Floor Statements

Thank you very much. I'm very appreciative, Congressman, for your taking this time out on the floor this evening and sharing this time with your colleagues to talk about the American Jobs Act.

What I'm going to say will take a little bit of a different tack. As you know, we just had a contest about the use of social media in our caucus, and I devised a program where I promoted a campaign on #ourspeech, which asked our followers, if they had the opportunity to speak to Congress, what would they say, using the 140 or so characters on Twitter. We got a lot of comments in. We combined them, and now I'm going to share them. A lot of it is about jobs, but they speak about it in a little bit different way. If you would indulge me, I would like to take a few minutes.

Thank you very much.

Today, I'm delivering what is known as #ourspeech--a speech composed of words solely from my followers and friends on Facebook who posted their thoughts about the economy and jobs online. This is a part of my effort to bring Americans closer to Congress.

To the people that sit on Capitol Hill:

As Members of Congress in the greatest country in the world, you are very well aware of the concerns expressed by the American constituency--jobs, stable economic environment, education, crime, war, et cetera. You are not Republicans. You are not Democrats. You are not an independent. You do not belong to any faction. Stop worrying about party and do something for the people. Pass the jobs bill. Pass the American Jobs Act. We all need to work.

A child with no food doesn't care about your power struggle with those who are across the aisle. You must represent the most downtrodden people in your district, not the most successful business nor any special interest. Big money donations from corporations and the financial industry have purchased our democracy. America elected the House, not corporations. It is time they represent us. You have an obligation as a public servant to ensure that the underprivileged of our society will be protected. Don't forget the poor, a group that continues to grow while the rich get richer. We have to trust you to make the right decisions for us. Support and pass the American Jobs Act.

My Facebook followers continue by saying:

We labor to right our small, overturned coffers to replace what was lost. We labor and pay three and four times over for substandard services.

We have become the disenfranchised while billionaire executives live and work in very comfortable environments. We are bludgeoned with partisan rhetoric that detracts from the

real American issues and Representatives who feel they may act without giving heed to the desires of their constituents.

Put partisan politics aside, they say. Start serving your citizens with measured focus on supporting the people. Congress must support jobs. Congress must support the American Jobs Act. We need jobs so that we can pay our reasonable share for life activities and services. We want the right to realize the promises of our founding documents.

The middle class have been the legs this country has stood on. The lack of meaningful action in D.C. has crippled us. We have not been able to save for our children's college education as we live paycheck to paycheck. We worry about the more immediate dilemma--will we be able to keep our home? We are 2 months behind in our mortgage. Bank of America, our lender, was bailed out with our tax money. Now who is going to bail us, who played by the rules and worked hard, out? Please don't give another dime of our money to save the banks, they do not care about us.

Americans are sick of hearing Congress bicker about who is to blame for our issues. While Congress pontificates and filibusters, Americans are starving, losing their homes, working multiple jobs if they can find them, and puzzling over ways to balance our incredibly shrinking budgets against the rising costs of tolls, gas, food and corporate thievery in the guise of bank fees and loan rates. Good, hardworking Americans shouldn't be rubbing nickels together and shouldn't have to pick food over medicine.

My Facebook followers wrap up by further saying: We wonder how we will pay our taxes and student loans, avoid answering our phones, leave our mail unopened as we struggle. The system, if it ever was for us, has failed at this critical juncture in history to safeguard us. The global Occupy Wall Street movement illustrates beautifully the consciousness of the people which has been missing from the political landscape. Congress must support jobs, education and health care. People are hurting out here. Our silence has finally and irrevocably been broken. Those of us who have been awakened are now willing soldiers in the fight.

The voice of the people occupying around the Nation will not go unrecognized. Our strength, our passion and our vision can, and should be, harnessed to power change.

Thank you so very much for allowing my Facebook followers to have a word on the floor tonight. They are watching us. They will be responding. But I think they are very appreciative that you have allowed me this time to condense those comments and the words that they gave to me to bring to the floor.

Thank you so very much.

I thank you. That is well said. You are absolutely correct. And the young people are waiting on us to act. They are burdened with debt. They can't get careers started. They can't get families started. This will be very helpful to them. The consolidation and the reduction of the interest rate is extremely important.

I thank my friend from Michigan, Congressman Sander Levin, for the time.

I rise to oppose this so-called free trade agreement. I find it deeply disturbing that the United States Congress is even considering a free trade

agreement with a country that holds the world's record for assassinations of trade unionists and would cause a loss of 55,000 jobs in the United States.

The Congressional Black Caucus has been working hard to create jobs. We've held job fares in five cities in the country. We have been working hard to create jobs because the unemployment rate in this country is unacceptable: 9.1 throughout the country, 11.3 for Latinos, 16 percent for African Americans. We need jobs, not an unfair trade agenda.

Additionally, according to Colombia's National Labor School, 51 trade labor unionists were assassinated in 2010. That's more than the rest of the world combined. In addition, 21 unionists survived attempts on their lives, 338 unionists received death threats, 35 were forcibly displaced, 34 were arbitrarily detained, and 7 just disappeared in 2010. Another 23 unionists have been assassinated so far this year, and a total of 2,908 union members have been murdered in Colombia since 1986. And the Colombian Attorney General's Office has not obtained any convictions for these murders for the past 4 years.

The people of Colombia don't need a free trade agreement; they need a government that respects the rights of all of its citizens.

Let's vote down this trade agenda and tell the Government of Colombia that there can be no free trade without human rights and human dignity.

Thank you very much, Congresswoman Donna Christensen. I am very pleased that you took this time out this evening to give us an opportunity to continue to focus on our top priority in the Congressional Black Caucus. We are absolutely focused like a laser beam on the fact that jobs are needed so desperately in all of these communities that we represent.

We recognize that unemployment is unprecedented, at its highest levels perhaps since the 1980s across this country, with 9.1 percent being that of the country. But we also recognize that in minority communities it is so much higher; in the Latino community, 11.3 percent; in the African American community, 16.7 percent.

Why are we focused like a laser beam on this issue? Because we understand the pain that is going on. We understand the increasing desperation. We understand the growing hopelessness and, as public policymakers, we must do everything that we possibly can not only to do actual job creation, but to help people out there understand that we know what's going on. We feel their pain, and we are prepared to do everything possible to come to their aid.

So there are those who may get tired of us talking about it. There are those who wonder why we took our vacation time and traveled across this country in five cities with these job fairs and town halls that we did, but it is all because we understand, perhaps better than others, this pain and this desperation and this feeling of hopelessness; and that's not good for this country.

So you're absolutely correct. The Congressional Black Caucus went to Detroit. We went to Cleveland. We went to Miami. We went to Atlanta. And we went to California, Los Angeles. And what did we see? As it has been said over and over again, thousands upon thousands of people in line desperate to be able to talk with employers.

I must extend a big thank you to employers. They heard our call and they showed up. And they were at each of these meetings, these job fairs that we had; and people were able to fill out applications, to learn what the process is for that particular employer, to be able to talk with someone. And I had job seekers in Los Angeles who said to me: Ms. Waters, you know, I may not get a job, but I appreciate the opportunity that the Congressional Black Caucus is affording me and others to be able to take a shot at it, to be able to talk with someone.

So in Los Angeles, in my own community, 10,000 people showed up. We organized it in ways that they wouldn't have to stand in line for long periods of time; and thanks to the Crenshaw Christian Center that has the Faith Dome that holds 10,000 people, we were able to get people off that sidewalk through that dome and to those employers where we set up tents for 170 employers who came behind the dome, and it worked very well.

Congresswoman, I want you to know this past weekend, as I traveled throughout the area, people came up to me and said: Ms. Waters, I got a job. I can't tell you how great that made me feel. And, of course, it was only a small number of people that I encountered. But just to have them say, thank you,

I received a job, was extremely impressive and inspiring and made me feel so very, very good. We are going to follow up with the employers and have them feed us back the information about how many people they were able to hire so that we can give a report on that.

But in all of this, I am so worried that the unemployment in the African American community may reach as high as 20 percent. Our communities have been hit hard. I heard you allude to the foreclosures that we're experiencing in our communities. Our communities were targeted. They were targeted by financial institutions because they saw that people were eager to have homes. They understood that if you gave people an opportunity, that they would take advantage of it. But what they didn't say was that they were coming up with all of these exotic products, products that literally got people into homes, but it could not be sustained because of the way these products were organized.

You had people who were told: you don't have to pay anything down; you just have to pay a little down. Don't worry about the resets; don't worry about what will happen 2 years from now. And these exotic products were products that had the devil in the details. And so people entered into mortgages they certainly could not afford down the road; and so our communities are overwhelmed with foreclosures, the loss of wealth, the loss of the only wealth that many of our families certainly had and could ever have for years to come.

I just want to share with you, in addition to the joblessness and the foreclosures and the loss of homes, the median wealth of white households is 20 times that of black households and 18 times that of Hispanic households, according to a Pew Research Center analysis of newly available government data from 2009.

These lopsided wealth ratios are the largest since the government began publishing such data in 1984, and roughly twice the size of the ratios that had prevailed between these three groups for the two decades prior to the Great Recession that ended in 2009. The median wealth of United States households in 2009 was $113,149 compared to $5,677 for blacks and $6,325 for Hispanics. The percentage of African Americans with no wealth has increased. About 35 percent of black households and 31 percent of Hispanic households have zero or negative net worth in 2009 compared with 15 percent of white households.

Basically, just looking at the joblessness and the lack of wealth, the decreasing wealth tells the story. No communities can survive under these conditions. Everybody must be concerned about unemployment in general, but specifically these communities that are so bad off under the situation and the environment that we're living in at this time. So we support the jobs bill. We want to create jobs in our infrastructure. This country needs to repair its roads and its bridges and its water systems, and we believe that creating those jobs will help all of our communities, not only get jobs but put money back into the economy.

The economy needs stimulating. You stimulate the economy not by cut, cut, cuts, but by investing in the economy, both the private sector and the public sector. So we've got to fight for it. We've got to stand up. We've got to resist any Tea Party efforts that say that they came to Congress to dismantle government and they want to cut, cut, cut. They will not support anything that will raise revenues, or even maintain revenues in some instances. We've got to push back on that. We've got to be strong. We've got to say to our colleagues: the facts are clear; they are in front of you. Nobody can deny these facts, and we're asking you to join with us in making sure that not only we deal with the most vulnerable in our society, but we pay attention to all of those who are suffering and the families that are suffering.

I want to tell you, I have witnessed that some of our friends on the opposite side of the aisle who represent very poor communities don't seem to be able to rise to the occasion to offer them support. It seems to me that they can basically talk about and inflame issues that have nothing to do with the economic well-being of their constituents. And so we have to keep reminding them that this is for everybody. This is for your constituents that you're not really representing, those poor people in rural communities who don't have health care clinics, those poor people who don't have jobs, those poor people who don't have the kind of education that they should have.

So thank you for bringing us to the floor this evening to once again put the focus on jobs, jobs, jobs.

Thank you very much, Congresswoman Christensen. I would like to thank you for taking this time this evening so that we could focus on this issue of jobs. It's extremely important.

I would like to thank Steny Hoyer for coming to the floor to recognize the work that we are doing, to increase job opportunities for people in this country.

The Congressional Black Caucus is to be commended because they heard the cry. They felt the pain of so many people out there who have lost their jobs, who do not know how they are going to pay their mortgages, who do not know how they are going to provide for their families.

So despite the fact that the Congressional Black Caucus organized and introduced over 40 bills dealing with this issue, the Congressional Black Caucus decided to do something more, recognizing, yes, that we have a public policy responsibility, that's why the 40 bills. But beyond that what else could we do?

So the Congressional Black Caucus took to the streets and went out into America and hit five cities: Cleveland, Ohio; Detroit, Michigan; Atlanta, Miami, and then my city of Los Angeles. And what we saw was mind-boggling. Even though we understood that 16.7 percent is a huge number for people to be unemployed, we did not realize the thousands upon thousands of people who really were hurting out there.

They came. They came by the thousands in every city that we were in. They were young, they were middle-aged, they were the unemployed, they were people who had been looking for jobs for over a year. And it was awfully painful to see all of these young college graduates who happened to be African American, who went to school, graduated, and looked forward to going to their job, who had no jobs. And so we saw it firsthand.

In my own city of Los Angeles where we organized one of these job fairs, there were over 10,000 people who showed up. Luckily, we had a venue, the Crenshaw Christian Center, where they had a dome, a faith dome. They could hold 10,000 people, and people didn't have to stand in line.

In Atlanta people got ill standing in line 3, 4 hours trying to get connected. The employers are to be commended. They came and they listened, they interviewed, they took applications, they assisted people in learning how to get an opportunity with their companies. We would like to thank all of those employers who participated with the Congressional Black Caucus in trying to help connect people with jobs.

We have to continue with this push for jobs. The press has done a relatively good job of shining a light on the devastation that's going on in these African American communities. We support all people getting an opportunity for jobs, but we must target our resources to those communities that are most in need.

We are talking about rural communities where there's unemployment and poverty, and we are talking about these urban areas. We believe that the resources must be targeted, the attention must be paid, not only to the entire population in this country of unemployed, but those areas that are absolutely suffering.

We need to continue to do this. And while the white unemployment rate stayed the same last month, black unemployment increased by 4 percentage points to 16.7 percent. Today in The Wall Street Journal they noted that black teenage unemployment is bordering on 50 percent. Fifty percent.

These figures don't even take into account the discouraged workers, involuntary part-time workers, and underemployed workers. Moreover, let me just tell you about the wealth gap. It is at its largest levels in more than a generation.

The median wealth of white households is 20 times that of black households and 18 times that of Hispanic households, according to a Pew Research Center analysis of newly available government data from 2009.

These lop-sided wealth ratios are the largest since the government began publishing such data in 1984 and roughly twice the size of the ratios that had prevailed between these three groups for the two decades prior to the Great Recession that supposedly ended in 2009.

The median wealth of white U.S. households in 2009 was $113,149 compared to $5,677 for blacks and $6,325 for Hispanics.

The percentage of African Americans with no wealth has increased. About 35 percent of black households and 31 percent of Hispanic households had zero or negative net worth in 2009, compared with 15 percent of white households.

So while unemployment and the housing crisis is impacting everyone, it is hitting minority communities the hardest. That is why we must continue to push. I am so pleased that the President presented a huge opportunity to focus on job creation, and so now the devil is in the details.

It must be targeted. The public policies must take into consideration targeting these efforts so that these resources are put where its most needed. The Congress must have hearings and markups for the American JOBS Act. We must work together to ensure that its stimulative investments are protected and strengthened through greater targeting.

Our entire jobs-creation agenda can't simply be the tax cuts alone. We need to focus infrastructure repair in the communities with the bridges, roads and sewer systems that are most in need.

We need to rebuild schools in urban and rural areas that have long been neglected.

We want housing, a national housing trust fund to produce, rehabilitate, preserve, and operate rental housing in areas where our homeless veterans and seniors are concentrated.

We need targeted aid to the unemployed, who are the most likely to spend their money and stimulate the economy. If we do not pursue targeted public policy, I predict that the African American unemployment will hit 20 percent. The American economy will never be stable if we have one segment of our population, particularly a segment as large as the African American population, that faces a systemic jobs crisis.

So, again, my appreciation and my thanks to our chairman, Emanuel Cleaver, and to the entire Congressional Black Caucus for having the courage to step up and make this a priority issue, not only for our caucus but for their Congress and for their country. We cannot sit idly by in silence and watch what is happening as this devastation is continuing in these communities.

Thank you one more time for allowing us to be here this evening.

Mr. Chair, I rise today in strong opposition to H.R. 2218, the Empowering Parents through Quality Charter Schools Act. Although this bill includes some modest improvements to charter school regulation over current laws, it still falls short of ensuring that charter schools are held to high standards for educational quality, accountability and accessibility for all students.

Charter school education currently lies at the center of a growing movement to challenge traditional notions of what public education means in America. Although it is important for students to have choice within the educational model, we cannot solely rely on charter schools and private for--profit companies to solve all of our educational challenges within our public school system. There is considerable research which documents mixed reviews of success among charter schools. In a national study conducted by Stanford University economist Margaret Raymond, she found that only 17 percent of charter schools were superior to the local public schools, 37 percent of charter schools received worse results than comparable neighborhood schools and 46 percent did about the same.

With more than 1.5 million students enrolled in charter schools that vary widely in quality, it is critical that we, as a nation, have protections in place that will ensure these students achieve educational success and this bill falls short of ensuring just that. We must enhance the focus on charter schools' and authorizers' accountability. We must enhance the ever so important role of parents and the community's input in the authorizing process. We must to ensure that adequate educational resources play a critical role in improving achievement for all students. With this bill's lack of transparency and accountability requirements, guarantee to adequate resources and parental and community involvement we will only further exacerbate current resource and opportunity gaps in the American educational system.

I appreciate my colleague Rep. George Miller's commitment to equality education in American and his hard work on this bill but I think is important for us to take a closer look at this bill's provisions just to ensure that every student receives a quality education that is transparent, holds its educators accountable and is most importantly equal.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to congratulate the Tea Party for extorting a deal made in their image and their image alone. The cuts will be deep, they will be lasting, and they will weaken an already depressed economy. What's clear is that the Tea Party is so ideologically driven to kill government that they're willing to kill the private sector, kill jobs, and kill growth in the process.

What's more, these cuts will be loaded onto the backs of seniors and the American middle class, all while asking the wealthiest among us to sacrifice nothing. Once again, the rich will feel no pain and the vulnerable will pay for their spoils.

Mr. Speaker, the process in which we got here has undermined our democratic system. While Democrats and the President negotiated in good faith, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle demonstrated a craven willingness to risk financial collapse for their extreme demands. As Democrats conceded time after time and provision after provision on this deal, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle just continued to issue new demands, all the while compromising nothing. Moreover, I am very concerned with the precedent set by this ``super committee'' whose establishment threatens our democratic process with its unconstitutional structure.

Mr. Speaker, I can honestly say if this bill passes, it may be the single worst piece of public policy to ever come out of this institution. I cannot support this rule, and I urge my Democratic colleagues not to be complicit in a Republican plan to eventually cut Medicare, Social Security, Medicaid and investment in our future, all while asking the rich to sacrifice nothing.

Mr. Speaker, today millions of Americans are waiting to see if the Republicans will stop holding the economy hostage and allow our nation to pay its bills, honor its commitments to senior citizens and veterans, and keep government workers at their jobs. But 4,000 government workers already have been laid off because of Republican intransigence.

The Federal Aviation Administration, FAA, was forced to shut down many of its operations last Saturday, because the House of Representatives refused to pass a simple bill to extend its funding authorization. As a result, 4,000 FAA employees in 35 states, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico were placed on furlough. Those affected include many of the FAA's engineers, scientists, research analysts, administrative assistants, computer specialists, program managers, environmental protection specialists, and community planners. These government workers are being forced to live without pay and are unable to do their jobs developing our air travel infrastructure and serving the flying public.

The FAA has assured the American people that air traffic controllers will remain on the job, and the safety of the flying public will not be compromised. However, numerous FAA projects and services have been affected.

Earlier this week, the FAA AN as forced to issue stop work orders to construction and technology contractors for critical airport modernization projects. As a result, dozens of construction projects to build and modernize air traffic control towers and other aviation infrastructure were immediately halted. This work stoppage risks putting numerous construction workers and other private sector employees out of work as well.

In my home state of California, the FAA shutdown has delayed $131.5 million in funding for projects and furloughed 203 FAA employees in the Los Angeles area alone. But the actual impact on the Los Angeles area is far greater. Los Angeles International Airport, LAX--which is located in my Congressional District--is the world's sixth busiest airport. LAX creates an estimated 59,000 jobs in or near the airport and has a total annual economic impact estimated at $60 billion. In 2008, 60 million passengers and 1.8 million tons of freight and mail passed through LAX. All of this economic activity depends upon the safety and efficiency of our air travel system.

The work stoppage will have an immediate negative impact on LAX, delaying a much needed project to design and install new runway status lights. These lights improve visibility for pilots and help them see when it is safe to enter, cross or take off on a runway. Stopping work on important projects like this one will not only delay their completion but also significantly increase the long-term costs for taxpayers.

Unfortunately, LAX isn't alone in losing out on these funds. Nationwide, over $250 million in contracts for runway status lights have been suspended. Also affected are nearly $20 million in construction and engineering contracts to protect air traffic control towers from earthquakes and over $14 million in projects to research weather technology systems for air traffic facilities and aircraft cockpits. This is no way to run one of the top air transportation systems in the world.

Why are the Republicans refusing to allow the FAA to reopen its doors? The Republicans certainly cannot claim they are trying to be fiscally responsible. The FAA shutdown is costing the federal government $30 million a day in lost revenue from uncollected airline taxes.

FAA employees are dedicated public servants who work hard to ensure safe and efficient air travel for the flying public. They are proud of the work they do. I urge my Republican colleagues to let them go back to work.

They need their jobs, and the American people need them.

Mr. Speaker, the people of the Horn of Africa are facing a devastating crisis. A severe drought has left millions of children, women, and men in Somalia, Ethiopia, Kenya and Djibouti malnourished. Many are on the verge of starvation. According to the World Food Program, more than 11 million people in the Horn of Africa require food assistance due to the drought.

The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) reports that below-normal spring rains in the eastern Horn of Africa led to below-normal harvests and shortages of water and grazing resources for livestock. Livestock health has deteriorated markedly, and milk production has declined significantly. Food prices throughout the eastern Horn of Africa continued to rise during the month of June, contributing to food insecurity for the population.

The conditions in Somalia are especially severe. According to the Famine Early Warning

Systems Network (FEWS NET), which is supported by USAID, two areas of southern Somalia are already experiencing famine. Famine exists when at least 20 percent of the population has extremely limited access to basic food requirements, acute malnutrition exceeds 30 percent, and the death rate exceeds 2 out of every 10,000 people per day for the entire population. Death rates are above the famine threshold in two areas and are elevated across the south. Tens of thousands of people have already died in the past three months.

FEWS NET projects that famine will spread across all regions of southern Somalia within one to two months. The network estimates that 3.7 million people are in crisis nationwide, and 3.2 million of them require immediate, lifesaving assistance. These severe conditions are expected to remain at least through December of this year. FEWS NET has declared this Africa's worst food security crisis since Somalia's 1991- 1992 famine.

The effects of the drought in Somalia have been exacerbated by the lack of an effective central government and continuing conflict with al-Shabaab terrorists.

Drought has also affected Kenya and Ethiopia, where the situation is complicated by the arrival of large numbers of refugees from Somalia, many of them suffering from acute malnutrition.

The U.S. Government has already spent a total of approximately $458.7 million on humanitarian assistance in the Horn of Africa during fiscal year 2011. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton issued a statement on July 20th expressing concern on behalf of the U.S. Government. She noted that additional international assistance for the region is needed and announced an additional $28 million in U.S. assistance to Somalia and Somali refugees in Kenya. However, more needs to be done. FEWS NET has called for an immediate, large-scale, and comprehensive response to save tens of thousands of lives.

I am deeply concerned that the State and Foreign Operations appropriations bill for fiscal year 2012, which was marked up yesterday, will not provide sufficient funds for critical priorities like these. The bill includes an 18 percent cut in development assistance, which funds projects such as food security and basic education. The bill also cuts international disaster assistance by 12 percent compared to the fiscal year 2011 level and a shocking 42 percent compared to the fiscal year 2010 level. Such drastically reduced funding levels will not allow the United States to help millions of people in need or respond to emergencies, such as famines, hurricanes and earthquakes.

I have seen children who were starving. It is a terrible sight to see. We cannot sit by idly and allow thousands of children to die and not take any action to help them. To do so would be contrary to our national interests and contrary to our values.

I call upon my colleagues and indeed all Americans to show compassion to our brothers and sisters in Africa. And I call upon the U.S. Government to organize a comprehensive effort to save the lives of millions of hungry people throughout the Horn of Africa.

Mr. Chair, I rise to oppose the underlying bill and the numerous extreme, anti-environmental riders included therein.

I rise to oppose the underlying bill and the numerous extreme, anti- environmental riders included therein.

Mr. Chair, this bill is full of anti-environmental riders. These riders are legislative provisions that were attached to an appropriations bill because they are far too extreme to pass Congress on their own merits. Together, these riders undermine decades of progress protecting our nation's environmental heritage. They threaten the air we breath and the water we drink.

One of the riders in this bill stops the Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, from giving Clean Water Act protection to critical headwaters and streams that supply drinking water to about 117 million Americans.

Another rider prevents the EPA from updating its stormwater discharge regulations to manage polluted stormwater runoff, which contaminates water supplies and contributes to beach closures. Last year was the second highest year on record for beach closings and advisories.

Yet another rider changes current law to eliminate requirements for chemical companies to obtain permits for pesticides entering rivers and streams. This will mean even more of these toxic poisons in our lakes, rivers, fishing places, and drinking water supplies.

The Cross-State Air Pollution rider prohibits EPA from implementing a rule to protect communities from pollution caused by power plants upwind of them. EPA estimates that this rule will prevent up to 34,000 premature deaths, 15,000 heart attacks, 400,000 cases of aggravated asthma, and 1.8 million sick days a year beginning in 2014.

The Mercury and Air Toxics rider blocks EPA from finalizing a rule reducing emissions of mercury and other toxics from power plants. EPA estimates that this rule could deliver as much as $140 billion in health benefits and prevent 17,000 premature deaths each year.

The Cement Kilns rider prohibits EPA from enforcing limits on emissions of mercury, particulate matter, and hydrochloric acid from cement kilns. These limits would reduce mercury pollution and fine particulate matter from cement kilns by 92 percent, preventing up to 2,500 premature deaths and avoiding 17,000 cases of aggravated asthma each year.

Finally, the Offshore Drilling rider allows oil companies to pollute more by exempting support vessels involved in offshore oil drilling from regulation. This provision undermines the ability of the EPA to ensure that oil drilling on the Outer Continental Shelf proceeds safely, responsibly, and with opportunities for stakeholder input. We've already seen from the BP oil spill how dangerous offshore oil drilling can be.

On top of all of these dangerous riders, this bill slashes funding for the EPA by 18 percent below the 2011 level, in addition to the 16 percent cut that was inflicted on the agency when compared to the 2010 level. These cuts would leave the Environmental Protection Agency unable to effectively regulate pollution or protect public health, even when it is not prevented from doing so by an anti-environmental rider.

This entire bill is a threat to our public lands and our public health, and I urge my colleagues to vote against it.

Mr. Speaker, for the first time in American history we are at the brink of compromising the full faith and credit of the United States Government--the pledge that America has made to be the strongest, most trustworthy economy in the world, the promise that we will always keep our word and pay back the money we have already spent.

And why are we on the brink of a default crisis? Is it because of a natural disaster that has devastated our Nation? Is it because of a catastrophic national security threat? Is it because of another meltdown of our financial system like the one we saw in 2008? No.

The default crisis is for none of these reasons. Instead, it is a crisis wholly manufactured by my Republican colleagues, who are holding our economy hostage to pursue a radical agenda. This is an agenda that seeks to continue the Bush policies of wars and tax cuts paid for by undoing the New Deal, shrinking the social safety net, and pulling the rug out from under millions of Americans who are still struggling to recover from a financial crisis that was created by Wall Street.

Mr. Speaker, the debt ceiling is being used as political leverage to pursue this agenda. Remember, the debt ceiling was raised 18 times under President Reagan and seven times under President George Bush. Instead of this phony crisis, we should be debating the real crisis facing this Nation, the crisis that is consistently named as the number one concern of American taxpayers, that is, the jobs crisis.

Today, about 14 million people are unemployed, wages are declining, and home values are still plummeting. The unsurprising result is consumers aren't buying, businesses don't need to hire as many workers. And the cycle continues. In minority communities, these problems are even worse, with over 16 percent of African Americans and 11 percent of Hispanics out of work. In fact, just yesterday, the Pew Research Center reported that while all households lost wealth during the recession, minority families experienced disproportionate losses, and the wealth gap between minority and white households is actually growing. The median wealth of U.S. households in 2009 was $13,000, compared to just over $6,000 for Hispanics and $5,600 for African Americans.

But to hear my Republican colleagues, it's as if these unemployed Americans are living in the shadows instead of the communities we represent. Because instead of pursuing a jobs agenda, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have proposed a continuation of failed Bush policies, this time on steroids. First under the Ryan budget, and now under these debt ceiling hostage negotiations, my Republican colleagues are pushing to cut Medicare, Social Security, Medicaid, and job- creating domestic programs no matter the cost. Mr. Speaker, now is the time to invest in our communities, not retreat.

We need jobs to get people employed and get them back paying taxes to pay down our deficit. In fact, the Congressional Progressive Caucus is happy to provide for you, Mr. Speaker, a long list of ways to create jobs. We can create a new civilian conservation corps; we can close tax loopholes and bring jobs back from overseas; we can encourage investments in the new green economy; and we can provide incentives for businesses to train and hire the long-term unemployed. And guess what? We can do this while balancing the budget. In fact, the people's budget, offered by the Congressional Progressive Caucus, can balance our books at least 10 years before the Ryan budget.

Mr. Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to stand opposed to Republican efforts to perpetuate this default crisis and balance our budget on the backs of seniors and the middle class. It will amount to an unmitigated and unprecedented disaster to not only America's reputation, but to our capital markets, our job-creating businesses, and our economic recovery.

Mr. Speaker, I held two town hall meetings this past weekend on Saturday, one in the city of Inglewood and one in the area of Westchester. They made it very, very clear that they want us to increase this debt limit, they want us to get about the business of creating jobs, and they want to close tax loopholes for the richest corporations in America that receive tax breaks under the Bush administration. They are sick of us playing with this issue. They want us to do the people's business and look out for the interests of the least of these.

Mr. Speaker, I am heartbroken that one of my closest and dearest friends, Lillian Mobley, has passed away. I worked with Lillian--known throughout South Los Angeles communities as ``Ms. Mobley''--for over 3 decades. We have marched together, participated in protests together, and fought off anyone who attacked our community together. Lillian was my `shero.'

Lillian Mobley is without a doubt the most accomplished and successful community activist South Los Angeles has ever had. She helped found numerous community institutions and organizations that include Martin Luther King Jr. Hospital, Charles Drew Medical Center, Los Angeles Southwest College, Black Women's Forum, the Lillian Mobley South Central Multipurpose Senior Citizens Center, Mothers in Action, Grandma's Hands Los Angeles Birthing Project, Watts Towers Community Action Council and others. She is on the Walk of Fame in Watts, has a building named after her at the Maxine Waters Employment Preparation Center, a clinic at Martin Luther King Jr. Hospital that also houses a bust of her image, the Mother of Africa statue at WLCAC was dedicated to her as well as the amphitheater at Watts Towers and a Family Housing Center, and of course the senior center she founded that now carries her name.

She served on the board of over 20 organizations and was highly sought after by politicians hoping to win her endorsement to be elected to office. And it was only if Lillian believed that their election to office would benefit the community and help preserve the very institutions she helped to create like Martin Luther King Jr. Hospital would she support them.

Lillian Mobley is one of the icons of South Central and the Watts communities of Los Angeles that has helped to educate the city and

the country about the problems of poor people and working folks and the struggles that they encounter on a daily basis. She was the voice that articulated their pain, their challenges, their hopes and dreams. Lillian has joined the legendary African American women who have passed on but clearly left their marks on the hearts and souls of the people they fought for. Women like Mary Henry, Caffie Greene, Jonnie Tillman, Margaret Wright, Edna Aliewine and Opal Jones.

We spent countless hours in meetings on issues related to health, seniors, youth, and education. Lillian was not only concerned with these issues, she tackled them with vigor. She was all about doing the work, even the `grunt work' as she liked to call it, to bring resources to help families and youth in South Central Los Angeles and Watts. She did all of this while battling with her own health issues. If Lillian was not at an important meeting it was only because she couldn't attend either due to her grueling dialysis schedule or because she was hospitalized. Lillian was a woman before her time who maintained her empathy and concern for the young and old. She was truly humble in her work and never asked or expected any recognition form of recognition from others.

One of the greatest experiences we had together was taking 80 African American women on a trip to Africa. Lillian was so happy and proud to travel to the motherland and said it was one of the most enjoyable moments of her life. I will hold on to this and other fond memories I have of Lillian to help come to grips with this devastating loss.

I join with other elected officials, community leaders, and the residents of South Central, Watts and South Los Angeles in paying homage to our queen, Lillian Mobley.

First, I would like to take a moment to thank Barney Frank for his leadership in establishing one of the most important pieces of legislation that has ever happened in the Congress of the United States of America, and that is the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 to create a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

I am so pleased to have been able to serve, not only on the Financial Services Committee, but on the conference committee that worked through all of the difficulty of creating this bureau to give protection to consumers who had been forgotten, who had been dropped off of the regulatory agency's agenda, who had not been protected because they simply said that they had the responsibility for safety and soundness and that they didn't know much about consumer protection. They failed on both, but our consumers have been harmed.

Mr. Chairman, the CFPB is needed because it is very clear that our current regulatory framework inadequately protects consumers. Just look at the wrongful foreclosures on veterans, the robo-signings on foreclosure documents, the 500 percent interest rates on payday loans. The list of abuses goes on and on and on.

This bill would undermine the CFPB by creating a commission instead of a director, making it easier for the Financial Stability Oversight Council to override CFPB rules and to delay the transfer date for the CFPB until there is a director confirmed by the Senate. In short, this bill would bring us back to the days when harmful financial products and practices went unchecked and when consumers paid the price in the form of high interest rates, predatory subprime mortgages, and bad credit card bills.

We've seen what happens when our banking regulators are tasked with both consumer protection and bank safety and soundness responsibilities. The pro-bank, anti-consumer stance wins every time. That's why we created CFPB, to make sure the consumer voices aren't shouted down by the industry and that an independent agency is beholden to consumers and not CEOs.

A strong regulator, one which focused solely on consumer safety and championed simpler disclosure and products, could have prevented the current economic crisis and the ensuing foreclosures, bankruptcies, and defaults. Preventing the CFPB from doing its work, as this bill would, would only hurt America's consumers and turn our economy upside down. I oppose this bill.

Mr. Chairman and Members, it is evident what was needed, and it is inconceivable that at this point in time we could have legislation that would undermine the good work of the conference committee of the Dodd- Frank legislation that is in the best interest of all Americans, all consumers.

I ask for a ``no'' vote on this bill.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

In 2011, we see that voter suppression is real and rearing its ugly head in too many Republican-led legislatures across this country. With only 15 months left before the next Presidential election, Republicans are rewriting voting laws to require photo identification at the polls, reduce the number of days of early voting, and to enhance voting restrictions against ex-felons and out-of-state students.

Since January, voter ID laws have passed in Florida, Wisconsin, South Carolina, Alabama, Texas, Kansas, and Tennessee. Governor Scott Walker of Wisconsin and Governor Rick Perry of Texas both signed laws this year that would require each voter to show an official, valid photo ID to cast a ballot, despite the fact that studies show up to 11 percent of eligible voters nationwide don't have government-issued IDs.

In Florida, Governor Rick Scott signed a bill to tighten restrictions on third-party voter organizations and shorten the number of early voting days. Governor Scott also helped to pass a ban on felon voting rights, forcing nonviolent offenders to wait 5 years after completing their sentences to apply to have their rights restored.

The Florida legislature also passed new laws that makes it tougher for get-out-the-vote groups to register new voters and reduces the number of early voting days from 14 to 8.

Make no mistake: We've been down this road before with Jim Crow laws. These smoke-and-mirror policies are poll taxes and literacy tests by another name. Communities must be alert and aware of these new laws. We will not allow the work, sacrifice and death of our forefathers and civil rights leaders to have been in vain. We are prepared for this fight, and fight we will.

The new voter ID laws and other restrictions have the potential to disenfranchise millions of eligible voters. Minorities, poor people, seniors, and students are among those that will be impacted the most.

The Justice Department must get involved. They must make sure that these laws that we have fought so hard for on voting rights are not undermined.

I yield to the gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Moore).

Madam Chairwoman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I rise today in strong support of H.R. 1309, the Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2011. Before I begin my remarks, I would like to thank Chairman Spencer Bachus, Chairwoman Judy Biggert, and Ranking Member Barney Frank for their assistance and support with this bill.

We were able to work in a bipartisan manner on this bill in our committee passing it on a vote of 54-0. The spirit of cooperation between Republicans and Democrats on this bill has been extremely welcome, and this is why I am proud to be an original cosponsor of this bill.

Madam Chairwoman, earlier this year I introduced similar legislation, H.R. 1026, the Flood Insurance Reform Priorities Act. A version of my bill passed the House last year on a bipartisan vote, and I hope that the bill offered by the gentlewoman from Illinois will also pass the House with significant support from both parties.

The flood insurance program is more important now than ever before. Floods are the most common natural disaster and flood insurance is the most effective means for helping families to rebuild after a flood. Therefore, it is vital that flood insurance remain accessible, affordable and available to the 5.5 million homeowners with policies and the many more who may want or need to purchase them.

Unfortunately, the lack of a long-term authorization has placed the flood insurance program at risk. The program lapsed three times last year. These lapses meant that FEMA was not able to write new policies, renew expiring policies or increase coverage limits. Given the current crisis in the housing market, this inability in the flood insurance program is unacceptable and must be addressed. I am pleased that the gentlewoman's bill not only reauthorizes the program for 5 years but also provides the program with the tools it needs to return to a strong financial footing while protecting homeowners.

The bill also addresses the impact of new flood maps on communities. The mapping process has caused confusion and financial strain on homeowners who now find themselves in flood zones and subject to mandatory purchase requirements. I saw this firsthand in my home city of Los Angeles. Last year, I was able to assist homeowners in the Park Mesa Heights area of the city who had been mistakenly placed in a flood zone. In that case, FEMA acted quickly to respond to new data and correct the mistake. However, there are thousands of homeowners nationwide who now find themselves in flood zones and subject to mandatory purchase requirements.

The gentlewoman's bill would ease the financial strain on newly mapped homeowners by allowing for a 3-year delay of the mandatory purchase requirement and allows for a 5-year phase-in of actuarial rates afterwards. In addition, I know that the gentleman from Alabama, the chairman of the committee, will be offering an amendment similar to the one I offered at markup that would extend the 3-year delay to 5 years. I know that the gentleman has worked with a bipartisan coalition of members of the House Levee Caucus, led by the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Costello), and I look forward to passage of that amendment.

To make sure that FEMA issues the most accurate maps, the bill establishes a Technical Mapping Advisory Council. By improving the mapping process, the council would prevent instances of erroneous flood maps, like the one I encountered in Park Mesa Heights. The bill also makes other improvements to the program by phasing in actuarial rates for pre-FIRM properties, raising maximum coverage limits, providing notice to renters about contents insurance, and allowing homeowners that receive letters of map amendment to be reimbursed for their costs.

Madam Chairwoman, I believe that the gentlewoman from Illinois and I have produced a good bill that will protect homeowners, the flood insurance program, and taxpayers. I hope that we can pass this bill today and that the Senate takes up flood insurance reform in short order so that we do not risk another lapse when the program expires on September 30 of this year. Again, I thank the gentlewoman from Illinois for her tremendous work on this bill, and I strongly urge an ``aye'' vote.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Chairwoman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. McCarthy). She has been very much involved in the development of this legislation and has worked very hard.

Madam Chairwoman, I am so pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer). He has a long history in this area, and the National Flood Insurance Act of 2004 bears his name. I appreciate his support.

Madam Chairwoman, I am very pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. David Scott). Mr. Scott has been a strong advocate for his constituents, making sure that they could afford it. The installment part of this bill is all because of his work.

Madam Chairwoman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Cuellar), who has worked very hard to make sure that we open up communications with communities that are located in areas where flood insurance rate maps have not been updated in 20 years.

I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Walz).

I reserve the balance of my time.

I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, I yield myself the balance of my time to close.

I am very pleased and proud to be a cosponsor of this tremendous comprehensive legislation.

I would like to thank the chairwoman from Illinois (Mrs. Biggert) for her work, her leadership, and her cooperation. And I would like to thank both the chairman of our committee, Mr. Bachus, and the ranking member, Mr. Frank, for their support and their cooperation on this legislation.

You heard Mr. Bachus, our chairman, recount for you that 54 members of the committee unanimously voted to support this legislation. That is pretty unheard of. And I think that the committee, the entire committee is to be congratulated for the tremendous work that we all put in to making sure that we have comprehensive legislation that would afford protection for our citizens and, at the same time, as was mentioned, reduce the costs, but recognize that this has been a long time in coming.

So as a cosponsor of this bill, H.R. 1309, the Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2011, this bipartisan effort that has brought us to this point, I would like to say that all of the Members who have spoken today, for the most part, on both sides of the aisle, have been complimentary of this comprehensive work. Of course, we did have one Member who disagreed with government's involvement in this flood insurance program. That's a rather radical view. I think most Members of this Congress believe that we have a responsibility to give support to those who are the victims of natural disaster, disasters that have been caused through, of course, no fault of their own. They're pleased that they have an opportunity to get some protection, with the help of their government, and to make sure that their homes and their families can be supported at a time that can be very traumatic in their lives.

Again, I will have to remind all of my colleagues that unfortunately the lack of a long-term authorization has placed the flood insurance program at risk. The program lapsed three times last year. These lapses meant that FEMA was not able to write new policies, renew expiring policies, or increase coverage limits.

Today, you have heard the Members of Congress again on both sides of the aisle give appreciation for the mapping reform that we have included in this legislation, for the outreach that we have included in this en bloc amendment that would allow the constituents of all of our districts to understand better what FEMA is doing, how it's doing, and how they can be a part of it. I am also pleased that included in this en bloc amendment is protection for small businesses. And I am very, very pleased that we have seen this as an effort not only to reauthorize, but to correct some of the weaknesses in the program and to strengthen the program in general.

With that, Madam Chair, I would ask for support for this bill. I know that there are some amendments that are being introduced a little bit later on; and I think that, again, you will see bipartisan support for most of these amendments. And I look forward to completing the bill with the amendments and to sending this bill on, where I believe we will have like support on the Senate side, and eventually to the President's desk. It's about time. I think that this country's going to be better off for it.

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

Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I oppose the gentleman's amendment.

In drafting this bill, the chairwoman and I sought to strike the right balance between protecting homeowners and strengthening the flood insurance program. I believe that the bill before us today does just that.

Unfortunately, I do not believe that the gentleman's amendment strikes the same balance. Specifically, by creating a reserve fund, the gentleman's amendment would allow the NFIP to increase insurance premiums on homeowners.

So regardless of their flood risk, homeowners will have to pay more in order to fund a reserve fund that will never have enough money to pay out claims for catastrophic events. This isn't fair to our taxpayers, Mr. Chairman, and, in fact, would stall the already slow recovery of the housing market.

I understand the problem that the gentleman is attempting to solve. We all know that the flood insurance program is over $17 billion in debt due to claims resulting from Hurricane Katrina.

However, I think we have to be clear that Hurricane Katrina was a catastrophic, once in a lifetime event. Prior to Katrina, the flood insurance program operated completely in the black.

In addition, I believe that the bill contains many provisions that would allow the flood insurance program to reform its premium structure so that it can collect the premiums it needs to pay out claims. For example, the bill ends subsidies for 350,000 pre-FIRM properties, including second homes, commercial properties, homes with new owners, homes substantially damaged or improved, and homes with repetitive claims.

By making these properties pay actuarial rates that reflect their full risk, the bill would make these properties pay their fair share, thereby increasing the amount of funding to the flood insurance fund.

Mr. Chairman, while I believe that the gentleman's amendment is very well intended, I believe that it is unnecessary given the strong reforms in this bill and the potential problems it may cause for homeowners, particularly those that have been phased into actuarial rates.

For these reasons, Mr. Chairman, I must oppose the amendment and I would urge a ``no'' vote.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I oppose the gentlewoman's amendment.

The gentlewoman's amendment would prohibit FEMA from spending any funds on television or radio commercials to promote the purchase of flood insurance.

Floods are the most common natural disaster in the United States. Unfortunately, even areas that aren't in floodplains experience floods sometimes. When that happens, the Federal Government provides aid to those homeowners and communities, and it is the taxpayer who pays for that aid.

Under the National Flood Insurance Program, insurance premiums pay for the cost of flood damage. Therefore, if homeowners outside floodplains buy flood insurance, taxpayers won't be on the hook if their properties flood. However, in order to have these homeowners buy flood insurance, they have to learn about the program and its benefits to them. This is where radio and television advertising are helpful-- essential, that is. The ads reach a wide audience and present clear facts about the availability and affordability of flood insurance.

To take away FEMA's ability to let the people know what's available to them would actually place the millions of Americans who choose and are not required to purchase flood insurance at risk. Given these times of record deficits, this is simply irresponsible. That is why I urge a ``no'' vote on this amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, as I mentioned earlier, when the gentlelady offered her views during the general discussion, she certainly does not join with her colleagues who have joined with us in a bipartisan way to produce a bill that is in the best interests of all of the citizens of this country. As a matter of fact, I have referred to her views on this issue as rather radical. I think that for us to have an insurance program that allows participation by the average citizen so that they can be in a position to make themselves whole after a disaster, to basically repair their homes, to replace their furnishings, and to basically have a way of continuing a decent quality of life is not too much to ask of your government.

So I would oppose this amendment and consider this amendment also just as radical. To say that you have a program but you can't tell anybody about it simply does not make good sense.

I yield back the balance of my time.

I claim time in opposition.

Mr. Chairman, I strongly oppose this amendment.

The gentlewoman's amendment would terminate entirely the flood insurance program, which provides much needed insurance for 5.5 million homeowners. The flood insurance program was created in 1968 after record flooding led the private insurance industry to stop writing flood policies. The private sector didn't want to write these policies because floods are very common and very expensive. However, the Federal Government didn't want to

simply write a blank check for homeowners every time it flooded. This is why the flood insurance program was created.

Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the gentlewoman from Illinois, Chairwoman Biggert, who has worked so hard on this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.