Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, as our Nation marks the 50th anniversary of the war on poverty this week, I rise to urge the Republican leadership in the House of Representatives to immediately extend unemployment assistance to the long-term unemployed workers who continue to struggle to find jobs as our economy recovers from one of the worst economic crises in its history.

The declaration of the war on poverty was a historic moment in our Nation's history when we affirmed our national priority to support those in need. The war on poverty helped reaffirm that our government has a responsibility to protect our citizens, especially during times of economic hardship. Providing support and economic opportunity creates a stronger citizenry and a stronger country.

In contrast, the expiration of the emergency unemployment program last month undermines the economic security of our citizens and of our Nation. The expiration of the emergency unemployment program cut off more than 1.3 million Americans from unemployment insurance, with approximately 72,000 additional Americans losing benefits each week during the first half of 2014.

In my home State of Illinois, where the unemployment rate remains high, at 9.2 percent, an estimated 82,000 Illinoisans lost benefits on December 28, with 38,000 of those citizens living in Cook County alone. An additional 89,100, or roughly 3,000 Illinoisans a week, will exhaust regular benefits without access to emergency benefits in just the first half of 2014.

Failing to help these citizens is an unacceptable failure of leadership. Failure to continue emergency unemployment benefits is not a theoretical issue for millions of Americans. It is a daily nightmare.

These Americans lost their jobs through no fault of their own. They tirelessly try to find work when the jobs are few and far between. They struggle to cover basic food, housing, and transportation costs for their families on an average of $290 a week, a pittance which typically replaces only half of the average family's expenditures. Failing to help these citizens is an unacceptable failure.

Failure to continue emergency unemployment benefits poses a realistic threat to our fragile economic recovery, costing over 200,000 much- needed jobs and restricting our economic growth. The expiration drained over $400 million from State economies. In Illinois alone, the loss of an average $313 in the weekly benefit means a negative impact of $25 million for our citizens.

Franklin Delano Roosevelt said, ``The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have little.'' Congress must act quickly to support our citizens and our economic recovery by continuing emergency unemployment benefits. The time to do it is now.

Mr. Speaker, I certainly want to thank the outstanding gentlewoman from California for yielding.

I am pleased to join with my colleagues to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the war on poverty declared by President Lyndon Johnson, a historic moment in our Nation's history when he affirmed a national priority to support those in need.

One of the reasons that I got involved and ran for public office was because of the war on poverty and the programs it created. The war on poverty called for citizen involvement and participation to strengthen America. As I got more involved and more engaged, the more aware I became of the difficulties faced by individuals, families, and communities. Ultimately, I decided I would run for public office.

The war on poverty has improved the lives of millions of low-income Americans through the creation of critical safety net programs such as the ESE Act assistance, Medicare, Medicaid, increased Social Security benefits, Head Start, legal assistance, investment in K-12 education, Federal college aid and loans, a permanent food stamp program, expanded housing assistance for low-income people, community health centers, mental health programs, and we could go on and on to talk about the programs.

But the real reality is that we still have not fulfilled the dream of seriously reducing and eradicating poverty. So we must not only remember, we must not only talk, but we must act. And one of the best ways to start is to provide right now--right now--resources for individuals who are unemployed.

I thank the gentlewoman.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the ranking member for yielding.

I rise in opposition to this rule, and I don't do so because it gives us limited opportunity to keep the government open for a few days, and I know that we are going to allow our physicians to practice medicine so that they can take care of Medicare patients for a few more days. What it does not do is it does not extend unemployment insurance for those 2 million or more people who will not have it. This is not going to be a good Christmas for many of the people in my district. It is going to be just the opposite.

I will vote against the rule so that we can, in fact, come back and provide unemployment compensation to those millions who need it.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to call attention to the human rights situation in North Korea. We all remain hopeful that the transition to the leadership of Kim Jong-Un has created new possibilities but we are well aware that there remain fundamental human rights violations in North Korea and humanitarian conditions in North Korea remain deplorable. I believe it is fair to say that the findings in the 2004 North Korean Human Rights Act and 2008 and 2012 Reauthorizations remain substantially accurate today. That is not just my opinion, it was the bi-partisan consensus of this Congress when it reauthorized the North Korean Human Rights Act until 2017.

Mr. Speaker, we know that democracy, economic growth and human development are intimately linked and perhaps nowhere is that more evident than the comparison of North and South Korea. South Korea has taken the path toward more democracy, more human rights, more education, higher living standards and economic self-sufficiency. North Korea has shunned that road . . . and the results of those policies are now glaringly evident. Perhaps even more relevant in today's world is the link of democracy and economic growth to peace. South Korea is not only a major trading partner but an ally in the region while North Korea remains a major source of regional and global instability and insecurity.

Mr. Speaker, the United States has one of the largest Korean populations outside of the Korean Peninsula with millions who have family ties to North Korea and the Seventh Congressional District has its share of the Korean diaspora. Like so many of my constituents, I believe the U.S. must continue its commitment to aid North Korean refugees and advocate for the human rights of the North Korean people. We share the pain of those who have been deprived of these most basic rights and the suffering of those who live in miserable conditions and look forward to the day when the Korean leadership will provide transparency in the delivery of humanitarian assistance, and guarantee the rights of those who seek refuge abroad.

I want to thank my constituent Mr. David Chang, a consistent advocate of human rights, for helping to maintain a focus on this critical issue.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to Charles ``Chico'' Daniels. Chico Daniels was known those who knew him as a Chicagoan well-versed in politics with a voice made to sing soul music. Chico Daniels was known to those who knew him for his humor that brought laughter and joy to those around him. Given my longtime relationship with his family, I know first-hand that Chico Daniels was a loving father who supported his children through good times and bad. He was adored by his family and his community, and we all will deeply miss his caring spirit.

Chico was born in Chicago, IL on May 20, 1957 to Quinion and Mildred Daniels. He grew up on the West Side of Chicago, attending Nash Elementary School and Austin High School and worshiping at the Helping Hand Church. Chico acquired an ear for music at a very young age. His signature deep baritone earned him the title of ``Little Al Green.'' In his early 20s, he performed at many of the clubs in Chicago, opening for well-known musicians. Music was most definitely his soul. In addition to being a talented singer, he also was a gifted composer, guitarist, pianist, drummer and organist.

Chico died on November 26, 2013. His parents (Quinion and Mildred) and his siblings (Eddie and Beverly) preceded him in death. He is survived by his wife Rozena Daniels, his children Lavell, Octavia, Jenell, Shavone and Francie; his two remaining siblings Valerie and David; six grandchildren and a host of friends and family.

Mr. Speaker, whereas, the Almighty God has called to his eternal rest Dr. W.H. Foster Sr.; and

Whereas, Reverend Foster was born and grew up in the State of Mississippi and migrated to Chicago like many of his contemporaries; and

Whereas, in 1957 he and his mate for life Ms. Louise Marshall were married and became the parents of nine children and a host of grand and great-grandchildren; and

Whereas, Dr. Foster was ordained a Minister at the age of 28, by Reverend Milton Brunson and preached the gospel and thrilled thousands of people with his messages and great singing voice from that time on; and

Whereas, Reverend Foster was a great preacher, a wonderful moderator and a devoted member of the National Baptist Convention; and

Whereas, in concert with his religious work Dr. Foster was actively involved with community and the world of politics. I was pleased to enjoy the support and encouragement of Dr. Foster during my entire political career. He was a friend, a comrade and a spiritual advisor. I loved him for what he meant to our community and what he has personally meant to me. I extend condolences to his family, his church, his friends and associates, and may his soul rest in peace.

Mr. Speaker, unemployment benefits are a critical lifeline for our citizens and our economy. Although our economy is gradually improving from one of the worst economic recessions in its history, the economic crisis remains a daily reality for 11.3 million unemployed workers and for the millions of Americans experiencing record levels of food insecurity, poverty, and foreclosure.

Now is not the time to cut unemployment. Our economy continues to need federal unemployment benefits to support its growth. Jobs still remain hard to get with 2 million fewer jobs now than at the beginning of the recession. We continue to experience historic levels of long- term unemployment with over one-third of unemployed workers having been out of work longer than six months. Further, unemployment remains high in many areas of our country, like in my home state of Illinois where the unemployment rate is 9%. The non-partisan Economic Policy Institute estimates that failing to extend emergency unemployment benefits another year will damage our fragile recovery, reducing economic growth by 0.4 percentage points in the first quarter of 2014 and costing 310,000 much-needed jobs next year.

Now is not the time to cut unemployment. Millions of Americans rely on unemployment assistance to survive. In Illinois, approximately 389,000 people relied on unemployment benefits during 2013. The insistence of the Republican Leadership on slashing federal emergency assistance will impose incredible hardship on approximately 3.2 million Americans, with 1.3 million cruelly stripped of benefits just after Christmas and another 1.9 million losing benefits in the first six months of next year. The failure of the Republican Leadership to extend this critical lifeline would impose incredible hardship on over 153,000 Illinoisans. These Americans lost their jobs through no fault of their own, they tirelessly try to find work when the jobs are few and far between, and they struggle to cover basic food, housing, and transportation costs for their families on an average of $290 a week, a pittance which typically replaces only half of the average family's expenses. Failing to help these citizens is unacceptable.

Government leaders have a responsibility to protect our citizens and our country, especially during times of national crisis. Failure to continue emergency unemployment benefits will harm our economic recovery and harm Americans who already are hardest hit by the economic crisis--including older Americans, low-income Americans, Americans from racial and ethnic minority groups, and Americans without a high school diploma. Congress must quickly act to support our citizens and our economic recovery by continuing emergency unemployment benefits.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to a woman who spent her life trying to help others. This is a tribute to Commissioner Deverra Beverly, a premiere public housing advocate.

In and around Chicago and in public housing circles throughout the Nation, Ms. Deverra Beverly was known as a staunch defender and key player in making decisions about public housing issues and plans, not only in the ABLA community where she lived, but throughout Chicago and with impact on national policy.

Ms. Deverra Beverly is what sociologists and urban planners and politicians call ``grassroots.'' She was from the people, of the people and with the people, and a representative for the people. She was first of all a wife, a mother, a friend, a confidant, a leader who emerged from the people and was trusted by the people.

Many people did not know it, but Ms. Beverly worked for the city of Chicago's Department of Human Services for more than 30 years. After her retirement in 1997, she devoted the rest of her life to providing leadership on Chicago public housing issues. She was president of the Local Advisory Council of ABLA, vice president of the Central Advisory Council, acting chair and treasurer of the Central Advisory Council, and was a close friend and supporter of Commissioner Artensia Randolph, who set the bar for CHA resident leadership.

As a result of her local leadership, national public housing leaders and groups were attracted to her, and she became a founding chair of the National Public Housing Museum. She was appointed a Chicago Housing Authority commissioner by Mayor Daley and retained by Mayor Emanuel.

Ms. Beverly was a skilled negotiator; and as a result of the many changes taking place in the ABLA community, she often sat at the table with Alderman Bob Fioretti, Danny Solis, Jason Ervin, university officials, people from the mayor's office, philanthropists, developers, myself, and others.

Deverra Beverly always expressed the position of the tenants, the people; and when you look at the ABLA community today, much of it is a reflection of the thinking and the work of Commissioner Deverra Beverly.

Contrary to much popular opinion, working families do live in public and mixed-income housing. As a result of the process known as ``urban renewal,'' Deverra Beverly's family moved into the ABLA homes in 1943. Her father was a postal employee. Her mother worked in the home. Deverra worked for the city of Chicago for more than 30 years. She did not have to live in ABLA, but she chose to live there because that is where her heart was.

I guess maybe the poet Sam Walter Foss may have been thinking of her when he wrote his poem that said:

Let me live in my house by the side of the road, where the

race of men go by.

They are good, they are bad, they are weak, they are

strong, wise, and foolish--so am I.

Then why should I sit in the scorner's seat, or hurl the

cynic's ban?

Let me live in my house by the side of the road like Deverra Beverly and be a friend to man.

Mr. Speaker, Kathy Kanak can be persistent. Late last Wednesday, the 57-year-old of Libertyville became one of the first known enrollees of health insurance at the glitch- stricken online marketplace operated by the Federal Government for 36 States, including Illinois. ``I just kept trying,'' she said. ``Tell people to just keep trying, and they will get in eventually.''

With Federal tax credits, the Kanaks will pay about $260 a month in premiums less than what they paid before. They will be able to retain their family doctor and their dentist, and their annual deductible will drop to $1,500 from $5,000.

Just keep trying.

Mr. Speaker, I am going to change the tenor a little bit and do a little switching, although I must confess that there is not much more important in this country than trying to make sure that citizens have access to quality, comprehensive health care. And I think that we are much closer to that than we have ever been and look forward to it actually happening.

As I was listening, I was reminded of something that my father used to tell us, that if you keep telling yourself the same thing over and over and over and over again, you will eventually get to the point where you believe it.

Being here to do a Special Order, though, reminds me of my good friend, Representative Major Owens, who was famous for doing Special Orders. I remember when I first came here that you could see Representative Major Owens on the floor late at night, by himself, talking about education and the need to make sure it happened. And I guess the fact that he was a trained librarian may have had something to do with that.

So I wanted to just take a moment and pay tribute to Representative Major Owens for the tremendous work that he did on education, and especially the work that he did that led to the creation of something called PBIs, predominantly black institutions, as a part of the Higher Education Act.

So, Major, many, many students will remember your contribution to the development of what we know as these 75 or so institutions across the country that are called predominantly black institutions, and who now receive special consideration for funds because of that designation.

I also, before I delve into my subject, want to express condolences to the family of Commissioner Devera Beverly, who passed away earlier this week and is known as probably the most profound advocate for public housing and public housing residents in the city of Chicago and, perhaps, throughout the Nation, because she has spent more than 30 years advocating for this population group and was a founding member of the Public Housing Museum, which is well on its way to being developed.

So we express condolences to the family, friends and associates of Commissioner Devera Beverly, who lived in the Abla Homes in Chicago. That is A-B-L-A, Abla Homes. But she was a public housing resident who advocated to the point of being selected by the mayor of the city of Chicago to be a commissioner of the Chicago Housing Authority. So we salute you, Ms. Devera Beverly.

Now I want to talk about something that is near and dear to my heart, but it is also near and dear to the hearts of many, and it is also part of a crisis that actually exists in our country.

Our country is known for many things, as it should be. It is one of the, and perhaps the, wealthiest country on the face of the Earth. It is one of the most technologically proficient countries in the world today. It is one of the most highly educated countries.

But it also is the country that has the distinction of having more people incarcerated, both per capita and in actual numbers, than any other country on the face of the Earth. More than 2.3 million people sit, tonight, in our prisons throughout America.

About 750,000 of those come home every year; and you know, of all the individuals who are incarcerated, most of them will come home, or they will go somewhere. There are numbers of individuals who do, in fact, die in prison. They are lifers, and in many instances they are individuals who have committed horrible crimes, sadistic crimes, crimes that suggest they should never be let out on their own.

But most individuals will return home, or they will return to some community; and when they do, what happens to and with them will often determine whether or not they remain on the outside, or how soon they will return to the inside.

There are some things that we know about this population. We know that if they do not receive any help, many of them, about two-thirds, within a 3-year

period of time will have done what we call recidivate, which means that they will have committed some offense for which they could be rearrested and re-incarcerated.

And about 50 percent of them, within 3 years, if nothing happens to or with them, if they don't get any help, will be back in jail or prison, costing the public money, living and being cared for at taxpayer expense. In some instances, these costs have become so high, until some States are just looking for ways that they can release them, some of them, because in some instances they are spending as much money for corrections as they are spending for education, and that is an awful lot of money.

But there is an alternative, and that alternative is called the Second Chance Act, and that is what I am going to spend some time talking about. As a matter of fact, it was passed into law 5 years ago, signed by President Bush, so it is not a Democratic piece of action. It is not a Republican. It is a joint legislative initiative that had bipartisan, bicameral support, Democrats and Republicans, House and Senate passed.

The interesting thing about it is that all of the reports that we have seen, and there have been a number of them, Justice Center has put out a report called ``Re-Entry Matters.'' Other groups have issued reports, the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights.

And the reports that I have seen all suggest that, while it has not been a panacea, meaning that it certainly has not been able to solve all of the problems or diminish all of the issues surrounding this need, it has, in fact, been very helpful, and there are States who are reporting reductions in recidivism.

Recidivism is one of the factors which contributes to keeping the numbers of people incarcerated as high as it is because, for many of them, they are constantly in and out; and it becomes a cycle of going in and a cycle of getting out and going in again.

But what helps them is when there are programmatic approaches, evidence-based, that actually help them; and we have had about 600 such programs and grants that have been funded under the Second Chance Act. Of course, it has not been as much money or as much funding as would be needed, but 600 groups across the Nation, 600 institutions, 600 research groups, all working towards finding a solution and finding help, has made a difference.

It is time now to re-introduce this legislation, and I am pleased and delighted that on yesterday, in both the House and the Senate, very senior level and prestigious Members of both bodies have introduced, and we have seen the re-introduction of the Second Chance Act.

In the Senate, Senator Leahy, chairman of the Judiciary, Senator Rob Portman, Democrat, Republican; in the House, Representative Jim Sensenbrenner, former chairman of the Judiciary Committee, Republican, myself, Democrat. And so we have Democrats and Republicans on this issue.

There are a lot of things that we are not necessarily agreeing upon right now in Congress. There is a tremendous amount of disagreement, enough that actually shut down the government. But on this issue there appears to be the emergence of tremendous agreement, which makes all of us optimistic that something significant and even more significant can be done.

So I want to highlight some of the organizations and groups that have been actively engaged and seriously involved, groups like the Leadership Conference for Civil and Human Rights, groups like the Justice Center, from the Council of State Governments, groups who have worked fastidiously to demonstrate that people can be helped.

What is it that individuals actually need when they are released from jail or prison? Well, they certainly need more than $20 and a bus ticket. Many of them have no place at all to go. But if they can find somebody waiting in some community who says, We are going to help you get reestablished. We are going to help you find a place to live, a place that you can call your own. Or if you have got a drug problem, we are going to find you a source of treatment. Or maybe, if you are in need of anger management help, we are going to find someone who can provide that.

Perhaps you don't have much in the way of formal education and skill, so maybe we will direct you to a GED program, or maybe we will direct you to a vocational or technical training program so that you can develop the skill that you need in order to find a job or secure employment. Or maybe if you have got some emotional, psychological, or just self-esteem problems, we could direct you to a program that will help you overcome these deficiencies.

And I can tell you that, if these individuals can find a job, a place to work, a place where they know that they can fit and make a contribution, many of them will never, ever see the inside of a jail or prison again because they have evolved into a person who knows that they have self-worth, self-esteem, that they can take care of themselves. They can earn what they need, and they can make a contribution.

But I will tell you, there are many barriers that often prohibit and prevent individuals from finding their rightful place or being able to successfully reenter society as a contributing member. For example, you may not be able to live in public housing if you have a felony conviction. You could just very well be barred. Well, who needs public housing more than individuals who can't find a job?

There are many entities within our society that say to an individual with a record, We don't hire people with records, meaning, if you have been convicted of a felony, there is no point to making an application even if we have ``help wanted'' signs posted. Fortunately, there are some businesses and some companies who are beginning to ease up a little bit and see the futility of that kind of policy because, if these individuals are never able to find a job, they will be a cost to the public for the rest of their natural lives. Somebody's tax dollars will have to go to support them in one way or another.

So some State legislatures are beginning to look at some of the licensing requirements that their States have and say, Maybe you can't get a license to be a barber or a beautician or a cosmetologist, yet you are able to get trained while incarcerated; and now that you have been trained, you cannot work in that profession. Of course that does not appear to be very logical, and so some States are beginning to review their policies as it relates to certain kinds of licensure requirements and whether or not individuals can get what might be called a waiver or whether they can demonstrate that not only do they have the training and expertise to do the job, but they also have the character which will allow them to do it well. So a little bit of progress is being made in that direction. There are some instances where housing authorities are beginning to look to see whether or not there might be some way.

And I don't think anybody is suggesting when they are being asked to provide opportunities, certainly you wouldn't necessarily put a child molester in a day care center. Many of the programs and many of the individuals who try to help erase some of the barriers, they already know that, and that is not the kind of thing that they advocate; but they do believe that people should be given a chance, an opportunity, a chance to demonstrate that they want to be good citizens, that they want to work, that they want to contribute.

So I am asking my colleagues both in the House and the Senate to look at the invitation letters that they have received to become cosponsors of this legislation. It is not asking for as much money as it needs. $100 million is money, but it does not break the bank. That is the appropriation asked.

I think one of the things that we look at is what it has spawned and what it has sparked, not just how much Federal money has gone into it, not just how many Federal dollars. But it has spawned response and reaction from State, local, and county governments who have established their own second chance programs, who have put together their own second chance initiatives.

I certainly want to commend Governor Patrick Quinn of the State of Illinois, my Governor, who, by the way, happens to live in my congressional district and is my constituent, for the State of Illinois' response to this problem.

And I also want to commend and congratulate the president of the Cook County government, the county board, which, of course, is larger than more than 25 States in the Nation. The county of Cook is a very large county, with more than 5 million people in it. I want to commend County President Toni Preckwinkle for how the county government is trying to respond to this need.

And I especially want to commend the sheriff of our county who has more than 13,000 people in his jail. He recognizes that many of them ought not be there because they have got mental health problems and mental health issues, and he is seeking and searching and looking for ways to change that.

I want to commend the mayor of the city of Chicago, our former colleague, Rahm Emanuel, because he has established a number of programs with city agencies and with city government where they are set aside specifically for individuals who have records, individuals who have been incarcerated, individuals who need a second chance with both the city of Chicago, itself, and the Chicago Transit Authority.

So there are bits and pieces of progress being made, and I commend all of those who are helping to make it. But my final ask is for my colleagues in both the House and the Senate to join in this effort, sign on to the Second Chance Act, help us to get it renewed, help us to get it reauthorized, to get it refunded, and get it seriously implemented throughout the United States of America so that these individuals will know that our country does, in fact, believe in a second chance.

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

Mr. Speaker, education is key to the economic well-being of our citizens and our democracy. Today, I am pleased to join my colleague, Diane Black from Tennessee, in introducing the Student and Family Tax Simplification Act. This bipartisan bill simplifies our tax code and dramatically strengthens our investment in students and their families, expanding aid for the lowest-income students.

Tax-based aid represents more than half of all non-loan federal aid, playing an important role in promoting college affordability, access, and completion. As partners in the Ways and Means Education and Family Benefits Tax Working Group, Congressman Black and I heard from dozens of experts about the need to improve education tax benefits. There was surprising agreement among politically-diverse stakeholders about the problems of and promising reforms to tax-based education benefits. The Student and Family Tax Simplification Act is a bipartisan effort to implement stakeholder recommendations for reform.

Education tax experts described current education tax benefits as complex and poorly targeted. The greatest agreement centered on creating one credit for current education costs to improve the simplicity, awareness, and use of tax benefits. Stakeholders highlighted that the complexity of multiple benefits makes it difficult for taxpayers to understand whether they qualify for a benefit and which benefit best meets their needs. Indeed, a study by the Government Accountability Office showed that 1.5 million tax filers who qualified for either the Tuition and Fees Deduction or the Lifetime Learning Credit in 2009 did not claim the credit or deduction; another 237,000 did not claim optimal benefits. To improve the effectiveness of the American Opportunity Tax Credit (AOTC), both conservative and progressive stakeholders urged policymakers to target benefits to low- and moderate-income taxpayers whose college enrollment and persistence decisions are more sensitive to cost.

The Student and Family Tax Simplification Act simplifies education benefits by consolidating the Hope Tax Credit, the Tuition and Fees Deduction, and the Lifetime Learning Credit into the AOTC, creating a single credit for current educational expenses. The bill also extends the AOTC permanently rather than allowing it to expire in 2017 and preserves the value of the credit over time by adjusting for inflation starting in 2018, an important provision given that college expenses have risen much quicker than inflation for many years.

In addition, the bill creates an improved, more robust education tax benefit for low-income students in multiple ways. It adopts the upper phase-out limits for the Hope tax credit adjusted for inflation, which focuses aid on families whose incomes are in the bottom 80% of income distribution. The bill also doubles the current phase-out range for single and joint filers to create a more gradual phase-out of the benefit and to reduce the effective marginal tax rate associated with the phase-out. These changes phase-out the credit for single tax filers between $43,000 to $63,000 ($86,000 to $126,000 for joint tax filers).

The bill expands aid to low-income students by increasing the amount of credit available and removing obstacles to claiming the credit. This bill increases the maximum refundable credit from $1,000 to $1,500. It also changes the process of awarding the credit from covering a proportion of total eligible expenses to covering the first qualified expenses. Currently, a family would have to have $4,000 in expenses to claim the $1,000 refundable credit; under the new bill, low-income families could claim the full $1,500 refundable credit after only $1,500 in eligible expenses, greatly enhancing the effectiveness of the credit for low-income families.

The bill also allows students to combine Pell grants and AOTC to address unmet financial need. Due to poor coordination between Pell grants and the tax code, an estimated 1 million college students with unmet financial need do not receive any benefit from the AOTC, with the vast majority of these students attending low-cost institutions such as community colleges. The bill improves coordination between the AOTC and Pell without double counting the same expenses as well as excludes Pell grants from taxation to simplify compliance.

In closing, the Student and Family Tax Simplification Act will help streamline education tax benefits, making it easier for students and families to understand and take advantage of education tax benefits. Further, it will substantially increase federal assistance for education for the lowest-income students and families, improving the affordability of higher education.

Madam Speaker, I want to thank the ranking member for yielding.

I hope that we have learned from 3 weeks ago, and that we are not easing down the road to brinksmanship once again. Every American will pay another heavy price if some of our colleagues are able to again trigger another shutdown of the government.

I agree with President Obama that the full faith and credit of our country is not negotiable. If there are colleagues who are thinking about it, I would urge you not to do it. Don't create higher mortgage costs. Don't cause investors to lose on their retirement plans. Don't cause doctors and hospitals to wonder whether or not they are going to be paid for treating Medicare and Medicaid patients. Don't cause student loans to go up. Don't create anxiety for more than 10 million seniors who will be wondering whether or not they are going to get their Social Security checks. Don't create concern among veterans who will be wondering whether or not they are going to get their disability benefit checks.

Anybody that might be thinking about it, I would urge you not to do it. Don't attempt to hold the debt ceiling hostage. I would say, as it was said in the Book of Isaiah, Come and let us reason together, because if we don't, then the whole country will suffer. Come and let us find the way to work in a way that our problems can be dealt with. I believe that we can do it. It has been done before.

I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I end with: let's do it. Let's show the American people that we can work in a bipartisan way and solve the problems and meet the needs of the people of this country.

Mr. Speaker, I wish to take a moment to voice my support for the Promoting Adoption and Legal Guardianship for Children in Foster Care Act. This bipartisan bill makes important advancements in encouraging states to place children in permanent, caring homes. I am especially pleased that the bill extends the Family Connection grants that help link foster children with family members. Nearly 400,000 children make up our nation's foster care population, with more than one in four (approximately 28 percent of these vulnerable children living with a grandparent or other relative. Research clearly shows that kinship foster care families are safer, more stable placements that are more likely to keep children connected with their siblings and communities than non-relative placements. Continuing these grants will advance the safety and well-being of children in care by connecting them with safe and caring relatives. I also strongly support the protections for youth from returning into care or losing assistance in the event that their legal guardian dies or is incapacitated. I actively worked to advance both of these provisions that encourage permanency and strengthen services to support children and families, and I am very happy they are included in this legislation.

In addition, I commend the bill and its authors for recognizing guardianship in addition to adoption as an important permanency option for children in care. Guardianship and kinship caregiving are very significant for Chicago, for Illinois, and for the African American community. My Congressional District has the highest percentage of children living with grandparent caregivers in the nation, followed closely by two other Congressional Districts in Illinois. Given the research showing that African American youth remain in care longer in part because of a hesitancy to choose adoption given the requirement to terminate parental rights, rewarding states for promoting permanency via guardianship is an important step forward to helping children in care find safe, permanent homes. Importantly, a study of the Illinois Subsidized Guardianship Demonstration Waiver demonstrated that the offer of subsidized guardianship increased overall rates of family permanency by six percentage points over and above the level of performance in a randomly-assigned control group that was limited to the option of adoption only. Incentivizing guardianship rather than incentivizing a particular path to permanency allows families to make the permanency choice that best fits the particular needs and circumstances of their family. It is my hope that we can increase the symmetry between guardianship and adoption incentives as this bill advances.

This bill makes a number of other improvements to the law. It calculates permanency incentives based on improvements in the rate of adoptions rather than the number of adoptions, so that states that reduce their caseloads still can demonstrate their success in moving youth to permanent safe homes. The bill also focuses more resources on older youth, enhances reporting requirements related to the use of state dollars, and strengthens benefits and services by establishing a minimum for post-adoption services. In closing, I urge my colleagues to support this important bill that will help the 100,000 children in foster care find permanent homes.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the House bring up the Senate amendment to H.J. Res. 59, the clean CR, and go to conference on a budget so that we end this Republican government shutdown.

Mr. Speaker, I have been very pleased to work in a very bipartisan way with Representatives Pitts, Goodlatte, Blumenauer, and others as we have shaped H. Res. 378.

The domestic sugar program is an outdated system of strict government controls that cost consumers $4 billion a year in higher prices. Historically, the sugar program not only hurts consumers but it also costs us jobs. High sugar prices were responsible for the loss of 112,000 jobs in sugar-using industries in the last decade. While growers of all commodities, including those for cotton, rice, peanuts, corn, soybeans, and wheat, have seen their benefits cut and their programs reformed, for some inexplicable reason sugar growers and processors continue to get a free ride and keep their program without any reform.

No other crop has a program like sugar, which restricts both domestic production and imports. Peanut and tobacco growers once had a quota that limited production, but Congress reformed those programs a long time ago.

Now we are only left with the sugar program, where it remains permanently in the 2013 farm bill to continue to cause higher consumer prices for food products containing sugar. This program is designed to benefit a few at a tremendous cost to many. Our current sugar policy offloads the program's cost onto consumers and food companies, entices U.S. companies to relocate overseas, destroys U.S. jobs, and limits export market opportunities for the rest of the economy.

It is time for Congress to finally reform this relic of a program of the past and put an end to sugar's special status. We can now correct a specific aspect of the 2013 farm bill by supporting H. Res. 378.

The 2008 farm bill directs the Secretary of the United States Department of Agriculture to manage the overall U.S. sugar supply, including imports, so that market prices on average can stay higher in the United States compared to the overall world price of sugar. We need to eliminate this same provision in the 2013 farm bill that would limit the Secretary of Agriculture's ability to allow sufficient sugar imports into the country so that consumers can pay their prices.

All that we are asking is to give the Secretary of Agriculture some flexibility to adjust.