Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, most Americans this week felt as though they were living on the North Pole. There was a condition called ``the polar vortex'' that became part of our common vernacular. Normal routines were disrupted. Schools closed, water mains ruptured, car batteries failed, and, tragically, weather-related deaths went up. So it didn't take long for conservative commentators to offer this cold weather phenomenon as proof that the planet isn't warming, that this is all a hoax or some left-wing liberal ideology.

But the fact is that scientists have told us that the real and measurable decline of Arctic sea ice that is the direct result of warmer weather and climate change is creating this polar vortex that allows weather conditions that normally remain fixed over the Arctic to spin out of control. They slip south and they subject us to Arctic-like weather conditions.

Now, this is a fact that we need to recognize and do something about or weather conditions are going to become far more common and far more severe.

Mr. Speaker, our lives will go on, but the life of the world community was forever changed by the life of Nelson Mandela, who passed away this week.

He chose the principles of truth and reconciliation and democracy and peace through justice to guide his life, and he was willing to give his life for those principles.

It is unfortunate that the United States didn't support world sanctions against South Africa. I would hope if we had the opportunity to oppose apartheid wherever it exists throughout the world again that we would follow the lead of Nelson Mandela.

Treating people differently because of their race or their class or their religion is simply wrong. The way that we honor Nelson Mandela best is to follow his principles. He transformed this world. We have the opportunity now to learn from his life and to follow his principles.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Marguerete Luter for her outstanding work with the Lupus Foundation of America, Greater Washington Chapter, for improving the lives of lupus patients and their families and friends.

Lupus is a life-altering disease and more widespread than most people realize. One out of every 200 Americans is affected, 90 percent of which are women. African Americans, Latinos, Asians, and Native Americans are all two to three times more likely to develop lupus, a disparity that remains unexplained. Lupus patients spend two to three times more on medical care than those without the disease. That multiplier skyrockets to over six times if lupus affects the kidneys.

Lupus can damage any organ, including the skin, the lungs, the heart, the kidney and the brain. No organ is spared. The disease can cause seizures, strokes, heart attacks, miscarriages, and organ failure.

Lupus can be particularly difficult to diagnose because its symptoms are similar to those of many other illnesses, and major gaps exist in understanding the causes and consequences of the disease. More than half of all people with lupus experience symptoms four or more years and visit three or more doctors before obtaining a correct diagnosis. A lack of awareness of the disease contributes to many people dismissing early warning signs of lupus, which can have serious health risks and greatly impact a person's quality of life.

The Lupus Foundation of America, greater Washington chapter, was formed in 1974 to help those affected by lupus. The foundation is committed to improving the quality of life for lupus patients through education, community outreach, and research. It is through the financial support of members and the dedication of its volunteers that the Lupus Foundation is able to work with the thousands of lupus patients, their families and friends, and the medical community to work towards its eradication.

One of those dedicated volunteers is Marguerete Luter of Arlington County, who has been honored as the 2013 Pamela B. Greenberg Volunteer of the Year. Ms. Luter currently serves on the Board and is Immediate Past Board Chair. Over her more than six years on the LFA-DMV Board of Directors, Ms. Luter worked tirelessly to ensure the growth and sustainability of the organization. Her passion to help members of the lupus community is evident through her commitment and participation at chapter events, including the Lupus educational summits and Walk to End Lupus Now events.

Ms. Luter has been an instrumental asset to the planning of the Chapter's Annual Gala and Luncheon and I rise today to recognize all her hard work and dedication to such an important cause.

Mr. Speaker, for 100 consecutive days, the Safe Climate Caucus has brought to the House floor the reality and the ramifications of climate change.

There was a recent report from three very reputable think tanks, entitled, ``The Arab Spring and Climate Change.'' Let me just quote from a couple of the troubling but illuminating conclusions that it comes to.

A prolonged and severe drought during the winter of 2010 in

China ``contributed to global wheat shortages and

skyrocketing bread prices in Egypt, the world's largest wheat

importer,'' accelerating political instability . . .

And in another part of the report, in quotes, ``social,

economic, environmental, and climate changes in Syria . . .

eroded the social contract between citizen and government . .

. strengthening the case for the opposition movement and

irreparably damaging the legitimacy of the Assad regime.''

The authors conclude that global warming may not have caused the Arab Spring but that it clearly made it come earlier.

The stresses climate change is imposing today on nations across the globe are harbingers of more severe consequences in the future. We have to address the reality and the ramifications of climate change now.

Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I join with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle in welcoming King Mohammed VI of Morocco to Washington. Support for good US relations with Morocco is a matter that has achieved longstanding, bipartisan support.

On Friday, November 22, 2013, King Mohammed VI will meet with President Obama at the White House for discussions designed to deepen the two countries' long friendship and strategic partnership.

The friendship between our two countries goes back to 1777 when Morocco's Sultan Mohammed III, the current king's namesake, was the first head of state, and Morocco the first country, to recognize the new United States.

Morocco was also the first country to sign a Treaty of Peace and Friendship with the United States. Negotiations for this treaty began in 1783 and the draft was signed in

1786. Future Presidents John Adams and Thomas Jefferson were the American signatories. The treaty was subsequently presented to the Senate, which ratified it on July 18, 1787, making it the first treaty ever to receive U.S. Senate ratification.

The treaty provided for the United States' diplomatic representation in Morocco and commerce at any Moroccan port on the basis of ``most favored nation status.'' It also established the principle of non- hostility when either country was engaged in a war with any other nation.

President George Washington wrote to Sultan Mohammed III on December 1, 1789: ``It gives me great pleasure to have this opportunity of assuring your majesty that I shall not cease to promote every measure that may conduce to the friendship and harmony which so happily subsist between your empire and these United States.''

U.S. relations with Morocco have strengthened in the years following this historic treaty. During World War I, Morocco was aligned with the Allied forces, and in 1917 and 1918 Moroccan soldiers fought valiantly alongside U.S. Marines at Chateau Thierry, Mont Blanc and Soissons.

During World War II, Moroccan national defense forces aided American and British troops in the region. In January 1943, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, President Franklin Roosevelt and Free French Commander Charles de Gaulle met for four days in the Anfa neighborhood of Casablanca to develop ongoing strategies against the Axis powers.

In 1956, President Dwight Eisenhower sent a letter to Moroccan King Mohammed V to the effect that ``my government renews its wishes for the peace and prosperity of Morocco.'' The King responded by assuring President Eisenhower that Morocco would be a staunch ally against the proliferation of Communism in the region.

Morocco was one of the first nations to express its solidarity with the United States after the September 11, 2001 attacks. The United States subsequently expressed its sympathies and support for Morocco when terrorists conducted major attacks in Morocco.

The United States and Morocco have a Free Trade Agreement and in September 2012, the U.S. and Morocco launched a Strategic Dialogue--the first such U.S. dialogue with a Maghreb nation--to advance common interests on political, economic, security, and educational and cultural affairs.

A bipartisan majority in both the House and Senate have signed letters in support of Morocco's desire to resolve the ongoing conflict in the Western Sahara through negotiations designed to ensure Moroccan sovereignty, while providing the inhabitants with autonomy. In 2009, 244 Members of the House signed such a letter. The following year, 54 Senators signed a letter expressing their support for such a negotiated process designed to end the conflict.

This rich history of friendship and cooperation sets the stage for the visit to the White House by King Mohammed VI. The visit is a result of President Obama's personal invitation to the North African monarch, who will be meeting the President for the first time.

In announcing the visit, the White House issued a statement declaring: ``This visit will highlight the long-standing friendship between the United States and Morocco and strengthen our strategic partnership. The President looks forward to discussing a range of issues of mutual interest with King Mohammed VI, including support for Morocco's democratic and economic reforms. This visit is also an opportunity to increase our cooperation on addressing regional challenges, including countering violent extremism, supporting democratic transitions, and promoting economic development in the Middle East and Africa.''

I join with my colleagues in Congress in welcoming the King to Washington in the firm belief that this visit will reinforce the special relationship between our two nations.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to mark the passing of Mr. Ataollah Rezvani, a Baha'i community leader in the port city of Bandar Abbas, Iran. In late August, Mr. Rezvani was found murdered in his car on the outskirts of the city, a gunshot to the back of his head. Before his death, he was subject to persistent threats and intimidation from agents of the Iranian Ministry of Intelligence. And ultimately, his steadfast refusal to submit or cower in the face of this oppression resulted in the loss of his livelihood and his life. His only crime was the practice of his faith.

Over the last several months, the Iranian regime has taken a new and welcome posture toward the resolution of the nuclear issue. While the talks between Iran and the P5-plus-1 have not yielded an agreement, we are in a better position to come to a sustainable agreement than ever before. These efforts are welcome. However, Iran's steps toward reconciling with the global community must be paired with progress on human rights at home, and an end to religious-based persecution of Iran's Baha'i and other minority communities.

Although the Iranian authorities released 91 political prisoners in recent months, not a single Baha'i was among them. Instead, 115 Baha'is remain imprisoned, solely because of their faith, including the leadership of the ``Yaran-i-Iran,'' or ``Friends in Iran.'' The seven leaders of this group, which oversaw the welfare of the Iranian Baha'i community, have now each served five years of their 20-year sentences-- the longest sentences given to any prisoner of conscience in Iran.

Dating back to the 1979 Islamic Revolution, the Iranian government has implemented a program of active, systematic discrimination against the Baha'i community. As a result, the Baha'i have been reduced to second-class citizens within their own country, stripped of their property, denied access to an education, and deprived of the freedom to worship. All human beings are entitled to these liberties, not simply because of a statute or a constitution. Rather, these are the basic human rights of every person, regardless of race, color, or creed, by virtue of our very humanity.

It is my fervent hope that Iran's leadership will move forward towards rapprochement with the international community, but we must also see progress toward internal reform, and a restitution of rights to all minority communities and the Baha'i citizens of Iran particularly.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the Northern Virginia Black Chamber of Commerce, Inc. (NVBCC) and the Global Business Network Association (GBNA) on five years of dedicated achievement, and to recognize the Celebration Gala and Awards Dinner being held to commemorate this auspicious occasion.

This year not only marks a milestone for both organizations, it signals the emergence of an improving economy five years after the economic strife that impacted the globe. The Celebration Gala and Awards Dinner will honor the achievements of business leaders and young scholars in our region who are significantly contributing to a more robust economy and vibrant business community.

The NVBCC is creating opportunities for businesses and entrepreneurs to build networks, obtain practical professional development, and gain the skills to strategically grow companies. The Chamber delivers products and services designed to maximize investment, including networking events, seminars, and resources, connecting members, companies, fellow entrepreneurs, public and private leaders who can help advance businesses

and inform on the economic, legal, policy, social, cultural and other factors that impact black-owned businesses.

GBNA is a regional network of business and nonprofit leaders that represents all industry sectors. Founded in 2007, GBNA's membership consists of start-up and experienced entrepreneurs and businesses. GBNA has assisted the local business community by working to bring the issues and concerns of small businesses to the forefront to the national economic agenda.

Mr. Speaker, we applaud the work of these two venerable institutions in Northern Virginia, and send our best wishes for a successful celebration dinner.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor and recognize the outstanding contributions made by Virginia Gallup Larsen, M. Ed., M.A./ CAGS in improving the lives of children and families across the City of Alexandria and the Commonwealth of Virginia.

Ms. Larsen is a 17-year resident of Arlington and a Nationally Certified School Psychologist

with 20 years of experience working with diverse populations in the Washington, DC, metropolitan region. She was recently named 2013 Virginia School Psychologist of the Year by the National Association of School Psychologists. Ms. Larsen is the first school psychologist from the City of Alexandria, where she is in her 13th year with Alexandria City Public Schools.

Ms. Larsen's wide area of expertise allows her to offer a host of comprehensive services to a diverse student population. Areas of expertise include: conducting psychological and educational evaluations, functional behavior assessments, pre-referral intervention consultations, and treatment assessments. She is deeply admired by her colleagues and the families she works with for her dedication and expertise.

After personally observing persistent problems caused by bullying, Ms. Larsen responded by securing a grant to implement the Olweus Bullying Prevention Program. She launched the program in a single school before advocating for its expansion to serve all Alexandria's students. She is now a bullying and violence prevention consultant across the Alexandria school system, providing dozens of free bullying prevention workshops.

Ms. Larsen, in conjunction with physical education teacher Kathy Chmura, worked to establish the Run for Fun program at James K. Polk Elementary School to address the problem of childhood obesity. The program creates an enjoyable physical activity that encourages children to establish healthy lifestyles, set personal goals, increase stamina, and form friendships outside of school.

Ms. Larsen directed and managed the Alexandria City division of the National High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area research project, where she facilitated the treatment component of an intensive outpatient treatment program. She provided therapy to clients and served as a program link to more and less restrictive services.

I am deeply proud of the lasting contributions made by Virginia Gallup Larsen, along with the other hard-working and dedicated Alexandria City Public Schools employees. She is representative of what those working in this under recognized, yet truly essential profession, should strive to attain.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor and recognize the outstanding contributions of Cecilia Cassidy and to commemorate her retirement after 21 years of service to the community of Rosslyn.

As executive director of Rosslyn Renaissance, Ms. Cassidy was crucial in growing the

member-based organization from a small core of volunteers to a respected business organization. Rosslyn Renaissance eventually merged with the Arlington Business Improvement District, BID, in 2012, and the majority of the programs Ms. Cassidy created while at Renaissance were implemented at the BID.

In 2003, Ms. Cassidy worked with property owners, the business community, the County Manager's Office and Arlington Economic Development to help create the Rosslyn Business Improvement District, BID. The first BID in Northern Virginia, Rosslyn BID was formed to enhance development and growth through highlighting the uniqueness and strengths of Arlington's Rosslyn neighborhood.

Her leadership as executive director of the BID paved the way for an influx of residential, retail, and dining offerings, which have transformed Rosslyni into a vibrant, dynamic, and more livable community. Today Rosslyn is a more walkable and drivable community; home to a number of award-winning living spaces.

Ms. Cassidy was instrumental in bringing Artisphere to Rosslyn. In order to make Arlington Counties' vision for Artisphere possible, BID pledged $1 million in start-up revenue and $300,000 annually for the life of the center. The state-of-the-art cultural center cemented Rosslyn as the cultural capital of Arlington.

Under the leadership of Ms. Cassidy, the Rosslyn BID garnered a number of awards including three from the International Downtown Association, one for urban placemaking for Central Space, and one in marketing for ROSSLYN magazine.

Ms. Cassidy has said that one of her proudest accomplishments as executive director of the BID was working with local partners to provide services for the homeless. Rosslyn BID is one of the only BIDs in the nation to provide homeless services.

Mr. Speaker, at this time, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon, Peter DeFazio, the ranking member of the Natural Resources Committee.

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

So here we are, Mr. Speaker. We are 14 days into the government shutdown, the shutdown that has cost this country money, has created enormous anxiety on the part of the Federal workforce, the contract workforce, the entire country.

In fact, there was a meeting of all of the leaders of the world over in Asia, and we weren't there because of the government shutdown. The Chinese, of course, took advantage of it. Both the President and the Prime Minister were over at this meeting of world leaders, trying to suggest to them that it is time that the world became ``de- Americanized''--I think that was their term--because we can't get our act together. We can't even fund our own government. We can't even decide whether or not we are going to pay off our debts on time.

And all of this, apparently, we are told, Mr. Speaker, was an idea that came from the Ted Cruz Tea Party wing of the Republican majority to shut down the government until they could have their way on what they call ``ObamaCare.'' Even though President Obama ran on the Affordable Care Act, which is its proper name, and was elected with 5 million more votes, still, they wanted to stop it, to gut it, to gut its principal provisions.

So here we are, 14 days into a government shutdown, which is really an embarrassment to the entire institution, but it certainly ought to be to the House majority. It is ironic with this particular bill because there are 579,000 uninsured American Indians and Alaska Natives, and they would get coverage under the Affordable Care Act. Nine out of 10 of them are likely to qualify for financial assistance either through tax credits or by purchasing coverage in the marketplace where you would get cost-sharing reductions, eliminate their out-of- pocket costs, or through an expansion of Medicaid if their States choose to do that. So the vast majority of them--undoubtedly, hundreds of thousands--would be better off if we were not only to not have shut down the government, but certainly by our making available to them the Affordable Care Act. So how ironic that here we are with a mini bill, suggesting that we will fund a small share of the Interior Department to take care of American Indians and Alaska Natives.

Obviously, we should be taking care of Native Americans--it should be our highest priority--and I know it has been for the chairman of the Interior and the Environment Appropriations Subcommittee, my good friend from Idaho, and our colleagues on that subcommittee, Mr. Calvert, Mr. Cole, a number of them. We have all agreed it ought to be a priority, but we also have a bill that needs to get passed. We have other agencies that need to be funded.

If we were to continue in this manner, we would get the Interior Department funded by Halloween. That is not the way to do business. In fact, this bill doesn't fund Native American education programs and the Department of Education.

It doesn't fund the law enforcement programs at the Department of Justice that carry out the Violence Against Women Act, which was a key component. Thanks to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Cole), the Violence Against Women Act that we passed makes sure that Native American women are protected.

It doesn't fund Native American social service programs at the Department of Health and Human Services. They don't get the child care and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families that they would otherwise get.

It doesn't fund Native American housing programs at the Department of Housing and Urban Development. Almost 100 percent of HUD employees are furloughed.

It doesn't fund the Native American employment and training programs at the Department of Labor, the Native American environmental programs at the Environmental Protection Agency.

It doesn't fund the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs, which oversees the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Bureau of Indian Education.

It doesn't fund the Special Trustee for American Indians, which administers $3.7 million in tribal funds and more than $700 million in individual Indian accounts.

It doesn't fund the Office of Navajo-Hopi Relocation, which administers the relocation settlement activities that arose from land disputes between the Navajo and Hopi tribes.

It doesn't fund the Institute of American Indian Arts or the Native American water rights activities. It doesn't do what we need to do, which is to fund the Interior appropriations bill.

So I have to ask the majority, since this bill only funds three agencies which represent 0.7 percent of the domestic discretionary budget, what are we going to do with the other 99 percent of the domestic discretionary budget? What about our other Federal obligations to Native Americans? What about their housing and their childcare services and their legal protections? This bill doesn't take care of that. It still leaves 50,000 Interior Department employees still furloughed.

Even if this bill were to be enacted--which we all know it won't until the government opens--there is no money for the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management for new offshore oil drilling permits.

There is no money for the Bureau of Land Management, which processes lease sales and permits for onshore oil and gas and coal and other mineral permits. They run the wild horse and burro adoption program. They award the timber sales. No money for that.

No money for the Fish & Wildlife Service so they can manage visitors to our national refuges. No money for hunting or fishing permits. What about the Forest Service?

Mr. Speaker, I would like to say this was well-intended, but I know that it is an attempted Band-Aid to hide the real problem, which is the government is shut down. We need to open it.

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

Here we go again. Each day, the gaping wound that the government shutdown represents grows bigger, and the House Republican response continues to be these little Band-Aids.

Of course, we on the Democratic side want to see all Native American programs funded. The other side knows that. In fact, this has been one area in which we have achieved bipartisan agreement. Both Chairman Simpson--and I want to particularly mention Mr. Cole on our subcommittee--I, and Ms. McCollum have tried to put as much money as possible, given very severe fiscal constraints, into Native American programs; but this bill that is on the floor today, in fact, doesn't serve its stated purpose. We are going to hear from House Republicans as to what this latest Band-Aid temporarily funds, but here are just some of the Native American programs and offices that are not funded by this resolution:

Native American education programs that are funded by the Department of Education; Native American law enforcement programs that are funded by the Department of Justice, including the programs to carry out the Violence Against Women Act. That is an area in which we had achieved, finally, bipartisan agreement. This doesn't allow us the funds to carry out that program. Native American social services programs that are so important to the American Indians, particularly on our reservations, are not funded by this bill. It includes child care and temporary assistance to needy families because they are funded by the Department of Health and Human Services. It includes Native American housing programs that are funded by the Department of Housing and Urban Development. HUD has the highest percentage--almost 100 percent--of its employees who are furloughed still.

What is this--the 11th day, Mr. Speaker? That was a rhetorical question.

While this resolution temporarily funds the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Bureau of Indian Education, it fails to fund the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs, which oversees those agencies. So we are not even willing to fund the office that is responsible for managing the programs that we purport to fund today.

What about the Office of the Special Trustee, which administers $3.7 billion in tribal funds and $728 million in individual Indian accounts? That is not funded either. So let's not be deluded that this is going to fix the situation with regard to our Native Americans. That is why a number of tribes have opposed this way of doing it. They want all of the government to open up because it is their government as well.

Mr. Speaker, the underlying basis for the Republican shutdown of the government has been an irrational and intransigent opposition to the Affordable Care Act. That is how it started. House Republicans voted 43 times to repeal the Affordable Care Act. At the same time, they were voting to repeal the permanent reauthorization of the Indian Health Care Improvement Act. Every time the other side voted to repeal the Affordable Care Act, they were voting to repeal the permanent reauthorization of the Indian Health Care Act as well as voting to repeal many new programs that are contained in the Affordable Care Act which are designed to assist the Indian Health Service in meeting its mission to raise the health

status of Native Americans. These 43 attempts to repeal the Affordable Care Act and the shutting down of government is all the more disheartening because we on the Subcommittee on Interior and Environment have so strongly supported Native American programs.

Now, unlike what we have seen in the last week--that of certain Members who have marched the floor to claim support for the NIH and Head Start, all of which we strongly support--even as Members have pushed sequester and proposed additional cuts to these programs in 2014 on the other side, this subcommittee has the bipartisan commitment to Native American programs. That is something we should be proud of.

This subcommittee, I know, does not want to go about funding Native American programs in this manner. It is a halfhearted, Band-Aid approach. It is wrong. We need to fund all Native American programs. We need to fund all of the Federal Government. It is long past time for this shutdown to end, so let's release all of the Federal employees who have been taken hostage. Let's reopen the people's government.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, it is my great pleasure to now yield 2 minutes to the gentlelady from New York, Nita Lowey, the ranking member of the full Appropriations Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to inquire as to how much time remains for both sides in the debate.

At this time, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlelady from Minnesota, Ms. Betty McCollum, the chair of the Indian Caucus.

Mr. Speaker, I agree with my good friend from Alaska on the unconscionable treatment that has been accorded our Native Americans, and I agree that there should be a unique commitment to our Native Americans.

At this point I would like to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee).

Mr. Speaker, this releases 1.5 percent of the Federal Government, leaving more than 99 percent of the Federal Government still closed.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to our very distinguished minority whip, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), for the purposes of a unanimous consent request.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Velazquez) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to Mr. Al Green from Texas for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Hahn) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Cicilline) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.

Mr. Speaker, at this time I yield to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Sean Patrick Maloney) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hinojosa) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlelady from New Hampshire (Ms. Kuster) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.

I now yield to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Serrano), a member of the Appropriations Committee, for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. McNerney) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Doggett) for a unanimous consent request.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Pocan) for a unanimous consent request.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from California, Mrs. Susan Davis, a member of the Armed Services Committee, for a unanimous consent request.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee) for a unanimous consent request.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Alabama, Ms. Terri Sewell.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Ohio (Mrs. Beatty) for a unanimous consent request

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Florida, Judge Hastings, for a unanimous consent request.

Parliamentary Inquiries

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings) to complete his unanimous consent request.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the distinguished gentlelady from California (Ms. Bass) for a unanimous consent request.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. Honda) for a unanimous consent request.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the vice chair of our Democratic Caucus, Mr. Crowley from New York, for a unanimous consent request.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Vermont (Mr. Welch) for a unanimous consent request.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from New Hampshire (Ms. Shea-Porter) for a unanimous consent request.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Veasey) for a unanimous consent request

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters), the ranking member of our Financial Services Committee, for a unanimous consent request

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott) for a unanimous consent request.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Roybal-Allard) for a unanimous consent request.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lofgren) for a unanimous consent request.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Brownley) for a unanimous consent request.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. Takano) for a unanimous consent request.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Kennedy) for a unanimous consent request.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from New Mexico (Ms. Michelle Lujan Grisham) for a unanimous consent request.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee) for a unanimous consent request.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Walz) for a unanimous consent request.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. Ruiz) for a unanimous consent request.

Mr. Speaker, I now yield for the purpose of a unanimous consent request to the dean of the New York delegation, Mr. Rangel.

Parliamentary Inquiry

Mr. Speaker, I had yielded to the gentleman from New York for a unanimous consent request, if the gentleman has a unanimous consent request.

Mr. Speaker, at this time I would like to yield for the purpose of a unanimous consent request to the gentlelady from California (Mrs. Capps).

Mr. Speaker, at this time I would like to yield to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Nolan) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.

Mr. Speaker, on October 10th Taiwan celebrates the 102nd anniversary of the establishment of the Republic of China. I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate Taiwan on its impressive economic progress and strong record of democratic achievement.

On this important anniversary the U.S. Congress should commit itself to strengthening our relationship by singing a bilateral investment agreement (BIA).

Greater economic cooperation between Taiwan and the United States will benefit both our peoples, and support the economic integration and material well-being of the entire Pacific region.

Such an agreement would provide protection for investors of the two countries and expand market opportunities for investors all over the world.

I applaud the efforts of the Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office in Washington to maintain the strong ties that exist between the people of Taiwan and the US Congress.

I look forward to ever greater cooperation between our two nations.

Madam Speaker, I don't want to get into the crosshairs of my friend from Minnesota, and if I had sugar beet farmers in my district, I suppose I might have a different position; but I would like to talk about jobs because that is why I support restoring the Secretary of Agriculture's ability to keep sugar prices at a reasonable level year-round, not just during the arbitrary 6-month period dictated by the 2008 farm bill.

Between 1997 and 2011, nearly 127,000 jobs were lost in segments of the food and beverage industry that use sugar in the products they make, while employment actually rose in food industry segments that don't use sugar. Today, there are an estimated 600,000 Americans directly employed in the food manufacturing industry. It is an enormously important industry. The U.S. Department of Commerce says that for every one sugar production job saved, our current sugar program eliminates three jobs in food manufacturing. That is a loss of manufacturing jobs at a rate of 100,000 per year.

And the fiscal impacts of our sugar policies are just as disturbing. Since this issue was debated on the House floor only 6 weeks ago, the sugar program has cost the taxpayer $90 million. And I am informed that the total cost to the taxpayer this year alone will exceed $150 million. The Congressional Budget Office projects another $239 million in the outyears of the bill.

We don't need to be hitting up the taxpayer for this money. We can make modest reforms to U.S. sugar policy while still leaving a safety net in place for U.S. sugar farmers and processors. This motion strikes the right balance. It is modest and commonsense policy. It is scaled back to include just one of the reforms that the House considered 2 months ago.

Madam Speaker, I think this should be supported. It is a modest, important reform. I think it is appropriate in light of the context of our farm policy. We are making reforms in other areas, and this is one area where we really do need to reform on behalf of the American consumer and on behalf of the need for more manufacturing jobs in the United States of America.

I thank my good friend from New York, and I trust that my very good friend from Kentucky wasn't referring to anybody on this side of the aisle when he used the word ``pontificate.''

Obviously, Madam Speaker, on this side of the aisle we are going to vote for this bill. The Democrats never wanted to shut down any of the government in the first place.

But I want to remind my colleagues that the vast majority of Federal employees in their districts are considered nonessential. I would like for my colleagues to reflect on what that means within each individual family when a breadwinner, who has been working hard at a job--making his family proud or her family proud--comes home and has to announce that they're furloughed because they were considered to be nonessential.

Imagine if that happened in the House and, if we had to divide up between essential and nonessential, how we would feel. I know it brings smiles as it did in the caucus just a few minutes ago, but think about it.

It's wrong to have this arbitrary distinction. Ninety percent of the IRS is considered nonessential; 90 percent of the Department of Energy, 90 percent of the Environmental Protection Agency, 81 percent of the Interior Department, 70 percent of the intelligence agencies are considered non essential. They're not nonessential. They're working hard. They ought to be able to get back to their jobs. We need them to be back to their jobs.

It's very disappointing that the Senate has held up the bill that we voted for unanimously on Saturday--I hope they'll let that loose--but the reality is, when we vote to pay people, we recognize they deserve to be paid, and if they're being paid, all of them want to be working for that pay.

So that's what we need to do. We need to open the entire government. Let everyone work for their pay as they want to do.

I thank my very close friend from Baltimore, Maryland, for yielding me the time.

Mr. Speaker, this bill is truly bipartisan. We have 177 cosponsors, 32 Republicans. It ensures that all Federal employees will be paid for the duration of the Federal Government shutdown.

The issue is fairness. It's just wrong for the hundreds of thousands of Federal employees not to know whether they're going to be able to make their mortgage payment, not to know whether they're going to be able to provide for their families. Many of them live from paycheck to paycheck, and they're absolutely committed to paying their bills when they come due.

I'm sure that this experience has been shared by many of our colleagues. They come to our offices. In fact, just 2 days ago, a woman came in and she started to kind of matter of factually explain the financial situation she had. And she just broke down sobbing. ``I don't know how I can provide for my children if I don't get my paycheck.'' It wasn't through her fault. She didn't do anything wrong. It wasn't through any kind of performance. She's a hardworking employee. She's got commendations.

But we decided, because we haven't been able to fix the budget situation, that we're going to allow this government to shut down. So she's collateral damage. It's wrong--800,000 people are suffering. This would relieve their anxiety. That's why it's a simple matter of fairness, Mr. Speaker.

Now of course on this side of the aisle, we feel strongly that if we could just bring up a simple appropriations bill today, tomorrow, it would pass because there are enough Republicans that want to do that, combined with virtually all of the Democrats. But whether that happens or not, when it happens, this bill does need to happen.

It should be borne in mind, keeping these individuals at home is costing us about $300 million a day in lost productivity. Hundreds of Federal workers have come to our offices, asking us to do this, asking us more importantly to let them go back to their work. They're dedicated to their jobs. So that's the underlying message, let them get back to work.

But in the meantime, let's get this passed. And let's bear in mind that this bill is introduced in a context that over the last 4 years, the Congress has frozen Federal employees' pay. We've cut their pension benefits, and we've furloughed thousands as a result of the sequester. The cumulative impact actually of these punitive measures will cost each Federal employee an average of $50,000 over the budgeted period. I don't think that's fair. It's not right to punish a workforce of civil servants for whom we are the board of directors. We're responsible for this. Let's do the right thing. Let's get a unanimous vote for this bill simply because it is the right thing to do.