Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I am calling, again, on the House to introduce a dose of democracy into this body.

For months, since December 28, millions of Americans have lost their extended unemployment benefits. We were elected to represent the will of the people, to chart a course for this country, and to deal with the exigent needs of those Americans who are struggling.

A majority of this House is ready to do that. A majority of this House would vote to extend Federal unemployment benefits to prevent people who have worked hard for their entire lives from losing everything that they have worked for because this body fails to act.

A majority is for it--a majority of the people and a majority of this House. The Senate will pass unemployment extension. They did once already. The President will sign it.

It is incumbent upon us to do the will of the people. If we do not do this, we bear responsibility for the fact that, for generations, poverty could be inflicted upon people who have worked hard their entire lives and stand a chance of losing everything simply because we won't act.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the House of Representatives to join me in recognizing Dr. Richard Shaink, Mott Community College's longest serving president, as he prepares to retire after 14 years of leadership and service. Mott Community College is a multi-campus institution serving Flint and Genesee County, Michigan.

He possesses a unique blend of business, community, economic development and educational experience having served as a former college campus president, multi-campus vice president, instruction dean, college business/industry director, shopping center general manager, industrial sales representative, production line supervisor, full-time high school vocational teacher, and an adjunct instructor at Michigan State University, Ferris State University, and Lansing Community College.

He received his Ph.D. in Educational Administration from Michigan State University, but affirms that he is most proud of the Associate of Arts degree he earned at Jackson Junior College.

In 2010, Dr. Shaink received the Marie Y. Martin Chief Executive Office of the Year Award from the Association of Community College Trustees, a national organization of governing boards representing more than 6,500 elected and appointed trustees who govern over 1,200 community, technical, and junior colleges in the USA and beyond. Moreover, under his leadership, Mott Community College was also the recipient of the 2011 Aspen Institute's College of Excellence Award designating MCC as one of the ten best community colleges in the United States.

Mr. Speaker, I applaud Dr. Richard Shaink for his exemplary leadership in Genesee County and congratulate him on his retirement.

Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk

Madam Chair, this is an amendment that is actually quite simple. I will only take a moment to explain it.

It simply requires that the use of funds in this legislation not be utilized in contradiction to existing U.S. law. Let me specifically point out the problem that I am trying to make sure is very clear.

As Members of Congress, we are elected to represent our constituents. That includes our constituents that serve in the Armed Forces, so I have been very concerned about reports and experience within my own office that some in the military have reacted unfavorably when servicemembers reach out for assistance from their Member of Congress, and as I said, we have experienced this in my own office.

I know that this is not Department of Defense policy, and I know and am certain that this behavior is being exercised by a very small minority of staff people, but it is entirely unacceptable.

I know for me, if somebody in government--any department--has a problem with me and the communications I have with my own constituents over issues they are having navigating the bureaucracy of government, if anybody has a problem with that, they can talk to me directly. My office is listed. They can call me.

I just want to make sure that this amendment makes it clear that no money can be spent in violation of 10 USC 1034. This is the statute that specifically makes it illegal to retaliate against members of the military for speaking to their Members of Congress.

I want to just reiterate this is based on real experiences that I am having in my office. I have talked to other Members. There have been similar experiences. I don't think it is pervasive, but I want to make the message clear that members of the military and any other constituent has an opportunity to reach out to Members of our Congress. It is important for our constitutional role, our oversight role.

I think this amendment, while perhaps redundant, would speak to that directly.

I hope the House would consider it.

I yield to the gentleman from Indiana.

I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey.

Reclaiming my time, I thank the chairman and the ranking member. I know when to quit when I am ahead.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Offered By: Mr. Kildee

Amendment No. 40: At the end of the bill (before the short

title), insert the following:

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the service of Chief Master Sergeant Willarvis ``Dee'' Smith, who, this week, will be retired after an illustrious 28-year career in the United States Air Force, a career that spanned many decades and took him to many continents across the globe.

I am personally honored and grateful that Chief Smith is here in the House gallery today as we celebrate his outstanding career and service and congratulate him on his retirement from the U.S. Air Force.

Mr. Speaker, Chief Smith was born and raised in the district that I now have the privilege to represent. In fact, he was raised in my hometown of Flint, Michigan, graduated from Northwestern High School, the school just to the north of Northern High School, my high school.

Shortly after graduation, he entered the Air Force in 1986, where he completed his basic training at Lackland Air Force Base in Texas. Upon graduation from his technical training as an aircraft maintenance specialist for the B-52 in Texas, he was assigned to many stations, including New York, New Jersey, Illinois, Maryland, Virginia, and Hawaii.

During Operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm, he was deployed in Saudi Arabia, afterward also serving 2 years at Andersen Air Force Base in Guam. In 1991, Chief Smith held the rank of staff sergeant. Over his 28-year career in the U.S. Air Force, he was promoted five times: first, to technical sergeant; then master sergeant; then senior master sergeant; and lastly, in 2010, he was promoted to chief master sergeant, the highest ranking enlisted position in the Air Force.

As the chief enlisted manager of the Directorate of Communications of the

Air Force District of Washington, Chief Smith served as senior adviser to the 844th communications group, which is made up of more than 900 military personnel. In this highly important and visible position, he helped to provide cyber support to the President of the United States and also to other senior officials at the Pentagon.

During his 28 years of service to our country, Chief Smith's commitment and excellence as an outstanding airman did not go unnoticed. In 1989, he was recognized as the Air Mobility Command Student of the Year. In 2001 and 2003, Chief Smith earned the Defense Threat Reduction Agency's Information Management Senior Non- Commissioned Officer of the Year Award. In 2005, he was named Air Force Senior Non-Commissioned Officer of the Year and Air Force Communications and Information Professional of the Year.

John Rogers, the deputy director of the 844th Communications Group, summed up Chief Smith's career by saying: ``He took care of our airmen and he was phenomenal. He embodied our core value of service before self.''

Chief Master Sergeant Smith, on behalf of the people of the Fifth Congressional District, on behalf of the Congress of the United States, thank you for your admirable service to our country. The motto of the Air Force is ``Aim High . . . Fly-Fight-Win.'' Chief Smith, throughout your career, you have aimed high and truly represented the best of the U.S. Air Force, and you have represented the best of our shared hometown of Flint, Michigan.

On behalf of my constituents in the Fifth Congressional District and on behalf of my colleagues here in Congress, congratulations to you on your outstanding career in the Air Force and your outstanding service to our country.

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

Mr. Chairman, my amendment would appropriate $10 million to fund an amendment passed unanimously in the 2015 NDAA that allocates additional financial literacy training programs for incoming and transitioning servicemembers. This $10 million will be spread equally among the service's operation and maintenance accounts.

This increased financial literacy training would be funded by allocating $10 million from the Navy's $14 billion aircraft procurement account, which includes nearly $1 billion in funding over the Navy's request to purchase 12 EA-18G Growler aircraft. The Navy actually requested none of these 12 aircraft.

The problem we have is that far too often servicemembers have inadequate training or experience. We are often talking about young people who have yet to really fully have their feet underneath them. When a servicemember has financial difficulty, often they are preyed upon by unscrupulous lenders, payday lenders, often.

In fact, in some cases--this was reported widely recently--offering and executing loans at up to 400 percent interest rates, often targeting these young servicemembers.

While this has an effect clearly on the financial condition of servicemembers, it also can have an effect on readiness, in that many servicemembers require a security

clearance to perform their duties, and financial difficulties and the loss of a clearance can have an enormous impact on readiness.

All that being said, I will be withdrawing my amendment. The offset that we offered, according to CBO, would require a $50 million offsetting cut to raise $10 million, and I will certainly yield to anybody who would like to explain to me the mathematics behind some of the scoring that comes up.

Hearing none, I will move on.

This is an important area. It is an important question. The House has already unanimously acted in the NDAA to support this program.

While it is my intention to withdraw this amendment, what I would ask, if the chairman and ranking member would engage and work with us on this--and certainly engage the Department of Defense--to find the financial resources to support this expanded literacy program, it would be of great benefit to our servicemembers, and it would be of tremendous value in terms of our readiness.

With that, I reserve the balance of my time.

I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment.

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

Mr. Chairman, much like the VA, the Department of Defense is confronting significant challenges regarding its care and transition of wounded warriors.

In fact, following the recent death of two individuals at the Army's Fort Bragg hospital, the Secretary of Defense ordered his own comprehensive review of DOD health care. Simply, it is obvious and is becoming increasingly more obvious that wounded warriors are still failing to receive the care that they need and that they clearly deserve.

We know that the DOD has undertaken countless studies and has appointed numerous working groups to identify ways to improve wounded warrior care. Moreover, Congress has rightfully engaged and has held a multitude of hearings and initiatives. There has been a lot of review internally and a lot of conversation.

I believe, though, that we need to engage some of the brightest minds in our country to gain a new and objective perspective on improving care for wounded warriors.

So this amendment appropriates $20 million to fund an amendment that, again, was passed in the FY15 NDAA to provide for an outside, independent study to identify challenges confronting the DOD's care of wounded warriors and offer specific recommendations to improve that.

This study, passed in the NDAA, will only be awarded to an entity that has received a small percentage--at the very most--of its revenue from contracts with the DOD, essentially an outside organization with little or no contact or relationship with the DOD or the VA. We are really trying to get a fresh set of eyes on this question.

This study of the Department of Defense's health care for wounded warriors is almost identical to the independent study of the VA, mandated by H.R. 4810, Chairman Miller's Veteran Access to Care Act, which just passed the House last week; so the same set of fresh eyes that will be looking at VA care, I believe, need to be focused on the Department of Defense care as well.

This amendment is funded by allocating $20 million from the Navy's $14 billion aircraft procurement account, which includes nearly $1 billion in funding over the Navy's request to purchase 12 EA-18G Growler aircraft.

The Navy requested none of these aircraft in its budget request, and it would seem to me that, out of the $14 billion in that procurement, with nearly $1 billion in new money for something that wasn't requested, we could find $20 million to make sure that the billions of dollars that we are spending in DOD health care--particularly for our wounded warriors--is spent in the most efficient way and provides the absolute best care in the timeliest fashion available.

That is what this amendment would do. I urge its passage.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I thank the chairman and the ranking member for their comments.

I will say that, when I speak of a set of fresh eyes--I understand the studies that have been done by the GAO and other internal studies, and I will acknowledge a certain irony in making the comment because it is so often that we hear that we can't be continually looking for answers to these difficult questions only from those of us in government, that we ought to be taking a look at it from a fresh set of eyes that come from outside, from the private sector. I think that that would be a great advantage in this case.

Regarding the offset, I understand and wholly support all of the work that we need to do and the investments that we need to make to ensure that our military is fully capable.

I just believe that the same commitment that we have to our own protection ought to extend to protecting those who put on the uniform of the country and suffer as a result. They ought to get the best care.

Out of the $970 million increase from what was requested, it would seem to me that finding $20 million from that would not be a bridge too far.

I appreciate the comments, and I hope that we can work together on finding solutions on this.

I think Chairman Miller was right in his approach with the VA, and I think the same could be said for the DOD, and that is what my amendment would do.

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

Offered By: Mr. Kildee

Amendment No. 25: Page 22, line 14, after the dollar

amount, insert ``(reduced by $20,000,000)''.

Page 33, line 11, after the dollar amount, insert

``(increased by $20,000,000)''.

Page 33, line 17, after the dollar amount, insert

``(increased by $20,000,000)''.

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to join my colleagues in support of this important NAHASDA program within this appropriations bill.

As has been stated, our country--this Nation, this government--has an important trust responsibility that it is obligated to live up to, and the full funding of NAHASDA is an important way to manifest that obligation.

Just as in any community, housing is an essential component of a civil society. What NAHASDA provides is to not only deal with the backlog of housing needs, which are many--certainly, the dollars that are presently available are not keeping up with the need that is out there in these tribal communities, for sure--but to also allow for the maintenance of the housing that is currently in place.

The difficulty, of course, with a funding level which is the same as it was a decade ago and with a backlog of housing needs is that, as the housing that has been developed ages, more and more of the dollars are necessarily placed into maintaining and improving existing housing, which further increases the backlog of available housing.

I would just suggest to my colleagues--and I know many of my colleagues have done this--to visit the communities. Talk to them about their housing needs, and take a look at the conditions that many are left to live in. You will find that, while this program has been quite successful, as has been said, in providing 110,000 housing units since its inception, there is so much more that needs to be done. We have an obligation as Members of Congress to make sure that we live up to the commitments that we have made, to the trust obligation that we have. It is more than words. In this case, it actually means putting our money where our mouth is and putting the resources behind this program as it should be.

This is an important program. It is one that we are obligated to fund. Obviously, I would prefer that we meet the full obligation that we have committed to. This appropriation does not go as far as it should in doing that. We really need to make sure that, in the future, we do.

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

Mr. Speaker, I ask the House of Representatives to join me in recognizing Mr. Lewis Driskell, Sr., a community leader in the City of Flint with more than 50 years of experience in the printing profession.

Mr. Driskell graduated from Tuskegee Institute in 1955 with many awards to his credit, including the ``Most Outstanding Student in Graphic Arts'' from the Mercantile Paper Company. Following gradation he relocated to Flint and worked with three major printing establishments before forming his own company, Union Printing.

Mr. Driskell is driven by a strong belief of giving service to his community. In 1969 he was elected president of Flint Printers Local 282. In 1989, he received the State of Michigan's ``Outstanding Minority Business Entrepreneur'' Award and the ``Sydney B. Melet Humanitarian Award''. In addition, in 1990, he received the Charles Stewart Mott ``Citizen of the Year'' Award from the Flint Chamber of Commerce and the Paul Harris Award from the Rotary Club of Flint.

His caring is further exemplified in the number of organizations for which he served as a policy maker. These organizations include: The Urban League of Flint, Greater Flint Opportunities Industrialization Center, Hurley Hospital Authority, Uptown Reinvestment, Planned Parenthood, Career Alliance, Food Bank of Eastern Michigan, and as founder of the Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce. Moreover, his lifetime commitments, national and international are to: Alpha Phi Alpha Fraternity, Inc., Rotary International, National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), and the Tuskegee University Alumni Club--Flint Chapter.

Now retired, Lewis enjoys spending time with his wife, Lois, their children and grandchildren.

Mr. Speaker, I applaud Mr. Lewis Driskell for his strong leadership and unwavering commitment to our community.

Mr. Speaker, it has been nearly 2 months since the Senate acted to extend unemployment compensation to millions of Americans. It is a bill that was passed in a bipartisan fashion, the way folks back home want us to do things; a bill that was paid for, as was requested; a bill that will not increase the deficit one penny; and a bill that would extend unemployment benefits and help preserve the American way of life for 2.8 million Americans who are at risk of losing everything that they have worked for.

And so what the American public asks me--I know what the folks back home ask--is, Why won't the House act? We know that there is bipartisan support for this legislation even in this body.

The bill that I introduced, H.R. 4415, right after the Senate acted with the precise same language, has bipartisan cosponsorship. So the question is, Why? Why won't Congress act? Is it because this question is too complex? No. This one is really simple. We have a bill that would extend unemployment compensation that is paid for, and it would prevent families from losing their house. Every day that passes that we don't act, a family loses their home. Every day that passes, a family loses hope. It is on our watch that we are allowing this to happen.

I call upon Congress to act.

Mr. Chair, I move to strike the requisite number of words.

Mr. Chair, first I would like to register my concern and support over the issues raised by Mr. Polis. The question on the amendment that he offers has not to do with much of the policy, but the fact that we have to make budget decisions that are based on priorities. I think he is correct to raise the question as to whether a $35 million plus-up is the proper priority when compared to the other competing interests that we are all trying to facilitate.

With that, I yield to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Polis).

I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Chairman, I offer this amendment. I represent Flint, Michigan, and Saginaw, Michigan, two cities that have dealt with significant violence. There are cities across the country that are plagued with extreme violence and are unable themselves, these communities, to deal with the challenges, simply having the resources to deal with the sorts of crime that they are seeing every day.

On occasion, the ATF has been able to provide support to these communities through their Violent Crime Reduction Partnership program, so-called ``surge.'' What my amendment would do would be to provide an additional $15 million to the ATF's budget to conduct additional surge operations in America's most violent communities.

As I said, there is a high correlation between communities experiencing serious violence, high rates of murder and other violent crime, and cities that are experiencing enormous problems, significant financial stress, such that they simply don't have the resources to deal with the tidal wave of violence and in fact, in many cases, see the loss of police and prosecutorial capacity. This amendment would address that by allowing ATF to utilize the additional funding to support those communities, those most violent communities. It makes a difference. It pays off.

In 2012, when a surge was executed in my hometown of Flint, the murder rate, the homicide rate, was cut in half for that period. In Oakland, California, we saw violent crime go down, in just a 4-month period, by 14 percent.

These programs do work, because what they do is that they support those local law enforcement officials, local prosecutors to make cases against the most violent offenders. It is really an important thing.

The offset--and I know this will rankle some. I know the chairman is particularly concerned about this, as is

the ranking member. I completely understand it. The offset comes from the NASA exploration fund.

I understand and I support the work--don't get me wrong--and the important priority that this Congress places on the work that NASA is doing in this regard. From my perspective, I think it is important that we keep, for this conversation, a sense of priority and proportion.

In the case of NASA's budget for exploration, we see a $191 million increase over what was requested.

I understand if we could do that, and if we could do that and still deal with the other priorities I would be all for it. But when I see my hometown and other cities like it literally seeing their kids die because we don't have adequate resources to deal with the violence, it seems to me reasonable to take a small portion of a very large increase in funding to an important program--don't get me wrong, a very important program--but to take a small portion of an increase in order to support this kind of work that the ATF is doing when, if I could turn to the ATF and say: use your increased budget to fund this, I would certainly be willing to say that.

But in this case, what we see is the ATF with a modest reduction over what was being proposed, what was requested, and the budget within NASA that I am addressing seeing $191 million added. It is a question of competing important priorities, I understand.

Where I live and where I come from, it is very difficult for me to find a higher priority than getting resources to help make cases against the bad guys who are killing kids on the streets of America's most violent cities.

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

Mr. Speaker, although I ultimately voted in favor of this bill, H.R. 361, the USA Freedom Act, like all legislation, it is not perfect. I, however, recognize that that without the reforms in H.R. 3361, the government's bulk collection of phone metadata and other records would continue absent necessary modifications. More reforms to these programs are necessary, and I am looking forward to continuing to implement them to protect individual liberties as well as national security.

Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Madam Chair, my amendment would ensure that the Interagency Trade Enforcement Center under the International Trade Administration's budget is funded at this President's requested level of $15 million by moving $10 million from NASA's $4.2 billion exploration fund, which is funded $191 million above the President's request.

Here is the problem: Mr. Peters and I, who offer this amendment, represent the State of Michigan, but I assume this problem, the problem of access to markets across the globe for American products, is one that other Members in this body experience on a regular basis and hear about all the time.

We may disagree, and I suspect that we would disagree on the elements of our trade policy and particularly the elements in form that many of the trade agreements that this country enters into with other Nations.

In fact, there is a debate brewing now over the extent to which we continue to expand those international trade agreements, but the one thing we ought not to disagree on is whether or not we enforce the existing structures that are in place and ensure that American-made products have access to markets that should be open to us and, under existing agreements, would be open to us if we had the strength and the resources to enforce those agreements the way they ought to be enforced, and this is having a real effect.

I represent Michigan, as I said, and the auto sector particularly has suffered greatly as a result of trade practices. Just recently, as a matter of fact, the WTO sided with the U.S. in a dispute with China on duties it imposes on imported American vehicles, duties ranging from 2 percent to 21.5 percent, affecting two-thirds of the $8.5 billion worth of American vehicles that are sold into that market.

This amendment would ensure that there are adequate resources to ensure that we enforce existing trade policy. American workers and companies are harmed when other countries are allowed to use unfair trade policies unfettered.

This amendment would ensure that the Interagency Trade Enforcement Center has the necessary resources to go after unfair trade barriers. It sends a strong message to the world that: If you violate global trade laws, the rules will be enforced and that there will be consequences for bad behavior.

American workers deserve this. American companies deserve this. We should stand strong. This amendment would make sure that the resources are available to do just that.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, this week, I and many others were in Lafayette Park joining the family of Amir Hekmati, my constituent, to commemorate a very sad anniversary.

For 1,000 days, Amir Hekmati, a young man born in the United States, grew up in my hometown of Flint, Michigan. His parents emigrated to the United States long before Amir was born, in the late 1970s, from Iran. Amir Hekmati has been sitting in a prison--in Evin Prison in Tehran, for 1,000 days.

He traveled to Iran for the first time in August of 2011 because, like many other young men and young women, he wanted to explore his own roots. He had served in the United States Marine Corps, came home; and, before enrolling in school, he wanted to go visit family that he had never met and, in fact, wanted to meet his grandmother whom he had never seen before.

He was there for about 2 weeks before he was arrested. For months, nobody knew where he was, and then soon it was revealed that he had been arrested, tried, and convicted of espionage. Because he was an American who had served in the Marine Corps, he was convicted of espionage.

That death sentence that was initially executed on him was set aside, and that death sentence was suspended. Apparently, there had been a new trial, and he is now, according to a New York Times report, serving a 10-year sentence.

This is a young man who simply went to visit his family, traveled with permission, in a transparent fashion, and is now caught up in the geopolitical struggle as Iran, apparently, seeks to rejoin the international community.

One thousand days in prison--holidays have passed; we experience every one of these days, the changing of seasons. For all of us, we take these moments, these passages for granted.

For Amir Hekmati, every day is the same. Every day, he is in a cell, for many, many months, in a 3 by 3 cell, unable to even sit down for all but 10 minutes of every day.

If Iran truly seeks to rejoin the international community--of course, there are the P5+1 negotiations taking place right now. If Iran seeks to join the global community, and if this Congress is to take any agreement that might be struck seriously, Iran must now free Amir Hekmati. If they expect to be taken seriously, they cannot hold political prisoners.

Now, for most of us, we don't think there is much that we can do about this, but I think every American citizen, every Member of Congress--especially those who have joined me in a bipartisan fashion in calling upon Iran to release Amir Hekmati--can do something. We all can.

For those of you that use Twitter, #FreeAmir. Believe me, it sends a message. It sends a message across the globe. It sends a message to the Iranian people, to the Iranian Government. It sends a message to the friends and the family of Amir Hekmati that our country stands with him.

During those 1,000 days, Amir Hekmati's father has fallen ill. He has brain cancer. It is time, even if for just humanitarian purposes, it is time, long past time, for Iran to do what is right and to release Amir Hekmati, so he can come home and be with his family.