Floor Statements

Over 13 million Americans are looking for work. That means for every one job opening in the United States, there are four Americans actively seeking employment. Another 10 million people have given up looking for a full-time job altogether because companies just aren't hiring.

These are real people. They are more than just numbers. Ellen Andrews lost her job last year. She's been supporting herself and her 1-year- old son Henry with her unemployment benefits. They help her keep the lights on and keep food in the house until she can get a job.

But the Republican plan will change all that. It will cut 40 weeks of Federal benefits out from under people like Ellen; and it will force partisan policies, like the controversial Keystone XL pipeline, on to a bill that should be all about helping American families.

With the holidays around the corner, Congress should be about giving America hope and security, not playing partisan politics.

America doesn't have a small business problem; it has a startup problem. That was the title of a recent Washington Post article. It pointed to the fact that self-employed startup businesses have been the chosen alternative for millions of Americans, but we must do more to help them. Today, one out of every three new jobs is created by self-employed startup businesses.

But we can do better. Compared to other wealthy countries, the U.S. ranks 23rd in new businesses formed per thousand working adults. These entrepreneurs take risks to make it on their own, but they could do better if we help them be competitive. That is why yesterday I introduced the Entrepreneur Startup Growth Act.

One of the most intimidating times of the year for new owners is tax season, as they learn and navigate the different tax standards for businesses. My bill turns this tough time into an opportunity by offering not only affordable business tax assistance but business development services so that these companies can get the advice they need in order to grow.

This bill builds on the Self-Employment Tax Initiative launched by CFED, the Corporation for Enterprise Development, a nonprofit economic opportunity organization. According to CFED, nearly two-thirds of all self-employed people are operating business startups.

Self-employed startups in their first year of existence create an average of 3 million jobs per year. In fact, without business startups, there would be no net job growth in the U.S. economy. Nearly all net job creation since 1980 has occurred in self-employed startups less than 5 years old. They are critical to our economy.

In my bill, community-based organizations, local governments, and higher education institutions are eligible to apply for grants up to $75,000 to operate this program. The IRS will work with the Small Business Administration to ensure that the operators of the program have expertise in both tax assistance and business development assistance.

This is a program that works. With such a modest investment in this assistance, 62 percent of businesses were able to get refundable tax credits such as EITC and Making Work Pay, refunds that they might otherwise have missed out on. The Entrepreneur Startup Growth Act will help businesses grow and help low-income households build the assets that they need in order to survive. They will get the economic security they desire. With this, we will be able to help people climb up that ladder of opportunity and reach for that American Dream.

I rise in opposition to the so-called Regulatory Flexibility Act. This bill shows just how out of touch the House leadership is, not only with the American people, but with America's small businesses.

A recent poll conducted by the Hartford Financial Group asked small businesses to name their biggest barrier to success. Despite the majority's claim, do you know how many cited government rules and regulations as the biggest barrier? Just 9 percent. Instead, a majority, a vast majority, in fact, 59 percent of small businesses, said they struggle the most with finding qualified talent.

So it's clear that this bill does nothing to knock down barriers and help the majority of small businesses with their greatest needs. Instead, it just slows down the regulation process and stops government from protecting the consumers from unsafe products, dirty air or water that could make them sick, a dangerous workplace, or gross misconduct in the financial industry.

Our country's small businesses don't have time for this nonsense. We should be working on a bill that creates jobs and actually helps small business.

Mr. Chair, on rollcall vote 874, on the Jackson Lee Amendment to H.R. 527, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.''

Dawn, a single mother of two, spends every day looking for a job. After 20 years working in human resources, she was laid off in July; and now, the only thing paying her heat and electricity bills, the only thing putting food on the table, is her modest unemployment benefit.

In just 35 days and counting, her safety net will be pulled away if Congress fails to act. If we don't extend emergency unemployment benefits when they expire, by mid-February, 2.1 million Americans will have their benefits cut off. And by the end of the year, 6 million will be without this critical lifeline.

Today one out of every 11 Americans is out of work. Congress has never allowed unemployment benefits to expire when unemployment was this high for this long. We should not start now.

Proponents of this bill claim it is about fiscal responsibility, but it is the opposite. This bill makes it impossible, in fact unconstitutional, for the government to save for the future. Under this bill, programs like Social Security or long term Federal highway projects would have to be completely eliminated to comply with the Constitution.

Today, American workers put money into a Social Security trust fund built to pay and save for future benefits. But under this shortsighted constitutional amendment, money coming into the Federal Government must be paid out the same year. That means you can't have a Social Security trust fund, so good-bye Social Security. Good-bye saving for retirement.

Let me tell you how bad this idea is. Let's say for a moment that this was your family's budget. If this constitutional budget amendment applied to you, you would have to spend everything you earned in the same year. No college fund or IRA, no savings account to put a downpayment on a house or, God forbid, to pay for expensive medical treatment. Not only is that ludicrous, it is tragic.

If that weren't bad enough, if this constitutional amendment goes through and no revenues are raised, all government programs will suffer a 17.3 percent cut. That's a $1.2 trillion reduction in Social Security payments through 2021. That is nearly a 20 percent reduction that would directly hurt current and future retirees and senior citizens for the next decade.

This so-called balanced budget amendment balances overzealous budget slashing on the backs of our senior citizens and future retirees. Does Congress really want to send the message now, in the midst of the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression, that saving responsibly for the future is unconstitutional? Is Congress prepared to abandon millions of Americans now? I, for one, am not. And so I urge my colleagues to oppose this reckless constitutional amendment.

This bill is a blatant attempt to override and weaken States' laws on an issue that could endanger people's lives. It hurts my home State of California, which developed laws to protect residents by developing criteria on those who could carry concealed-carry weapons. With this bill, that all goes away.

This bill is so bad that it even allows drug dealers convicted of selling drugs to minors to carry a concealed weapon. California would not allow it because such permits can only go to those of good moral character. But under this law, we would have to accept the concealed weapon permit for every other State that allows weapons to these drug dealers. I offered an amendment in the Judiciary Committee to stop this, but those on the other side of the aisle voted it down.

With this bill, a person who endangers the lives of our children will be allowed to carry a concealed loaded gun nationwide, and you would be powerless to stop it. It is the individual States that are in the best position to determine how to best protect its citizens.

I strongly urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this dangerous bill.

There was a time when women and minorities could not vote in this country. People were jailed and even killed for the right to vote. But because people fought back, every U.S. citizen gained the right to vote--that is, up until now.

This year, an unprecedented 42 bills were introduced in various States to deprive you of that right. States have passed voter ID laws that would stop 21 million legal U.S. citizens from voting, including your grandmother who was born in this country and lived here for 82 years. Why? Because she no longer drives and doesn't have a picture ID.

These laws would stop early voting and voting by mail, so that if you know you have to travel out of town or have an operation on Election Day, you would be deprived of casting your vote. This threatens the very basis of our democracy.

We must work together to protect every American's right to vote.

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

H.R. 1002, the Wireless Tax Fairness Act of 2011, will impose on States a 5-year moratorium on any new tax on mobile services, mobile service providers, and mobile service property. This will deny States the flexibility to respond to economic downturns during the moratorium and, therefore, undermine the ability of States to pay for essential services such as public health and safety, education and maintenance of State highways.

The legislation is based on faulty information and will benefit the wireless services industry. Further, the legislation contains vague language which will lead to increased litigation for both State and local governments and the wireless industry. Because of these and other concerns presented by the bill, many organizations are opposed, including the League of Cities, National Governors Association, the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, the AFL- CIO, AFT and NEA, amongst others.

Why are they opposed?

Because, first, this bill will force States to cut services and increase taxes on nonwireless taxpayers.

In order for States and local communities to continue to recover from this recession, they need all tools at their disposal to balance their budgets, to preserve and create jobs, and to provide essential services like police, fire, and education.

In fact, demand for many of the essential services, such as unemployment payments and other social programs, has increased during the economic downturn. Yet this bill takes away one of the tools to tax the wireless industry at the expense of other taxpayers and businesses. The moratorium will exclude from possible State taxation millions, if not billions of dollars, in future revenue from wireless service taxes. Thus, to balance their budgets, States will be forced to cut even more services and shift more of the tax burden on to other local taxpayers.

As a former member of the California Board of Equalization, the Nation's duly elected statewide tax board, I understand the unique fiscal challenges facing our Nation today and believe we should leave local taxes in the hands of local officials and residents.

Finally, State legislators and local officials who are elected by their constituents and accountable to them have decided to impose these taxes. By passing this legislation, Congress impedes upon local elections and is telling local governments how to run their budgets.

A second reason for opposition is that this bill is a special interest bill for the wireless industry. It benefits the wireless services industry at the expense of other industries. Despite industry claims, this bill will not lead to more broadband development and competitiveness. Current State and local taxes on wireless services and providers have not diminished adoption rates, nor have they inhibited broadband expansion.

In fact, the wireless industry has not yet presented any data indicating that State and local wireless taxes have had adverse effect on wireless subscribership, revenue, or investment. Instead, the wireless industry continues to grow and profits remain high.

If this bill becomes law, it would set up a dual tax system on telephone services by giving preferential treatment to cell phone customers but continue to allow taxes on traditional wire-line phones. This will put a higher burden on those without cell phones.

Finally, vague definitions within this bill will lead to increased litigation. H.R. 1002 will increase litigation costs for wireless service providers and State and local governments. Courts will have to interpret the many vague terms that are contained within the bill.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Zoe Lofgren).

In conclusion, H.R. 1002 is irresponsible legislation that will restrict State flexibility to raise much-needed revenues, which will force State governments to eliminate essential government programs and services and shift burdens to other taxpayers.

For all of these reasons, I oppose this legislation and urge my colleagues to vote ``no.''

I yield back the balance of my time.

This month is Filipino American History Month. It is time for us to take pride in our country's diversity and to celebrate the ways in which Filipino Americans have contributed to the vibrancy of our Nation.

Filipino Americans are civic leaders, health care providers, educators, and hardworking Americans. They've won Pulitzer prizes, been elected to Congress, served as ambassadors, and pitched in the World Series. Filipinos volunteered by the thousands to help us win World War II and have served our Nation's military in every war since.

Filipinos first came to the U.S. in California over 400 years ago. Today, Filipino Americans have grown to be the third-largest Asian American group in the Nation, and they reside in every corner of the United States.

So as we celebrate Filipino American History Month, I hope you will join me and remember the many contributions that Filipino Americans have made to our great country.

Did you know that small businesses create two out of every three new jobs? That's why we need a plan to invest in them and that's why I support the President's American Jobs Act.

It includes tax cuts for every small business. Businesses that hire workers who have been unemployed for 6 months or more get $4,000 off their tax bill; those that invest in machinery or equipment get to write off the whole expense; and the payroll tax cuts will save a small business with 50 workers approximately $50,000 a year, putting money in the bank for every mom-and-pop shop. The American Jobs Act will help small businesses do what they do best: create good jobs, drive innovation, and strengthen the middle class.

For small businesses, the economy, and Americans everywhere, let's pass the American Jobs Act now.

H.R. 358 would stop abortion coverage for millions of women. It allows doctors and hospitals to refuse treatment even if women will die without their help. This bill is so extreme that it prohibits a pregnant woman with cancer from getting an abortion so radiation can save her life. For those women, every day and every week of treatment could be the difference between life and death.

If this bill passes, we will see thousands more women abandoned by their doctors--women like Stephanie, who was pregnant at 19 weeks. She came to the hospital with a 108-degree fever. The whites of her eyes were filled with blood. She was dying before her doctor's eyes. But the hospital considered the life of the fetus more important than the life of the mother and refused treatment until the fetus died. Because they delayed, Stephanie almost lost her life.

This bill should really be called the ``Don't Protect the Life of the Mother Act.''

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, October 10th marked the 100 year anniversary of the Republic of China (ROC).

And how the ROC has grown over the years since the 1911 Revolution! The state played a vital role as a founding member of the United Nations and contributed to the drafting of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, infusing into it the spirit of Confucianism. And it drafted the most progressive and democratic constitution in Asia. And finally, the state found solid footing on the island of Taiwan in 1949. It has successfully transitioned into a liberal democracy and become the first democratic state in an ethnic Chinese society in history.

Today, the ROC is a model of political and economic progress for developing nations around the world. It is a modern and industrialized nation, an early adapter and proponent of a global and interconnected marketplace. Taiwan, Asia's first Economic Tiger, embraced market reforms in the 1950s and quickly launched some of the best known, and most efficient, original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) that came to serve many U.S. multinationals. Today's Taiwan is a technology powerhouse and the island's firmly entrenched in the top tier of developed world markets.

And while many other markets turn inwards when economic times are tough, Taiwan's almost always kept its trade and investment doors open. A founding member of the Asia Development Bank in 1966, the ROC on Taiwan joined the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 2001. It further acceded to the WTO's Government Procurement Agreement (GPA) in 2009.

And since 2008, Taiwan President Ma Ying-jeou has removed many of the longstanding trade and investment barriers to mainland China, resulting in Taiwan now best positioned serving as a global gateway to the Greater China market. This new outlook culminated in last year's signing of the Economic and Cooperation Framework Agreement between Taiwan and mainland China. Foreign firms can now access mainland China's vast economic potential from the comfort and safety of a Taiwan market that's among the friendliest in the world to U.S. companies and one that also values and protects their intellectual property.

As we celebrate this hundred years of history, let us recall that the ROC of today has come about thanks to generations of people who have fought for social reform and a democratic future.

And as the Republic of China embarks on a new century, I hope it will be a model democratic nation for the world and continue to grow and prosper. I therefore urge all my colleagues to join me in congratulating the Republic of China on its 100 years of existence, Taiwan's many economic achievements since 1949, and to further support enhanced economic relations between the United States and Taiwan.

Mr. Speaker, last July, the DC U.S. Court of Appeals found that People's Mojahedin Organization of Iran, PMOI/MEK, was not awarded due process when their petition to be removed as a terrorist organization was denied by the State Department. The Court ordered the State Department in conjunction with the Attorney General to review the decision and make a decision.

But I stand here today, over 500 days after the Court made this decision, and the State Department still has not given a response. Every day of delay means another day where peaceful MEK democratic leaders and activists are at risk.

Nearly 100 of my colleagues have joined together by cosponsoring H. Res. 60 to ask the State Department to heed a federal court order and remove Iran's largest opposition group called the People's Mojahedin Organization of Iran, PMOI/MEK, from the U.S. list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations, FTO.

Because the U.S. needs to use its influence to protect Iranian dissidents fighting for democracy, Iran is using the U.S. terrorist designation to attack MEK leaders opposed to their rule. As long as the MEK is listed as a foreign terrorist organization, thousands of its members living in Camp Ashraf, Iraq are subject to further brutality by the Iraqi government. The longer we wait to remove the MEK from this list, the more we put Ashraf residents and fighters for democracy at risk.

Every 9 seconds, a woman is assaulted or beaten in the United States. Every day, more than three American women are murdered by their husbands or boyfriends. And a staggering 1.3 million women and almost 840,000 men are physically assaulted by an intimate partner every year.

For the last decade, in October, during Domestic Violence Awareness Month, I stood up with the shelters and hospitals in my district to support the women and men who escaped their abusers. Many of these victims escaped with literally only the clothes on their backs. So together, we put on a donation drive of cell phones, clothing, and personal necessities to benefit victims of abuse. This drive will be going on throughout October, and you can support the effort by donating items at Kaiser offices throughout the 32nd Congressional District in California.

Together, we can and must do more to stop domestic violence.

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

I rise today in strong opposition to H.R. 2681 and H.R. 2250.

Some in Congress want to use the jobs crisis as an excuse to roll back clean air protections that will prevent 9,000 premature deaths every year. Today, we are debating an unnecessary, wasteful bill that only delays long overdue pollution-reducing regulations at the expense of Americans' health. This is one of the Republicans' so-called ``jobs bills,'' conducting redundant and costly studies that will do nothing but add paper to landfills instead of creating jobs by upgrading cement kilns so that they are no longer a threat to public health.

These studies have been done. Americans are still breathing mercury, arsenic, and lead; but we have a means to clean it up. It's called the Clean Air Act, and it was passed in 1963. It is known as one of the most successful pieces of legislation in congressional history; yet the Republican majority is trying to gut it over and over, bill after bill, wasting time and energy that could be spent passing legislation that would help create new jobs for Americans. Today's bill would cancel requirements to clean up toxic air pollution, smog, and soot from cement plants.

So, while big companies save a penny or two, American families will face billions of dollars in increased health costs. Thousands more people will go to hospitals with cases of bronchitis, heart attacks, asthma attacks, and

thousands more will die prematurely. These pollutants are also neurotoxins, causing major harm to the development of unborn babies, infants, and children.

While the majority claims that eliminating this antipollution rule for the cement industry will be good for business and the economy, the EPA rule institutes new standards based on the best available technology already in use in the industry. Let me repeat that. This rule that the Republicans are trying to weaken is based on the best available technology already in use voluntarily by a good portion of the companies in the industry.

What does that mean? These antipollution standards are actually achievable today, and companies are already using them and making a profit.

So today's bill is just another in a long string of anti-environment/ anti-health attacks that look out for corporate interests over the best interests of American families. We cannot afford to give polluters a free pass to spew deadly, toxic air pollution that hurts our health and puts our children at risk. No matter what anyone says, increased pollution is not a sustainable path to job creation. Instead, we should be saving lives, saving our environment, and investing in the clean- tech jobs of the future.

I urge my colleagues to oppose this bill and the anti-environment/ anti-American health bill that is up for a vote tomorrow.

I yield back the balance of my time.