Floor Statements

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

I rise in opposition to this legislation, which, again, is no stranger, sadly, to this Congress. This is the fifth time that the majority party has introduced it, going back to 1997; and each time, the huge flaws in this legislation have resulted in its complete collapse in terms of getting anything close to real support through both Chambers and through the executive branch. And once again, it doesn't deserve that support in this case.

Despite the representations made in its title, that it promotes workers' flexibility, that it gives workers choice, the fact of the matter is, a closer examination of the bill shows the opposite is true.

The better way to describe this bill is the More Work, Pay Less bill because what it does is take the 1938 Fair Labor Standards Act, which created a bright line to protect people's right to a 40-hour work week, and make sure that that next hour after 40 hours is paid for with the time-and-a-half of wages. And, again, that created the weekend in America. That created the time off that families have taken for granted as middle class Americans for decades.

What this bill does is it blurs that line; it creates total chaos in terms of trying to come up with a system to set up ground rules with a case-by-case contract, written contract, that's mandated by the language of the bill, and

then leaves it to the enforcement of State Labor Departments Wage and Hours Divisions, which are totally incapable of going into the tens of thousands of workplaces all across America and trying to figure out whether or not, in fact, the rules have been followed.

A closer examination of the bill shows, on page 8 of the bill, in lines 7-10, that, in fact, all these representations that the worker gets to choose are, in fact, not correct. At the end of the day, the employer has the right to veto any comp time that this bill has allowed to accrue over any period of time. So the notion that somehow a person has that choice to accumulate comp time and then be able to use it for a family vacation, or a family emergency, in fact, does not meet the actual plain language of the bill that is before us today.

And that is why organizations that represent working families, organizations that represent women, organizations that have been part of employment law for years and years and years in this country have resoundingly come out in opposition to this legislation. Over 160 various organizations of every stripe representing religious groups, women's groups, labor groups, groups that, again, deal with employment law have basically looked at this legislation for the fifth time and given it thumbs down.

The fact is we should do that. There's no question, however, that workers do, in fact, need more help in terms of making sure that the wages that have stagnated over the last three decades get more support. And families, again, are strained by the fact that those stagnating wages have required second jobs and multiple spouses in the workforce.

But the fact is that there are much better solutions than this legislation, the More Work Pay Less Act. In fact, what we should do is set up a standard for paid sick leave in this country so that a single parent waking up with a child whose temperature is over 100 degrees doesn't feel that they have no choice in terms of how to deal with that situation, that they have some guaranteed opportunity without losing the pay that they need to put food on the table or put gas in the tank, that they, in fact, have that choice which so many of us here as Members of Congress and our staffs certainly take for granted. We should apply the same standards in terms of sick pay that we enjoy to the working people of this country.

This bill doesn't do it. This bill does not meet that test. Again, it sets up a system that is completely unworkable and unenforceable. It butchers the Fair Labor Standards Act's bright line that has protected the American weekend for decades and decades in this country, and in the name of workplace flexibility, in fact, tips the scales of power within the American workforce, once again against the worker, against the employee, who basically for far too long has suffered in this economy.

We need better solutions. This is not the bill.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, it is my privilege now to yield 2 minutes to the minority whip, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer).

I yield the gentleman 1 additional minute.

Mr. Speaker, as somebody who was a private sector small employer for over 25 years, I just have to say that today, under existing law, employers already have the flexibility to give workers paid time off. The only new flexibility this bill gives is flexibility for employers to not pay people overtime. The fact is employers have that choice to give their workers paid time off.

With that, I would now like to yield 3 minutes to the esteemed chairman of our committee, who has led the fight for working families for over 30 years in this Congress, the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller).

Mr. Speaker, I now yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the Representative from Oregon, a colleague on the House Education and the Workforce Committee, Ms. Bonamici.

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

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I now yield to the gentlelady from New York (Mrs. Lowey) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.

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

Mr. Speaker, I now yield to the gentlelady from California (Mrs. Napolitano) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield now to the gentlelady from Massachusetts (Ms. Tsongas) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.

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

Mr. Speaker, I now yield to the gentlelady from Connecticut (Ms. Esty) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.

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

Mr. Speaker, I now yield to the gentlelady from the Virgin Islands (Mrs. Christensen) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.

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

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

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

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

I yield to the gentlelady from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.

I yield to the gentlelady from New York (Mrs. Maloney) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.

I yield to the gentlelady from Arizona (Mrs. Kirkpatrick) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.

I yield now to the gentlelady from New Mexico (Ms. Lujan Grisham) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.

I yield now to the gentlelady from Texas (Ms. Johnson) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.

I now yield to the gentlelady from California (Mrs. Capps) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.

I now yield to the gentlelady from California (Ms. Speier) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.

I now yield to the gentlelady from California (Ms. Matsui) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.

I yield to my neighbor and good friend, the gentlelady from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro), for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.

I now yield to the gentlelady from Florida (Ms. Frankel) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.

Mr. Speaker, if I could be given the time remaining, I'd appreciate it.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I now yield to the gentlelady from California (Ms. Bass) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.

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

I now yield to the gentlelady from New Hampshire (Ms. Shea-Porter) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.

Mr. Speaker, it is now my honor to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to an outstanding colleague on the Education and the Workforce Committee, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews).

(Mr. ANDREWS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I now yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Carolyn B. Maloney).

Mr. Speaker, again, as someone who was a private sector employer for over 25 years, there is nothing under existing law that prevents an employer from giving an employee paid time off. I did it many times.

Now it is my privilege to yield 1 minute to my colleague from the State of Florida, Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz.

Mr. Speaker, I now yield to 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro), a champion for working families and my neighbor.

Mr. Speaker, I now yield 1 minute to my colleague from the State of Texas (Mr. Green).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Bishop), my colleague from the Education and Workforce Committee.

Mr. Speaker, can I inquire as to the time left?

Mr. Speaker, at this time I'd like to yield to the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.

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

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).

Mr. Speaker, it's now my privilege to yield 1 minute to my colleague from the State of Maryland (Ms. Edwards).

Mr. Speaker, if I could just inquire through you, again, we have no further speakers, so I'm prepared to close.

Could the Chair give me one last update in terms of how much time remains?

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

We've probably reached the point where enough has been said where the full 4\1/2\ minutes maybe isn't necessary, but again, I would just like to reiterate a few points. And again, as somebody who was an employer in the private sector for over 20 years, and, again, the notion that somehow existing labor law makes it impossible for employers to respond to their staff's family emergencies, to vacations is really just a myth.

The fact of the matter is that over the last 75 years under the Fair Labor Standards Act, which protects the 40-hour workweek, employers in tens of thousands of workplaces all across America have always made accommodations for their staffs with paid time. What is different about this bill is it's basically tying that flexibility to sacrificing your right under the Fair Labor Standards Act to time and a half for every hour earned over 40 hours. Given the fact that we're living in a time right now where the median income of this country has basically been as flat as a pancake for the last 30 years, that is basically tipping the scales once again against working families in an unacceptable fashion.

If you read this bill closely, you have to execute a written agreement every time you want to set up a comp time arrangement. Can you imagine small employers out there, basically, and their workers have to sit down and write like a mini labor agreement every time they want to come up with one of these arrangements? It doesn't allow for emergencies when you have a system like that.

The enforcement mechanism, which would be through the State Department of Labor's Wage and Hour Division--if anybody has ever dealt with them before, they know that is mission impossible. There is no way that that unit--which, again, today benefits from a bright line system where you just check the payroll hours. If you hit 40 hours, you've got to pay the time and a half. Nobody has the time to go through and examine that agreement to see if it was free and voluntary and whether or not the exercise of comp time was done in accordance with it. You're basically creating a labor relations board in every State, in every workplace across America.

Careful what you wish for as employers if you read this bill closer.

But the fact of the matter is that at the end of the day, it does not empower employees or workers in terms of giving them the ability to basically support their family and have time to deal with the important family issues, whether it's the birth of a child, making sure you're there on important school dates, or making sure that they're there when they're ill or in need of family and parental assistance.

The fact of the matter is paid sick time is the way that you do that. That's the way you empower people. And that is what exists in the public sector. That's why comp time works in the public sector. Paid sick time is something that is part of every collective bargaining agreement in all 50 States in the public sector.

Small employers, is that what the majority really wants to impose on every private employer in this country?

The fact of the matter is that we need to scrap this bill which is before us for the fifth time since 1996 and go back and have a real dialogue in a real bipartisan collaboration in terms of coming up with real solutions for working families.

I actually am an optimist and believe we can do that. I respect the chairman. I respect my chairman of the Subcommittee on Workforce Protections. But the fact is we can do far better than this recycled, rehashed bill which, again, has been rejected by over 160 organizations which represent working families and women.

Again, let's vote this bill down, go back, and as a real body, deliberative body, come up with a better solution for working families.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I claim time in opposition, although I am not opposed to the amendment.

Mr. Speaker, first of all, I just want to again recognize my colleague's hard work. He is a person that I respect and admire greatly.

Again, I do not oppose the amendment. It's hard to oppose a GAO study of almost anything because the more we know and the more we learn, it's always a good thing. However, what I would say, just in observation, in passing, is that if you look at the scope of the study, which is to basically look at actual adjudicated complaints before the Secretary of Labor, and looking again at the scope of the U.S. economy in the private sector, the fact of the matter is it is not going to be a very accurate picture really in terms of the operation of this bill--again, an attempt albeit, but nonetheless not something that I think is really going to give us a very accurate picture in terms of all of the day-to- day sort of conflicts. Blurring the lines of the Fair Labor Standards Act and creating an almost chaotic system of executing written agreements in every instance where a person wants to negotiate an overtime comp arrangement really, I think, is even beyond the scope and great powers of the Government Accountability Office--which does do great work.

Because, again, will this study tell us how many workers were fired or discriminated against for their choices? No. Because there is no right to reinstatement or rescheduling under this bill. Will this study tell us how many times a worker was denied the precise day he or she asked for? No. Because the bill provides no right to use comp time on that specific day.

I want to go back to that point. If you go to page 8 of the bill, use of comp time is, again, under the veto power of the employer. The notion that somehow employees have unilateral choice or power over using that comp time is not the way this bill is written.

As far as the public sector is concerned, again, in all of those instances you have an elaborate grievance system which exists at State government levels, city government levels, which doesn't exist in the private sector. And it certainly doesn't exist in the Department of Labor's Wage and Hours Division--which, again, Mrs. Roby and I, in all of our back and forth, fleshed out the fact that that ultimately is where complaints would go and reside.

So, again, a GAO study is fine, and I'm certainly going to join the gentleman in supporting his amendment, but this does not fix a flawed bill. Once we get past this amendment, I think all of the arguments that you've heard over the last hour or so in opposition to the bill still trump any benefit that Mr. Gibson's good-faith amendment brings to the bill.

With that, I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Dr. Grace Jones on her retirement as President of Three Rivers Community College in Norwich, Connecticut. Dr. Jones' exemplary work and dedication to eastern Connecticut's students and her community has contributed greatly to the educational development of our region.

Dr. Jones began her career as a high school physical education and science instructor in Chicago, Illinois. She advanced to higher

education in the 1970s, continuing her career as a teacher at Berkshire Community College in Pittsfield, Massachusetts. During her decade of service at Berkshire, she served as a member of the faculty, coordinator of the recreational leadership program, coordinator of student activities, and director of personnel services. Her gifts for university leadership took her to new heights in 1990 when she was named tenured professor and Vice President for Multicultural Affairs at SUNY Oneonta. Soon afterward, Dr. Jones became president of College of Eastern Utah in Price, Utah, before being named President of Three Rivers Community College in 2001.

As President, Dr. Jones balanced her extensive administrative duties with a commitment to remaining visible to her students across campus. A key initiative for Dr. Jones was designing open spaces on campus for students to congregate. She was instrumental in securing funding and overseeing the construction and renovation for the college's new campus. Dr. Jones has also sought to contribute to the region's workforce by continuing to administer professional programs, including those for nursing, manufacturing technology, and hospital management. This ground breaking work--tying Three Rivers curricula to the region's workforce needs--is a model that has been embraced in Washington, D.C. and all across the country as a solution to filling the ``skills gap'' that has hindered economic growth. Under Dr. Jones's presidency, enrollment at the college has grown to 5,150 full and part-time students and an additional 2,000 non-credit enrollees.

A distinguished member of the educational community, Dr. Jones has been recognized by numerous outlets for her extensive achievements. In 2009, she received the Palmer Davies award from the United Community and Family Services of Connecticut, honoring her commitment to fostering an environment of community spirit and understanding. During that year, Dr. Jones was also recognized by the Connecticut State Conference of the NAACP. In 2012, Dr. Jones was named 62nd Citizen of the Year by the Eastern Connecticut Chamber of Commerce.

Dr. Grace Jones's contributions as an educator, administrator, and community leader have encouraged generations of students to attain high levels of achievement and contribute to their communities and the economy in a positive way. Across the United States and here in eastern Connecticut, countless students have benefited from Grace's hard work and dedication to her craft. I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring the career of Dr. Grace Jones.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the 300th anniversary of the Town of Pomfret, Connecticut, located in the 2nd Congressional District. The citizens of this community will celebrate the anniversary with festivities on May 22, 2013.

Rich with history and tradition, the Town of Pomfret has retained much of its old-time charm and beauty for which many of the New England communities are so famous. It is nestled in the rolling hills of northeastern Connecticut and is one of the diminishing number of communities in our part of the country which still maintains a rustic and gentle way of life so characteristic of America a generation or two ago.

The Town of Pomfret was settled by pioneer colonists and incorporated in the year 1713. Because of its beautiful location and its rural atmosphere, it has been for many years a summer resort for city dwellers. It still boasts active farms, with apple and peach orchards and dairy farms in its 38 square miles. The town has overwhelmingly approved the preservation of over 1200 acres of open space in the course of the last decade.

The 300th Anniversary of the town will actually be observed over the full year of 2013 and many events have been planned by committee working diligently over the past few years. Festivities began with a Coast Guard Dixieland Jazz Band Concert, a Commemorative Quilt has been made by residents, displayed at various locations, and will be presented to the town, Pomfret was Grand Marshall in the area's Holiday Parade, there have been ice-skating parties, walking events, artwork displayed, and a special Tercentennial Ball has been planned.

Historical phases of the event include a self-guided historical tour map showcasing many historic homes and public buildings, a program of Characters from Colonial Connecticut, a talk by State Archaeologist Nick Bellantoni about aborginal inhabitants, CT Women's Suffrage Program, an historical talk on General Israel Putnam--a Revolutionary War hero--and a commemorative postmark.

As the Representative of Putnam in the U.S. House, I want to pay a well-deserved tribute to those early settlers of Pomfret who helped build our country through their hard work, struggles, and sacrifices. The record of their achievements lives to this day in the hearts and memories of their descendants who can take pride in the legacy handed down to them, a legacy of patriotism and devotion to our nation. Mr. Speaker, I salute the citizens of Pomfret on this festive occasion. All of us in eastern Connecticut take great pride in this community. I am confident that Pomfret's 300th anniversary will be a great and successful event, and I hope that the next 300 years in the history of this community will be as happy and prosperous for its people as it has been in the past.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the United States Coast Guard International Ice Patrol (IIP). Today marks the IIPs 100th anniversary, and on this occasion I would ask that my colleagues join me in honoring this distinguished group's service towards achieving maritime safety for passengers and commerce traversing the North Atlantic.

Prior to the establishment of an organization tasked with monitoring risks and sharing information, trans-Atlantic travel presented serious dangers to passengers and cargo. Among these risks was the presence of icebergs, which presented numerous obstacles in Transatlantic shipping lanes. These icebergs were a prominent threat to all who braved these long voyages, but it took a tragedy of international proportions and historic scope to bring the danger into focus. On April 15, 1912, the sinking of the RMS Titanic due to an iceberg strike instigated the provided the impetus for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS) agreement, and the establishment of the International Ice Patrol, managed by the United Sates Coast Guard.

Other than the years interrupted by the two world wars, the IIP has been active in every ice season 1913. The Revenue Cutter Service, precursor to the modern day Coast Guard, provided two cutters--the Seneca and Miami--to meet the needs of protecting trans-Atlantic shipping routes from the dangers of icebergs. For many subsequent decades, Coast Guard IIP ships would brave the waters of the North Atlantic to provide timely data and warning to safeguard global commerce.

The current mission of the International Ice Patrol is to monitor the iceberg activity surrounding the Grand Banks of Newfoundland that threatens trans-Atlantic shipping lanes, with an average of 500 icebergs from Greenland's glaciers drifting into these vital channels. This area, with its high concentration of oil platforms, fishing vessels, fog, and tremendous iceberg activity, makes it one of the most dangerous areas in the word for maritime transportation. Today, Coast Guard fixed wing aircraft perform aerial reconnaissance to monitor icebergs providing real time data on this persistent danger. To date, no ship that has heeded International Ice Patrol warnings has struck an iceberg.

Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring the United States Coast Guard International Ice Patrol's dedication to protecting the lives and livelihoods of the many courageous mariners that daily cross the seas and who form the backbone of our international maritime trade. Safe and reliable transportation is a critical component of trade, which is further a driver of economic growth. We would be bereft of these benefits without the hard work of the men and women of the International Ice Patrol.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the 2013 recipient of the Ellis Island Medal of Honor. Hailing from Willington, Connecticut, Steven Ortiz is the first Costa Rican-American to receive this honor in award's 27-year history.

Steven is the founder and director of The Good Samaritan Project, which donates new and slightly worn clothing throughout Latin America and has provided educational scholarships in Costa Rica. His clear global vision, leadership and philanthropic spirit has ensured that his organization is run completely by volunteers and that 100 percent of donations are used for charitable purposes.

Steven serves in the Massachusetts Air National Guard as the Commander and conductor of the Air National Guard Band of the Northeast. Under his leadership, the band's various ensembles provide support for military units and civilian events, and perform for tens of thousands of people every year throughout the Nation.

He has taught at the elementary, middle, and high school levels in both public and private schools in Connecticut and has led ensembles at the collegiate level. As an undergraduate student, Ortiz founded the Danbury Youth Band and has provided numerous instruments at no cost to children at home and abroad. He has facilitated thousands of hours of free and low-cost music instruction in an effort to keep children safe and engaged in productive activities, while ensuring they learn valuable life lessons.

The Ellis Island Medal of Honor is a prestigious award presented to an immigrant who dedicates his life to helping others, preserves and celebrates the history, traditions and values of his ancestry while proving himself as a valuable citizen of the United States. Recipients like Steven strive for tolerance and acceptance among ethnic, racial, and religious groups in our nation and abroad and above all, they share their personal or professional gifts for the benefit of humanity. I ask that my colleagues join with me in congratulating Steven Ortiz on his impressive achievement.

Mr. Speaker, 1 year ago tomorrow marks the anniversary of the Federal Reserve Board reporting that student loan debt exceeded $1 trillion. What that means for the average student loan borrower in America is a debt level of $27,000. That's just the average. Many students graduate, sadly, with debt levels of six figures.

Despite the fact that we have that looming burden on middle class families all across the country, in 67 days the Stafford student loan program interest rate will double from 3.4 percent to 6.8 percent, adding even further interest debt to students unless Congress acts.

Mr. Speaker, I've introduced H.R. 1595, the Student Loan Relief Act, with my colleague in the Senate, Senator Jack Reed--we have 95 cosponsors in the House--which will extend the lower rate for 2 years and give this House time to come up with a comprehensive solution for higher education access and affordability, which, again, extends back to giving students better information for when they enter college and helping those who graduated in terms of allowing them to refinance.

It is time, however, to pass the extension of the lower rate. Let's not go backwards. Let's help middle class families all across America.

Mr. Speaker, on Monday April 15, 2013, I was unable to be present for three recorded votes. Had I been present, I would have voted:

``Yes'' on rollcall No. 103 (on passage of H.R. 1162);

``Yes'' on rollcall No. 104 (on passage of H.R. 882); and

``No'' on rollcall No. 105 (on passage of H.R. 249).

Mr. Speaker, there is a basic principle of Anglo- American common law that reaches back to antiquity that goes as follows:

Without a remedy, there is no right. Ubi jus, ibi remedium.

That is the common-law doctrine which was the cornerstone of the National Labor Relations Act, which recognized that workers' rights only exist when there is a place to go to enforce fair elections, unlawful terminations, and retaliation cases. In fact, it is that legal doctrine which formed the basis of the Supreme Court's decision of Marbury v. Madison, which basically established the legal authority of the U.S. Supreme Court.

This law shamefully tramples on that decision and strips the National Labor Relations Act of its power, and you have to only look at line 10 of the bill which states very clearly:

The Board shall not implement, administer, or enforce any

decision, rule, or vote on or after January 4, 2012.

This is a shameful day for this House. The rights of workers to collectively bargain were not only recognized by the National Labor Relations Act; they were recognized by the Vatican in the 1890s by Pope Leo XIII. They were recognized by the United Nations Human Rights Charter after World War II as a basic criterion of civilized society.

Today, when this law passes, America will go on record basically saying that workers who are seeking to have elections to form unions, to have workers who try to protest unlawful terminations, to workers who are trying to protest unlawful retaliation, you have no place to go. You are living in an undeveloped country right now in terms of your legal rights.

Shame on this House for bringing up a measure like this which strips the rights of people which common-law doctrine, reaching back beyond the birth of this Nation, has recognized for centuries.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Anne Evans, United States Department of Commerce International Trade Administration District Director for Connecticut. I congratulate her for her induction into the New England Tire and Service Association (NETSA) Hall of Fame for 2013 and wish to recognize her numerous achievements in business, government, and service to her country and community.

Throughout her career, Anne has demonstrated a commitment to excellence. From her childhood experience learning valuable customer service skills from her father and grandfather, through her leadership of New England's tire industry, and now as a senior Department of Commerce Official, Anne continues to seek innovative approaches to develop New England and Connecticut's economy and solve business and environmental challenges.

Anne's career began early, helping with the family business. As a young professional, she served her state in Washington, D.C. as a Congressional and Committee staff member, as well as in the Connecticut Assembly. While Anne would go on to an illustrious career in government service, her family business came calling first. When her father fell ill in 1978, Anne returned to Connecticut to run the family tire business.

Over her 30 year career in the tire industry, Anne has found success in the retreading, retailing, distribution, and import-export sectors. Joining Import Tire in 1982 sparked Anne's passion for international trade. She dove headfirst into global challenges facing the tire industry, forming a company to focus on international trade in tires as well as the global waste-tire disposal. This company, in partnership with Oxford Energy, developed the Exeter Energy Plant in Sterling, Connecticut. She was recognized for her immense success and went on to manage waste-tire issues for the government of the United Kingdom and founded Elm Energy and Recycling Limited with the support of the global tire industry. Her commitment to global business issues culminated in 2008 when she was appointed as the District Director for Connecticut to the United States Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration.

For her efforts, Anne has been featured in the Wall Street Journal, The New Yorker, The Financial Times, and the New York Times. In 2000, she received the International Business Leader of the Year award from the Metro Hartford Chamber of Commerce. In 2003 Anne was awarded the Tire Industry Association ``Industry Pioneer Award'' for her leadership and achievements in the waste tire industry. In 2012 the Hartford Business Journal named Anne as the ``Remarkable Business Woman of the Year.'' Most recently, in December of 2012, she was recognized by the U.S. Department of Commerce for her work in creating and sustaining her Veterans Workforce Development Program at the Middletown Export Center. Since I was elected to Congress, I have worked closely with Anne to help Connecticut companies expand exports. Anne and I have lead trade missions to the United Kingdom, Israel, and Belgium with Connecticut companies to help create new economic opportunities and jobs in the state.

Anne's honor gives us the opportunity to reflect on our shared commitment to growing our economy in the face of the challenges of increased global competition. I ask my colleagues to join me today in honoring Anne Evans's induction into the NETSA Hall of Fame for 2013.

Mr. Speaker, it is with great pride and admiration that I rise today to share with you the accomplishments of Jeremiah Lowney of Norwich, Connecticut.

I am pleased that the White House is honoring Jeremiah Lowney as a Champion of Change, which is a well deserved honor. On April 5, 2013 Jerry was honored with 11 other Rotary International Members that have improved the lives of thousands both in the United States and abroad. For over thirty years, Jeremiah ``Jerry'' Lowney has successfully applied his exceptional skills in orthodontia and medicine to helping those living in some of the world's most inhospitable conditions. After cultivating a fruitful career as an orthodontist, Jerry became focused on providing the most basic and necessary health services to those who needed it more than almost anyone in the world: the citizens of Port- au-Prince, Haiti. In doing so, Jerry selflessly prioritized his own health concerns below those of his future patients: he was recovering from surgery and radiation following treatment of a rare form of cancer when he embarked on his first mission trip to Haiti in 1982.

After dedicating three years of service toward Mother Teresa's Sisters of Charity providing free dental care to Haitians in Port-au- Prince, Jerry was asked by Mother Teresa to branch out to Jeromie, a rural city in Southwestern Haiti suffering from severe deficiencies in both the quality and availability of health care. Jerry's tireless efforts led what was initially a small outreach group to blossom into the Haitian Health Foundation (HHF), a stalwart organization that has offered health care services to Jeromie and over 100 of the rural and remote mountain villages which surround it.

Though the Foundation's successes are innumerable in quantity, some recent highlights include: a 90 percent immunization rate, almost 100 percent reduction in diarrhea deaths, a national award for Vitamin A program which prevents child blindness, and a reduction in childhood deaths from bacterial pneumonia by more than 50 percent. In addition, the HHF maintains programs which distribute hot meals and take-home food for thousands of malnourished children, as well as a family sponsorship program that sends thousands of children to school each year.

As a recipient of dozens of humanitarian awards, Jerry's efforts have certainly not gone unrecognized. Yet despite his philanthropic accomplishments, Jerry has never lost his quiet, humble sense of duty and compassion for those less fortunate. Jerry's unwavering determination, skills, and philanthropic nature have led him to extraordinary success in one of the world's most impoverished regions. His actions have improved the lives of hundreds of thousands of impoverished Haitians, who without him may never have been able to find adequate care. Jerry has offered more than health and dental services to these people; he has offered them hope. Despite his grueling schedule running a busy dental practice and managing the Haitian clinic he also is active in the Norwich community lending a hand to civic and charitable causes of every type. His family, his hometown of Norwich, and all of eastern Connecticut are proud of Jerry Lowney's remarkable success, and I applaud the White House for recognizing his accomplishments.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all my colleagues to join me in honoring the service and accomplishments of Jeremiah Lowney.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the achievements of Howard Coro. Howard joined the North Thompsonville Fire Department on August 30, 1972. Rising through the ranks to Lieutenant and then to Captain in 1994, Howard retired from his post in July of 2012 after forty years of service to the people of Enfield, Connecticut.

Early in his career Howard distinguished himself from his peers and earned the North Thompsonville Firefighter of the Year Award in 1975. He went on to assist in the training of hundreds of new firefighters across the region and was involved with a variety of local committees within the fire department. Howard was instrumental in overseeing the renovation and addition to the current North Thompsonville fire station.

Throughout his decades of service, Howard responded to countless emergency calls. Whether he was responding to a fire, a hazmat incident, or an automobile accident, Howard was someone Enfield residents could count on to help during their most urgent times of need. This compassion and dedication to the people of Enfield truly set him apart.

We owe great deal of gratitude to the first responders who risk their lives every day to protect their communities. I ask my colleagues to join with me in applauding Howard Coro's courage and service.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to offer my heartiest congratulations and sincere thanks to Marsha Jette of Norwich. For more than four decades she has assisted the farmers of Connecticut. This past January, Marsha retired after more than 41 years of working for the U.S. Department of Agriculture Farm Service Agency in Connecticut.

After graduating from Norwich Free Academy, Marsha attended Johnson and Wales Junior College in Providence, RI where she took courses in bookkeeping. Between 1969 and 1971 Marsha worked at various companies as a bookkeeper. In 1971, Marsha began her career at USDA with the Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service (ASCS), now the Farm Service Agency (FSA) as a Program Assistant in the New London County office in Norwich. In 1973 Marsha was made Acting County Executive Director in her office which led her to enter the County Office Training program the following year in order to become a County Executive Director.

Marsha became County Executive Director of the New London County ASCS Office on May 11, 1975. During her tenure in the county office, Marsha also served on the 2007 National CED Classification Review Committee and served as the State Communications Coordinator. In her role as State Communications Coordinator, Marsha coordinated various events including a visit from the FSA Administrator and Washington, DC staff, as well as educational tours from the Connecticut State and County Committee members. Mrs. Jette also compiled an education text for state and county committee members in order to provide them with a better understanding of FSA and its mission.

In August, 2009, Marsha Jette was appointed as State Executive Director of FSA in Connecticut by President Barack Obama. In her capacity as Executive Director, Marsha worked tirelessly to promote agriculture in the state and support her staff in Connecticut. The final three and a half years of her tenure at USDA crowned an impressive career. My staff and I called on Marsha countless times-- whether to assess damage after a hurricane hit the state or to determine the status of FSA payments, Marsha always had the answer. Mrs. Jette's absence at the Farm Service Agency will be felt both within and outside the agency for some time to come. I thank her for her many years of service to the agricultural community, congratulate her on her retirement, and wish her well in all of her future endeavors.

Mr. Chairman, as we talk about the issue of young people and debt, one thing is very clear: for 7\1/2\ million young Americans who receive subsidized Stafford student loans, in 103 days the interest rate on those subsidized student loans is going to double from 3.4 percent to 6.8 percent.

We have before us now two budgets. One budget, the Democratic budget brought out by Mr. Van Hollen, protects the lower rate. The other budget, by the majority party, allows that rate to double to 6.8 percent.

The Federal Reserve Bank of New York came out with a study just a few days ago which shows, in fact, that the student loan debt for young Americans has tripled over the last 8 years.

We have one budget which protects Pell Grants, which reduces the need to borrow money to pay for college, and we have the other budget from the majority party which freezes Pell Grants at $5,665 a year. Any parent like myself who has kids in college, any student who is in college who believes that over the next 10 years that tuition is going to stay flat obviously has no understanding of what the trends are and have been over the last 20 years in terms of State withdrawal for higher education support, and what's actually happening out there in the real world.

We have one budget which speaks to the monumental challenge of young people who are trying to improve themselves and get ready for the workplace of the future; we have another budget which is blind to those challenges and which will reduce college to a system of haves and have- nots.

We must invest in young people in the future. The Democratic budget, which protects the lower interest rate and the subsidized Stafford Student Loan program, understands that. The majority budget, which allows those rates to skyrocket, which freezes Pell Grants so that young families from poor backgrounds will not be able to afford the cost of college, again leaves this country basically behind in the competition for high-value jobs, for jobs that require skills, whether it's in science, technology, engineering and math or other areas of curriculum.

The fact of the matter is for young people, there is only one budget which speaks to them and addresses their needs--that's the Democratic budget that is brought out by Mr. Van Hollen.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the contributions of the 26 Peace Corps members from eastern Connecticut who are currently serving in the Peace Corps around the world. For five decades, the Peace Corps has supported international diplomacy through the promotion of peace, goodwill, and social and economic equality. I am proud that these young Connecticut residents have devoted part of their lives to help improve the lives of others.

Among these eastern Connecticut volunteers is Keith Esposito, a resident of Gales Ferry and a Boston University graduate who is teaching English in Ukraine. Emily Howell Heller, a Niantic resident and Connecticut College graduate, is serving in Panama as an Environmental Education volunteer. Justin Lamountain, who is serving in the Philippines, is a forest and land management consultant as part of the Peace Corps Response program.

Another volunteer, Chelsea Krieger, is serving as a HIV/AIDS technical health advisor in Malawi. Chelsea previously spent a year in Honduras through the Peace Corps; however, the Honduras program was suspended only a year into her service. Chelsea completed a Master's in Public Health and was motivated to apply for a Peace Corps response position to use her knowledge to assist those in need. Lantham Avery Jr. is currently serving in Kenya, a country currently experiencing unrest in the wake of the upcoming national elections. Additionally, one of my former interns, Gabrielle Tassone from Montville, is serving in Madagascar as an education volunteer. Other eastern Connecticut residents are serving in countries from Armenia to Tanzania to Gambia, and Kenya.

As we recognize the 52nd Anniversary of the founding of the Peace Corps program, it is important to recognize the over 210,000 American volunteers that have participated in this important service program. Volunteers have shown the international community the American value of service in over 139 countries. This program provides the best and brightest of our young people the opportunity to represent their country abroad, by teaching English, by assisting with economic development programs, and by providing necessary support to small communities throughout the world. As we begin Peace Corps month, I am hopeful that we can all recognize all of these invaluable contributions to American values and global understanding.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all my colleagues to join me in honoring these distinguished volunteers from Connecticut and across the country, for their contributions to the developing world and for embodying the core value of service we all share.

Madam Speaker, it just came over the newswire a few minutes ago that on Friday morning, March 1, there will be a meeting at the White House involving President Obama, the leadership of the House, Speaker Boehner, and the leadership of the Senate, Senate Majority Leader Reid to begin a process of talking about resolving the issue that we're obviously confronting as a Nation a few hours away, which is an automatic mechanism put into effect by the Budget Control Act of 2011 to cut discretionary spending across the board.

I begin with that point because, in fact, that really should have been happening months ago. In fact, that was the intent of sequestration, which is a mechanism that was created in 1985 by the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings legislation that set up the formula for sequestration that cut across defense and non-defense programs. And as Senator Phil Gramm, who was the inventor of sequestration, said in a speech a couple of years ago: It was never the objective of Gramm- Rudman to trigger sequester. The objective of Gramm-Rudman was to have the threat of sequester force compromise and action.

In other words, this was a mechanism that was designed to hurt. It was designed to create so much pain politically that the two sides, which again were in a similar point of gridlock in 1985, would begin the process of negotiation to deal with a structural deficit.

If you look at the history of what occurred from 1985 up until early 2000, that pressure actually did force Congress to face up to the fact that we could not continue to pile up deficits and burden our children and grandchildren with further debt. Unfortunately, in this present Congress, it's taken a little longer for the message to get through, but, nonetheless, the meeting that's scheduled on Friday morning hopefully is going to begin the process of having the two sides do what their predecessors did in the eighties and nineties and begin the process of a balanced plan to eliminate the structural deficit that our Nation confronts today.

Yesterday, President Obama was over in Newport News, Virginia, talking to shipyard workers about the fact that the Navy, which is obviously a critical part of our Federal Government, now has to hit spending cut targets over the next 7 months. We're 5 months into a fiscal year right now. They have begun the process of cancelling the refueling of the USS Lincoln, one of our 10 aircraft carriers which are so critical to force projection in this country. And he was absolutely right to be there. This is a program which, if it is cancelled or delayed, it's going to daisy-chain its way through our Navy's fleet of 287 ships which must be repaired and maintained constantly to make sure that they're available for operations.

I represent southeastern Connecticut, the home of Electric Boat shipyard that builds and repairs nuclear submarines. We have the USS Providence slated to come in for a needed overhaul and repair later this fiscal year. The Navy has notified the shipyard that that work is going to be suspended. That's 200,000 man-hours for welders, for shipwrights, for machinists, for electricians that do amazing work with incredible skills to make sure that our fleet is capable of meeting the mission requests that are out there. The USS Miami, which is a submarine that was burned in an arsonist fire last year, is another repair job which EB was going to be on the road helping the shipyard workers in Kittery, Maine, to make sure that that critical vessel was going to be back in the fleet. That project has now been put on ice because of sequestration.

These are just totally irrational, destructive outcomes for a bill which was designed to force compromise. It was not to be a policy, not to be an outcome. When you look at Admiral Greenert, the CNO of the Navy, who is one of the most outstanding leaders in our country, he has cancelled the USS Harry Truman, which is a carrier strike force that was scheduled to go over to the Middle East to fly air-cover missions for our troops in Afghanistan, to keep the Strait of Hormuz open where 20 percent of the world's oil supply passes every single day. This is a policy or an outcome that threatens the military readiness of this country. Secretary Panetta at the Department of Defense and General Dempsey, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, has made that crystal clear.

So the stakes could not be higher for our country to make sure that this process, which belatedly is starting on Friday morning, is going to result in smart, balanced ways to reduce the deficit.

I can offer one big idea that will get us to that point. I sit on the Agriculture Committee, which is a great bipartisan committee that's been working hard in terms of reforming ag policy in this country. It is time that the direct payment system to farms comes to an end. The good news is that Republicans and Democrats on that committee and Republicans and Democrats in this Chamber agree on that. We can help farmers deal with the vagaries of weather and unexpected events through risk insurance, which is far cheaper to the U.S. taxpayer than direct payments. That will save $30 billion over the next 5 years. That is a huge step forward that we can use as a building block to avoid these horrible outcomes and make sure that Senator Gramm's warning to us is heeded by this Chamber and by this Congress.