Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, although we must fix the economic problems America now faces, we cannot afford to obliterate important programs that educate and expose our citizens young and old to American culture. Our minimal investments in the National Endowment for the Humanities and the National Endowment for the Arts yield large community benefits and must be protected. For this reason, I oppose the severe cuts proposed to these key programs via the FY12 Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies bill.

The programs supported by the National Endowment for the Humanities, or NEH, benefit millions of Americans each year. Last year, NEH made over 1,200 grants totaling $143 million that benefited communities throughout our Nation--communities big and small, urban and rural. For example, over 4,300 college, community college, and school teachers benefited from education programs supported by NEH. Almost 22,000 citizens from museums, libraries, archives, and historical organizations obtained training in appropriate preservation and ways to expand public access to humanities collections. Approximately 35 million people benefited from 24 television and radio projects funded by NEH that produced 88 broadcast hours of programming related to arts and humanities.

My State of Illinois and my Congressional District have received vital support from NEH funds as well. These funds allowed cultural institutions to leverage their dollars to educate the public more broadly than would have been possible without these funds. From getting a grant to help expand the Hull-House Museum to the Illinois Meaning of Service program that works with thousands of young people to help them understand the nature and rewards of volunteerism. An NEH grant is contributing to the digitization of the papers of Abraham Lincoln so that these important historical documents are available to the Nation, not just to those in driving distance of Springfield. My constituents rely on these programs for education and cultural awareness. Especially during hard economic times when travel and vacations are not possible, the programming supported by the NEH provides significant educational resources for Americans.

Cutting funds to NEH will negatively affect our citizens, not help them. It is a unique source of funding for a wide range of local non- profit institutions and organizations across the country. NEH has already experienced dramatic funding cuts; slashing this program more will directly curtail programs and projects in millions of communities for minimal deficit reduction, which means jobs will be lost, services will be gone, and local communities will lose educational opportunities. So I urge my colleagues to oppose provisions that would cut the National Endowment for the Humanities or the National Endowment for the Arts any further.

Mr. Speaker, although our economy is gradually improving, we cannot ignore the fact that the economic crisis remains a daily reality for millions of Americans, nor can we ignore the fact that the crisis unevenly affects certain groups of citizens, such as racial and ethnic minority groups.

A study by the Pew Research Center released last month demonstrates starkly the wealth gap among racial and ethnic minorities in this Nation. Although all racial and ethnic groups experienced loss of wealth during this economic crisis, the wealth of African American and Latino households dropped dramatically. For example, the median net worth of a white family now stands at 20 times that of a black family and 18 times that of a Hispanic family, roughly twice the gap that existed before the economic crisis. Even more startling, this is the largest wealth gap since data started being collected in 1984. Other findings of note that reflect the uneven economic difficulties among groups of citizens include the fact that approximately 35 percent of Black households and 31 percent of Latino households had zero or negative net worth in 2009, compared to only 15 percent of white households. The Pew findings echo those of a recent study by the Economic Policy Institute (EPI) that found that the Great Recession has decimated the black middle class. This study found that the median wealth of black households dropped 84 percent from 2004 to 2009, essentially wiping out the economic gains that black Americans made since the early 90s.

There are multiple factors that contribute to the wealth gap-- disproportionate investment patterns, experience of unemployment, and education debt are a few. The Pew study highlighted the fact that white families are typically able to diversify their investments in housing as well as stocks and bonds, whereas minorities usually invest heavily in housing. The housing crisis then contributed to wealth disparities because minority families lost everything and had few (if any) other investments on which to fall back.

African Americans and Latino Americans disproportionately experience both unemployment and long-term unemployment, which further contributes to the wealth gap. African Americans stand at the highest unemployment levels since 1984. Most recently, the black unemployment rate averaged 16.1 percent in April, May, and June 2011, compared to an average of 7.9 percent for whites during the same periods. The unemployment rates for recent high school graduates who were white were 9.5 percent and 21.4 percent in 2007 and 2010, respectively. In contrast, the unemployment rates for recent high school graduates who were black were 20.3 percent and 31.3 percent, respectively. Thus, the unemployment rate of 21.4 percent in the middle of the recession for white high school graduates was about the same level of unemployment for black high school graduates at the beginning of the recession. Similarly, recent black college graduates have the highest unemploynient rate among college graduates. With regard to long-term unemployment, researchers at the Institute for Research on Labor and Employment at the University of California at Berkeley recently found that African Americans represent only 11 percent of the labor force, but 22 percent of the long-term unemployed. Thus, African Americans are twice as likely to experience long-term unemployment compared to their representation in the labor force. Similarly, Latino Americans

represent 15 percent of the labor force but 17 percent of the long-term unemployed. In contrast, white Americans experience unemployment and long-term unemployment at lower rates than their representation in the labor force. These discrepancies are problems that we cannot sweep under the rug.

The costs of higher education exacerbate the problems of differential investment and unemployment that contribute to the wealth gap. Recent analyses by Mark Kantrowitz, the publisher of FinAid.org found that student loan debt in 2010 surpassed credit card debt for the first time. The report--Trends in Higher Education Series 2010--found that black graduates with bachelor's degrees exceeded other racial and ethnic groups for highest debt. For 2007 to 2008, 27 percent of black graduates with bachelor's degrees had over $30,500 in debt, compared to only 16 percent of white graduates, 14 percent of Latino graduates and 9 percent of Asian American graduates. The high-cost of college creates a two-fold obstacle for black households to become middle class. Some youth may choose not to attend higher education given the costs, dramatically reducing their income and ability to enter the middle class. Other youth face overwhelming debt that combines with poor job opportunities that make a middle-class lifestyle difficult to obtain.

These studies demonstrate that black families will face serious obstacles to becoming middle class, furthering the wealth gap. High rates of unemployment and college debt will make it difficult for recent graduates to enter the middle class. These difficulties with obtaining well-paying jobs are expected to grow given the discussion of continued cuts in public sector jobs and capital investment in the name of deficit reduction.

So my fellow colleagues, I urge us to address the wealth gap head on. It affects our economy and the well-being of our citizens. Right now, we need to do everything we can to rebuild our economy. We need to fix our economy, and we need to help our citizens who have borne the brunt of the economic crisis recover. Government intervention and investment are needed to make our Nation's economy and households strong again.

Mr. Speaker, a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution represents bad economics--pure and simple. To require a balanced budget every year without regard to the state of the economy would threaten to make recessions more frequent, more protracted, and deeper. It would require greater cuts to spending at the time when the Federal Government would be needed most to use countercyclical policies to aid its citizens and states in weathering economic crises. It would jeopardize our nation's credit by making default a more regular likelihood.

A balanced budget amendment is a good sound bite, but it is not good policy. The ability to borrow in a time of crisis to help our states and citizens is a critical tool to aid our nation during economic crisis. A balanced budget requirement risks substantial harm to our economy, to Social Security, to military and civil service retirement systems, to critical government activities, and to our most vulnerable citizens. During economic hardship, federal revenues decline and safety net programs become even more vital lifelines, causing deficits to rise. Rather than allowing the Federal Government the flexibility to institute a variety of economic stabilizers, a balanced budget amendment would force the Federal Government to cut benefits or raise taxes exactly when such responses are least effective and more likely to further weaken the economy and result in higher deficits. As Robert Reischauer explained in 1992, a balanced budget amendment ``would undermine the stabilizing role of the Federal Government.''

I cannot fathom how policymakers would risk default and serious economic damage to our nation in order to make the elderly pay more for medicine, poor children go hungry, and low income students skip college in order to give that money to corporate jet owners, hedge fund agents, wealthy citizens who own multiple homes, and oil companies that already earn tens of billions of dollars in profits.

During times of challenge, I resolutely believe that the mantle of responsibility for caring for the poor and struggling falls squarely on the shoulders of government, not primarily on the charity of individual citizens. In such times of hardship and strife, government leaders should extend help to the needy, not advance the wealth of the most secure. With so many of our children and youth bearing the brunt of our nation's economic hardship, I am committed to protecting all of America, not just the privileged. For these reasons, I resolutely and steadfastly oppose a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, as a member of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, I am pleased to join my colleagues in support of H.R. 2548, which designates the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 6310 North University Street in Peoria, Illinois, as the Charles ``Chip'' Lawrence Chan Post Office Building.

H.R. 2548 was introduced by our colleague, Representative Aaron Schock of Illinois, on July 14, 2011. And I, along with the entire Illinois delegation, are proud cosponsors of the underlying bill. The Committee on Oversight and Government Reform unanimously agreed to report out H.R. 2548, given the sad circumstances that led to the death of the bill's designee.

Mr. Speaker, H.R. 2548 will rename the post office in Peoria in honor of a young man who was unfortunately a victim of the tragic events of September 11, 2001.

Chip, as he was affectionately known to family and friends, gave the full measure of the greatest devotion that one can display: He gave his life in support of his country and in service to his country.

I have no further speakers, Mr. Speaker, and so I urge passage of this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform minority, I am pleased to

present for consideration H.R. 2244, which would rename the United States Postal Service facility at 67 Castle Street in Geneva, New York, as the Corporal Steven Blaine Riccione Post Office Building.

The measure before us was first introduced by Representative Richard Hanna from New York on June 21, 2011 and, in accordance with committee requirements, is cosponsored by all members of the New York delegation. Further, H.R. 2244 was taken up by the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform on June 22, 2011, where it was favorably reported out of committee by voice vote.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to briefly highlight some of the achievements and honorable service of Corporal Riccione.

Corporal Steven Riccione was 20 years old when he volunteered to join the United States Army during the Vietnam War. A native of Geneva, New York, and a graduate of Geneva High School, Corporal Riccione served our Nation admirably up to the point of his death in the Quang Tin province of South Vietnam on September 27, 1967. Corporal Riccione died in action while helping evacuate wounded soldiers after a fierce battle with North Vietnamese troops.

No greater gift can one give than to give his life in service to his country and his fellow men. I urge passage of H.R. 2244.

I yield back the balance of my time.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I join my colleague from the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform in support and consideration of H.R. 2213, which would rename the United States Postal Service facility located at 801 West Eastport Street in Iuka, Mississippi, as the Sergeant Jason W. Vaughn Post Office.

H.R. 2213 was introduced on June 16, 2011, by our colleague Representative Alan Nunnelee from the State of Mississippi. Currently the bill is cosponsored by all four members of the Mississippi delegation and was favorably reported out of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform on June 22, 2011, by voice vote.

Mr. Speaker, the achievements and honorable service of Sergeant Jason Vaughn are certainly worth noting. The son of Walter Glenn and Llalanda

RaNae Vaughn, Sergeant Vaughn grew up in his hometown of Iuka, Mississippi, where he graduated from Tishomingo County High School in 1996. Following graduation, Sergeant Vaughn enrolled in Northeast Mississippi Community College before going on to attend Mississippi State University. In 2003 Sergeant Vaughn made the decision to serve his country by enlisting in the U.S. Army. Shortly thereafter, Sergeant Vaughn became a member of the 5th Battalion, 20th Infantry Regiment, 3rd Brigade, 2nd Infantry Division, which is based out of Fort Lewis, Washington.

While serving in Operation Iraqi Freedom, Sergeant Vaughn was tragically killed by an improvised explosive device on May 10, 2007, right outside of Baqubah, Iraq. This heroic soldier was only 29 years of age when he lost his life in service to our great Nation.

Mr. Speaker, in recognition of this young man's bravery and accomplishments, I ask that we pass the underlying bill without reservation and pay tribute to the commitment and sacrifice made by Sergeant Jason Vaughn.

I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

It is my pleasure to yield such time as he may consume to the author of this legislation, the gentleman from the Garden State of New Jersey, Representative Steve Rothman.

I thank the gentleman for introducing this thoughtful measure and yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield such time as he may consume to the author of this measure, Representative Adam Schiff from California.

I want to thank the gentleman from California for his introduction of this very thoughtful measure. I can't help but recall the fact that I was given a Tuskegee Airmen jacket by the DODO Club, the DODO Chapter in Chicago. I wear it whenever I get a chance in honor of Lieutenant Goodall and his fellow Tuskegee Airmen.

I urge the passage of this measure, and I yield back the balance of my time.

It is my pleasure now to yield such time as she may consume to the author of this measure, the delegate from Guam (Ms. Bordallo).

I want to thank the gentlelady for her introduction of this measure. I urge its passage.

I yield back the balance of our time.

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield such time as he might consume to the author of this measure, Mr. Keating of Massachusetts.

Mr. Speaker, I commend the gentleman from Massachusetts on this very thoughtful measure, I urge its passage, and I yield back the balance of my time.

It is my pleasure to yield such time as she might consume to the gentlewoman from Hawaii (Ms. Hanabusa), the author of this measure.

Mr. Speaker, I commend the gentlelady for her introduction of this very thoughtful measure, I urge its passage, and yield back the balance of my time.

I want to thank the gentleman from Louisiana for yielding.

I rise in support of the Richmond amendment and in opposition to H.R. 2584, the Interior and Environment appropriations, and I do so because we cannot afford to make such drastic cuts to programs that benefit our Nation's drinking water, deplete our air pollution standards, and reduce the beautiful landscape.

For example, in Illinois, where I live, the drinking water systems face a required investment of $13.5 billion over the next 20 years to replace aging facilities and comply with safe drinking regulations. In 2009, total Federal funding for drinking water was less than $3 billion, which included a one-time $2 billion infusion of funds from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.

Within Cook County, a large portion of my district, we can take only half an inch of rainwater before flooding takes place. This means sewer water and other contaminants flood both the streets and homes. We cannot afford to reduce the health and safety of our citizens, and we cannot disrupt our environment.

Again, I thank the gentleman for yielding, urge support of his amendment, and urge that we defeat the overall appropriation bill.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Whenever I hear a Member of Congress proposing austerity as a fix for any or all of our Nation's economic problems, whether the problems are real or perceived, my first reaction is ``austerity for who?''

The fact is that in recent years we've been condemning more and more Americans to austerity then ever before while at the same time we continue to hand out tax breaks and fat government contracts for the wealthiest Americans, and the largest and wealthiest corporations. After getting bailed out, the profits at the largest financial institutions have recovered and then some--bonuses for their CEOs have recovered, and then some, but this Congress refuses to ask those institutions and those CEOs, and others like them, to give back just a little.

The latest census data dramatically shows how after African Americans had made significant gains in the 1950s and '60s, progress began to stall in the 1970s. Four decades after the civil rights movement, blacks still earn only 57 cents and Latinos earn 59 cents for each $1 of white median family income in our country. The contrast is even starker for net worth. That is, the total value of investments, savings, homes, and other property, minus debt. Blacks hold only 10 cents of net wealth and Latinos 12 cents for every $1 that whites hold.

Out of the 43.6 million Americans living below the poverty threshold, 9.9 million of those are African Americans. Meanwhile, the latest unemployment rates are, to say the least, grim. Overall, African American unemployment, 16.2 percent; African American men, 17 percent; black teenagers, about 40 percent--and this Congress can't find the votes to extend unemployment insurance. I say that our policies must reflect the needs of those who are most vulnerable. We must provide opportunity for the needy and not just the greedy.

When I see that the median annual Social Security benefit for a 65- year-old single African American woman is $10,680 which puts the median benefit for African American woman seniors just above the 2010 poverty line for individual seniors, an obscenely low $10,458. And when I couple that with the knowledge that nearly half--45.6 percent--of non- married African American women aged 65 older rely on Social Security for all of their income and 54.1 percent rely on it for 90 percent of their income or more. And, worst of all when I recall that non-married African American women seniors already suffer from high rates of poverty and near-poverty, nearly half--47.8 percent--of African American women living alone have an income under 125 percent of poverty, and one-third--33 percent--have income below 100 percent of the poverty line . . .

Well, I just have to say to those who are talking of reducing Social Security benefits, or the annual Social Security COLAs, or raising the age for collecting Social Security ``austerity for who?''

When I pick up the paper every morning and have to read over and over that home foreclosures were two-and-a-half times above the 2001 rate by the end of 2010 and that some 3.7 million homes are in danger of foreclosure and this Congress, instead of addressing the epidemics of unemployment and foreclosure, plays politics with raising the debt ceiling;

I can't help but remember that, for all the hubbub about the size of government and Federal spending, the Bush tax cuts increased the deficit by $1.7 trillion between 2001 and 2008 and the two wars begun by President Bush added another $1 trillion to the deficit and Bush Administration's policy of deregulation of the financial markets led ultimately to the bursting of the housing bubble which triggered the Great Recession which not only sapped our federal budget, but have decimated state and local budgets in every corner of the nation. I have to demand of those risking default and tipping the nation into depression ``austerity for who?''

I have to wonder why we aren't talking about the fact that since the recession officially ended in June 2009, private payrolls have increased by more than 1 million workers, still nowhere close to putting 14 million Americans back to work, but State and local government payrolls for teachers, fire-fighters, police officers, public health workers and other critical services have declined by 493,000--cutting the number of jobs created almost in half while the loss of those good jobs reverberate throughout the local economies. My obvious question is ``austerity for who?''

I wonder if some Members of Congress just don't know that Medicaid covered half of all Black children in the United States and nearly two- thirds (64%) of low-income Black children. Medicaid covers over a third (35%) of African Americans in fair or poor health and 59% of African Americans living with HIV/AIDS. Shouldn't we expect and require of those who are proposing to slash Medicaid an answer to: ``austerity for who?''

I am just as concerned about balancing the Federal budget as any Member of this Congress, but there are a lot of ways to do that. The Peoples' Budget proposed by the Progressive Caucus would get us to a balanced budget and would put us on the road to paying down the debt and lay the foundation for a healthy, sustainable and just economy.

I've reached the conclusion that we do need a Constitutional Amendment, not a Balanced Budget Amendment, but one that would require Members of Congress who glibly propose austerity as a quick and dirty solution to every challenge which comes over the horizon to explain to the American People, truthfully and fully, in each and every case, ``austerity for who?''

Mr. Speaker, I was unable to cast votes on the following legislative measure. If I were present for roll call votes, I would have voted in the following manner for the following vote:

Roll 534, July 11, 2011: On Agreeing to the Amendment to H.R. 2354: Tierney of Massachusetts Amendment. I would have voted ``aye'' on this amendment that would restore U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Construction and Operation and Maintenance accounts to Fiscal Year 2011 levels, offset with a $140,000,000 reduction to Department of Energy's Nuclear Energy activities and a $92,790,500 reduction to Department of Energy's Fossil Energy Research and Development activities.

Roll 535, July 11, 2011: On Agreeing to the Amendment to H.R. 2354: Graves of Missouri Amendment. I would have voted ``no'' on this amendment that would reduce the Army Corps of Engineers Construction account by $1.75 million and increase the Army Corps of Engineers Operation and Maintenance account by $1 million.

Roll 536, July 11, 2011: On Agreeing to the Amendment to H.R. 2354: Scalise of Louisiana Amendment. I would have voted ``no'' on that amendment that would increase the Army Corps of Engineers Operation and Maintenance account by $6.36 million and reduce the expenses account for Supervision and Administration by the same amount.

Roll 537, July 11, 2011: On Agreeing to the Amendment to H.R. 2354: Woodall of Georgia Amendment. I would have voted ``no'' on this amendment that would reduce the Army Corps of Engineers Operation and Maintenance account by $4,900,000 and increases the spending reduction account by the same amount.

Roll 538, July 11, 2011: On Agreeing to the Amendment to H.R. 2354: McClintock of California Amendment I would have voted ``no'' on this amendment that would zero out all funding for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy in addition to eliminating or severely reducing another 13 accounts in the bill, all of which would cut over 10 percent from the total funding in the bill.

Mr. Speaker:

Whereas, the Almighty God has called to his eternal rest, Mr. Willard Overton; and

Whereas, Willard Overton was born on April 9, 1935 to the parentage of Arthur Overton Sr. and Osca C. Presley in Chicago, Illinois and was the 7th of 9 children; and

Whereas, Mr. Overton received his formal education in the Chicago Public Schools and worked for 31 years at AT&T Western Electric Hawthorne Works and retired at the age of 47, as the youngest person ever to retire from this company; and

Whereas, he received many awards and commendations for his outstanding works; and

Whereas, Willard was a very talented, bright, accomplished, witty and intelligent person who was committed to protecting and improving the quality of life; and

Whereas, he was actively involved with Provident St. Mel High School and was a regular and skilled debater on WVON and other radio talk shows: now be it

Resolved, that we pause and pay tribute to Mr. Willard Overton on a very outstanding and productive life.

On a personal note, Bill's niece Levogne and my wife Vera were best friends and worked together in the Business Department at Collins High School; brother Ray made my first political sign and Al had a variety store in front of my office on Cicero Avenue and was a benefactor to many of our community activities; and niece Crystal is a community and political activist who is involved with many of the public things that I do. A great family, I am proud to know them.