Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise to congratulate Dr. Erdag Goknar of Duke University in Durham, North Carolina for being honored by the National Endowment for the Arts, NEA, and awarded a 2014 NEA Literature Translation Fellowship.

Dr. Goknar serves at Duke University as an Assistant Professor of Turkish Studies and concentrates on late Ottoman and modern Turkish works. He also specializes in politics and cultural translation on works from the Middle East, including Islam and Sufism as well as secular modernity, identity, and gender issues. He is a published author on Turkish literary culture and has produced three complete translations of important Turkish books.

Dr. Goknar has an impressive list of national and international accomplishments, including receiving two Fulbright awards and the Dublin IMPAC literary award. He holds a PhD and Master's Degree from the University of Washington, Seattle.

Since 1981, the NEA has helped support the accessibility of priceless pieces of literature to all Americans by providing Literature Translation Fellowships to outstanding scholars to help translate those works into English. For 22 years the NEA has awarded 255 fellowships to help translate different pieces of literature in 62 languages from 78 countries. This year, after a rigorous review process, only 16 scholars are being awarded a total of $250,000 to translate works in 13 languages from 15 countries into English.

Mr. Speaker, I commend Dr. Goknar on his commitment and contributions to helping more Americans access important literary works through translation. In an increasingly globalized society, it is critical to understand those from other places and walks of life. Literature provides perspective and context into important cultural trends and ideals, so we must invest in learning all we can through works in other languages and from other places.

Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring and congratulating Dr. Erdag Goknar and other 2014 NEA Literature Translation Fellowship recipients for their outstanding work and commitment to helping others access important pieces of literature.

Madam Speaker, during the final vote series last night, I inadvertently voted ``no'' on the DeLauro amendment No. 44 that would prohibit the use of funds to train the Afghan Special Mission Wing. I would say for the record that I support the amendment offered by Ms. DeLauro, and had I voted correctly, I would have voted for the amendment.

Mr. Speaker, I am still hurting from the farm bill debate last week. I was looking forward to a bipartisan compromise on farm programs as well as nutrition programs. But as we all know, the Republicans removed the food title from the farm bill and narrowly passed it on a vote of 216-208. I am proud that not a single Democrat voted for this ill-conceived bill denying food support for food banks and millions of Americans.

The House farm bill was passed. I now urge House conferees to meet with Senate conferees and reauthorize the farm bill with nutrition before the August recess.

I am beginning to hear rumors that the Republican leadership may be considering a stand-alone rewrite of the food stamp program to cut nutrition by $135 billion. I hope that's a rumor and not fact. If it's a fact, many of us will speak as loudly as we have ever spoken before on this floor.

Please let the conference committee meet and resolve the difference between the House and Senate. Don't play politics with food support for low-income American citizens.

Let me thank you, Mr. McDermott, for yielding time, and thank you for you leadership on this issue. I've watched you for years doing your work, and you are consistent. I thank you so very much.

Mr. Speaker, I am opposed to this bill. You know, I've kind of lost track. I think it's 38 times that the Republican-controlled House has voted to repeal the Affordable Care Act, either in whole or in part.

Why are my colleagues wasting valuable time legislating on what amounts to nothing more than a talking point and something they know has no chance, no chance of becoming law?

Why is discrediting this President at the top of their agenda?

Let me remind my colleagues that there is real work to be done here on this floor on behalf of the American people. Maybe my friends somehow forget student loan interest rates doubled on July 1. Maybe they forget that they rammed through a farm bill that, for the first time since 1973, was without a nutrition title, leaving the door open for food banks to be closed and for millions of needy Americans to go hungry.

But, no, they didn't forget. I suggest that many of them just do not care.

Today, for the 38th time, Mr. Speaker, we vote on a bill that would delay better health care, delay fixing the problem of uncompensated care from emergency room visits, and delay access to good, affordable health care for millions of good Americans.

Therefore, I come to the floor today to urge my colleagues to oppose H.R. 2668. I ask you to vote ``no'' on this ill-conceived legislation.

Mr. Speaker, shame on the Republican majority. Shame on you.

The Rules Committee met last night and is sending us a rule today that has attached to it a bill that we have not seen and have not been able to read. They call it the farm bill. But it appears that, in this farm bill, they have stripped away the nutrition title from the bill.

Mr. Speaker, for years and years we have combined nutrition assistance with support for farmers and ranchers, but this is a rush job. Democrats and the Congressional Black Caucus are appalled that the Republicans are determined to defund food stamps and place vulnerable Americans in a position of not being able to feed their families.

Shame on you. You have removed food stamps, the SNAP program, from this legislation. I don't know where it's going to go. It looks like it's going to die a slow death. It is despicable.

What is it about poor people that you don't like? What is it? Tell us today.

What is it about poor people that you don't like and you don't want to feed their families?

I have the fourth poorest district in the Nation. We do not like it.

Mr. Speaker, I have a parliamentary inquiry.

I have finally received a copy of the bill. It appears to have no ``nutrition'' title at all. Is this a printing error?

Mr. Speaker, it is no secret that the Republican Tea Party has a national agenda that is playing out right here in this Chamber today. You are attempting to defund food stamps--yes, you are-- and place poor people, which includes children and the elderly and veterans, in a position that none of you would want to be in.

When it was time to reauthorize the farm bill, Republicans cut $16 billion in food stamps. And what happened? The Speaker refused to schedule the bill for floor action, not because the cuts were too deep, but because they were not deep enough. And so the Ag Committee made deeper cuts, this time $20 billion in cuts. When the bill was debated, Republicans then added mean-spirit amendments that doomed the bill. Now you bring us another bill with no nutrition title at all.

We cannot stand by and be silent when Republicans take these actions that offend what we are as Americans. We can do better than this.

Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Madam Chair, I am very disappointed, to say the least, that significant cuts are being proposed to reduce funding for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. But with that in mind, I've come to the floor this evening with an idea that I think mitigates the effects of those cuts.

I will begin by saying that my amendment has no cost associated with it. It simply expresses the sense of Congress that the Army Corps of Engineers should consider and prioritize projects that mitigate the danger of natural disasters. Eastern North Carolina is especially vulnerable to extreme weather events, and other States have the same vulnerability.

The Corps works to improve the safety of communities near the Neuse River in Goldsboro, North Carolina, and in Princeville, where Hurricane Floyd all but destroyed the town because of the rapidly rising and poorly contained Tar River.

My amendment would give added confidence to my constituents in North Carolina and to many of your constituents, as well, that the Federal Government is doing everything possible to protect and reinforce communities and neighborhood from natural disasters.

For several years, the Nation has witnessed the widespread devastation caused by these disasters. Hurricane Sandy and Hurricane Irene are just two examples. Communities affected by natural disasters like those in my district face a long recovery filled with hardship and painful dilemmas. The underlying bill we are discussing today cuts $104 million in civil projects of the Corps, and it rescinds $200 million in previously appropriated funding.

At the same time, the Corps has a $60 million backlog of projects, and some of my colleagues have referenced that tonight. Many of these are in important places like my district, and many of yours, as well, that experience frequent storms. Due to insufficient funding and a prohibition on new construction, no new projects have been initiated by the Corps since the year 2010.

The Corps has many important responsibilities, but none more so than its effort to mitigate flood and storm dangers. The Corps provides essential mitigation assistance such as repairing damaged levees and providing emergency water supplies to communities in need. It also works to engineer infrastructure that will prevent some of the effects of natural disaster.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration has predicted an especially active hurricane season,

with up to 11 hurricanes and up to 16 major hurricanes in the 6-month hurricane season. The number of predicted storms is significantly greater than the seasonal average of six hurricanes and three major hurricanes. NOAA has also indicated that hurricanes threaten inland areas through rain and strong winds and flooding, as we saw in many communities.

Never has funding and support for the Corps been more critical to my constituents and the many areas throughout the country. So as we consider a bill that plans to reduce funding for the Corps, we must keep in mind the communities who may suffer, and many who have spoken tonight come from those districts. They suffer the most from this type of activity.

I remind my colleagues that this amendment costs no money whatsoever. A ``no'' vote on the amendment does carry the cost of heavy inaction.

I ask the Chair to overrule the point of order.

The chairman of the subcommittee mentioned earlier that he supports the Corps and funding for the Corps. This is simply an effort to try to instruct the Corps to prioritize the projects as they make these difficult decisions.

My colleagues, I thank you for listening, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Point of Order

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

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this amendment.

H.R. 2609 seems to decimate funding for the Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy programs.

In reading the bill, it appears that the bill cuts ARPA-E funding by some $215 million--that's 81 percent--effectively terminating this program. At the same time, the bill provides $98 million in additional funds for nuclear weapons activities, and it even provides $29 million beyond the President's budget request for fossil fuels energy and research development. My amendment would shift that extra funding to fund ARPA-E and continue important investments in innovation that keep our Nation globally competitive.

ARPA-E is modeled after the successful Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, which helped develop global positioning systems and stealth fighter technologies. Since 2009, ARPA-E has helped fund 275 innovative energy technology projects, and we are beginning to see the positive benefits. ARPA-E projects have doubled energy density for rechargeable lithium-ion batteries and have developed microbes to use hydrogen and carbon dioxide to make liquid transportation fuel. The many important innovations made possible by ARPA-E have resulted in millions of dollars of economic activity in the private sector.

In my district in North Carolina, the Research Triangle Institute in Durham has developed technologies to dramatically reduce the cost of carbon capture to coal-fired power plants. This valuable technology will increase our energy efficiency, reduce climate change, and create jobs. RTI has also received funding to enhance economic and energy security by converting biomass resources, such as leaves and corn husks, into transportation fuel. They have developed some of these fuels already and intend to test them at a local military facility in the very near future.

Mr. Chairman, we can all agree that we must remain globally competitive in energy industries to continue to create the jobs of the future. ARPA-E provides critical funding for new technologies, which will strengthen our

economy and lead us to energy sustainability. Eliminating the ARPA-E program will harm our competitiveness and will cost jobs in emerging energy industries, so I urge my colleagues tonight to support this amendment.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

I thank you, Congressman Fattah, for convening this Special Order this evening, and I thank you for doing so much for so many.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to my friend and great American, William Herbert Gray, III.

I spoke by email today, Mr. Speaker, with a family friend in Cincinnati, her name is Barbara Bond, whose deceased late husband, LaVelle, was Bill's friend. She informed me that Bill's closest of friends called him Herb, and that Herb always insisted on paying for the meal and telling his friends where to sit at the dinner table.

Mr. Speaker, I first met Bill Gray many years ago. He was a dear friend of a mutual friend, Attorney Ralph Stephens, of Raleigh, North Carolina, who was also a minister and a lawyer. Bill and Ralph's relationship was very deep. When Ralph passed away some years ago, Bill came to Raleigh, consoled the family, and delivered the eulogy.

In fact, when Ralph's older brother, Dr. Claude Stephens, of Fayetteville, passed away, Bill chartered a flight from Washington to Fayetteville and then flew back to Washington. He was that type of human being, compassionate and caring for his friends.

On Monday of last week, June 24, Bill Gray telephoned me to say that he wanted me to meet the former Ambassador to Morocco. I agreed, and we met at noon the following day in the Members' dining room here in the Capitol for a delightful 1-hour meeting.

During the meeting, Bill reminisced about his days here in the House of Representatives and talked about his work as majority whip. He reminded me, Mr. Fattah, that he'd never lost a vote during his tenure. But he went on to talk about how Democrats and Republicans worked together on the big issues of that day and solved problems. And he mused about how that approach to governance would be so valuable today.

Bill also reminded me that when I was first elected in 2004, he and Andrea invited me to their Virginia home to meet CEO Michael Dell of Dell, Incorporated.

Well, Mr. Speaker, as we departed from the lunch last week, Bill gave me a big hug and said something that men generally don't say to other men. He said to me, Butter, I love you, man, and we walked away.

Well, Bill Gray, we love you and will celebrate your life and your work.

To Andrea and the entire Gray family, I extend to you my warmest condolences as you reflect on the life and work of your loved one. May God bless each of you.

I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. Chairman, I rise to propose an amendment to the nutrition title of this bill. I will mention at the outset that my amendment has been scored by the Congressional Budget Office as budget neutral and not adding to direct spending.

Mr. Chairman, my amendment is very simple. It will expand the items available for purchase under the SNAP program to include items of personal hygiene.

Historically, the purpose of the SNAP program has been to provide financial assistance to poor individuals to purchase food. Nearly 50 million people in this country currently rely on SNAP benefits to provide food for themselves and their families. No one wants to depend on SNAP for one's next meal, but we have a responsibility to our neighbors to provide and care for them in their time of need; but for the poor, need does not just stop at food.

While SNAP currently provides financial assistance to purchase certain types of food, there is no mechanism to help needy people purchase personal hygiene items like toothbrushes and toothpaste and toilet paper and feminine items, among other items used for their personal care, items that they cannot afford. My amendment expands SNAP-eligible purchases to include personal hygiene items to be determined by the Secretary of Agriculture.

Ensuring that poor families have access to personal hygiene products is the right thing to do. Giving families the ability to purchase personal hygiene products will save us money in the long run. Poor personal hygiene can have far-reaching consequences on an individual's health and result in more trips to the emergency room, and it increases uncompensated care. Research indicates that a lack of proper dental hygiene can increase the risk of heart attack and stroke, can exacerbate diabetes and kidney disease and, for expectant mothers, can increase the risk of delivering a pre-term, low-birth-weight baby.

Mr. Chairman, at a time when we are coming out of this recession and when State governments across the country, like the one in my home State of North Carolina, are refusing to expand Medicaid, now is the time to give our most vulnerable citizens some flexibility to buy products that will improve their long-term health. It is especially critical as we stand here today to debate this $20.5 billion cut to the SNAP program.

So, Chairman Lucas and all of those responsible for this bill, thank you for the work that you have done.

I reserve the balance of my time.

How much time is remaining, Mr. Chairman?

I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlelady from Wisconsin (Ms. Moore).

Mr. Chairman, I'm going to ask my colleagues if they would look very closely at this amendment. It's not a radical amendment. It simply empowers those recipients of SNAP to buy very simple and basic items that are related to nutrition, such as toilet paper and toothpaste and toothbrushes and the like.

I ask my colleagues to please allow an up-or-down vote on this and to vote ``aye'' on the amendment.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

I rise today to draw attention to the Congressional Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency EXPO being held here today.

For my constituents in North Carolina, investing in new forms of energy and improving efficiency can create jobs and reduce costs. The estimated 850,000 jobs in renewable energy industries are continuing to grow.

Triangle Biofuels Industries in Wilson, North Carolina, continues to expand each year; the Biofuels Center of North Carolina, located in Oxford, is working to replace 10 percent of the petroleum used in our State with locally produced biofuels; and a proposed Chemtex plant stands to bring more than 300 direct and indirect jobs and increase revenue for local farmers by $4.5 million annually.

This project would not be possible without a $99 million loan guarantee from USDA.

Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.

Madam Chair, let me first begin by thanking the chairman of the subcommittee and the ranking member for their leadership on this committee. I've watched you over the years, and the two of you work together so well, and I thank you so very much.

Over the years, I have led an effort here in the House to recognize a group of Americans who served our country during World War II. We refer to them as the merchant marines. They have not been properly recognized for their service, and I'm very sad about that. We are quickly running out of time to recognize the few remaining Americans that stood up for our country by serving as merchant marines when our country needed them the most during World War II.

Without weapons or formal training, many risked their lives; and, tragically, too many gave their lives in defense of our great Nation during the Second World War. For those who are still living, we must not let their efforts go unrecognized while we still have a chance.

The recent passing of Senator Lautenberg earlier this week, the last remaining World War II veteran in the Senate, is a strong reminder that our time is running out to recognize those who are lesser known but still contributed significantly to the World War II effort. Few have given more to this country than Senator Lautenberg, and I pray that his family has peace in the weeks and months to come. He will be missed.

Because I believe that it is only fair to recognize merchant marines who served during this war, I reintroduced H.R. 1288, the WW II Merchant Mariner Service Act. To date, I have been joined by 81 of my colleagues from both sides of the aisle in support of this bill, and I encourage all of my colleagues to cosponsor this legislation that costs nearly nothing.

This bill would award veteran status and limited benefits to a segment of the World War II merchant marines that has gone unrecognized. These men and women operated tug boats and barges in the territorial seas of the United States transporting raw materials, weapons, and troops that sustained the war effort. Though most of these individuals operated domestically, their duties were not without risk.

A tugboat, the Menominee, was sunk by a German U-boat on March 31, 1942, about 9 miles off the coast of Virginia, causing the death of 16 of the 18 mariners that served aboard.

I acknowledge that a point of order would be raised if I were to offer this legislation as an amendment today. However, the legislation before us does address funding that is utilized in the support of our Coast Guard and merchant marines, and I could not forgo the opportunity to address the dire need to rightly recognize the efforts of these individuals before it's too late.

I thank you and my colleagues for allowing me time to speak on this very important issue. I strongly encourage my colleagues to join me in cosponsoring H.R. 1288 and in passing the legislation so these remaining Americans can gain the recognition they deserve.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, it has now been more than 2 months since across-the-board sequestration cuts were enacted, devastating so many important programs that Americans rely upon. Instead of working together to find compromise to fully reverse these automatic, indiscriminate spending cuts, House Republicans have voted for the Ryan budget, leaving these cuts in place and hurting our economy, just to gain political points.

This is not President Obama's sequestration. The GOP effort to make sequestration a reality shows they are ready and willing to take our economy backwards at a time when Americans are desperate to move the Nation forward. In fact, sequestration will cost 750,000 jobs this year alone.

House Democrats want sequestration repealed and replaced with a combination of revenue and cuts. The President has proposed $2 in spending cuts for every $1 of revenue. But Republicans remain dug in. Republicans refuse to address 70,000 children who could lose Head Start. They refuse to address the SNAP program, which is very important to feed the elderly and children. Republicans refuse to address the cuts to NIH and other very important programs.

We must work together. We must repeal sequestration.

First, let me thank Mr. Waxman for yielding time and thank him for his extraordinary leadership on our committee. Let me also thank Mr. Latta and Mr. Matheson for working together to try to get this legislation to the floor today.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1919 and urge its passage. Since the Prescription Drug Marketing Act was signed into law some 25 years ago, a patchwork of varying State pedigree laws has evolved, leaving our drug supply chain very vulnerable. Resources should focus on up-to-date and adaptable technology using global serialization standards.

In the past 25 years, industry stakeholders have been unable to agree on a uniform Federal solution, but today I'm happy to report that it does exist. The fact that so many members of the industry have finally come together to embrace new, commonsense regulations speaks to the importance of getting this done soon.

If we fail to enact drug distribution safety legislation soon, my fear is, Mr. Speaker, that we will miss the opportunity to significantly enhance patient safety for all Americans.

The House bill has improved since its introduction. And while I strongly support some of the provisions in the Senate companion bill, including a date certain to reach unit-level tracking, the House bill represents a good step forward and advances the ball toward one ultimate goal. Hopefully, some of these concerns can be addressed in conference.

My constituents, like all of yours, deserve to know that the prescription drugs that they use to treat diabetes, high blood pressure, and heart disease are not stolen, misbranded, or counterfeited. This bill--and the Senate counterpart--addresses the very real concerns that spurred the introduction of this legislation.

While the House bill isn't everything many of us want it to be--and Mr. Waxman spoke to that earlier--I am hopeful that once the House and Senate bills move to conference, we will see a final version that will protect consumers and better protect the prescription drug supply chain.

Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues today in the Senate to proceed with deliberate and swift action so that we can pass a workable solution as soon as possible so as to better protect the American people.

I ask my colleagues to support H.R. 1919.