Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, first, let me just commend Congressman Schiff and the 185 Members who voted today to restrict the authorization for the use of military force.

Today's vote is a very important step in our effort to repeal this overly broad blank check to wage war anywhere, at any time, and for any length, which of course I could not vote for September 14, 2001.

I have a bipartisan bill which would repeal the authorization to use military force, and doing so would provide Congress an opportunity finally, a long overdue opportunity, to have a meaningful debate about our constitutional role in declaring war.

Last week, I released a public report from the Congressional Research Service citing 30 instances where this resolution has been invoked. Most Americans, and of course my colleagues in Congress, would be surprised to know that these activities include deploying groups in Ethiopia, Djibouti, Georgia, Yemen, Kenya, the Philippines, Somalia--I could go on and on. It also includes justifying detentions at Guantanamo Bay and warrantless surveillance activities.

Finally, let me just say it is time to repeal this authorization and rein in the overly broad and deeply troubling NSA domestic spying program.

I urge all Members to join our continuing efforts and cosponsor my bill, H.R. 198, to repeal the AUMF.

Congressional Research Service,

Washington, DC, July 10, 2013.

Mr. Speaker, I was not present for rollcall votes 375 and 376. Had I been present, I would have voted yes on both.

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

First, let me thank Congressmen Polis, Blumenauer, Conyers, and Schrader, who have joined me in offering this amendment.

Our amendment is very straightforward. It would trim Pentagon spending by a very modest 1 percent.

The Congressional Budget Office estimates our amendment would result in a reduction of discretionary spending of $5.9 billion, and it does so while maintaining our national security and protecting our Active Duty military personnel.

This Defense appropriations bill is $28.1 billion more than the Pentagon's current funding level, which includes $5 billion more than the President's request for war spending in the Overseas Contingency Account. In total, this bill includes over $85 billion in war spending at a time when the majority of the American people and a growing bipartisan group in Congress are calling for an expedited end of military activities in Afghanistan.

Our amendment simply takes the total amount in the bill, reduces that amount by 1 percent, and then allows the Department of Defense to choose what accounts to take the reduction from. As I mentioned before, military personnel accounts and medical and health care programs are exempt from this amendment.

Mr. Chairman, month after month we have been talking about ways to address the budget and the impacts of the harmful sequester. The question before the body today is: How do we ensure that we have a budget that reflects our national security priorities, our moral values, and our underlying economic strength? I'm talking about a budget that protects the most vulnerable in our country and a budget that ensures that we have priorities to create jobs and turn this economy around--in other words, nation-building in our own country.

What this amendment does is say that we need to put everything on the table--and I mean everything--and that includes the Pentagon. Believe me, if I could, I would support much greater cuts to the Pentagon. But surely $5 billion can be found among the tens of billions of dollars lost each year at the Pentagon due to waste, fraud, and abuse. You know that that $5 billion is a mere drop in the bucket when you look at what has been actually taken away without knowledge of where that money has gone, when you look at the suitcases filled with cash in Afghanistan, and previously in Iraq.

Even with this modest cut of 1 percent, the Pentagon base budget would still far outpace any other nation in defense spending. The United States spends as much on its military as 13 countries combined. But all three of these are close allies. I'm talking about China, Russia, the United Kingdom, France, Japan, India, Saudi Arabia, Germany, of course Brazil, Italy, South Korea, Australia and Canada. Combined, we spend more than those countries.

Finally, Americans believe that no Federal agency should really be immune from cuts, including the Pentagon. In fact, the average American would pursue a much larger cut of over $93 billion, according to a poll released in 2012 by the Stimson Center.

So it's long overdue that we be honest with the American people and begin to have some real debate about deficit reduction, job creation, and the reduction of spending. And that includes the Pentagon.

So I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Let me first thank our ranking member for his comments and just reiterate the fact that while this is a 1 percent cut across-the-board, it allows the Pentagon to make those decisions about where the Pentagon and our military officials believe the cuts should come from and how to reallocate our funds.

Certainly as the daughter of a veteran of 25 years--I'm an Army brat--I recognize and support our young men and women who have been placed in harm's way and who have sacrificed so much for our country. There is no way that I would offer an amendment that would harm our troops.

A 1 percent cut really forces us to pause, quite frankly, and forces us to look where we can find savings when we scrutinize the Pentagon budget, the same way that we scrutinize our domestic discretionary spending. At a time when American families, businesses, and government agencies are facing budget cuts, why shouldn't the Pentagon be asked to become more efficient and eliminate waste, fraud, and abuse?

Let me reiterate that this bill includes $5 billion more than the President's request for the overseas contingency account. So it makes no sense. We need to begin to focus our resources on nation-building at home, ensure our national security, and really make sure that all of our agencies begin to look at waste, fraud, and abuse. Certainly, the Pentagon should be the first to do that, especially given the fact that we have not had audit requirements of the Pentagon and still don't know what type of resources there have been wasted and misallocated.

I ask for support for this very modest amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Speaker, let me thank the gentleman for yielding and for his tremendous support.

First of all, I agree that we must take a critical look at No Child Left Behind and address its numerous shortcomings, but the Republican proposal is not the answer.

This bill guts education. It violates the civil rights of students, and it does not support educators. It leaves students with disabilities, low-income students, students of color, English-language learners, migrant students, and LGBT students out in the cold.

The so-called Student Success Act, which really is the Letting Students Down Act--that's what it really is--guts education. It guts it by $1 billion below the fiscal 2012 level, locking in, really, these already detrimental sequester cuts. It would fail to support meaningful improvements and reforms

at the Nation's lowest performing schools. This bill does not support students, it does not protect students, and in no way does it guarantee access to equal quality public education.

Finally, Mr. Speaker, let me just say, the rule fails to make in order the student nondiscrimination amendment, which would protect lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender students across the country from harassment and bullying. Every child deserves these protections.

So we should go back to the drawing board on this bill. We should call it for what it is, and that's ``letting students down.'' That's what this bill does. And we should really look at how we invest in our future through education rather than making it more difficult to improve student achievement.

Once again, this bill begins to erode our system of public education; it violates our students' civil rights; it does not support our teachers and our educators; and finally, let me just say, it fails to prioritize STEM education that would eliminate the Mathematics and Science Partnership program, which really is the only program at the Department of Education focused solely on teacher professional development in STEM subjects.

I hope that we vote against this rule and also the underlying bill.

I ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks in strong opposition to the farm bill rule and the underlying bill because it increases hunger in America.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in very strong opposition to this rule and the underlying Republican bill.

The partisan bill before us is an abomination and shows just how out of touch, out of control, this extreme Tea Party-controlled Congress is. I can't say, though, that I am surprised. I am sad to say that this House has reached a very shameful new low.

This bill also violates decades of bipartisan support for a delicate balance between America's nutrition programs, farm conservation, and other priorities. This partisan bill also fails to reauthorize nutrition programs, which benefit millions of Americans in rural and urban areas across our country. The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program is our Nation's first line of defense against hunger and among the most effective forms of economic stimulus.

Republicans say they want to decrease poverty and hunger--I hear this all the time on our committees--yet they do just the opposite.

Be assured this bill will increase poverty and hunger. It is a moral disgrace. Nobody wants this Republican bill to move forward--not the 532 companies and organizations from every congressional district that have urged this Congress to not break apart the farm bill, not the administration which issued a veto threat last night, and certainly not the millions of low-income and poor people and working families with children and seniors who continue to struggle from the impact of the Great Recession.

Enough is enough. This is un-American. It's a shame and a disgrace. It's not only on days that we worship that we must remember to do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

I want to thank the gentleman for yielding time and for leading our efforts tonight to celebrate the life of our beloved Bill Gray.

I first want to extend my condolences to his loving wife, Andrea, and his three sons.

My thoughts and prayers are with Bill's family, his extended family, friends, the Bright Hope Baptist Church family in Philadelphia and, of course, the residents of Philadelphia.

I know that tonight, Bill's friend and colleague, my predecessor and good friend, Ron Dellums, also sends his sympathy and prayers to Bill's family and friends.

When Congressman Gray was elected to Congress in 1978, I was a member of then-Congressman Ron Dellums' staff. Congressman Gray hit the ground running, became chair of the Democratic Caucus, majority whip, and chair of the Budget Committee.

As the first African American in many of his positions, he was truly a trailblazer and paved the way for many of us to follow.

As a congressional staffer, I worked closely with his staff, and thank you so much for recognizing them. I worked with almost every one of them who are here tonight, and we worked so closely on so many issues, especially education, and his efforts with Congressman Dellums to put the United States on the right side of history relating to sanctions against then-racist apartheid South Africa.

Congressman Gray treated staff with respect, and he valued their counsel and their hard work. And so I know that all of Congressman's Gray's staff, former staff, those who are here, and others, mourn his loss and send their sympathies.

In recalling so many wonderful memories of Bill, one stands out for me like no other. In 1980, Congressman Bill Gray led a congressional delegation to Sierra Leone in West Africa to participate in what was then the Africa-America Institute's conference.

I was privileged to represent my boss, Ron Dellums, on this mission, and Singleton McAllister, his staffer, was on that visit. Now, this was my first visit to the land of my ancestors, so it was exciting, and it was a moving visit for me.

On the plane were many dignitaries, including Ambassador Andrew Young.

Now, the leader of congressional delegations had input into the menus served on the plane. In Bill's typical way, he decided the delegation should have soul food on the journey to Africa. We had fried chicken, greens, sweet potatoes, macaroni and cheese, and peach cobbler.

We visited several countries on this trip, and I was amazed and so proud of Congressman Gray's command of the issues in each country and his diplomacy with African leaders.

I had the privilege to worship at the Bright Hope Baptist Church in Philadelphia and learned what a great, prophetic, and Spirit-filled preacher he was. And I also marveled at how every weekend he was in his church preaching.

I had many memorable talks with him about religion and politics. He was dedicated to his country, his church, his constituents and, most importantly, his God, and he understood very clearly the importance of the separation of church and state.

What an incredible human being he was. I have so many memories that I could share, but in the interest of time, I cannot do that tonight.

But I just want to say that when Bill Gray learned I was running for Congress in '98, he became one of my most consistent supporters and my dear, dear friend. We had many conversations on the phone, many meetings; and I'll always remember his words of encouragement and wisdom.

I will miss the Honorable Congressman Reverend Bill Gray tremendously. He touched my life in so many ways, and for that he will always have a place in my heart.

May his legacy live. May he rest in peace.

Mr. Speaker, as a member of the Sustainable Energy and Environment Coalition and the Safe Climate Caucus, I rise to call for urgent congressional action on climate change.

This week, President Obama released a Climate Action Plan. While it makes important steps toward reversing the trend on carbon pollution, congressional action is necessary to get the job done.

Climate change continues to affect our communities through severe events like extreme heat, floods, and superstorms.

For so many African Americans and communities of color, the impact of climate change is real and present. They bear the brunt of the effects of pollution, toxic dump sites, and greenhouse gas emissions, leading to higher rates of asthma and a greater vulnerability to natural disasters.

Yet, instead of working with Democrats to address climate change and promote job creation, Republicans voted on a bill to expand unsafe drilling and make Big Oil even bigger.

That is exactly the wrong approach. Domestic energy production is already booming. The American people are waiting for real action on climate issues. We owe it to our children and future generations to act now on climate change.

Mr. Speaker, I join with the Congressional Black Caucus to talk about this week's Supreme Court decision on the Voting Rights Act, which is a devastating blow to one

of our most fundamental rights, and that is the right to vote.

I was born and raised in Texas and I vividly remember the days of Jim Crow, segregation, and the poll tax. The Supreme Court decision could turn the clock back to these very, very tragic days in our American history.

It is truly tragic how the majority of the Court has simply refused to acknowledge these real threats to our voting rights and turned its back on the law that people fought and died for.

Now is the time for urgent, bipartisan congressional action. We must defend the heart and soul of this democracy.

As our drum major for justice, Dr. Martin Luther King, once said, ``Voting is the foundation stone for political action.''

I am reminded of this every year when I march across the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, Alabama, with our great warrior, Congressman John Lewis, who really sacrificed so much for justice and for freedom.

Truly, our votes are the bedrock of our democracy.

Mr. Speaker, I was not present for rollcall votes 287-288. Had I been able to vote, I would have voted ``yes'' on both.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of this bipartisan amendment which I am proud to cosponsor.

The underlying farm bill is designed to artificially raise the price of milk. This will have negative consequences for consumers, and that's why the Consumer Federation of America, the National Consumers League, the Consumers Union and other consumer groups, also the Teamsters, oppose the underlying language in this bill and support this amendment.

And when milk prices increase, it disproportionately harms America's poor, working families.

Now, there's a lot in this bill that I cannot support, including the heartless cuts to SNAP. Without this amendment, this bill adds insult to injury. Without this amendment, 246,000 women and children will lose access to milk because of the decrease of milk supply, and also prices, as the Representative from Georgia has so eloquently laid out, the milk prices will rise about 32 cents.

So this amendment protects families whose budgets are already stretched to the limit and they're already being cut in this bill.

So I hope that people understand this bill. There's been a lot of confusion, but this is a good bill that consumers support, that teamsters support; and I urge an ``aye'' vote on the amendment, not the bill, but the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentleman for yielding.

I rise in strong opposition to this amendment.

This is yet another heartless cut on the backs of hungry families all across America. How much is enough for those who are relentless-- relentless--in attacking low-income families and hungry children. Cutting over $20 billion in SNAP benefits is bad enough, but this amendment would add insult to injury. This is mind-boggling.

Let me tell you, I know from personal experience, no one wants to be on food stamps. Many who are on SNAP are hardworking people making minimum wage, and others are desperately looking for a job in these difficult economic times.

This amendment demands that hungry families search for a job even while it eliminates all employment assistance and job-training funds for those very families. Let's not pretend that by making a family suffer more hunger and more desperation and more hardship that a job will suddenly appear for them.

I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this very, very heartless, cruel, and inhumane amendment.

Let me thank Congressman McGovern for yielding and also for your tremendous leadership, not only in preserving our safety net, but your tireless work to eliminate hunger, which really should be an oxymoron in America.

I'm a proud cosponsor and rise in strong support of this amendment to safeguard hungry children and families across America.

Mr. Chairman, this farm bill would make heartless and harmful cuts to our Nation's frontline defense against hunger, the SNAP program. Oftentimes, people need a safety net, a bridge over troubled waters to help them through difficult economic times.

And yet these huge cuts come, even while they preserve wasteful subsidies for huge agribusiness, that really don't need corporate subsidies to continue with their huge profits.

Taking away food from hungry children hurts their health, their educational outcome, and restricts their economic prospects for their entire adult lives. And the Federal Government will end up paying more for their health care and their education, and get less revenue from their taxes.

As a former food stamp recipient, I know for a fact no one wants to be on food stamps. People want to work.

Mr. Speaker, I was not present for rollcall votes 245-247. Had I been able to vote, I would have voted ``yes'' on all three.

Mr. Speaker, I submit the following letter of Dec. 18, 2002, on the 10th anniversary of PePFAR

Dear President Bush, As members of the Congressional Black

Caucus, we are writing to draw your attention to the growing

spread of HIV/AIDS throughout the developing world. It would

be impossible to overstate the devastation caused to date by

the global AIDS pandemic, or the urgency of the need for a

greater response from the United States and the global

community. With 42 million people currently living with HIV/

AIDS--29.4 million of them in Sub-Saharan Africa--14 million

children already orphaned by the disease, and 70 million more

people expected to die by 2020, we must do more now. We must

respond on an appropriate scale to address the greatest

plague in recorded history.

The United States, as the world's wealthiest nation, must

take greater action by contributing its fair share, and in

doing so we can help galvanize the global response that we so

desperately need. As you prepare to travel to Africa in

January, and as you prepare your budget for fiscal year 2004,

you have a remarkable opportunity to demonstrate United

States leadership against AIDS at a moment when the world

will be watching. We urge you to launch a major new US

initiative to fight AIDS, as well as tuberculosis and

malaria. TB is the leading killer of people with HIV,

claiming 2 million lives each year despite the existence of

an effective and inexpensive cure, while malaria kills nearly

one million people each year, most of them young children in

Africa.

An expanded US Initiative to fight AIDS must:

Provide at least 2.5 billion for implementation of global

AIDS programs in 2004, as well as additional funds to combat

TB and malaria. At least 50% of this should go to the Global

Fund to Fight AIDS, TB and Malaria.

Prioritize treatment, as well as prevention and care, for

those affected--including an expanded mother-to-child

transmission initiative that would detect and treat entire

families, and including funding and personnel as needed to

implement the WHO call to treat three million people with HIV

by 2005.

Promote developing country access to sustainable supplies

of affordable medicines for AIDS and other diseases such as

opportunistic infections in accordance with the Doha

Ministerial Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public

Health and oppose any attempts to limit the scope of the

Declaration.

Expand programs for children orphaned by AIDS.

Seek debt cancellation for impoverished countries, so they

can invest in poverty reduction and AIDS programs.

Most importantly, a US initiative should consist of new

monies and policies that complement existing US-supported

programs and are additional to the Millennium Challenge

Account (MCA). The MCA, however, also must help meet the

Millennium Development Goal of halting and reversing the

spread of these diseases.

We cannot win the war against AIDS without greater

financial resources and a clear plan of action for the United

States. Programs around the world are ready to scale up

prevention, treatment, and care to save lives now, and to

develop the systems needed to save tens of millions more in

the future. Each day we delay in mounting a comprehensive--

and compassionate--response to the global AIDS and TB

pandemics, the cost in human, social, and economic terms

grows. You will have our strong support and the support of

the American people for a bold new initiative to save

families and communities affected by the AIDS crisis, to

extend the parent-child relationship, and to secure the

future of young people.

Sincerely,

Barbara Lee; Donna Christian-Christensen; Edolphus Towns;

Charles Rangel; Julia Carson; Juanita Millender-

McDonald; Maxine Waters; Danny K. Davis; Robert Scott;

Elijah Cummings; William ``Lacy'' Clay, Jr.; Stephanie

Tubbs Jones; Eddie Bernice Johnson; Bobby Rush; Carolyn

Kilpatrick; Diane E. Watson; Gregory Meeks; Major

Owens; Harold Ford, Jr., John Conyers; Alcee Hastings;

Sheila Jackson Lee; Eleanor Holmes Norton; Donald

Payne; Sanford Bishop; Bennie Thompson; Melvin Watt;

Corrine Brown; Chaka Fattah; Jesse Jackson, Jr.; James

Clyburn; Albert R. Wynn.

Mr. Speaker, this morning, I had the honor of joining Secretary Kerry and hundreds of advocates to mark the 10th anniversary of our global aids program known as PEPFAR. Ten years ago, when the AIDS pandemic was ravaging many African countries, Democrats, Republicans, and Independents put aside our differences and came together to create the largest, most effective foreign aid program to date.

I'm very humbled to have played a small role in the creation of PEPFAR and proud about the leadership of the Congressional Black Caucus and our chair at that time, Congresswoman Eddie Bernice Johnson--even before the world knew about this initiative. And I'm so proud of the role my staff played over the years, including the late, beloved Michael Riggs, whose memory and leadership Secretary Kerry recognized this morning.

To quote from a 2002 letter to President Bush, the Congressional Black Caucus called for ``an expanded United States initiative'' to ``respond to the greatest plague in recorded history.'' The next month, in his State of the Union speech, President Bush boldly embraced our call to action.

Now, a decade later, PEPFAR's success isn't just measured in terms of dollars spent but in lives saved and communities transformed.

First, let me thank the gentlelady for yielding, but more importantly, I just want to thank Congresswoman Slaughter, our ranking member on the Rules Committee, for fighting for women's health and for the rights of women, really, all of her life.

Thank you so much.

I rise in strong opposition to this rule and the underlying bill. Once again, the Republicans have decided to make women's health a battleground as part of their, yes, ongoing war on women.

The bill on the floor this week is nothing more than a direct challenge to Roe v. Wade and a vehicle for yet another ideological attack against women's reproductive rights. In fact, this is the 10th time that the Republicans have forced a vote on this topic since taking control of the House in 2011. The bill is a direct threat to the privacy rights and health of every woman living in this country and especially to women of color, who already face an increased stigma and other barriers to reproductive health due to the terrible Hyde amendment. Now, I remember the days of back alley abortions. Many women died and were permanently injured before Roe v. Wade. With this bill, Republicans have decided to try to take us back there--to threaten physicians, for instance, with criminal prosecution.

Can you imagine a criminal prosecution for attempting to provide the medically accurate information and care that is best for their patients? Why in the world should Members of Congress or any legislator interfere with women's personal health choices?

These private decisions should always be between a woman, her family, her doctor, or whomever else she chooses to help in making these very difficult decisions. We should not be making it--not you nor I. We should let women make their own decisions. Congress has no business in the personal lives of women--no business.

We need to vote ``no'' on this rule and this bill. We need to get back to the real business--like creating jobs-- that we should be doing, like creating economic opportunities we should be doing. We should be trying to figure out how to reduce poverty. We should be trying to figure out how to ensure our young people have the best quality public education. There are many issues this Congress needs to take on. Why don't you stay out of the personal lives of women. It has no place on this floor.