Floor Statements

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

I am very happy to stand in support of my bill, H.R. 2197, the York River Wild and Scenic Rivers Study Act, and I want to start by thanking Mr. DeFazio, Mr. Grijalva, and tonight Mr. Hastings for their support in reporting this bill out of committee in September. I thank them and former Congressperson, now Senator Markey's help in passing this bill last Congress. I very much appreciate their persistence and their willingness to help get this bill passed and into law. I know the people of Maine will appreciate their commitment, too.

This bill was really proposed by the folks back home, the same people who live and work around the York River and who care deeply about it. This bill would allow organizations working around the York River to partner with the National Park Service to conduct a study that would provide the information that is vital to making smart decisions about the future of the York River and its communities.

I have heard from small business owners, community groups, State and local government, local and national land trusts, fishermen, hunters, school representatives, and historical and environmental conservationists, and all

agree that continuing to benefit from the river depends on recognizing and protecting its important and unique qualities.

There are many unique features of the York River and the ecosystems surrounding it, and I will talk about those in a minute, but I want to start with a little history.

The first English settlers came to the York River nearly 400 years ago--but there is archaeological evidence along the shores of European settlers who were here even earlier. Before anyone came from Europe, the Abenaki Indians named the river ``Agamenticus,'' which means ``little cove beyond the hills.''

When I last visited the York River, I spoke with members of the local community about the importance of the river to the people today, to the economy, and to the wildlife of the York River watershed. The river is home to important and rare species, including the Maine endangered box turtle and the threatened harlequin duck.

The salt marshes of the York River watershed serve as a nursery ground for nearly 30 species of fish that are vital to the Gulf of Maine ecosystem. The York River is a place where children are learning in an outdoor classroom. Students from nearby school districts gather data from the river for classes and to inform community decisions about the environment and the economy.

Maybe the most important factor is that many of the hardworking people in this part of the State depend on the York River to support their jobs. The York River is a place where people go to work. Commercial and recreational fishing operations depend on excellent water quality and reliable access to the waterfront. Farmers in the York River watershed grow pumpkins, potatoes, and other produce that help keep Maine communities healthy.

People travel to the York River to explore and appreciate its natural character and its incredible history, and while doing so, they invest in the surrounding communities.

The work of community groups has already resulted in considerable progress, but the York River needs additional protection so this vital resource is not overwhelmed by increasing development. In order to move forward to a future that protects the most important aspects of this waterway and the jobs and the communities that depend on it, it is vital to connect these communities with the information they need. That is the goal and hopefully the eventual outcome of this important piece of legislation.

My bill is widely supported in Maine, and I look forward to it being favorably considered today.

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

Mr. Speaker, I want to take a moment to say to Mr. Hastings, I really do appreciate the work you have done in your committee, the bipartisan activity in your committee, and truly for your assistance in bringing this bill to the floor. I know you are preparing to retire, and I wanted to wish you the best on whatever journey happens next in your life, and thank you for your long service to your State and to the rest of us in Congress. You have been a wonderful colleague to work with. Thank you very much for that.

Representing Washington State, while we are at opposite ends of the country, I think many of the concerns you have raised and that your constituents have raised, given the fact that you have a tremendous amount of open land, you have a tremendous amount of coastal shore land, you deal with some of the same issues that those of us who reside in Maine do, and I appreciate you bringing that perspective to this bill and to the many bills you have worked with.

I would just add in speaking about this particular program, it was really a wonderful experience for me when the many residents of this community, as I mentioned earlier, from all diverse walks of life, some of them were farmers and some of them were fishermen who depend on the river, some who care deeply about the history, but all of them came together, people who

hadn't necessarily had the opportunity to work together before, but realized this is a very important concern, and that this particular river has enormous impacts. Because this river is in the southern part of my district, which means it is close to the southern border of Maine, it is surrounded by a very developed part of our State, although not much is that developed in Maine. We are one of the most rural States in the country with only 1.3 million people, so we are not a particularly overdeveloped State, but this is part of the southern part of the State, where there is a lot of activity going on, and people were concerned even more so because they wanted to make sure that when visitors come to our State, when residents decide to make it their home, we can count on the fact that there will be this part of the river and the area around it that will be looked at very closely when thinking about future uses and how to make sure that it is always there for those people who depend on it for jobs, for the fishing industries that are so critically important, and for the communities that care deeply about its history and about the activities that go on there. That is part of what has made this bill so particularly important to our State. I am extremely grateful to everyone on the committee who worked to help us bring it to the floor.

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

Mr. Speaker, I want to talk for a minute about two very special young girls from Waterville, Maine.

Gabbie St. Peter and Alice Willette both celebrated their eighth birthdays last month and are in the second grade at the George J. Mitchell Elementary School. Since their birthdays are just a day apart, they decided to have a joint birthday party. But instead of presents, these two extraordinary girls asked their friends to bring the items most in need at their school's food pantry.

This amazing act of generosity and community spirit came straight from Gabbie and Alice themselves. There was never a suggestion from a parent or a teacher to do this. They planned it all themselves.

I would have to agree with their teacher, Sherril Saulter, who said these two girls have some of the biggest hearts she has ever seen. Their compassion and generosity is inspiring, and I want to recognize and thank these two emerging leaders from Maine, Gabbie St. Peter and Alice Willette, for recognizing not only that no one in their community should go hungry, but also that they have the power to effect change.

Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to congratulate PORTopera on its 20th anniversary season.

Since 1994, PORTopera has been the only company in the State of Maine performing fully staged operas with nationally and internationally acclaimed artists. It has provided unduplicated opportunities to enjoy creative, inspiring opera that showcases excellence and brings the brightest stars and musical professionals to Maine.

PORTopera has generated critical acclaim from national publications, including its 2012 production of Madama Butterfly by Opera News and 2001's Le Nozze di Figaro by the Boston Globe. PORTopera has also been involved in educating upcoming generations who dream of performing in the theater through the opera-in-schools program with the University of Southern Maine and the Young Artists Program.

I am proud of PORTopera's commitment to developing and expanding the arts in Maine on many levels. The company has enriched Portland and the State of Maine culturally and has maintained a reputation for creativity, sophistication, and artistic excellence for two decades. Its work is critical to the quality of life we enjoy in our State.

As Maine's creative culture continues to develop and receive national attention, I am proud to recognize PORTopera for its leadership and success.

Bravo!

Mr. Speaker, I would like to recognize three constituents in my District who have recently been selected to receive Presidential Awards for excellence in math and science.

Teachers Karen Jagolinzer of Frank H. Harrison Middle School in Yarmouth and Elizabeth Heidemann of Cushing Community School in Cushing will receive 2012 Presidential Awards for Excellence in Math and Science Teaching. By being chosen for this prestigious award, Karen and Elizabeth distinguish themselves as some of the top teachers in the country.

I am proud of both Karen and Elizabeth for what they are doing to give our students solid skills in math and science, along with a greater sense of where those lessons can take them in life. Karen has taught for 18 years, creating classrooms where students can learn mathematics in a safe and supportive environment. Elizabeth is a kindergarten teacher who challenges her young students to apply lessons in their community and natural surroundings.

In addition, Daniela Oliveira, an Assistant Professor at Bowdoin College, will receive the 2012 Presidential Early Career Award for Scientists and Engineers. This honor recognizes promising scientists and engineers who are beginning their careers with important research and community service. Daniela is conducting groundbreaking work on using innovative technology to make our computers more secure.

Mr. Speaker, advancing math and science is critical to keeping the United States competitive in a global marketplace, driving innovation, and discovering more about our world. My deep appreciation goes to Karen, Elizabeth, and Daniela for their commitment to these goals, as well as my sincere congratulations for receiving these awards.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to recognize an organization in my state for its outstanding work to honor Maine veterans who died in the line of duty since September 11, 2001.

The Summit Project engages teams of hikers in carrying stones--some weighing up to 10 pounds--to the summits of Maine mountains. Each engraved with a fallen veteran's initials, the stones are picked by family members from a special spot in the veteran's life. The stones come from a range of places, including childhood homes, family camps, and favorite fishing spots. And each has a story to tell about the heroes we lost.

Marine Major David J. Cote of Maine was inspired to start the Summit Project when he climbed Mt. Whitney with a group of Navy Seals. Each carried stones on the 11-mile hike up the 14,500-foot mountain to honor their fallen brothers. Maj. Cote decided to bring the practice to Maine, which has some of the highest numbers of veterans per capita in the nation.

I applaud the Summit Project for engaging people in such a fitting tribute to veterans who gave their lives in service to the country. By toiling up steep mountain trails and carrying the heavy weight of these stones, we can be reminded of the sacrifices these men and women made and the struggles they went through. At the same time, we can symbolically reconnect the fallen to the state they loved and pay respect to their families.

Mr. Speaker, physical monuments in our town squares serve an important role in ensuring that our country's fallen heroes are not forgotten. What makes this project so special, though, is that the monuments are built inside of those who participate. More than carrying stones, these hikers carry the memories of our veterans in their hearts. It's hard to think of a better way to keep the spirit of these veterans alive.

Mr. Speaker, tomorrow, October 24, is Food Day, a nationwide movement to promote healthy, affordable and sustainably produced food; and next week, Congress will begin the process of reconciling the House and Senate farm bills.

I know this is a big job, but I want to urge my colleagues to work to come up with a farm bill that promotes healthy, affordable and sustainably produced food.

Without exception, everywhere I go and every group I talk to--from bankers to teachers unions and from veterans to college students-- people nod their heads when I talk about locally grown, sustainable food. People want to know where their food comes from, and they want to see the farmers in their communities succeed. There is nothing more fundamental than food, and it is time we got serious about creating a food system that works for everyone--for families, for farmers, and for our local communities.

If we are going to change our food system, Congress must take this historic opportunity to reform agriculture policy by producing a farm bill that reinvests in our local economies.

Thank you, Chairman Ryan, for yielding me this time.

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to be on the floor on this bipartisan issue, which we certainly don't have enough of today, and I am happy to be here as well with the chairman of the Agriculture Committee, whom I have had the privilege to work with, even though we possibly don't agree on this issue.

I, too, was pleased to offer a similar amendment during the farm bill process and was glad to see Mr. Hanna speak on that earlier. That amendment was actually called the Hanna-Pingree amendment. I digress for a minute because I was particularly sentimental about that amendment since my daughter is named Hannah Pingree. Unfortunately, that amendment met its demise. I am just pleased to see we are back here discussing this topic.

The sense of Congress is a very small step toward a basic, commonsense reform: modestly reducing premium payments for the most successful farm businesses in America. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise--99 percent of crop insurance holders will see absolutely no change in their premium payments; but for a very few, the absolute richest, they will see a very small increase in their premiums. We are just

asking those few to pay something a little closer to their fair share.

To put this in perspective, crop insurance is the only farm income support program that is not subject to some form of payment limitation or means testing. Honestly, I would like to see a much stronger crop insurance reform; but for now, for this farm bill, for today, this is a step in the right direction.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote in support of this commonsense reform.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to recognize two young men in my district whose courageous actions saved the lives of two fishermen this past New Year's Eve.

While attending a family gathering on Montsweag Bay in Woolwich, Maine, late that evening, Blake McElman and Jay Cavanaugh, both 21, heard yells coming from the water. Looking out, they saw that the incoming tide had quickly surrounded two men who had been digging for worms on mudflats far from shore. Standing on a rock, the men would quickly become immersed in the frigid water.

With time of the essence, McElman and Cavanaugh decided to attempt a rescue themselves. Hauling a canoe to open water over ice and snow, they paddled several hundred yards offshore and recovered the men, both showing early signs of hypothermia. Once ashore, they fed and warmed the men, who ultimately escaped from the incident unscathed.

This would not have been the outcome without the quick and courageous actions of McElman and Cavanaugh. Most likely they saved those men's lives that night. I'm relieved and thankful that all four men survived this very dangerous situation.

Mr. Speaker, many people in Maine make their living in jobs that involve braving the elements and even risking their lives in unforgiving and swiftly changing environments. But what also characterizes our state is that our people look after each other and are willing to go a long way to help one another. McElman and Cavanaugh certainly showed that to be true, and then some. I'm very proud to have them in my district.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for yielding me time this morning, and I thank everyone who has been on the floor to talk about the unconscionable and unthinkable cuts to SNAP benefits. This will have a devastating effect on my home State as it will across the country.

I want to mention one other thing. Just over a week ago, Speaker Boehner promised a fair and open debate on the FARRM Bill and said:

If you have ideas on how to make the bill better, bring

them forward. Let's have the debate and vote on them.

Lots of people brought ideas forward, ideas that would help farmers in States like mine, but we aren't getting a chance to debate those ideas here today.

The biggest programs in this bill, the revenue loss program and the price loss program that benefit big farmers, they won't do anything for the farmers in my State or many others. They won't make them more vital, as the Chair on the floor has said today. That's not going to happen.

A bipartisan amendment that I submitted--and this is just one of the 117 denied consideration--would benefit diversified farmers in every State. This is an amendment that has zero cost and is supported by over 400 organizations from 46 States. It's an amendment that would help the tens of thousands of small businesses that did $5 billion in local food sales last year.

I'm glad we will get to vote on the amendment to roll back the outrageous SNAP cuts in this bill, but I am very disappointed that local food and sustainable agriculture has been left out of the farm bill debate.

This is not an open process, and I urge my colleagues to join me in voting against the rule.

Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment and want to speak in favor of the Farmers Market Promotion Program.

I have a very different perspective. While I appreciate my colleague's opposition or concerns raised about the sequester, I do not think those same concerns apply to what is a very good program.

You know, when I moved to Maine about 40 years ago and started a small farm, growing and selling healthy food, locally grown food, was a little bit out of the mainstream. We had gone in a different direction. But I can tell you today, wherever I go, whether I'm talking to a group of bankers or a group of school teachers or a group of school kids or their parents, people nod in very strong support when I say we need to have more locally grown, sustainable food.

People want to know where their food comes from. They want to see farmers in their communities. They want to help those farmers make ends meet. This amendment would take us backwards. It would further undo our weakened infrastructure of local food support.

The Farmers Market Promotion Program--which is reformed in this bill to be the Farmers Market and Local Food Promotion Program--helps communities support local food systems through direct marketing. There are not price guarantees, there isn't income support. This helps farmers understand the best practices for marketing their food. It helps them understand how to get the best price from the market for their product in this growing opportunity that truly supports rural communities.

It's not an either/or proposition. You don't have to have just locally grown food or nationally grown food. You can support re-growing our local food infrastructure, helping rural communities, and also support conventional agriculture. You can buy California lettuce

and also buy in-season tomatoes from the farmers who live down the road and support your community.

The truth is I come from a State like Maine, and Maine is like many other States around the country; we have very, very few farmers who will be able to take advantage of the biggest programs in this bill, the biggest programs that are worth billions of dollars--the Revenue Loss Program, the Price Loss Program, the Stacked Income Protection Plan. They don't apply to farmers in my State. They get very little support to help these growing opportunities in rural communities. That's okay with them. They're not asking for a price guarantee; they're asking for some parity, for USDA programs to once and finally apply to them. They're not asking to be at a tremendous disadvantage because they are diversified and sustainable farmers, people who live and work in rural communities, whose kids go to our schools, who serve on local boards, who are part of the rural fiber of our country. That's all this program is asking for, a little bit of parity, a little bit of assistance in this billion-dollar program for big corporate farms.

I cannot imagine how anyone could come to the floor and say, I don't want to help the fiber and fabric of rural States like mine, programs like Cultivating Community, which helped promote six local farm stands in low-income areas. This program helps people to support farm stands that accept SNAP benefits, that do a tremendous amount of things to get more people eating healthy, local food and promoting them. As I said, it's a critical part of our local infrastructure. I can't imagine why anyone would go against that.

I'll pause there and reserve the balance of my time.

I'm happy to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Austin Scott).

I would just like to say one more time that this is a vital program.

Let me again reinforce the good words of my colleague and thank him for speaking on the other side of the aisle in support of this program. This helps communities through direct marketing. This helps roadside stands, farmers markets, CSA, agritourism, other direct producer-to- consumer marketing opportunities.

It's a competitive grant. It's not a boondoggle. It's not direct payments to a farmer. And once again, I just want to say, I come from the State of Maine, which like many States is full of rural communities, rural communities who are seeing this renewed interest in buying food locally--a great way to expand this economy, to provide jobs, to get more money into our rural economies, to make sure people are eating healthier food, getting to know their farmers in their communities, making better, healthier decisions.

I strongly oppose this amendment, and I urge my colleagues to do so.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Thank you, Mr. Kind, for giving up some of your valuable time. I will try to be quick. First, I want to thank the chair and the ranking member. They've worked hard on the FARRM bill, and I appreciate many of the good pieces that are in this bill.

But there are a lot of unconscionable cuts that hit deeply into the working poor in this country, particularly the SNAP benefits cuts, which is a means-tested program.

I want to rise in support of this amendment because unlike the cuts on the SNAP benefits for low-income families, this amendment just asks the richest agricultural business in America to pay a little more and receive a little less, just this one portion of the amendment, the $250,000 cap for farmers who clear more than $250,000 a year. We have a lot of farmers in our State and a growing number of farmers in our State, but there are very few that clear more money than that.

This mostly affects corporate farms. Ninety-six percent of the farmers will never be affected by this amendment, but for a very few, this is a huge benefit.

I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I thank my colleague for his time.

Thank you to my good friend for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, as we confront the issue of sexual assault in the military, we can't forget the survivors who continue to serve.

One area that has needed reform is the questionnaire that must be filled out to obtain or renew a security clearance. One of the questions, Question 21, asks if you have ever sought mental health counseling. Knowing the question is there, and believing that answering ``yes'' might jeopardize their chances at a security clearance, survivors of sexual assault often decided not to get the mental health counseling that they needed.

The Director of National Intelligence has listened to us on this and has issued guidance saying survivors of sexual trauma do not have to report counseling related to that assault. But that change won't do the survivors any good unless they know it has taken place, which is why I've introduced an amendment that is part of a package we are considering later today that would require the Department of Defense to inform servicemembers of this change.

Mr. Speaker, I regularly hear from survivors of sexual assault who want to know when the change will be made. It's time they get their answer.

It's unfortunate that this rule does not allow more time for debate on these critical topics.

Mr. Speaker, I make this submission to correct a previous record statement printed on June 4, 2013, which erroneously named the location of the Brick Store Museum as Kennebunkport, Maine.

Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to congratulate the Brick Store Museum, located in historic Kennebunk, Maine, for achieving accreditation from the American Alliance of Museums.

Since 1936, the Brick Store Museum has offered generations of locals and visitors the opportunity to explore the rich history of one of Maine's most iconic communities.

The Brick Store Museum's focal point is a building constructed in 1825 as a dry goods store by William Lord. The exterior remains much the same as when it was built, giving today's visitors a glimpse of what life was like nearly 200 years ago.

I am proud of the museum's commitment to preserving, interpreting, and exhibiting Kennebunk's important role in our history. Many students have passed through its rooms, gaining knowledge, understanding, and a stronger attachment to the area where they have grown up.

I share the Brick Store Museum's belief that the history of our oldest towns is crucial to understanding where we are now and where we are headed. As Maine continues to advance into the future, the Brick Store Museum offers an important tether to our past.

Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to congratulate the

Brick Store Museum, located in historic Kennebunkport, Maine, for achieving accreditation from the American Alliance of Museums.

Since 1936, the Brick Store Museum has offered generations of locals and visitors the opportunity to explore the rich history of one of Maine's most prominent port cities.

The Brick Store Museum's focal point is a building constructed in 1825 as a dry goods store by William Lord. The exterior remains much the same as when it was built, giving today's visitors a glimpse of what life was like nearly 200 years ago.

I am proud of the museum's commitment to preserving, interpreting, and exhibiting Kennebunkport's important role in our history. Many students have passed through its rooms, gaining knowledge, understanding, and a stronger attachment to the area where they have grown up.

I share the Brick Store Museum's belief that the history of our oldest towns is crucial to understanding where we are now and where we are headed. As Maine continues to advance into the future, the Brick Store Museum offers an important tether to our past.

Mr. Speaker, first, I want to thank my colleague from Maine, Mr. Michaud, for his time, for his leadership on the Veterans' Affairs Committee, and for sharing his brave constituent, Ruth Moore, with me.

I also want to thank Chairman Miller for his bipartisan work on this bill, as well as subcommittee chair, Mr. Runyan, and Ms. Titus, the ranking member, for their work on this issue as well. Thank you very much.

Mr. Speaker, lately it has been hard to escape the news about the crisis of sexual assault in the military. Senior military personnel charged with preventing sexual assault are themselves investigated or arrested for the very same thing.

A new Pentagon report showing 26,000 men and women were sexually assaulted in the military last year--up 35 percent. And only about one in 10 of those assaults were reported, and even fewer ended up with a prosecution. In fact, the Pentagon says that every week--every single week--400 sexual assaults go unreported.

But even though we've heard much more about this problem lately, in no way is it a new problem. Almost every day I hear from another veteran who is the survivor of sexual assault in the military. Men and women of all ages, from every branch of the service, from every era. I have heard from survivors of sexual assault from World War II, the war in Afghanistan, and every conflict and every era in between.

There is no question that we have to get to the root of the problem, that we have to reform the legal service and

change the culture so sexual assault in the military is no longer tolerated and is thoroughly prosecuted.

But the sad fact remains: even if sexual assault in the military ended today, even if a woman or man in uniform was never raped again, there would still be tens of thousands of veterans who survived a sexual assault and suffer a disability because of it, but still can't get veterans disability benefits that they are owed.

That's why we need this bill, the Ruth Moore Act. This bill doesn't create any new benefits for survivors of sexual assault. This bill doesn't give any special treatment to the survivors of sexual assault. This bill just levels the playing field and makes it easier for those survivors to get the benefits they are owed.

A few years ago, the Department of Veterans Affairs acknowledged that too many combat veterans were suffering from PTSD and they were being denied benefits because it was too difficult to document what happened to them on the battlefield. So the VA made a commonsense change. They said if you were in combat and a VA doctor gives you a diagnosis of PTSD, and if an examiner links that diagnosis to the combat you experienced, then you are eligible for benefits.

The Ruth Moore Act asks the VA to do the same thing for victims of military sexual assault. If a VA doctor gives a veteran a diagnosis of a mental health condition and there is a medical link to the sexual assault, then the VA will have to qualify the veteran for service- related disability benefits.

Currently, the VA requires ``secondary markers'' to show the sexual assault occurred. Those secondary markers--statements from relatives or friends or a supervisor--are often hard to come by, especially for veterans who suffered an assault years or even decades ago. In the case of combat-related PTSD, those secondary markers are no longer required and the sworn statement of a veteran is sufficient. The same reform should apply to survivors of sexual assault.

We named this bill after a very brave woman from Maine. Ruth Moore was in the Navy when she was 19, serving her country. At a base in the Azores she was raped. When she reported it, she was told to keep quiet, and then she was raped again. For 23 years she fought for the benefits she was owed. Her records were tampered with, she was diagnosed with mental illness, and her life fell apart. After decades of fighting, Ruth was finally given the benefits we owed her, and slowly she has put her life back together.

When I met her in my office in Maine 2 years ago, she could barely tell her story. Her friends, her neighbors, even many of her loved ones didn't know what had happened to her. But bit by bit, Ruth has rebuilt her trust of people in positions of responsibility to the point where she came here to Washington and testified before the Veterans' Affairs Committee--a very brave woman.

But there are thousands and thousands of Ruth Moores out there who have been fighting for their benefits for years or even for decades. As survivors of sexual assault, they have suffered and sacrificed enough. We can make the process of getting the benefits they are owed a little bit simpler.

I urge my colleagues to support this important bill.

Madam Speaker, for generations we have fought to improve conditions for working American families: the minimum wage, anti-discrimination rules, and the 40-hour workweek. These changes were all passed by Congress to make it a little bit easier for Americans to make a decent living under decent working conditions.

Now the Republicans want to roll back some of these basic protections, starting with the 40-hour workweek. The bill we are debating this week--which should be called the Right to Work for Less Act--is designed to let employers avoid paying overtime and could force workers to take comp time instead. But the comp time could only be used when it suits the employer.

There is no question we need to improve workplace rules, like equal pay for equal work or guaranteed paid sick leave or a higher minimum wage. But rolling back the clock to do away with the 40-hour workweek is a step backwards, and it is a lousy deal for American workers.