orders. It is really raising the level of awareness on the critical issues of our day. It takes a lot to do this, but thank you for giving us a voice and an opportunity to be with you.

I join you and our colleagues tonight in the Congressional Progressive Caucus, really, in strong opposition to the Trans-Pacific Partnership. We are talking about trying to ensure that people do not fall into the ranks of the poor but also that people have pathways out of poverty and into prosperity.

Now here we are, looking at another bill, H.R. 3080, which is called the Bipartisan Trade Priorities Act of 2014, which would provide the administration with Fast Track authority for the TPP. Once again, this is not a progressive trade policy. It will not allow for people to be employed and get good-paying jobs but, rather, just the opposite. So, unfortunately, looking at this really worries many of us that we will fall backwards in terms of more people becoming unemployed.

Let me just be clear up front, though, in that I do not oppose all trade agreements. I support fair and free trade. However, the notion that Congress should provide a rubber stamp for a complex free trade agreement is simply irresponsible and dangerous to our economy and to our constituents. They elected us to provide a voice in all of these policies, so to shut the Congress out of having that seat at the table, to me, is downright undemocratic.

The TPP will have a devastating effect on the working class families and communities of color that I represent and that many of us represent. It would sacrifice the well-being of working Americans for the wealth of multinational corporations, not to mention that, in its current form, the TPP would lock in higher prices for popular drugs, threatening access to life-saving medicines, including HIV/AIDS drugs, for millions of poor and low-income individuals and families around the world.

By exporting American jobs to countries where the minimum wage is just 28 cents an hour, CEOs will continue to get richer while working Americans will lose their only sources of income. We have seen this happen before. Past trade agreements have already cost us 3.4 million service sector jobs. Many of those jobs were in California. We simply cannot afford to lose more. NAFTA alone resulted in the net loss of 1 million U.S. jobs. It led to a trade deficit of $181 billion, and it devastated the manufacturing sector.

These agreements have allowed corporations to ship good American jobs overseas while wages, benefits and workplace protections and environmental protections are really declining and are denied. Rather than focusing on trade agreements that will hurt the middle class, we really should be focusing on job creation, eradicating poverty, income inequality, and improving economic mobility.

In 1980, CEOs were paid an average of 42 times the salary of a blue collar worker. In 2012, that number exploded to 354 times more than the average worker. This is unacceptable. It is really unconscionable that, rather than building pathways to prosperity, we are debating measures to make, yes, the 1 percent richer while holding working families down. So I stand in firm opposition to Fast Track authority and to any final deal that sacrifices American jobs and environmental protections in the name of international corporate profits. This must be defeated.

Finally, as many of us are talking about tonight, we have 1.4 million people who did not receive their unemployment compensation checks this week. The Republican Tea Party House has totally abandoned these people who are living on the edge. They want to work, so it is incumbent upon us to do the right thing on behalf of these people and immediately extend unemployment compensation.

First of all, it is the correct thing to do. It is the American thing to do. It is the moral thing to do, but it is also economically wise to do this. So we hope, during the district work period next week, that Republicans hear from their constituents because it is not only Democrats who have people who have lost their unemployment compensation but Republican constituents. All Americans who are seeking to work and who want to work and who need that bridge over troubled waters have lost their unemployment checks also.

I hope, for those who are people of faith, they really draw from their faith and understand that this is the moment, that now is the time to think about the least of these and to remember that we are our brothers' and that we are our sisters' keepers and that we need to pass unemployment compensation right away and then move forward and increase the minimum wage and, hopefully, one day, increase the minimum wage to really a living wage because that is what the American people deserve.

Thank you again for your leadership, and thank you for giving me the chance to be with you tonight.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to continue with our 50 floor speeches marking the 50th anniversary of the war on poverty.

Now, yesterday, we were joined by President Lyndon Baines Johnson and Lady Bird Johnson's eldest daughter, Lynda Johnson Robb, to mark the 50th anniversary of her father's State of the Union speech in which he declared an unconditional war on poverty. She reminded us that this was a bipartisan and bicameral effort led by the White House.

Now, I have shared my own story, reluctantly, in the past of the time in my

life when I depended on our vital social safety net programs during some very difficult times; but my testimony is only one of millions of other Americans. Many of you may be familiar with the Campaign to Cut Poverty in Half in Ten Years, a project of the Center for American Progress, the Coalition on Human Needs, and the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights. Now, they are doing phenomenal work gathering American stories of those who are living in poverty and have been lifted out of poverty, including our own Congressman Pocan's constituent, Amy Treptow's story.

Amy is here today, and I look forward to hearing Congressman Pocan read her story later on this House floor. Her story, though, is a true representation of the legacy of the war on poverty and the promise of the American Dream fulfilled. Her story is not unlike one of my constituents in Oakland who visited my office here in D.C. last month. After becoming a single mother, Jennifer was forced to stop attending her college courses and take a job making minimum wage as a caregiver. She relied on CalWIC and food stamps to feed her daughters, and her family and friends supported her with her housing and other basic needs.

Today, two of her daughters are graduates of the Head Start program, which prepared them to start elementary school where they are currently doing very well. And Jennifer was able to finish school and is now working to advocate on behalf of other families like hers who had to turn to the American people in her time of need. Also, I am reminded that one of my former district directors was a graduate of the Head Start program. He is doing phenomenal work raising a family and living the American Dream.

These are stories of resilience. They are the stories of millions of Americans who are facing homelessness, hunger and unemployment, if it weren't for a safety net. In my home State of California, 6.3 million people--17 percent--lived in poverty in 2012. And in my district in Oakland, California, 18 percent of the residents live below the Federal poverty level, including one in four children.

While the richest segments of our population continue to prosper nationally, income inequality traps millions of the working poor in poverty. Many low-wage workers must rely on food stamps and Medicaid just to survive--which our colleague Congressman Al Green just brilliantly laid out--just to survive while CEOs are making megabillions with government subsidies.

As a recent study by the National Poverty Center at the University of Michigan showed, in any given month, 1.7 million households live on a cash income of less than $2 per day. Now that is comparable to many living in the developing world. Yes, $2. I said $2 per day. Now, that is here in America, the richest Nation on this Earth.

In an economy that, despite recent gains, there are three unemployed for every one job opening, it is really a shame and a disgrace that 1.3 million people lost their lifeline as Republicans continue to refuse to extend emergency unemployment compensation. Now, these individuals' checks should arrive or should have arrived this week. Unfortunately, they did not. What in the world are people going to do now? This is heartless, it is mean-spirited, and, of course, to add insult to injury, many of these people lost about $35 in food stamp benefits last November.

Yes, the economy has gotten better for some, but has left millions behind. Fifty years ago, the safety net was put in place just for times such as these. That is why it is so important to share stories like Jennifer's and like Amy's. Vital social safety net programs are still needed. We need to stop this war on the poor. We should have a cease- fire on the war on the poor. We have a moral and we have an economic obligation to make investments in economic opportunity and jobs.

Mr. Speaker, as cochair of the Congressional Black Caucus' Taskforce on Poverty and the Economy and chair of the Democratic whip's Task Force on Poverty, Income Inequality, and Opportunity, I join my colleagues today in marking President Lyndon Baines Johnson's 1964 State of the Union address.

Fifty years ago, President Johnson boldly declared an unconditional war on poverty. For the next 50 days, Members will be giving 50 speeches on the floor in continuing this war for economic justice.

I am so pleased and honored that President and Lady Bird Johnson's eldest daughter, Mrs. Lynda Johnson Robb, accepted our invitation to join us here today. She is here in the gallery. I just want to say to her that she exemplifies President and Mrs. Johnson's commitment and the leadership required to fight poverty and build a great society. She visited Appalachia with her daddy, as she told us earlier, and reminded us today that this was a bipartisan and bicameral effort requiring leadership from the White House.

President Johnson's war on poverty created critical antipoverty programs such as Head Start, Job Corps, food stamps, Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security.

As President Johnson said 50 years ago:

It will not be a short or easy struggle, no single weapon

or strategy will suffice, but we shall not rest until the war

is won.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today with many Members to mark President Lyndon Baines Johnson's 1964 State of the Union Address.

Let me first take a moment to thank Leader Pelosi; our whip, Steny Hoyer; and the chair of the Congressional Black Caucus, Congresswoman Marcia Fudge, for their tremendous leadership in leading our agenda for economic justice and for jobs.

This is truly a historic day in our fight to provide every American with a pathway out of poverty. This morning, we were joined here at the Capitol by Linda Johnson Robb, President Lyndon Baines Johnson and Lady Bird Johnson's eldest daughter, to mark the 50th anniversary of her father's State of the Union speech in which he declared an unconditional war on poverty. At the time of his speech, the Nation's supplemental poverty rate was approximately 26 percent; 36 percent of low-income households struggled with food insecurity; and more than a third of American seniors were living in poverty.

And let me tell you, President Johnson got it. He recognized in his speech that poverty is a national problem requiring national organization and support. He knew that in a great society it is absolutely essential that we prioritize investments that lift millions out of poverty. As a result of his vision, his daughter reminded us this morning of the bipartisan and bicameral effort that followed, benchmark antipoverty legislation passed during the Johnson administration, including--and I want to remind everyone of these major initiatives that have significantly changed the lives of millions of Americans--the Civil Rights Act, the Urban Mass Transportation Act, the Criminal Justice Act, the Food Stamp Act, the Older Americans Act, Social Security amendments, the Voting Rights Act, the Housing and Urban Development Act, the Public Works and Economic Development Act, the Department of Housing and Urban Development Act, the Amendment to the Immigration and Nationality Act, the Higher Education Act, the Child Nutrition Act, the Child Protection Act, and the National School Lunch Act, in addition to Head Start, Job Corps, of course food stamps, now known as SNAP, Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security.

The result of these policies and programs are undeniable. The poverty rate was cut nearly in half by the mid-1970s. They even had a personal impact on many of us here, a personal impact on me, providing a critical bridge over troubled waters when I was a single mother in the seventies, trying to raise two boys and go to college. And I am forever grateful to the American people for being there for me when I needed them.

And we know that today, 50 years later, these critical antipoverty programs continue to provide that support for vulnerable Americans and people living on the edge. Today, the Nation's supplemental poverty rate is now 16 percent, well below what it was in 1964. The programs put in place after the war on poverty, they work. They create economic security, return people to their dignity, and provide opportunities for Americans to lift themselves out of poverty.

According to a report released by the Center for American Progress yesterday, without the safety net initiated as a part of the war on poverty, ``poverty rates today would be nearly double what they currently are.'' And I will now insert that report into the Record.

[From americanprogress.org, Jan. 7, 2014]

Key Findings From Our New National Poll

One-quarter to one-third of Americans, and even higher

percentages of Millennials and people of color, continue to

experience direct economic hardship. Sixty-one percent of

Americans say their family's income is falling behind the

cost of living, compared to just 8 percent who feel they are

getting ahead and 29 percent who feel they are staying even.

Twenty-five percent to 34 percent of Americans report serious

problems falling behind in rent, mortgage, or utilities

payments or being unable to buy enough food, afford necessary

medical care, or keep up with minimum credit card payments.

While these numbers have somewhat retreated over the last

five years, they are still shockingly high, and the

disparities across demographic groups underscore how uneven

the current recovery has been.

A majority of Americans have a direct personal connection

to poverty. Fifty-four percent of Americans say that someone

in their immediate or extended families is poor, a figure

that has actually increased 2 points

since we conducted our first poll in. Nearly two in three

African Americans (65 percent) report a direct connection to

poverty, while 59 percent of Hispanics say the same.

Americans vastly overestimate the annual income necessary

to be officially considered poor. Perhaps expressing a more

realistic understanding of the economy than official

government measures currently capture, Americans on average

estimate that it takes just over $30,000 in annual income for

a family of four to be considered officially in poverty--

about $7,000 more than the government's poverty line. Most

respondents in the focus groups were shocked to hear that the

official poverty line was as low as it is; many suggested

that it represents a disconnect with the reality of rising

prices over the last few years. Americans on average also

report that it would take more than $55,000 in annual income

to be considered out of poverty and safely in the middle

class.

Americans now believe that nearly 40 percent of their

fellow citizens are living in poverty. When we conducted our

2008 poll, 13.2 percent of Americans were living below the

federal poverty line, but our survey found that Americans

guessed the number to be 29 percent. Today, with unemployment

at pre-financial crisis levels and a recovery ostensibly

underway for several years, government statistics tell us

that 15 percent of Americans live below the poverty level.

The public, however, believes that number is now 39 percent--

a stunning 10-point increase that flies in the face of

economic indicators such as the unemployment rate, consumer

confidence, the financial markets, and gross domestic

product, or GDP.

Americans strongly believe that poverty is primarily the

result of a failed economy rather than the result of personal

decisions and lack of effort. In a forced choice test of

ideas, nearly two in three Americans (64 percent) agree more

with a structural argument about the causes of poverty--

``Most people who live in poverty are poor because their jobs

don't pay enough, they lack good health care and education,

and things cost too much for them to save and get ahead,''

underscoring the current economy's failings in the areas of

wages, health care, education, and cost of living. In

contrast, only 25 percent of Americans agree more with a

personal cause--``Most people who live in poverty are poor

because they make bad decisions or act irresponsibly in their

own lives.'' Even white conservatives and libertarians prefer

the structural vision of a failed economy over personal

reasons for poverty by a wide margin (63 percent to 29

percent).

Retrospective evaluations of the ``war on poverty'' are

mixed, but Americans across ideological and partisan lines

believe the government has a responsibility to use its

resources to fight poverty. Americans do not generally have a

favorable impression of the term ``the war on poverty''

without additional context about the programs and goals

associated with the larger project. But after introducing

information to describe the war on poverty and its impact, an

overwhelming percentage of Americans--86 percent--agrees that

the government has a responsibility to use some of its

resources to combat poverty. Moreover, a majority (61

percent) feels that the war on poverty has made a difference,

albeit not a major difference, in achieving its goals (41

percent say war on poverty has made a ``minor difference'';

20 percent say it has made a ``major difference'').

Retrospective evaluations of the war on poverty, however, are

heavily divided by ideology, partisanship, and race. Nearly 7

in 10 (69 percent) white liberals and progressives believe

the war on poverty has worked, and more than 6 in 10 (64

percent) white conservatives and libertarians believe the

opposite.

Despite mixed feelings about the original war on poverty,

there is strong support for a more realistic goal of reducing

poverty by half over the next 10 years. Asked whether they

would support or oppose ``the President and Congress setting

a national goal to cut poverty in the United States in half

within ten years,'' 7 in 10 Americans said they would support

such a goal--40 percent of the public would strongly support

the goal--and only 22 percent would oppose it. This figure is

quite similar to the 74 percent of support reported in the

first study in 2008. Support for a national goal of cutting

poverty in half is very strong among African Americans (87

percent support, 58 percent strongly) and reaches roughly 80

percent among both Millennials (79 percent) and Latinos (79

percent). Sixty-five percent of whites support this goal as

do a majority of Democrats (89 percent), Independents (66

percent), and Republicans (54 percent).

The public is clear about its priorities for reducing

poverty--jobs, wages, and education. Asked which two areas

they believe are most important for new investments, 40

percent of Americans choose ``creating jobs and increasing

wages''; 30 percent choose ``job training and workplace

preparation''; 25 percent choose ``elementary and secondary

education''; 23 percent choose ``college access and

affordability''; and 21 percent choose ``early childhood

education.''

Americans also express very strong support for a number of

policies to help reduce poverty rates with particular

intensity around jobs, wages, and education but also on more

traditional safety net items. Of the 11 policy ideas tested,

five proposals received 80 percent or higher total support

and 50 percent or higher strong support from Americans. These

five policy proposals are: help low wage workers afford

quality child care (86 percent total support, 52 percent

strong support); expand nutrition assistance to provide

families with healthy food and enough to eat (85 percent

total support, 50 percent strong support); make universal

pre-kindergarten available for all children (84 percent total

support, 59 percent strong support); expand publicly funded

scholarships to help more families afford college (84 percent

total support, 54 percent strong support); and increase the

minimum wage and make sure it rises with inflation (80

percent total support, 58 percent strong support). A second

tier of anti-poverty proposals with roughly three-quarters

total support and more than 40 percent strong support

includes ideas for expanded tax credits like the Earned

Income Tax Credit and Child Tax Credit and access to

affordable health coverage, as well as proposals for a new

national jobs program and more refinancing of mortgages.

Policymakers should feel confident that the American public

will support efforts to expand economic opportunity, increase

access to good jobs and wages, and maintain a robust social

safety net. Harsh negative attitudes about the poor that

seemingly defined political discussions throughout the 1980s

and 1990s have given way to public recognition that many

Americans--poor and middle class alike--are facing many

pressures trying to stay afloat and get ahead in the

difficult economic environment. Supporters of anti-poverty

efforts should not be complacent in their efforts, however,

and should recognize that although Americans back government

action to reduce poverty, questions remain about the

structure and scope of these efforts and how effective they

have been over time.

Let me give you an example. SNAP lifted 5 million people out of poverty in 2012 alone; and according to a new report by the White House, released yesterday, unemployment benefits reduced poverty by nearly 1 percent in 2012 alone.

Without Social Security, nearly half of our Nation's seniors would live in poverty; and since 2008, unemployment insurance has kept 11 million people out of poverty, including 2.5 million children and adults in 2012.

We are going to talk about not only the history this evening but also about the challenges ahead.

I will now yield to Congresswoman Yvette Clarke from New York to speak about many of the challenges which remain, in addition to a historical perspective on the war on poverty.

I now yield to the gentleman from North Carolina, Congressman G.K. Butterfield.

I thank the gentleman from North Carolina.

Now I would like to yield to the Democratic whip, Steny Hoyer, whose Democratic Whip's Task Force on Poverty, Income Inequality, and Opportunity I am honored and proud to chair. I thank him very much for being here and for his tremendous leadership.

Thank you very much for that very powerful message, Mr. Hoyer.

Let me now yield to Representative Danny Davis from Illinois who continues to remind us of the formerly incarcerated individuals who have families and children living below the poverty line.

Thank you.

Let me now yield to the gentlelady from California, Congresswoman Susan Davis, whom I served with in the California Legislature, who continues to remind us that middle-income individuals are worried at this point now of falling into the ranks of the poor. Thank you for being here.

Thank you very much for your leadership and for being here with us tonight, Congresswoman Davis.

I would now like to yield to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel), someone who has been a fighter and a warrior for many, many years and who continues to remind us of our moral obligation, our religious obligation for many, to ensure that we continue this fight in the war on poverty.

I want to thank the gentleman for reminding us tonight of our moral obligation to the most vulnerable in our country. Thank you for being here.

How much time do I have remaining?

Thank you very much.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlelady from Illinois (Ms. Duckworth), who will speak on behalf of not only her constituents but the entire country. She has come to Congress, hit the ground running, and continues to remind us of our veterans and the sacrifices that they have made, and to ensure their economic security. So many live on food stamps, unfortunately, as we speak. So thank you for being here.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro) whose subcommittee I serve on, the Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health, and Human Services.

I thank you so much for not only talking the talk, but walking the walk each and every day.

I yield now to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Delaney) and thank you so much for your tremendous leadership.

Thank you very much.

Let me now yield to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee), my good friend who constantly throughout his life has been waging this war on poverty. Thank you for being with us.

Mr. Speaker, how much time do we have remaining?

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We have many Members who still would like to speak, which really let's us know the importance of this issue.

I yield to Congresswoman Grace Meng from New York, a freshman from New York who has hit the ground running, is representing her constituents in a bold and brilliant way. Thank you for being with us.

Thank you very much.

Let me yield now to Congressman Pete DeFazio from Oregon, who has some stories he would like to tell about his constituents and what they are going through.

Thank you for that very powerful statement and for sharing those stories. All of us have stories very similar, but thank you for your constituents' testimonies.

I yield to Congresswoman Marcy Kaptur from Ohio. I am privileged to serve with Congresswoman Kaptur on the Appropriations Committee, who constantly speaks for the voiceless. Thank you for being here.

Thank you for that very powerful statement, Congresswoman Kaptur.

I yield now to our assistant leader, my good friend Congressman Clyburn from the great State of South Carolina, who constantly and consistently talks about prioritizing and targeting resources to area needs, to the poor and low-income communities. Thank you for being here.

Thank you so much for being here with us and for your leadership, Mr. Clyburn.

Mr. Speaker, how much time do I have remaining?

Let me yield now to the gentlelady from Texas, Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee.

Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, I have Congresswoman Schakowsky and Congressmen Green and Bishop here, who would like to insert their statements into the Record. We had an overwhelming number of Members who attended, and they did not have the opportunity to speak tonight.

General Leave

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Mr. Douglas L. Bragg for his extraordinary career of public service and leadership on the occasion of his retirement. Mr. Bragg is retiring after thirty- four years of dedicated service to the United States Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), where he has served as Director of the Oakland VA Regional Office since October 2011.

Mr. Bragg is a Vietnam Era veteran who served in the United States Air Force from 1970 to 1973. Mr. Bragg began his career with the VA in 1979 at the San Francisco VA Regional Office. In 1986, he took on the role as a Veterans Benefits Counselor and also served as the station's outreach coordinator. He was at the forefront of the Regional Office's response to the Loma Prieta earthquake, as he was primarily responsible for the outreach efforts to victims of the earthquake.

He joined the Veterans Benefits Administration as a Supervisory Field Examiner in 1989. In 1994, he accepted a position as a Program Analyst in the Veterans Assistance Service (VAS) at the VA Central Office in Washington, DC, where he worked on the Foreign Medical Program, performed station surveys, and was a member of the VAS Business Process Reengineering team.

In 1996, Mr. Bragg went on to become an analyst for the Fiduciary Program on the Policy and Regulations staff. He returned to the field in 1999 following his appointment as the Assistant Veterans Service Center Manager at the Washington, DC VA Regional Office. During his tenure in this position, he was accepted into Leadership VA through the VA Learning University, the VA's corporate university for VA employees to develop leadership and other management skills, and graduated in 2002. He became the Acting Veterans Service Center Manager at Washington Regional Office in 2003.

In 2004, Mr. Bragg joined the management team of the St. Louis VA Regional Office as the Education Program Manager. He further developed his leadership credentials while serving as the Acting Assistant Director in 2007, completing the Leadership for a Democratic Society course at the Federal Executive Institute in 2007. He was accepted as a participant in the FY 2007 Assistant Director Development Program.

He served as Assistant Director of the St. Louis VA Regional Office from 2008 through 2011. He was appointed to the Oakland VA Regional Office as Director in October 2011. In this capacity, Mr. Bragg has had the responsibility of overseeing California's 1.8 million veteran population. From the Oakland VA Regional Office, over 127,000 Californian veterans receive benefits with the total monthly compensation and payment benefits paid at over $146 million.

Throughout his prolific career with the VA, Mr. Bragg has been praised for his strategy, strong leadership, integrity and compassion. He has worked hard to create opportunities for veterans, a critical commitment that we must continue to honor to make sure our veterans come home to good jobs and services that are necessary to help transition successfully into civilian life.

On behalf of the residents of California's 13th Congressional District, Mr. Douglas Bragg, I salute you. I congratulate you on your many achievements, and I wish you and your loved ones all the very best as you transition to this exciting new chapter of life.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the extraordinary career of Linda Crayton as we celebrate over 40 years of her dedicated service to the community and her wide reaching accomplishments. Ms. Crayton is an outstanding individual, who throughout her distinguished career has championed public private partnerships, led efforts for gender equality, advocated for justice in her community, and supported our youth.

Ms. Crayton's esteemed career has spanned over four decades as an employee of Comcast, where she is currently the San Francisco Regional Senior Director of Government Relations. Along the way, she has been a staunch advocate for the advancement of women by leading efforts with Black Women Organized for Political Action, California Women Lead, EMERGE, Women In Cable and Telecommunications, and 100 Black Women of the Bay Area, Inc. Ms. Crayton has been recognized numerous times for her commitment to gender equality. The San Francisco League of Women Voters accorded Ms. Crayton ``The Woman Who Could Be President'' award in 2001. In 2006, she was named ``Woman of the Year'' for the 9th senatorial district by California State Senator and President Pro- Tempore Don Perata, as well as ``Corporate Woman of the Year'' by 100 Black Women, Inc. In 2011, Ms. Crayton was recognized by the National Women's History Month with a History Makers Award.

Among her many contributions, Ms. Crayton has tirelessly served her community and church as a civil rights leader. She has worked with the NAACP, Urban League, and countless other community justice organizations. She also supports the East Oakland Youth Development Center, Oakland Boys and Girls Club, and the Spanish Speaking Citizens Foundation. For her tremendous commitment to the community, she has been recognized by the San Francisco African American Chamber with a ``Lifetime Achievement'' award and by the National Association for Multi-ethnicity in Communications (NAMIC) as a Black History Month-- Living Legend. In 2007, the Martin Luther King Jr. Civic Committee and the Bayview Hunters Point Family Resource Center further honored Ms. Crayton with a ``Distinguished Community Service Award,'' and a ``Humanitarian Award,'' respectively.

Moreover, Ms. Crayton boasts an impressive commitment to local government. In 1996, San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown first appointed her to the San Francisco Airports Commission, a role that she has been appointed to by successive San Francisco mayors continuously till this day. She has worked hard to ensure that San Francisco International Airport is the best run, cleanest, and most welcoming airport in the world.

Additionally, Ms. Crayton provided much needed support and leadership to the restructuring of the San Francisco Department of Health in her capacity as President of the San Francisco District V Mental Health Board. For these efforts she was recognized by the San Francisco Board of Supervisors with the prestigious Leadership Award.

Throughout her prolific career, Ms. Crayton has not only been a hardworking professional, but also a compassionate and generous individual. She has been a mentor for countless men and women throughout the years, taking them under her wing to help them grow professionally and pursue job opportunities.

Therefore, on behalf of California's 13th Congressional District, Ms. Linda Crayton, I salute you. Your many years of service have made an indelible mark in our community. Best wishes to you and your loved ones in the years to come.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to express my support for H.R. 3309, the Innovation Act.

While not perfect, this legislation would take significant steps toward reducing the number of costly and abusive patent lawsuits.

``Patent trolls,'' or non-practicing entities that take advantage of the legal process for their own economic gain, are a massive cost to businesses and a significant strain on our already overburdened justice system.

I strongly agree that we should be addressing this critical problem especially at a time of continuing economic recovery.

However, like many, I had serious concerns about specific portions of this legislation.

That is why I voted in strong support of an amendment introduced by my dear friend and colleague Congressman John Conyers, the Ranking Member of the Judiciary Committee.

His amendment would have improved the Innovation Act by adding provisions that protect customers targeted in infringement suits, promote transparency in patent ownership, and direct the Patent and Trademark Office to develop educational materials for small businesses.

Unfortunately, while his amendment failed, I hope we will continue to work to implement many of his suggestions.

As we vote on this legislation today, it is also important that we remember other issues affecting our ability to fight patent fraud.

For example, the sequester cost the Patent and Trademark Office nearly $150 million this year. It also resulted in 1000 fewer patent examiners and delayed the construction of a satellite patent office in Silicon Valley.

I commend this legislation's well intentioned goal to curb abusive patent litigation and look forward to continuing to work with my colleagues to end this destructive practice.

Mr. Speaker, I was not present for rollcall votes 630-636. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes'' on rollcall 630, ``yes'' on rollcall 631, ``no'' on rollcall 632, ``yes'' on rollcall 633, ``yes'' on rollcall 634, ``yes'' on rollcall 635, and ``yes'' on rollcall 636.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlelady for yielding and for her tremendous leadership in her capacity as our ranking member on the Rules Committee. Thank you so much for standing in strong opposition to this rule.

As a member of the Budget Committee and Appropriations Committee, I want to commend all of my colleagues for putting forth a plan to replace some of the reckless sequester cuts that do continue to hurt families each and every day.

Yet this budget deal is really outrageous for what it doesn't do. It does nothing--nothing--to extend emergency unemployment benefits to the millions of jobless workers in every State.

As the Center on Budget and Priorities report today points out, the failure to include any extension of Federal emergency jobless benefits in the deal would likely negate any boost from sequester this deal would bring, and I will include this report for the Record.

Over 170 Democrats have joined my letter calling for an extension of this critical lifeline. It is really shameful that Republicans have refused to include an extension of unemployment benefits. The least we can do for the millions of the long-term unemployed who are struggling just to get by during this holiday season is to pass this 3-month extension. This budget does nothing for the millions of jobless people and asks nothing from the people who caused our economic crisis and continue to benefit from economic inequality.

Please remember, this is not about showboating or statistics. We are talking about people's lives. We are talking about people living on the edge. We are talking about 1.3 million people who will lose unemployment benefits during this holiday season. It is cruel. It is morally wrong, and it is economically stupid.

So I hope that we can vote ``no'' on this rule and defeat the previous question so we can vote for a 3-month extension of unemployment compensation.

Finally, let me just say, we must do better. We must protect and expand the safety net that are the pillars of our society.

[From offthechartsblog.org, Dec. 11, 2013]

Failure To Continue Jobless Benefits Would Undo Budget Deal's Economic

Boost

(By Chad Stone)

The Murray-Ryan budget deal provides a stimulative boost to

the economy--albeit a modest one. But here's the rub: the

economic drag caused by lawmakers' failure to include an

extension of federal emergency jobless benefits in the deal

would likely negate that stimulus.

Economist Joel Prakken of Macroeconomic Advisers says that

the deal would boost economic growth by ``maybe 1/4

percentage point'' compared to the sequestration cuts

scheduled under current law. The deal follows the sound

principle under current circumstances of raising deficits in

the near term to boost the economic recovery but reducing

them by an even larger amount later, when the economy is

expected to be stronger.

The problem is, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO)

estimates that Emergency Unemployment Compensation (EUC) has

a very similar impact--boosting the economy by up to 0.3

percent by the end of 2014 and adding up to 300,000 jobs. Not

extending EUC would remove that potential boost from the

economy.

The budget deal and extending EUC have similar economic

effects because their budgetary effects are roughly the same

size: CBO estimates that the budget deal's increases in

discretionary spending would raise federal spending by $26

billion in fiscal year 2014 and $22 billion in fiscal year

2015, while its deficit-reduction provisions would cut

spending by roughly $3 billion in each fiscal year. Netting

these effects and assuming that about a quarter of spending

for fiscal year 2015 (which starts October 1, 2014) occurs in

calendar year 2014, the budget deal would produce a net

increase in spending of about $28 billion by the end of

calendar year 2014. CBO estimates that extending EUC would

cost about $26 billion in calendar year 2014.

CBO and other analysts generally regard spending on

unemployment insurance as providing more ``bang for the

buck'' than most other stimulus measures. So, the economic

drag in 2014 from a failure to extend EUC is likely to be at

least as large as the economic boost from the budget deal.

Mr. Speaker, first let me thank Chairman Royce for his tremendous leadership, for his continued support, and for his true efforts to create bipartisan initiatives in the legislation coming out of the committee. I have served with him on the committee for many, many years, and it has always been consistent in terms of trying to reach a bipartisan agreement on these bills. So, again, I thank him very much.

And, of course, to the gentleman from New York, Ranking Member Engel, thank you, again, for your leadership and for helping to craft a bill that we could get to the floor, which is a bill that I think will really put the United States on the right side of history as it relates to Haiti, and also for your focus on the Western Hemisphere.

Let me also just thank all of the original cosponsors of the Assessing Progress in Haiti Act of 2013, including Representatives Yvette Clarke, Frederica Wilson, Maxine Waters, John Conyers, Charlie Rangel, Gregory Meeks, Karen Bass, and, of course, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen. I want to thank my colleague Sheila Jackson Lee for staying strong and steady and supporting this legislation. And I thank them also for their tireless work and longstanding commitment to the well-being of Haitians and the country of Haiti.

Nearly 4 years ago, I stood as chair of the Congressional Black Caucus and led a Special Order, recognizing the importance of our relationship with Haiti. A short time later, I led a delegation to Haiti where we witnessed the destruction and devastation firsthand.

The Congressional Black Caucus has a long history of working with the Haitian people and the Haitian American community on a variety of issues.

We share a close and longstanding relationship. This has continued under the magnificent leadership of our current chair, Chairwoman Marcia Fudge.

On January 12, 2010, a devastating 7.0 earthquake struck near Haiti's capital. This terrible earthquake killed hundreds of thousands and left 1 million more homeless.

Our government, the American people, and the international community responded with a tremendous outpouring of support for the Haitian people. However, what began as a swift and effective relief effort gave way to a sluggish reconstruction.

A report by the Government Accountability Office, also cited by Chairman Royce, found that USAID has missed a number of its own goals and deadlines. Most importantly the GAO found that as of June, 2013, USAID had committed only 52 percent, and disbursed 35 percent, of the $651 million in funding for earthquake reconstruction.

That is why passing the Assessing Progress in Haiti Act of 2013 is so important. With so much money yet to be disbursed, we have an opportunity to ensure that our assistance is as effective as possible.

My bill helps us understand where our aid efforts stand, where they are going, and how USAID plans to get there. It would require the State Department to report on the progress of infrastructure projects, indicators used to measure project success, efforts to combat corruption, measures taken to strengthen Haitian capacity, and considerations of vulnerable populations.

My bill would give us the information we need to make those assessments and help get the reconstruction on track.

No one is saying that this will be easy. The road to recovery is a long one, and this legislation is but one small step.

We must also keep in mind that USAID cannot fix the problem on its own. I commend the agency for the work it does around the world and encourage it to continue to address the challenges it faces in Haiti.

Haitian citizens and their government, along with nongovernmental and intergovernmental organizations, must do their part. The Haitian Government will need to hold free, fair, and timely elections. I commend them for the steps they have already taken this week to hold long overdue elections next year.

The United Nations will also need to vigorously address the cholera epidemic. There is no question that in October 2010, after nearly a century of not having cases of cholera in the country, it was introduced by U.N. peacekeepers.

As I said before, I am very proud today that we are voting to increase the transparency and accountability of U.S. assistance to Haiti on a bipartisan basis. I strongly urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan legislation, and I look forward to continuing to work with them to ensure that Haiti is truly built back better and that the Haitian people once and for all have a future--and that future will be ensured by the support of the American people.

Thank you.

I want to thank Chairman Royce's and Ranking Member Engel's staffs. I want to especially thank my staff, Pablo and Jirair, and all of our staffs here for their very diligent and steadfast work. This has taken us probably about 4 years to get this bill to the floor.

Thank you again, Chairman Royce, Ranking Member Engel, and all of the original cosponsors for their tremendous support.