Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I am asking the House to pass the expansion of the payroll tax cuts, which will put more money in the pockets of Americans and will boost economic growth and job creation.

American workers have received bigger paychecks in 2011 because of the payroll tax cut, helping families to pay their grocery bills, to pay their rents and mortgages, and helping to support local businesses. Allowing the payroll tax cuts to expire at the end of this month will result in less money in the pockets of hardworking middle class families at a time when our economy and our families can least afford it. With global financial uncertainty threatening our domestic recovery, this is not the time to take money out of the pockets of working families.

A family earning $50,000 a year will receive a tax cut of about $1,000 if the 2 percent payroll tax cut is extended. For Rhode Island, this would add $400 million to the paychecks of roughly 600,000 workers. Expanding the payroll tax cut to 3.1 percent, as the President has proposed, could increase the flow of capital into our local economy in Rhode Island to approximately $700 million.

It's time for Congress to stand up for working American families by extending and expanding the payroll tax cut now.

Madam Speaker, at a time when so many Rhode Islanders and so many Americans are out of work, we need to do everything we can to provide assistance to families while individuals continue to look for work. The Federal Emergency Unemployment Insurance system is a critical part of our safety net that supports families during difficult economic times.

Many constituents have contacted my office explaining the impact on their families of not extending unemployment benefits, like Estella Londono in the town of North Providence. Estella is a single mother who was laid off from work and now relies on unemployment benefits to support herself and her son. She's looking for work and is currently participating in a job training program to improve her skills and to enhance her ability to find a job. Without unemployment benefits, she would not be able to support her household and pay her bills.

If the Emergency Federal Unemployment Compensation program is not extended at the end of this year, it will be devastating to Estella and to thousands of Rhode Islanders who rely on this program. These Americans who have worked hard throughout their lives should not be sacrificed on the altar of partisan politics. Congress must stop playing Washington-style political games with the fate of these families and act now to provide security to unemployed workers and their families while they look for jobs.

I rise today to honor Rhode Island's former attorney general, Julius Michelson. Julie passed away at his home this past Saturday.

Julie Michaelson was a brilliant and caring man, deeply committed to social justice and equality. He was an accomplished lawyer and a distinguished public servant who served our country both abroad and at home.

Julie was a first lieutenant in the Army in World War II. A passionate defender of justice, he also served as general counselor to the Rhode Island AFL-CIO, a State senator in Rhode Island, and State attorney general.

Julie is credited with playing a key role in the passage of our State's fair housing law, which prohibits discrimination in access to housing.

I had the pleasure of knowing Julie as a friend, a colleague, and a neighbor. His role in the community and his commitment to justice was unmatched. He made the world a better place.

I offer my sincere condolences to Rita and the entire Michelson family. Julie Michelson will be greatly missed.

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

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

As a founding member of the bipartisan Mayors Against Illegal Guns, cochaired by Mayor Menino of Boston and Mayor Bloomberg of New York, I rise today in strong opposition to the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act.

This dangerous legislation threatens public safety by undermining the ability of States and localities to reduce gun violence by limiting the carrying of loaded concealed weapons within their borders.

This bill has nothing to do with honoring the Second Amendment. It, instead, completely dishonors the rights of local communities and State governments to make decisions to protect the well-being and safety of their citizens. This bill prevents States from responding to the unique needs of their communities as they determine the eligibility criteria for carrying a loaded concealed weapon. It instead forces them to accept standards set in other States.

As a result, this bill strips away reasonable limitations properly enacted by States and imposes upon every State, except Illinois, the least restrictive standard in the country for carrying a concealed loaded gun. The implications of this bill are drastic and a radical departure from well-settled practice and law that assigns primary responsibility for public safety to States and localities.

In Rhode Island and in many States like it, this bill would decimate the strong concealed-carry framework developed by duly elected officials within the State. These officials enacted requirements that they believe most effectively prevent dangerous individuals from carrying a concealed firearm within their borders.

Rhode Island does not have any reciprocity agreements recognizing any other State permits; and our heightened standards require applicants to be at least 21 years old, of good character, not an abuser of alcohol, to complete a firearm safety training course that includes a live-fire examination, and to show good cause for needing a concealed-carry permit. To further provide for our unique public safety needs, Rhode Island also grants broad discretion to local law enforcement officials in the process of approving or denying a concealed-carry permit. As a result, Rhode Island ranks among the States with the lowest gun death rates, less than half the national average.

Under this bill, Rhode Island would be forced to recognize concealed- carry permits from all States, regardless of how lax the other States' standards. This would leave my fellow Rhode Islanders subject to the whims of the other States' concealed-carry permits and actually prioritize the rights of out-of-State concealed-carry permit holders over the rights of Rhode Islanders within our own borders. For example, while Rhode Island requires safety training that includes a live-fire exam in order to acquire a concealed-carry permit, there are 10 States that have no training requirements whatsoever. While Rhode Island prevents alcohol abusers from obtaining these permits, only 28 States have such a standard in place.

The commonsense provisions of Rhode Island State law and the laws of similarly situated States prevent dangerous individuals from carrying loaded concealed weapons. Such protections would be completely undermined by this law. This bill is a clear and undeniable threat to public safety and will facilitate a new path that allows more and potentially dangerous individuals to carry concealed loaded guns within our borders and against our will. This must not be allowed.

Because this bill presents such an indisputable threat to public safety in many States, I have introduced this amendment which would require that, at the very least, prior to granting reciprocity in a State, the attorney general, the head of a State police, and the secretary of State jointly certify that the laws of a nonresident permit holder State are substantially similar to its own. This would provide States an opportunity to preserve adherence to their core requirements that restrict concealed-carry weapons but not allow them to deny permits from States that match their standards. It would, at a minimum, ensure that we respect the decisions and judgments made by local and State governments on this key public safety issue.

The certification process will not be burdensome to States. In fact, some States, including South Dakota and Nebraska, already incorporate this type of process in determining eligibility for engaging in reciprocity agreements with other States.

I urge my colleagues to support my amendment and protect the citizens of this country from the imposition of dangerously lax standards for the carrying of concealed weapons in direct contradiction to the decision of local and State governments charged with protecting the lives and safety of their citizens.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Just very quickly, the purpose is not, of course, to overly burden State governments but, instead, to respect the judgments and decisions they've made in weighing the equities and making determinations as to what is the right criteria, to give respect to the duly elected officials in States who have made those judgments. It happens in South Dakota. It happens in Nebraska. It's not unduly burdensome. It's really about respecting the people in State government and in local governments who have the responsibility to protect the public health, safety, and well-being of residents of States.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.

I am opposed.

Madam Speaker, with nearly 14 million unemployed Americans and our Nation's economy continuing to struggle, it is disheartening that we stand here today divided, engaging in heated debate about expanding the ability of people to carry concealed weapons and ignoring the most important issue confronting our country, the jobs crisis. We're debating an effort to undermine the ability of States to protect residents from the scourge of gun violence, and we have before us a bill that will effectively preclude States from limiting who can carry a concealed weapon within its borders and for what purpose.

While many of my colleagues and I are seriously opposed to the passage of the underlying bill, there still remains an opportunity for us to find common ground. There's a chance for us to unite around a reasonable and commonsense amendment which would prevent the privileges in this bill from being extended to some of the most dangerous individuals into in our society, individuals who have or intend to inflict great harm upon our communities and our Nation.

Let me be clear, this is the final amendment, and passage of this amendment will not kill the bill. It will be incorporated into the final language and be immediately voted upon.

While many of us may disagree with the underlying intent of this bill, it's hard to imagine anyone would disagree that there are certain individuals that should not be afforded the right to carry concealed, loaded weapons across State lines. It's hard to imagine that anyone would advocate for preserving a path for terrorists, child sex offenders, stalkers, and domestic abusers to transport a loaded gun into another State. Yet these glaring loopholes are present in the underlying bill. And if my amendment is not passed by this body, this dangerous and appalling pathway for violence will remain.

For far too long, terrorism has inspired fear in our country and threatened the happiness and safety of our citizens. While we continue to live in a world that requires constant vigilance and full awareness of the danger of future terrorist attacks, there is not a single provision in H.R. 822 that would prevent suspected or known terrorists who acquire concealed-carry permits in one State with lax regulations from carrying that same concealed loaded weapon into another State with more stringent regulations.

In addition, many current States' concealed-carry laws do not sufficiently protect victims of domestic violence. A 2007 investigation found that Florida's licensing system had granted concealed-carry permits to more than 1,400 people who had pleaded guilty or no contest to a felony, 128 people with active domestic violence injunctions, and six registered sex offenders.

In fact, in 2010 Gerardo Regalado, a man who had a record of violent behavior against women, was able to obtain a concealed-handgun permit in Florida. He then went on to commit the worst mass killing in Hialeah, Florida's history when he killed his estranged wife and three other women at a local restaurant. H.R. 822 will force other States to recognize Florida's concealed-carry permits, the same permit held by Gerardo Regalado.

Finally, there are no protections in H.R. 822 to prevent individuals convicted of a sex offense against a minor from carrying a concealed loaded gun into a State whose requirements might have otherwise prevented that individual from acquiring a concealed-carry permit. Child sex offenders, individuals who create unimaginable lasting harm in our communities, should not be allowed to continue to perpetuate fear in the hearts of our children and families. H.R. 822 will force other States to recognize permits issued to these individuals who pose danger to our children. All too often, guns legally end up back in the hands of criminals, and nothing in this underlying bill would impede child sex offenders or domestic violence offenders from carrying their loaded concealed guns across State lines.

In the simplest of terms, my amendment would preclude child sex offenders, domestic violence offenders, and known or suspected terrorists from enjoying the privilege of concealed-carry reciprocity authorized in the underlying bill. We owe this commonsense amendment to our brave law enforcement officials and first responders, who bear the greatest responsibility in protecting us from terrorist attacks.

We owe this to our Nation's children, whose innocence is threatened by dangerous individuals who prey on them. We owe this to the victims of abuse, who deserve some consolation that the law will not send their abusers legally armed into another State to continue stalking, threatening, and perpetuating abuse.

Now is the time for our Chamber to unite. Let's demonstrate to the American people that we can use common sense and come together to do what is right. While there is no question that the Second Amendment embodies the right to bear arms, our citizens also enjoy the right to be free from the terror of gun violence.

I urge all Members to support this motion.

Madam Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Speaker, last month the Congressional Budget Office released a report that examined household income distribution between 1979 and 2007. The most disturbing figure to me in this report is that the top 1 percent of income earners have seen their average real after-tax household income grow by 275 percent. Middle-income Americans saw an increase of 40 percent over the same period of time.

This report illuminates a sad fact: Income inequality in our country is growing at a staggering pace. The report is pointing out what many of my constituents tell me as I travel around my district from Cumberland to Pawtucket to Newport, from community dinners and talking to business owners: This economy is not working for the majority of middle class families. In fact, the hardworking middle class of our country is being hollowed out, a middle class made up of people that are just trying to provide a good life for themselves and their families. My real fear is that if we let that happen, we'll never get it back.

Those here in Washington need to remember that our job is to help people and to strengthen the middle class of this country. The way back to prosperity is not to ignore the problem; it's through investing in workforce retraining, infrastructure, housing, and education for tomorrow. We can't wait any longer. Now is the time to act. We need to work together in a bipartisan way to get our economy and our country moving again.

I have introduced legislation, the Make It in America Block Grant, designed to help small to medium-sized manufacturers retool, retrofit their facilities, and train employees so they can sustain their current workforce, create jobs, and better compete in the 21st century economy. We need to develop new efficient and effective ways to fund much needed investments in our Nation's crumbling infrastructure, including legislation to create a national infrastructure bank which will attract private investment in vital infrastructure projects.

American families will not feel or share an economic recovery until we stabilize our distressed housing market. We not only need to mitigate our foreclosure crisis but undertake bold actions to prevent the next wave of foreclosures from occurring. Congress needs to pass critical housing legislation, like the Preserving Homes and Communities Act, introduced by Senator Jack Reed and Representative Elijah Cummings, which would improve home loan modification programs, including creating an appeals process for homeowners denied a loan modification, limit foreclosure-related fees, and respond to robosigning misconduct by forcing mortgage servicers to prove they actually have the legal right to foreclose on a property.

I believe that each and every American must be guaranteed access to an affordable higher education, including vocational education, regardless of their economic status. We need to protect the funding of Pell Grants, named for my home State Senator, the late Claiborne Pell, which are one of our

Nation's most significant college financial aid programs. We must also guarantee that our education system is preparing young people for career readiness, which I have worked on to ensure that we're offering more training options to young adults, moving them along on career pathways, and strengthening public-private partnerships so that business and government are working together to build and improve our workforce.

I recommend to my colleagues that they all read this report, if they haven't already. I also ask that they join me in renewing our commitment to keep fighting for middle class families as we work to help our country every day here in the Congress of the United States. It's time to get America back to work and to strengthen and support the hardworking middle class of this country, the hardworking middle class that's built this country.

Mr. Chair, during rollcall vote No. 840 on H.R. 2838, I mistakenly recorded my vote as ``aye'' when I should have voted ``no.''

Mr. Speaker, I recently visited two factories in my district in Woonsocket, Rhode Island--a

textile mill, Hanora Spinning; and a producer of personal care products, Diversified Distribution. These businesses had a clear message: They believe in making it in America, but they need an even playing field.

The U.S. has the best workers in the world and makes the best products in the world, but we need policies that allow us to compete and prevent cheating by our global competitors. Rhode Island businesses, American businesses, can't compete with their Chinese counterparts who keep their currency artificially low so their imports are cheaper than U.S. goods.

It's time to end this unfair practice, and I'm calling on the Republican leadership in the House to allow a vote on the Currency Reform for Fair Trade Act. This is a bipartisan bill that could create between 500,000 and 2 million jobs. Ending the cheating by our trading partners, especially the Chinese, we can level the playing field for American manufacturers and create jobs. We must bring H.R. 639 to the floor for a vote now.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to draw my colleagues' attention to a recent change nearby at the Capitol Visitors Center. Two paintings by Albert Bierstadt, ``Discovery of the Hudson River'' and ``Entrance into Monterey,'' are now on public display in the CVC. These paintings capture the beauty of the American landscape, and, as part of the Hudson River School of Painting, symbolize an important time period in our country's history that impacted culture, recreation, and conservation in the United States.

The Hudson River School was comprised of painters who created detailed landscapes of the American wilderness. One of these men, Worthington Whittredge, is connected to my district. His work ``Sakonnet Point, Rhode Island'' captures the calm and color of our country's smallest state. His paintings of my district's coastline reflect his studies with other American artists and European influences. This vibrant landscape is very emblematic of many of the School's ideals.

Whittredge, like many Hudson River School painters, garnered acclaim and traveled widely both abroad and throughout the United States. However, his works of the American West are not of mountainous scenes, but of the plains. One of these works, ``Crossing the River Platte,'' resides in the White House Art Collection and has been displayed in the Roosevelt Room.

As part of the first indigenous American schools of painting, the School's painters used small brush strokes to create highly detailed paintings that accurately portrayed the landscapes around them. This technique contributed to one of the School's most important legacies.

Another way the Hudson River School influenced American history and culture is through the creation of several National Parks. Many of Whittredge's contemporaries, like Bierstadt, helped support environmental conservation. Primarily through the artists' travels to the American West, and also to other parts of the United States, we can still see the dramatic landscapes they captured on canvas of Yellowstone, Yosemite, Zion, and Acadia National Parks, among others. These landscapes were also later used to help our predecessors create the National Park Service in 1916.

Another legacy of the Hudson River School of Painting is the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York City. Many of the School's painters, like Whittredge, spent considerable time traveling in the grand capitals of Europe and were inspired by the cultural and artistic scenes. Together with local businessmen, lawyers, and educators, they formed the Met in 1870. Several of the School's painters served as trustees or as members of the executive committee. Today, many of their works, including some by Whittredge, hang in the Met.

Mr. Speaker, it is clear that Worthington Whittredge and the Hudson River School of Painting made significant contributions to American art, culture, and conservation that have spanned three centuries.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Whitmarsh House in Providence, Rhode Island--a safe haven and support network for Rhode Island youth, adults with developmental disabilities, and families for over 40 years.

In recognition of the organization's commitment to excellence, Whitmarsh House has received a 3-year accreditation from the Commission on Accreditation of Rehabilitation Facilities, or CARF. CARF is an accrediting body that recognizes an organization's demonstration of accountability and conformance to internationally accepted standards in providing essential health and rehabilitation services to its community. This accreditation comes as no surprise given the vital and quality services Whitmarsh House provides every day to our communities in Rhode Island.

Whitmarsh House has served hundreds of youth through programs that support their development as productive and contributing members of our society. I am proud to honor Whitmarsh House and to congratulate the dedicated staff on receiving this important accreditation. I look forward to seeing its continued work for the community in the coming years.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the Leon Mathieu Senior Center. This nationally accredited and certified senior center recently celebrated 30 years of service to seniors in Pawtucket, Rhode Island.

The Leon Mathieu Senior Center is a great success, due in part to the work of its wonderful staff, including the director of the Pawtucket Senior Services Division, Mary Lou Moran, and information specialist and caseworker Joan Newton. Joan and Mary Lou, like the rest of the staff of the center, have committed themselves to improving the lives of seniors in Pawtucket by providing them with a safe, supportive, and nurturing environment where seniors can access information about resources, programs, and services available on the local, State, and Federal levels.

The center acts as an advocate for the rights and well-being of older Americans on a wide variety of issues. The center has worked through 1,200 individual cases and annually serves 3,000 individuals.

The Leon Mathieu Senior Center does not work to be recognized, but today I'm proud to salute their great work and congratulate them on 30 years of service.

Mr. Speaker, my home State of Rhode Island, like the rest of the country, is facing a jobs crisis. The President put forth a comprehensive jobs bill which puts teachers, first responders, and construction workers to work and puts money in the pockets of American workers and employers so businesses will grow and add jobs. It also creates jobs by investing in America's schools.

On a recent visit to the Henry J. Winters Elementary School in Pawtucket, I saw firsthand what this jobs bill could do. I saw a leaking roof, broken windows in kindergarten classrooms, exposed wires. These are the kinds of repairs that we could make if we passed the Fix America's Schools Today Act, which I'm cosponsoring. This Act, like the President's jobs bill, will provide critical funding for vital repairs and renovations to Winters Elementary School and schools all across Rhode Island and our country.

Under the FAST Act, Rhode Island stands to receive more than $98 million to invest in modernizing existing K-12 public school buildings and facilities at community colleges, putting more than 1,000 Rhode Islanders back to work now.

The Jobs Act would create jobs now. It would put money into the pockets of working Americans now. It would give businesses job-creating tax breaks now, and it would provide a boost to the economy now. That's why we need to take action now.

I have a motion to recommit at the desk, Mr. Speaker.

Yes, I am.

Mr. Speaker, this is the final amendment to this bill. It will obviously not result in any delay. Once this amendment is acted upon, we will immediately consider the bill.

Mr. Speaker, the people of the First Congressional District in Rhode Island, much like the men and women from districts and States across this country, sent me to Congress to focus on our most important priority as a Nation. That priority is getting people back to work and putting our economy back on track. And yet here we are again, spending the time and energy of this Congress not focusing on creating jobs or reviving our economy, but instead we're spending the time and energy of this body with another piece of legislation that threatens our environment and fails to protect the health of our communities.

If we're going to be forced by the Republican leadership to spend time in Congress considering legislation with the potential to devastate our environment and damage public health, then at the very least we should allow some semblance of common sense to prevail. At the very least, those of us in this Congress with a sense of responsibility for protecting the health and safety of our communities must impress upon others the inherent dangers in the legislation before us today, a bill that fails to set sufficient baseline standards for coal ash storage and disposal, which is why I'm offering a simple, straightforward amendment that could avert future tragedies, both human and environmental.

While the underlying premise of this bill threatens the public safety and health of communities, and while the provisions in this legislation set insufficient standards to ensure the adequate protection of our environment and public health, I, like many of my colleagues, am a pragmatist. I fully understand that, despite my opposition to this bill, H.R. 2273, it's going to pass the House today. But as a former mayor, I take the public safety of my community and monitoring and preparing for and managing disasters very seriously.

The key to this work, the element that saves lives and property, is early

warning. Local communities cannot absorb all of this responsibility themselves. Operators and owners must do their part. And while I oppose this bill, it's indefensible to let this legislation proceed without including commonsense emergency preparedness provisions, which is exactly what this amendment will do.

The 2008 coal ash impoundment failure in Kingston, Tennessee, spilled more than 5 million cubic yards of coal ash, and you can see it depicted in these photographs. Over 1 billion pounds of coal ash sludge swamped houses, filled rivers, and covered 300 acres of land. Three hundred acres of land covered in coal ash, a substance found to contain significant quantities of arsenic and other toxins.

Nearly 4 years ago, a coal waste impoundment on Buffalo Creek in West Virginia burst, unleashing a wave of floods more than 15 feet high, traveling at a rate of about 7 feet per second. The wave struck the community living below the impoundment without warning. Within just a few hours, 125 people were dead--including 30 infants and young children--more than 1,000 injured, and 4,000 people were left homeless. Mining officials had been monitoring the rising water levels in the impoundment for 4 days before it burst and yet never informed the men, women, and children in harm's way. This amendment will help ensure these human tragedies and catastrophic environmental disasters never happen again.

This amendment requires owners and operators of surface impoundments to equip their facilities with systems to monitor for potentially hazardous conditions that could lead to a failure of the impoundment. Further, should a potentially hazardous condition develop at surface impoundments, this straightforward, commonsense amendment will require owners and operators to take action to eliminate the hazardous condition, to notify first responders and take appropriate steps to notify and/or evacuate residents, personnel, and others who may be in harm's way.

In the United States right now, there are 49 toxic waste ponds at risk of catastrophic failure, just like the one that devastated Kingston, Tennessee. Each year, the United States generates 130 million tons of coal ash. We need to be prepared.

As the former mayor of Providence, which was the first municipality in the Nation to receive accreditation from the Emergency Management Accreditation Program, I understand the importance of preparedness and the responsibility that comes with it. Monitoring and early warning of potentially hazardous conditions save lives.

We need to make certain that if this legislation passes, it includes these commonsense safeguards that will avert another tragedy and devastation. It's the responsibility of this body to protect the health and safety of the communities we serve and those affected by the legislation we pass.

I urge my colleagues to support this commonsense amendment and do all that we can to avoid this kind of disaster again.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Madam Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this dangerous legislation, the so-called Protect Life Act, which will, in fact, endanger the lives of women.

With only 23 legislative days remaining in this session before the end of the year, I'm stunned by the decision to waste precious time debating this bill, this unprecedented attack on women's health and the right of women to access reproductive health care.

We should, instead, be spending this time debating ways to grow our economy, ways to help small businesses create jobs, and ways to rebuild our roads and schools so that we can put people back to work and improve our competitiveness in the global marketplace.

But instead of talking about how we create jobs, we're debating merits of a bill intended to continue the war on women being waged by my Republican colleagues. This bill would effectively limit, for the first time, how women can spend their own private dollars to purchase health insurance. This is outrageous.

I am certain Members of this body would never dare to enact legislation limiting the ability of men to access health care.

I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this bill, to end the attack on women's rights and women's health, and to focus, instead, on job creation.

Social Security, Medicaid, and Medicare were created because they reflect the values of our country. We should be incredibly proud of these programs, which provide a vital safety net for our seniors, and we should commit ourselves to strengthening them.

There are seniors like Rita Manley, in my district, who depend on Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. Rita is 82 years old, suffering from cancer. She lives in Central Falls, Rhode Island. She was recently laid off from her job at the Central Falls Housing Authority, and relies on Social Security for income and Medicare to cover her medication, which costs about $400 a month. Rita would not be able to afford her cancer medication without the support of Medicare.

We should do everything we can to protect and strengthen Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid for seniors like Rita all across this country. Our seniors deserve and have earned

the benefits provided in these programs. They deserve to live their retirement years with dignity. We should not ask seniors to sacrifice benefits before asking the wealthiest Americans and largest corporations to pay their fair share.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to remove my name as a cosponsor of H.R. 2920.