Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I have a resolution at the desk previously noticed under rule IX.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleagues Congressmen Jeffries and Congressman Horsford for once again leading the Congressional Black Caucus Special Order Hour.

As a result of your leadership, the Congressional Black Caucus continues to discuss critical issues facing our nation on the House floor and to the American people.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to discuss why we must raise our nation's debt ceiling and bring a clean debt ceiling bill to the floor.

The full faith and credit of the United States should not be subject to negotiation.

On Friday, February 7th, the United States of America once again reached its debt limit.

Treasury Secretary Jack Lew has again begun paying our bills with what he calls ``extraordinary measures.''

This is not a new situation for us, as we have been here many times before.

And we have seen that each time we face this fully preventable crisis, the result is harm to the American people and to this nation's international economic reputation.

In August 2011, Members of Congress faced a debt ceiling standoff that resulted in the Budget Control Act of 2011.

Because we could not come to a budget agreement as required by the Budget Control Act, Congress instituted automatic spending cuts to our military and to critical services to our communities.

In October 2013, we faced another debt limit crisis when our government shut down for 17 days, leaving hundreds of thousands of government workers unsure of when their next paycheck would arrive.

By the end of February, if we do not raise the debt limit, we will again be teetering at the end of a financial cliff.

It is reported that Republican House leadership is deciding what they should ask for in return for allowing our nation to meet its financial obligations.

Once again, they are looking to barter this country's financial well- being for narrow political wins when they've seen the harmful results of their actions.

We cannot continue to play political games when our nation's credit is at risk.

Approaching the 11th hour in this debate, when a clean debt ceiling bill can be brought to the floor today, should not be an option. It is not in the best interest of this nation.

Before I yield back, I also want to clarify what raising the debt limit means. There is often confusion about raising the debt ceiling. Some believe it allows our government to authorize additional or new spending, which is not the case.

Raising the debt ceiling does not mean our country will be allowed to spend more money; it means that we will be able to pay the financial obligations which we have incurred in the past.

Just like millions of people across this nation have bills to pay that keep the lights on in their homes, or to pay for the car they drive back and forth to work, America must pay the bills required to keep our state and local governments running.

America must make sure that millions of seniors receive their Social Security checks.

We must not let partisanship or brinkmanship do any more damage to our federal programs or our ability to borrow in the future.

This is why raising the debt ceiling is so important.

I urge my colleagues to bring a clean debt ceiling bill to the floor.

No conditions or concessions should be made in turn for raising our country's debt ceiling.

The full faith and credit of the United States is not for sale.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor the women of Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, Incorporated as they use their collective strength to engage in public advocacy during Delta Days in the Nation's Capital.

101 years ago, Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, Incorporated's 22 trailblazing Founders started an organization of college educated women devoted to sisterhood, scholarship and service.

Since 1989, women of Delta from across the country gather annually to hold their representatives accountable and stand up for the issues critical to their communities and our country. Delta Days in the Nation's Capital, a creation of the sorority's National Social Action Commission, ensures the members of the sorority are active participants in the public policy-making process.

I am proud of the legacy and expectation of activism that forms the backbone of this sorority.

I welcome my Sorors to the Nation's Capital as they work for change in their communities.

Thank you so very much, and thank you for yielding.

I want to especially say this evening that as we talk about women, we are anchored tonight by two women, Congresswoman Beatty, of course, from the great State of Ohio, and Congresswoman Kelly from Illinois. I have had a wonderful opportunity to meet these outstanding women, and I am so pleased that they are here this evening. I thank them again for leading this Special Order hour for the Congressional Black Caucus.

Today, members of the CBC raise our collective voices to advocate for a stronger economy by supporting and investing in working women across America.

My colleagues and I know improving the economic condition of families and communities across the country begins with strengthening the economic position of women, because when women succeed, America succeeds.

Last week, we marked the fifth anniversary of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, the first piece of legislation signed by President Obama. As a result of this important legislation, women can more effectively take legal action against employers for gender-based pay discrepancies. While the Lilly Ledbetter Act helped provide a pathway for women to litigate pay discrimination, it does not address how we will invest in the economic future of working women in the United States.

Today, women comprise almost half of the American workforce. The country has come a long way in promoting equal rights and equal pay for women, but it is unacceptable that in 2014, women still make 77 cents on the dollar compared to their male counterparts.

In my home State of Ohio, women make approximately $10,000 less than men each year, and in my district, the median wage for women is 86 percent of the median wage for men. According to the 2010 Census, in 40 percent of American households with children, women are the sole or primary providers, and over 30 percent of households headed by women are living in poverty.

African American and Latino women tend to feel wage discrepancy more acutely, receiving approximately 64 cents and 55 cents on the dollar, respectively, when compared to White, non-Hispanic males.

This inequality must not continue. The economic security of our Nation's children depends on women's access to fair pay. This Nation cannot afford to continue treating women unfairly or leave women behind if they expect to strengthen and grow our economy.

We can start to address this inequity by increasing the minimum wage. Almost two-thirds of workers earning the minimum wage are women. The minimum wage has not been sufficiently adjusted to reflect inflation. Increasing the minimum wage will help lift millions of women and children across the country out of poverty.

It is also necessary to establish policies that enable working mothers to earn a living wage and to take care of their families. This requires workplace protections for pregnant workers, paid family sick leave for emergencies, and affordable child care.

We cannot sit idle as half the population of our Nation lags behind. I look forward to voting in support of measures that break down economic barriers preventing women from reaching their full potential, because when women succeed, we all succeed.

Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, let me begin by thanking Democratic Leader Pelosi for her confidence in me in appointing me as her representative to the farm bill committee.

I thank Representatives Peterson and Lucas and Senators Stabenow and Cochran for their leadership in negotiating this conference report.

Throughout this process, it was my goal to ensure a fair and balanced farm bill. While I do not agree with some of the provisions of this conference bill, I firmly believe it is a good compromise.

Given how far apart we were when this conference began, I am pleased Members on both sides of the aisle and across the Chamber were able to reach a consensus and show the American people Congress can work together.

The agreement rejects categorical eligibility, something that we have talked about for some time. The $8.6 billion savings in SNAP over 10 years--over 10 years--comes from a change in LIHEAP policy that would shrink benefits for approximately 850,000 households in 16 States. It does not eliminate a qualified household from access to SNAP, which was an important consideration on the difficult road to reach a compromise that prevents devastating cuts and changes to this critically needed program.

This agreement also expands economic investment in low-income, urban, and rural communities. It provides certainty and sound agricultural policies for America's farmers and ranchers.

Passing the farm bill has always been a bipartisan endeavor, and this conference committee report proves it is still possible for Congress to work through its differences and produce a balanced bill that meets the needs of the American people.

We have negotiated the farm bill for the last 2 years. It is now time to move forward. I strongly encourage my colleagues to join me and vote ``yes'' on this bipartisan, bicameral conference agreement.

Mr. Speaker, the nutrition title in the Conference Report for the 2014 Farm Bill is truly a compromise. It's not the bill I would write on my own. It fails to adequately tackle the hunger and poverty that stalks our country from inner cities to rural towns and suburbs across America. However, it is a genuine compromise and represents important improvements to our federal nutrition programs. We have kept SNAP intact and rejected every one of the harsh House provisions that would have ended food assistance to nearly 4 million people.

I am still deeply disappointed we were not able to make new investments in SNAP to help the struggling families in my district and around this country put food on the table. Millions remain unemployed and unable to provide for their families, and others who work in low- wage jobs or live on retirement income rely on SNAP to afford barely enough food.

Despite this, I believe this legislation will strengthen and improve SNAP and the many other nutrition programs authorized under the Farm Bill. SNAP has been vital in assisting millions of families and countless communities cope with the Great Recession. Not only has the program responded quickly to increased needs, but it has also delivered benefits with ever-increased accuracy despite higher caseloads and strained State administrative budgets. While we look forward to a strengthening economy, which provides more jobs, we expect a strong SNAP will remain critically needed.

This bill reauthorizes the program and makes some modest improvements. Despite expanding to respond to the increased need arising from the Great Recession, SNAP maintained historically low payment error and trafficking rates. The farm bill tightens eligibility in response to concerns about the way some States calculate benefits and media reports of unusual circumstances involving SNAP recipients, invests in fraud detection and prevention activities, improves retailer operations, and makes a number of small but important program changes.

I would like to take this opportunity to review some of the key provisions of the nutrition title. First, I want to address the one significant cut in SNAP benefits that is included in the title. We have curtailed a practice that about a third of the States use to raise SNAP benefits for some families and simplify administration of the program. CBO says that about 850,000 families in those States will lose about $90 a month because of the cut. Though a painful loss for these families, the change fixes an oversight in the SNAP benefit calculation that has allowed some States to let households deduct more income than warranted by their actual expenses. They do this by giving SNAP households with no heating or cooling expenses a token LIHEAP payment of $1 or less in order to leverage a heating and cooling deduction, which raises their SNAP benefits. For decades, the receipt of LIHEAP has automatically qualified households for a standard utility allowance within the shelter deduction calculation. This is the right thing to do when the LIHEAP program already has determined that the household pays heating or cooling bills. But these States with very small LIHEAP payments have allowed some of these families to receive larger benefits than their circumstances warrant under the SNAP formula.

Congress, however, did not intend to give households without heating or cooling expenses a deduction for such expenses. While I would strongly prefer to reinvest all of the savings from ending this practice back into meeting the needs of struggling households, it is reasonable to address this issue. This bill does so by requiring that a LIHEAP payment must be at least $20 for the State to use the LIHEAP connection to confer the SUA.

This change will lower SNAP benefits to 850,000 low-income households by $8.55 billion over ten years. This will not be an easy adjustment for these households, but it will establish a stronger and more credible link between the traditional LIHEAP program and SNAP benefits. As a conferee, it was very important for us that the people who really deserve to deduct heating or cooling costs have a chance to do so, and the change we are making to fix a narrow problem not disrupt the original purpose of the LIHEAP linkage in promoting efficiency and ensuring households get all the benefits for which they qualify.

This is why we gave the Secretary some flexibility here. I expect that the Department will work closely with State agencies to ensure households that now receive the SUA on the basis of a negligible LIHEAP payment will have the opportunity to clarify they actually do pay for heating or cooling, and this process

will not be burdensome. Some States have targeted these small LIHEAP payments to households in public housing that are highly unlikely to incur a separate charge for home heating or cooling. But other States have given a one dollar payment to most, if not all SNAP households. We know that a large proportion of these households actually do pay a separate charge for utilities and need the SUA to get an adequate level of benefits.

I also want to make clear this change is designed to affect only households in the 16 States that have provided a nominal LIHEAP benefit for purposes of qualifying households for a larger deduction. We got assurances from USDA that in the States that do not use the current rule in this way, SNAP participants would neither experience a cut in benefits, nor would there be a change in the way their income, shelter deduction, and benefits are calculated. This is an important implementation issue. States that, like my own State of Ohio and the majority of all States, do not provide a nominal LIHEAP benefit should be able to continue the way they determine eligibility for the SUA. Nor should low-income Ohioans be asked to do or verify anything differently from what they do now. None of the savings in the bill comes from reducing benefits for households that have LIHEAP payments that exceed the new $20 threshold, so USDA must ensure State implementation of the changes does not result in a benefit loss to a household legitimately receiving LIHEAP.

Finally, I am concerned we may not have given States enough time to make the change and protect households. States will have flexibility in phasing in the provision for most participating households, but for new applicants and households who need to reapply for SNAP in the coming months, the provision is effective just 30 days after enactment, which is a very quick time-frame for States to implement. Under SNAP regulations, States will be protected from being cited for errors during the first few months after enactment. I urge States and USDA to not hold households accountable for receiving slightly higher benefits because the short implementation timeframe has not given their State ample opportunity to adjust their benefits properly. I'm proud of what we have been able to accomplish as conferees to improve the program without unduly burdening the struggling families that turn to SNAP in times of need. We focused our reforms on the administration of SNAP, and I'd like to highlight some of the areas where we tightened eligibility to respond to some uncommon cases.

Over the last several years, there have been two reported instances of SNAP participants winning the lottery and remaining on the program. While a rare occurrence, and one that in many States already results in disqualification, we included a provision to make sure it does not happen again. We're focused on people winning a million dollars or some other life-changing amount, not someone who nets a few hundred dollars in scratch-off tickets that could very quickly be spent by paying overdue bills or paying for overdue auto or home maintenance. In implementing this provision, the Department should consider ``substantial'' to be truly extraordinary windfalls that will change lifestyles rather than provide more modest gains. Another key implementation issue is how the State discovers such winnings. Rather than clog application and report forms with questions that will apply to a negligible number of people, the bill requires State SNAP agencies to establish relationships with any in-State gaming commissions, so that the commissions will report any winnings that meet the threshold USDA will establish. The State agency will apply the regular income and asset tests to these households and the households will remain ineligible until they meet these tests. We do not see any need for any additional reporting by applicants or households, as the State-level reporting should be accurate and sufficient.

The farm bill also clarifies rules around eligibility for felons. People with criminal records fleeing from law enforcement and violating their parole are not eligible for SNAP. The farm bill reiterates people convicted of certain felonies such as murder and armed robbery who violate their parole or probation are ineligible for benefits. And it imposes a hard penalty on the families of those who do not comply--the household of the ex-offender will see a significant drop in benefits because the income and resources of the non-eligible member would still be counted. While harsh to innocent family members who may have helped their family member rehabilitate successfully by providing a place to live, it represents no change in the law and is the way other offenders, such as drug felons and those intentionally violating SNAP rules are treated now. Ex-offenders who have served their time and continue to comply with the conditions placed on their release, and who are otherwise eligible for food assistance through SNAP, will be able to apply for and receive assistance. Program participants should not experience any change from our desire to reiterate current policy with respect to fleeing felons. The SNAP eligibility and enrollment process already solicits information from applicants about their fleeing felon status and we anticipate those efforts will be not be disrupted or changed as a result of this re-articulation of current rules.

Another area where the conferees worked hard to make improvements is in the area of program integrity and fraud prevention.

The bill contains an important program integrity enhancement for multiple requests for EBT card replacements. Participants can lose cards. The cards may also be stolen or malfunction. Without a working card, households can't buy food. We've become aware of a very small number of households with more frequent requests for card replacement and this raises program integrity issues. The bill requires USDA to set a standard for excessive requests for card replacement and requires States to seek explanations from households that exceed this threshold as to why another card is needed prior to re-issuing a card. Similarly, States may not require households to provide their explanation in person or withhold the card based on the household's explanation. That requires following the procedures for an intentional program violation. Because of the critical importance of maintaining access to food assistance, the bill requires that States promptly give individuals a chance to explain. We expect USDA to monitor this closely; any delay in working with the household is a day they do not have benefits to purchase food.

There are many reasons why replacement cards are legitimately and urgently needed--people may not understand the card was reusable, they may confuse a PIN problem with a card problem, they may be victims of theft, or they may simply lose their card. These things can happen to anyone, but some people are particularly vulnerable. Accordingly, this bill requires protections for vulnerable populations such as persons with disabilities, homeless persons, and crime victims.

This provision does not empower States to use this process to terminate participation or impose undue new burdens on households. SNAP rules set out procedural standards for acting on evidence of intentional program violations--standards that balance the pursuit of program integrity with fundamental legal rights of accused persons. If a State believes its evidence indicates an intentional program violation in this area, it must replace the card and use its disqualification process to take any further action.

We've provided additional resources to USDA to improve integrity efforts. We applaud USDA's strong commitment to rooting out fraud in the program, but with a significant increase in the number of stores accepting SNAP, USDA must continue to improve its retailer monitoring efforts. This bill gives the Department additional resources to improve its technology to take advantage of innovations like data mining, which can reveal retailer redemption patterns and help identify stores that may be abusing the program. We expect USDA to focus on data analysis and other smart tools to maintain the high standards of compliance in the program. Again, this is an example of the conferees focusing on the improving the administrative side of the program, rather than placing onerous burdens, like photo identification requirements, on retailers or participants.

We've also provided funds to encourage State and federal partnerships to address retailer fraud through pilot projects. States selected for the pilot need to show they have committed resources to recipient trafficking and have a proven record of accurate determinations of fraud. In other words, States that have been successful in identifying and reducing documented fraud should be given a priority in partnering with USDA on retailer fraud.

There has been a lot of attention given to the relationship between SNAP and work. We know many households on SNAP have a working member and some States operate promising employment and training programs. Earlier versions of the farm bill in each house had widely differing approaches to the issue of work and, as a conferee, I'm proud we worked diligently to find areas of agreement and come up with some important reforms in the program without cutting people off for failure to find a job or imposing some other hardship on households.

While the majority of SNAP participants who can work are working, we want to do what we can to help those who are able to work but cannot find a job. SNAP Employment and Training (E&T) has allowed States to provide services to adults facing the three month time limit as well as individuals seeking to improve their employability, but it is time to evaluate what really works and encourage States to build upon successes.

So we have improved and increased funding for SNAP E&T. The bill provides $200 million to pilot and evaluate innovative and promising State employment and training programs. These pilots can be drawn from

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleagues Congressmen Jeffries and Horsford for once again leading the Congressional Black Caucus Special Order Hour. Today's topic of income/economic inequality is one of the most critical challenges currently facing our country.

For too many Americans, the barriers to economic opportunity and mobility have become insurmountable.

Just last week, a Pew Research Center survey found that at least 60 percent of all Republicans, Democrats and Independents say the gap between the rich and everyone else has grown in the past 10 years.

However, we do not need a survey to tell us what we already know to be true. According to the Census Bureau, 95 percent of all economic gains since the recovery began have gone to the top 1 percent.

We also know that, since 1979, our economy has more than doubled in size, but most of that growth has flowed to a fortunate few.

In the past, the average CEO made about 20 to 30 times the income of the average worker, today's CEO makes 273 times more. Meanwhile, a family in the top 1 percent has a net worth 288 times higher than the typical American family, the largest income gap ever for our country.

This is simply egregious.

We cannot continue to believe that a growing economy guarantees higher wages and income for all. Because it does not.

We cannot ignore that in 2014, women continue to lag behind men in wages, with women making 77 cents for every dollar a man takes home.

According to The Shriver Report: A Woman's Nation Pushes Back from the Brink, women make up nearly two-thirds of minimum-wage workers. Given this statistic, it's no wonder that a third of all American women are living on the brink of poverty.

Americans are working harder than ever, for the smallest of gains. This is simply not acceptable.

Congress must renew its focus on investing in the American people through quality programs that promote access to the middle class, equality and accountability.

In order to help the working poor and middle class, we must raise the minimum wage; invest in education; improve our infrastructure; reign in Wall Street and return our focus to Main Street.

Only then will we be on the path toward prosperity and equal economic opportunity for all.

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the citizens of the Eleventh Congressional District of Ohio, I rise today to recognize a great Ohioan, Arnold Pinkney, who passed away Monday, January 13, 2014, at 83 years of age.

Arnold Pinkney was an extraordinary political strategist and mentor to generations of elected leaders, including me. He had an innate understanding of people's needs and knew how elected officials could best articulate and pursue policies that achieved the common good.

Mr. Pinkney managed the Cleveland mayoral campaign of Carl Stokes, who in 1967 became the first African-American mayor to lead a major American city. Mr. Pinkney went on to manage successful campaigns for the Honorable Louis Stokes. He also co-managed Ohio gubernatorial campaigns of Dick Celeste.

Arnold managed the 1984 presidential campaign of Rev. Jesse Jackson, Sr. Notably, the strategy used in Rev. Jackson's campaign resulted in the significant presence of delegates at the Democratic National Convention. The presence of Rev. Jackson and his delegates allowed for their meaningful input into the party's focus and priorities for the election cycle and beyond, and opened a door that eventually culminated in the election and re-election of President Barack Obama over 20 years later.

Mr. Pinkney was elected to and served many years on the Cleveland Metropolitan School District Board of Education, including time as its president. He also helped the school district pass levies critically needed to educate the city's children and provided successful strategic advice to other local public office candidates.

What I remember most about Arnold is his passion to use the talents with which he was blessed to improve our community. His love of politics was inspired and nurtured early on by the great Hubert Humphrey, having served as deputy manager for the Vice President's 1968 presidential campaign. Vice President Humphrey once said, ``The moral test of a government is how it treats those who are at the dawn of life, the children; those who are in the twilight of life, the aged; and those who are in the shadow of life, the sick, the needy, and the handicapped.'' Mr. Pinkney kept those words close to heart as he strategized with and advised so many of us.

Mr. Pinkney was also an astute businessman. He was the first African American agent for the Prudential Insurance Company, and later co- founded the Pinkney-Perry Insurance Agency, which remains a thriving business in northeast Ohio today.

Financial success did not blind Arnold Pinkney to the needs of the people and the need of government to serve all people. He lived his life to the fullest, and left the world a better place than he found it.

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the citizens of the Eleventh Congressional District of Ohio, I rise today to recognize and reflect on the achievements of Eleanor Montgomery, who was inducted into the U.S. Track and Field Hall of Fame in 2013 on her 67th birthday. Ms. Montgomery passed away three weeks later on December 28, 2013.

A native Clevelander, Ms. Montgomery literally set the bar high early in life. At the tender age of 14, she won her first national title in the long jump, and while in high school, she set a record and won a gold medal at the 1963 Pan American Games as a high jumper. Ms. Montgomery went on to compete in the 1964 and 1968 Olympics as a member of the U.S. Track and Field Team. She was the U.S. high jumping champion, placing 8th at the 1964 Tokyo Olympics. She won six Amateur Athletic Union (AAU) national high jump titles from 1963 to 1967 and in 1969, and won the Pan American games in 1967.

A member of the famous Tennessee State TigerBelles, which dominated women's track and field before there was a Title IX, Ms. Montgomery was ranked top 10 in the world through most of the 1960's.

Later in life, Ms. Montgomery raised the bar for us all as she worked tirelessly for decades encouraging youth and promoting academic and athletic opportunities for them. As an employee of the Cleveland Metropolitan School District, she served as a high school track and cross country official. She was also the executive director of the NFL Players Association Youth Camp and coordinated Special Olympics events.

Eleanor Montgomery achieved what many merely dream of doing. She will be missed and long remembered.

Mr. Speaker, today I rise to commemorate the 50th anniversary of President Lyndon B. Johnson's war on poverty.

In 1964, President Johnson stood in this Chamber and addressed a Congress that represented a nation where more than 25 percent of Americans lived in poverty. In his address, President Johnson launched an agenda that led to the creation of Medicare, Medicaid, Job Corps, Head Start, and nutrition assistance for those who struggle to put food on their table.

His war, and its resulting programs, helped move millions out of poverty. From 1967 to 2012, the poverty rate fell from 26 percent to 16 percent, largely because of the strong safety net programs initiated by President Johnson's agenda.

Yet here we are today, 50 years later, and too many Americans are still living on the outskirts of hope because the war on poverty has now become a war on the poor. In the last year alone, Congress has agreed to indiscriminate, across-the-board cuts known as sequestration in an effort to balance the budget, and the House passed a farm bill that cut SNAP by $40 billion. Sequestration hurts the very people who need help the most by greatly reducing critical funding to programs like WIC and Head Start.

Congress drastically cut one of the most powerful antipoverty programs, SNAP, better known as food stamps. That is absurd when, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, SNAP kept 4.9 million Americans out of poverty in 2012 alone, including 2.2 million children.

Congress has also chosen not to extend unemployment insurance. Even though our country continues to lift itself out of the recession, many Americans still need our support. Turning our back on the 1.4 million Americans who have lost their jobs through no fault of their own is unconscionable.

In an interview yesterday, I was asked to respond to a quote regarding unemployment insurance by a Republican, and this is what he said. He said:

We have to introduce the blessing of work to people who

have never seen it.

And let me just say, to be clear, he could not possibly have been talking about unemployment insurance, because you have to have worked to even receive it. So he obviously doesn't know what unemployment insurance is.

And to my colleague, I say that the American people know that they should be blessed with work, but they need meaningful work with a living wage.

I will continue to be a voice for the poor and will always fight on behalf of the 46 million Americans trying to survive in households with inadequate incomes. Americans need us to open the gates of opportunity so they can eat properly, get a quality education, and find good-paying jobs.

So on this 50th anniversary, I am making it clear that the war on poverty might be over, but the fight for the poor is not. We must reinforce the plans of President Johnson that would ensure all Americans can support themselves and their families and have better chances to contribute to our economy and our society. This is the way we build upon the progress we have made over the past five decades, not by taking action to reverse it.

To paraphrase Dr. King, he says, we have an obligation to those who have been left out of the sunlight of opportunity.

Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me as we pause to honor and remember the life of former South African President Nelson Mandela, who dedicated his life to making his vision of a free South Africa a reality.

Mr. Mandela stood for peace, for justice, and for a society that recognized the equality of every human being. After serving 27 years in prison for challenging the apartheid-sanctioned South African Government, Nelson Mandela emerged with a powerful message of forgiveness and reconciliation, a message that would transform his nation and unite the world.

In 1986, the members of the Congressional Black Caucus and the majority of the U.S. Congress stood with Mandela for peace and justice, and helped force an end to apartheid in South Africa. Today, I leave you with Nelson Mandela's words:

What counts in life is not the mere fact that we have

lived. It is what difference we have made to the lives of

others that will determine the significance of the life we

lead.

South Africa and the world will forever be changed because Nelson Mandela lived.

I now ask that you pause for a moment of silence in honor of a great man, a man we respectfully and affectionately refer to as ``Madiba.''

Thank you, Mr. Fattah, for leading this Special Order.

Mr. Speaker, today we celebrate the life and legacy of former South African President Nelson Mandela, a relentless pioneer for justice, equality, and democracy.

I am proud to say that members of the Congressional Black Caucus stood with President Mandela before it was popular or politically advantageous. Working with grassroots advocates, members of the Congressional Black Caucus and many others from across the world, Mandela activated a movement that not only spoke of democracy and equality, but realized those principles through action, meaningful action that ultimately broke the chains of apartheid and will be forever remembered as the legacy of Madiba.

Today, the CBC salutes the life of a world leader who sacrificed a lifetime for the ideals of democracy. Today, we celebrate the life of a man from humble beginnings who overcome the obstacles of racial intolerance and rose to lead a country and a people to prosperity and freedom. Today, we cherish the life of a President who led with dignity and strength. Today, we treasure the life and legacy of Nelson Mandela.

Madiba, you will forever be remembered.

Madam Speaker, prior to the passage of the Affordable Care Act, 23 percent of Ohioans with incomes below 133 percent of the Federal poverty level were uninsured. But thanks to the expansion of Medicaid in my home State of Ohio, all of the almost 600,000 residents who are uninsured with incomes below 138 percent of the Federal poverty level will now have access to Medicaid coverage.

In my district alone, an additional 72,000 people became eligible for Medicaid. And next Monday, December 9, all of these individuals will be able to begin signing up for health care coverage that begins January 1. No longer will I receive calls from constituents like Brandon Proctor, who was told that he was ``too rich for Medicaid but too poor for subsidies.''

This is the way the Affordable Care Act was supposed to work. Finally, all Ohioans will have access to quality and affordable health care.

Thank you, Congressman Jeffries, for yielding.

I would like to take this opportunity to thank my colleagues, Congressmen Jeffries and Horsford, for leading this CBC Special Order hour and for leading 16 CBC Special Order hours this year. It has been a pleasure to listen to you both. The information that you have shared with the American public is to be commended, and I thank you both because, week after week, you have led the CBC in discussions that promote increased opportunity, justice, and a better America for all Americans.

I ask my colleagues to join me in saluting you both for bringing our message to the American people.

Mr. Speaker, 2013 has been a challenging year. Partisan gridlock has made this year one of the least productive in the history of the U.S. Congress. To date, Congress has passed only 52 bills into law, and if you remove the ceremonial legislation, that number shrinks to 42, almost matching the 41 laws passed in 2011, which was, to date, the least productive year in the history of the Congress.

It is far too easy to simply point fingers, but this much is clear: Congress is failing the American people.

Partisan grandstanding has paralyzed our legislative branch, leaving our country unable to move forward to prepare for a rapidly changing and uncertain world. Facing widespread economic and political instability, America looks to Congress for leadership. The CBC has risen to this challenge, working with both sides of the aisle and both Chambers of Congress.

This year, the CBC addressed the government shutdown, our Federal budget process, gun violence, voting rights, justice reform, education reform, and so much more. The members of the CBC also led efforts to directly engage underserved communities on the benefits of the Affordable Care Act; to improve the judicial nomination and confirmation process; in discussing the pressing issues related to immigration reform, especially for those of the African diaspora; and we convened a summit on the culture of violence in our communities.

I am proud of the CBC for our bipartisan solution-oriented approach to the most pressing issues facing our country, and despite the tough legislative environment, the CBC consistently looks to build coalitions and to enact solutions that will benefit all Americans. Unfortunately, a deeply divided Congress has prevented America from reaping the benefits of our efforts.

As we move into next year, Congress must end our crisis-oriented budget cycle. Our inability to end the sequester, to move past the failed policy of austerity and to generate new sources of revenue will slow economic growth and leave all but the very wealthy behind. We are a great Nation, but we cannot sustain our standing unless we end the partisan political gamesmanship and live up to the promise of America. Working together, we can create a more prosperous America in which the only ceilings to our potential are the limits of our own imaginations.

Mr. Speaker, in 2 weeks, the first session of the 113th Congress will come to a close. It will be the end of a Congress marked with missed opportunities and hyperpartisan games. The Congressional Black Caucus is prepared to make 2014 the year Congress moves beyond the partisan politics of years past, ends our legislative paralysis, restores faith in our government, and brings prosperity back to the American people.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

I would like to thank my colleagues, Congressmen Horsford and Jeffries, for continuing to lead the Special Order and for tonight leading on a Special Order hour that addresses another important topic, and that is hunger in America.

In 10 days, Americans will come together with family and friends to celebrate Thanksgiving, but for many families around the country, their Thanksgiving tables will be sparse and some even bear. As one of the wealthiest countries in the world, it is shameful that this Nation has not and will not address the issue of hunger.

As ranking member on the House Agriculture Subcommittee that oversees our country's nutrition programs, I am working hard to end hunger in America.

One in every six Americans struggle with hunger or food insecurity. This is an issue that plagues nearly every community, from our inner cities to our rural countrysides. While Americans are still struggling to rebound from the recent recession, many families have already seen a setback as they experience a reduction in SNAP, which my colleague talked to you about just a moment ago. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities reports that this reduction is equal to the loss of 16 meals for a family of three.

When children are hungry, they are not able to focus in school. When seniors have limited resources and limited incomes, they are forced to make the difficult choice between purchasing medicine and sufficient groceries.

Mr. Speaker, when the House adjourns this Thursday, many of us will go home to spend the Thanksgiving holidays with our families. Some will serve the less fortunate in our communities. But let's all take the time to talk to workers at food banks and other charities, ask about the impact of Federal benefits cuts, the increased demand on charitable antihunger programs and what has been done to fill the gap. Just a short discussion with those who have fallen on hard times can be a sobering reminder of the impact a little help can provide.

And to the American people who are struggling this Thanksgiving, please know that the CBC has not forgotten you. As the conscience of the Congress, we continue to fight for you every single day. The fight is far from over, but as long as one American is suffering, we will fight on.

I thank the gentleman.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the Kelvin Smith Library at Case Western Reserve University, which celebrates this year 100 years of service as a congressionally-designated Federal Depository Library. As one of the Nation's more than 1,200 Federal Depository Libraries, Case Western Reserve serves students, faculty, and the constituents of Ohio's 11th Congressional District with free access to the publications of all three branches of government.

In its 100 years as a Federal Depository Library, Case Western Reserve has made government information available in a variety of formats, from ink on paper to the latest digital technologies. In the mid-1990s, Case Western Reserve was one of a handful of libraries nationally which pioneered making online government information freely available through a partnership between the Government Printing Office, which administers the Federal Depository Library Program, and the Cleveland Free Net. The University Libraries have maintained an outstanding retrospective collection of government publications, and have provided countless hours of expert assistance to researchers.

Throughout its 100 year history as a Federal Depository Library, Case Western Reserve has been recognized by the Government Printing Office for providing outstanding expert service to its primary clientele and to the residents of my Congressional district. I would like to recognize the library staff and Associate Provost and University Librarian Arnold Hirshon as they mark the 100th anniversary of depository designation. I wish them much success as they enter their second century of Keeping America Informed.