Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks in strong opposition to the farm bill rule and the underlying bill because we are the conscience of the Congress. The majority of the people getting food stamps are not African American.

Mr. Speaker, a few weeks ago Democrats and Republicans alike unilaterally rejected a bill that would have cut $20.5 billion from our Nation's most important anti-hunger program which touches nearly 1 out of 7 American's. Today, the Republican Majority in the House of Representatives is considering H.R. 2642, a bill that is even more deeply flawed than before, which opts to leave out programs that will protect those who are most in need entirely.

In these tough budgetary times, the Republican majority should not signal to their constituents that helping those most in need is no longer a priority. In addition to leaving behind those who are most in need, the bill being rushed to the floor today is under a closed rule, with an amendment that eliminates the 1949 permanent farm law and replaces it with the language of H.R. 2642. Additionally, this bill makes permanent deep cuts to conservation programs, weakens protections for our forests, wetlands and wildlife and guts regulation of pesticides.

Congress first enacted the farm bill in response to the Great Depression in order to foster growth in our Nation's economy and to protect those who were most in need. Today, we are still recovering from what some economists call, ``the Great Recession.'' We find ourselves at a crossroads where we must decide how to manage our fiscal priorities while still protecting those who were hardest hit by the recent recession. President Eisenhower once said, ``Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed.''

Mr. Speaker, historically funding for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, constitutes about 80 percent of the funding in a Farm Bill. I have received letters from the two largest general farm organizations in the country which have voiced opposition to separating nutrition programs from the farm bill. Splitting this bill is a shortsighted strategy which undermines the long-standing bipartisan fashion in which urban and rural members unite to support this package.

Mr. Speaker, considering the serious flaws of this bill, I would encourage all of my colleagues, both Democratic and Republican to vote against this unconscionable package.

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

Mr. Chairman, I am offering this amendment to restore the significant cuts to the critical science and energy research and development programs that were made in this bill, including an 80 percent cut to ARPA-E and a 50 percent cut to the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. These programs, along with the Department of Energy's Office of Science, are vital to our national security, our economy, and our environment in the decades to come.

It is really worth us thinking about the fact that we have seen how government research can pay off when it comes to energy development. DOE-supported research was key to the development of high-efficiency gas turbines, for coal plants, nuclear reactors developed at Federal labs, and the directional drilling and hydraulic fracturing practices that have led to the shale gas boom today. But we should remember that those achievements require decades of Federal investment, the overwhelming majority of which was focused on fossil and nuclear energy.

I continue to support research to make today's technologies cleaner and more efficient, but I believe that it is

time for a level playing field. I introduce a real competition to our markets. That is where the priorities set by Congress come into play. We have to find the greatest value for our investment of the taxpayer dollar. Today, it is the emerging energy technology sectors that can most benefit from government support.

I have heard it said that this bill has been cut to the bone, and I know that. It is important that DOE's Office of Science is actually the largest supporter of basic research in the physical sciences in the country, and it 30 national scientific user facilities whose applications go well beyond energy innovation.

Our Nation's top researchers from industry, academia, and other Federal agencies use these facilities to examine everything from new materials, which will better meet our military's needs, to new pharmaceuticals, which will better treat disease, to even examining the fundamental building blocks of the universe. I believe that this stewardship of unique scientific research, which includes the Nation's major national user facilities, is another important role that I hope the Department will continue to make one of its highest priorities.

It is no secret that Congress' inability to date to come to an agreement on a sensible budget plan has led to some devastating cuts to many of these important programs, with serious impacts on our Nation's future. To restore these research funds, I certainly would not wish to make these proposed cuts in my amendment which may slow down our ability to meet the Nation's defense environmental cleanup obligations this year. However, I believe that these research programs are the seed corn of our future. Some things we know we have to wait to do, and perhaps we can prolong that cleanup.

Yet, Mr. Chairman, I sincerely plead that we not cut this type of money from the research we have going. Research is our Nation's future. We cannot give up on our Nation's future, so I am hoping that we can support this amendment and allow some of this research to go forward, and I ask for support.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Will the gentleman yield?

Thank you for your explanation. I don't disagree with you, but I do feel that we cannot cut our research and think that we will have a prosperous future.

So I would ask you to help me find a spot in which we, perhaps, can use the dollars and postpone some of the cleanup. This is urgent and it is needed, and I would ask you to agree to assist in our restoring some of this research.

I clearly understand the explanation.

This amendment does not strike all of the funds. It strikes about a third. I know the dangers of having all of the waste that needs to be cleaned up, but I also think that it's important not to close the doors on the future of this Nation while we do it. I really think that research has been the element that has brought us here thus far and that it is going to be research and innovation that carry us forward. We cannot close the door on research while we talk about cleaning up waste. We are only asking for a third of that money.

So I want to make another appeal that we not close the door on the future of our Nation by shutting down our research.

Offered By: Ms. Eddie Bernice Johnson of Texas

Amendment No. 23: Page 22, line 5, after the dollar amount,

insert ``(increased by $992,620,780)''.

Page 26, line 12, after the dollar amount, insert

``(increased by $430,029,400)''.

Page 26, line 18, after the dollar amount, insert

``(increased by $233,250,000)''.

Page 31, line 16, after the dollar amount, insert

``(reduced by $1,655,900,180)''.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to a remarkable man, a former Committee Chair, Majority Whip of this distinguished body and an outstanding American, Congressman Bill Gray.

In 1972, Congressman Gray succeeded his father to serve as the Senior Pastor of Bright Hope Baptist Church in Philadelphia, a position he held until 2007. It was through the church and his family where he first learned the benevolence of kindness and value of public service.

Congressman Gray, first elected to Congress from Pennsylvania's 22nd District in 1979, worked tirelessly to promote the civil rights of all people. His dedication to this cause extended further than the boundaries of our country and touched countless lives. In Congress, Congressman Gray was instrumental in passing legislation aimed at ending apartheid practices in South Africa.

Throughout his tenure in Congress, Congressman Gray achieved many firsts. Most notably, he rose to become Chairman of the Budget Committee, a first by an African American. He also served as Majority Whip, the top three job in the House leadership and the highest position occupied by an African American elected official up to that point.

Congressman Gray was a strong advocate for educational policies, and later led the United Negro College Fund, which supports scholarship programs for African American students and more than three dozen private historically black colleges. In 1999, Congressman Gray helped to secure a $1 billion pledge from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation for scholarships to be administered by the fund. This is believed to be the largest single act of philanthropy in the history of American higher education.

I had many opportunities to personally speak with Congressman Gray.

Congressman Gray was an advocate of strong family values, as he displayed in his marriage with his wife, Andrea, and three sons, William IV, Justin and Andrew.

Mr. Speaker, it is incumbent upon this body to acknowledge Congressman Gray's achievements and life of public service which have improved our Nation.

On behalf of the people of the 30th Congressional District of Texas and the United States Congress, I extend my heartfelt sympathy and celebrate his life of service.

Madam Chair, today we have a major piece of legislation before us which provides an opportunity to set the general direction for America's farm and food policy. Congress first enacted the farm bill in response to the Great Depression in order to foster growth in our Nation's economy and to protect those who were most in need. Today, we are still recovering from

what some economists call, ``the Great Recession.'' We find ourselves at a crossroads where we must decide how to manage our fiscal priorities while still protecting those who were hardest hit by the recent recession. When considering H.R. 1947 we should not forget the underlying principal which defines the farm bill, which is to provide assistance to those most in need.

Our Nation looks on as the Republican majority in the House of Representatives attempts to justify having nearly two-thirds of the savings generated from the entire bill come from cutting $20.5 billion in SNAP funding. While we are in a very difficult fiscal climate, we simply cannot continue to place further burden on our Nation's most vulnerable citizens. In these tough budgetary times, we should not signal to our constituents that helping those most in need is no longer a priority.

President Eisenhower once said, ``Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense a theft from those/who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed.'' We must consider the short and long term consequences of these cuts on our children, the elderly and disabled. Madam Chair, I would like to remind my colleagues that 95% of SNAP funding goes directly to families to buy food. For many of these at-risk populations, SNAP is the sole form of income-assistance they receive and is a powerful anecdote to extreme poverty.

Madam Chair, I am disappointed that two amendments I offered, which would have made improvements to this bill were not considered. Although I have many concerns with this bill, I feel they would have made modest improvements. My first amendment would have provided language which would have enabled the reauthorization of USDA's Hunger-Free Communities grant program. This program was created to provide public funding for comprehensive and collaborative efforts to end hunger at the community level. The 2008 Farm Bill authorized the grant program and $5 million was appropriated for Fiscal Year 2010. 14 communities in eight states, including my State of Texas, were awarded 2-year grants ranging from $63,000 to $2,000,000.

My second amendment addressed the issue of broad-based categorical eligibility. My understanding is that if broad-based categorical eligibility is ended under H.R. 1947, all states will have to use the asset test. Current law states that ``that a household otherwise eligible to participate in the supplemental nutrition assistance program will not be eligible to participate if its resources exceed $2,000 or, in the case of a household which consists of or includes an elderly or disabled member, if its resources exceed $3,000.'' If that is the case I feel that the asset limit should be higher. My amendment would have increased the asset eligibility for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program to $5,000 for all households, including those households including elderly and disabled members.

Madam Chair, In conclusion, I simply cannot support a bill which cuts $20.5 billion from our Nation's most important anti-hunger program which touches nearly 1 out of 7 American's.

Mr. Speaker, 30 years ago today, Sally Ride became the first American woman to travel into space. For that, she will be forever enshrined in history. But as impressive as that feat was, she made many other contributions to our country that were just as important. In recognition of all of her achievements, today I am pleased to be an original cosponsor of the Sally K. Ride Congressional Gold Medal Act of 2013, which was introduced by my colleague Representative Scott Peters.

Sally Ride was a newly minted Ph.D. physicist when she joined the National Aeronautics and Space Administration in 1978. During her service in the astronaut corps, she participated in two Space Shuttle missions: STS-7 in 1983 and STS-41G in 1984. While training for her third mission, the Space Shuttle Challenger disaster occurred, which ended her service as an astronaut. In the aftermath of the disaster, Dr. Ride was selected to serve on the Presidential commission investigating the accident. She would later go on to serve as a member of the Space Shuttle Columbia Accident Investigation Board, becoming the only person to serve on both Space Shuttle accident investigation boards.

After her service at NASA, Dr. Ride became a professor of physics at the University of California, San Diego, as well as the Director of the California Space Institute. In addition to her teaching at UC San Diego, Dr. Ride was heavily involved with programs to increase science, technology, and mathematics (STEM) educational achievement in young women. To this end, in 2001 she co-founded a company that creates entertaining science programs for elementary and middle school students. Dr. Ride was also a prolific writer of children's books.

Sadly, in July of last year, Dr. Ride passed away after a battle with cancer.

During her life, Sally Ride was honored and recognized many times. However, she was never awarded a Congressional Gold Medal. I think we can all agree that this was an unfortunate oversight on the part of Congress, and we should expeditiously move forward with this legislation to posthumously recognize Dr. Ride's achievements.

I hope that as we work to pay tribute to this extraordinary woman, we also work to honor the legacy of her achievements. We can best honor that legacy by ensuring a strong and healthy space program, by rededicating our scientific and educational agencies to the cause of improving STEM education, and by striving to ensure that all young people, regardless of race or sex or creed, believe that they too can reach for the stars.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 1797, the ``Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act.'' This bill represents a new line of attack on women's reproductive rights. It would criminalize abortions twenty weeks after fertilization, limiting women's ability to make their own choices about their pregnancies and their lives.

I am not pro-abortion, but I am pro-choice. The Constitution guarantees all of us a right to privacy and freedom of religion. A woman must be free to make the difficult decision about the future of her pregnancy in conjunction with her family, religious advisers, and health care professionals.

The narrow exceptions to this blanket ban on abortions after twenty weeks are insufficient to guarantee women's health and safety. They do not change the fact that this bill would deny women the care they need, even in emergencies or in the case of unreported sexual assault.

H.R. 1797 is a direct challenge to Roe. v. Wade, and would significantly erode women's freedom and right to individual choice. I strongly believe that protecting women's rights and guaranteeing women's safety must be our priority. I urge my colleagues to oppose H.R. 1797 and support women's right to choose.

Mr. Speaker, as we celebrate American small businesses during the 50th Annual National Small Business Week, it is important that we recognize minority entrepreneurs and their contributions to local economies all across the country. Small businesses serve as the backbone of America's economy, and minority-owned enterprises have played a critical role in our Nation's economic development, generating an estimated $1 trillion in annual revenue as of 2011.

In Texas, there are more than 365,000 minority-owned firms, employing more than 690,000 individuals. Small businesses account for the majority of the employers in the State of Texas, and create a substantial number of local new jobs. Small businesses bring dynamic ideas, and generate innovative services and products, to the marketplace which are necessary for economic prosperity.

Mr. Speaker, as we honor small businesses this week, let us all reaffirm our commitment to expand economic opportunities for aspiring business owners all across the country. These enterprises are a key component to a strong economy and a flourishing middle class.

Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of the men and women in uniform who have been faced

with sexual assault while serving in the military. According to the Defense Department's own estimates, roughly 26,000 individuals in our military will be sexually assaulted each year. Worse yet, only a small fraction of these victims will find the courage to come forward to report these incidents, all of whom must then possibly face sizeable retaliation or anemic prosecution.

Currently, sex-related crimes are subject to a traditional military chain of command, where a commander essentially has complete authority and control over the discovery process. This creates an opportunity for military commanders to protect perpetrators and even punish victims for speaking out.

Today, as the House begins consideration of amendments to the National Defense Authorization Act, I applaud the efforts of Representative Jackie Speier and other House Democrats to drastically alter the way that military sexual assaults are addressed. Representative Speier's amendment, which was rejected by House Republicans without debate, would have given prosecutorial discretion to the impartial Office of the Chief Prosecutor, limiting any opportunities for wrongdoing during this critical phase in the judicial process. Until consistent and effective processes are established to carefully consider any wrongdoing, members of our armed forces will continue to struggle with the shameful reality of widespread sexual assault throughout the military ranks.

Mr. Chair, mechanisms within the military structure must be implemented in force if we are to send the powerful message to these perpetrators that sexual assault will not be tolerated under any circumstances. We must stand behind our men and women in uniform, and provide them with the assurances that their voices will be heard, and that they will no longer have to live in fear of losing their livelihood in the process.

Mr. Speaker, in less than 3 weeks, student loan interest rates will double for millions of the country's neediest students, going from 3.4 percent to 6.8 percent, unless Congress takes decisive action to maintain the current interest rate.

The rising cost of a college education is driving many young Americans to assume historically high levels of student debt. With college tuition growing rapidly, the doors of opportunity are closing on today's students. The problem will only get worse if Congress does not act soon.

With the job market still recovering, we should not be asking students with the greatest need to be burdened by higher loan costs. Making college more affordable is one of the best investments our Nation can make in America's economic future. We must craft a long-term solution for student debt--and it must be now--as part of a comprehensive approach at lowering the cost of college, but time is running out to block the July rate hike. We don't need the sham that we passed a few weeks ago that makes the situation worse.

Providing affordable education should not be a partisan issue. This is a student issue, and it affects young people across this Nation of all political persuasions and in all congressional districts.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak against the appalling proposed cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, SNAP, in the 2013 Farm Bill. SNAP provides an indispensable safety net for families struggling to make ends meet.

Approximately 50.1 million Americans live in households that suffer from food insecurity. In Texas, 19 percent of people and 27 percent of children struggle against hunger. SNAP supports people when they need it most, responding to the dramatic increase in the number of unemployed Americans from 2007 to 2011 with a 70 percent increase in participation.

The Republican Farm Bill would cut $20.5 billion from SNAP, kicking 2 million Americans off the program. As a result of these cuts, 210,000 children would also lose access to free school meals. These cuts are reckless and irresponsible. As our economy continues to recover, now is not the time to slash funding for this essential safety net program that helps people out of poverty.

I urge my colleagues to oppose cuts to SNAP. We must not balance the budget on the backs of children and the most vulnerable Americans.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 1911, the Smarter Solutions for Students Act.

In a global economy, putting a college education within reach for every American has never been more important. But it's also never been more expensive. On July 1, the interest rate on subsidized Stafford student loans will double from 3.4 percent to 6.8 percent if Congress does nothing, increasing college costs for over 7 million students by $1,000 per student, per loan. Unfortunately, this bill does not adequately provide the assistance our students need and instead exacerbates the college debt crisis.

According to estimates by the Congressional Budget Office, interest rates under H.R. 1911 will be higher than current fixed rates for millions of borrowers seven of the next ten years. Even more troubling, H.R. 1911 also includes provisions the will provide $3.4 billion in debt reduction. It will be a sad day in American history if should the Congress decide to further burden struggling students to reduce a national debt they will already be paying for throughout the course of their lives.

In Texas and all across the country, students and recent college graduates are now facing the highest unemployment rate of any other group. By 2018, 63 percent of all American job openings will require some sort of postsecondary education. In order for our country to remain competitive, we need to make college more affordable and accessible. Political gimmicks such as H.R. 1911 will only discourage our Nation's students from pursuing an education.

With the cost of higher education continuing to skyrocket, I simply cannot support a measure that will increase the financial burden for millions of students and their families. If Americans fail to address this issue now, we will default on commitment to a better future for our children. We owe it to our young people to provide the opportunities that will allow them to become successful and productive adults.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to discuss the ongoing crisis of poverty in some of the most vulnerable communities in our country. In the United States, one out of every three African American children lives in poverty, which is three times higher than the rate of white American children living in poverty. Over 30 percent of African American children suffer from food insecurity-- more than twice the rate of food insecurity among white children. At the same time, residents of predominantly black or Hispanic neighborhoods have access to about half as many social services as residents of predominantly white neighborhoods.

These disparities are unacceptable. Every American deserves enough food to eat and an equal opportunity to get a quality education, a good job, and safe housing.

Our Nation's basic social safety net improves access to affordable housing, childhood education, and adequate nutrition, and serves as a lifeline for millions of Americans. Providing a helping hand to the nearly 50 million Americans who are living in poverty should be at the forefront of Congress' priorities. Instead, we are still living with the sequester, which has delivered devastating cuts to many of our essential safety net programs. I call on my colleagues to prioritize our most vulnerable communities and replace the sequester with an agreement that protects vital safety net programs.

In particular, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, helps low-income families across the country put food on the table. Of the 47 million Americans who rely on SNAP for access to nutritious food, nearly half are children. Even more strikingly, nearly half of all American children will receive SNAP benefits at some point in their lives. SNAP is one of our Nation's most effective anti-poverty programs, helping families get back on their feet while providing an economic stimulus to the local economy.

We must not balance our budget on the backs of children and families struggling to make ends meet. With our economy still recovering, it is time to invest in Americans and in our Nation's future, by supporting important programs like SNAP.