Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 211, I inadvertently voted ``aye'' when I intended to vote ``no'' on final passage of H.R. 2217, the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act.

The addition of the Amendment to H.R. 2217 offered by Mr. King altered the true intent of the bill. Mr. King's Amendment would prohibit the use of prosecutorial discretion by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, preventing Immigration and Customs Enforcement from focusing its limited enforcement resources on those who pose a real threat to public safety and national security.

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

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this important amendment, the Deutch-Foster amendment. First of all, this is the right thing to do, but to bring the conversation back to what my colleagues on the other side of the aisle pivot to in almost every policy discussion we have in this body--cutting spending.

In a budget age where many in this body celebrate the draconian and harmful cuts of the sequester, it seems we've come to accept as the norm indiscriminate, across-the-board cuts that in many cases fall on the backs of the most vulnerable among us. Cutting spending in this Congress no longer equates to targeted cuts to inefficient or duplicative government programs to root out waste. Cutting spending in this budget climate is simply about the bottom line. But it doesn't have to be that way.

This amendment is the perfect example of how we can cut spending in a smart and efficient way while defending those most vulnerable. By ending the arbitrary 34,000-bed mandate for immigration detention, we can cut spending and do the right thing.

How's this for a bottom line: alternatives to immigration detention save money. We're spending more than $5 million a day to detain immigrants, 45 percent of which have no criminal record, according to Human Rights Watch. That equates to roughly $164 per day per detainee for detention and roughly $2 billion per year.

On the other hand, alternatives to detention only cost between 30 cents and $14 per day per detainee, and they have proven to be safe and effective. According to Julie Myers Wood, who ran ICE under President Bush, 96 percent of individuals enrolled in alternatives to detention show up for their final hearing and 84 percent comply with removal orders.

So what's stopping us from putting in place these effective, cost- saving policies? Another harmful appropriations policy rider, mandating a daily detention level of 34,000 immigrants. In no other law enforcement context do we impose such a ridiculous quota. You wouldn't tell a county jail or a State prison that you have to keep ``X'' number of prisoners in that facility.

Mandating such a high level of detention makes absolutely no sense. By doing so, ICE is effectively prohibited from making decisions about detention based on enforcement policies, efficiency, and need.

All-too-often in this body, we look for someone else to blame. But in this case, we have no one to blame for this wasteful policy but ourselves. We have the power to change a policy that does nothing but waste the taxpayers' money and cause undue hardship to immigrant families across the country. I urge my colleagues to vote for increased efficiency and compassion, and urge a ``yes'' vote on this amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to urge my colleagues to come together and improve our broken, misguided, and convoluted tax system. The time is right for tax reform.

We currently spend $1 trillion through the Tax Code each year, all of which is off budget, meaning it is not scrutinized each year by appropriators. Once a tax break is written into the Tax Code, it usually remains, unlike discretionary programs which are reexamined for their necessity each year. To put this in perspective, $1 trillion would be the single largest government spending program--larger than the Pentagon's budget, larger than Social Security, and larger than Medicare or Medicaid.

As we desperately search for ways to reduce the deficit, we are making deep and painful cuts to discretionary spending. All the while, we are spending more than $1 trillion through the Tax Code with little oversight.

I have introduced a bipartisan bill with Congressman Renacci, which would bring greater transparency and oversight to such expenditures. But in addition to greater oversight, we also need reform. While many of these tax expenditures incentivize worthwhile behavior, such as homeownership and increased savings and investment, there are others, such as the yacht interest deduction, which clearly need to be reconsidered. We are cutting the funding for the National Institutes of Health, Head Start, and Meals on Wheels, while subsidizing yachts.

Let's put this into perspective. If one of my constituents takes out a loan to buy a car to get to work or take the kids to school, the interest on that loan is not tax deductible; but if they were to go out and buy a yacht, the interest on that loan would be tax deductible.

Clearly, it's time to reexamine our Tax Code and get our priorities in order. I have a bill that would end this tax break for yachts. But rather than tackling these tax breaks individually, we need a wholesale rewrite of the Tax Code.

Our Tax Code is the product of years of small tweaks and layers of changes. We need to step back and ask ourselves: If we were to start over and rewrite the Tax Code today, what would it look like? With such limited resources, what do we need? What behavior should we be incentivizing?

Due in part to years of additions and changes, our current Tax Code is deeply recessive. According to a report released last week by the Congressional Budget Office, the richest 20 percent of households in America receive over 50 percent of the tax breaks. The top 1 percent benefited the most, receiving approximately 17 percent of all funds flowing from tax breaks.

It's time for a reexamination of our Tax Code: Who benefits from it? How much do we spend? What are our priorities?

Not only is it time for reform because of our fiscal situation; but at a time of frequent partisan gridlock, tax reform is one area where the two sides seem to agree. Members from both sides of the aisle have said tax reform is essential.

I commend Chairman Camp and his counterpart in the Senate, Chairman Baucus, for their efforts to reform our Tax Code. I hope they will continue their bipartisan work and give the two Houses a package of reforms we can live with.

I have no illusion this will be simple or that everyone will like everything in the package, but that's the beauty of democracy--we don't have to agree on everything, but everyone's voice has to be heard. We have to compromise, and in the end, we vote. I hope we get to vote on a tax reform package that is big, bipartisan and balanced--and soon-- because reforming our Tax Code will save us billions, lower tax rates, and help reduce the deficit. As we sit down to address our fiscal woes, everything has to be on the table, including the trillion dollars we spend each year on tax expenditures.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the 50th anniversary of the Wellington-Oakdale Old Glory Marching Society's Annual Memorial Day Parade, a patriotic tradition in Chicago's Lakeview neighborhood. This vibrant Chicago institution invites marchers of all ages to participate in Lakeview's only ``do-it-yourself'' parade, where everybody marches and nobody watches.

In 1963, Chicago resident Al Weisman began this annual tradition along with his son, Tony, and a half dozen friends marching around the block with an American flag. Today, the WOOGMS parade is led by Tony Weisman and regularly attracts more than 1,000 marchers. It is a wonderful way Chicagoans celebrate freedom and remember those who have served our country.

The WOOGMS parade's emphasis on inclusion and participation sets this wonderful event apart. Guided by Al Weisman's belief that children would rather participate in a parade than simply watch, the parade encourages Chicagoans of all ages to join in the parade and march; spectators are discouraged from sitting down and encouraged to participate. These annual parades attract parents, children and grandparents who are walking or riding strollers, bikes and wheelchairs down the parade route. Accompanied by the Jesse White Drum Corps, participants march towards St. Joseph's Hospital where they are greeted by welcoming volunteers.

As a longtime Lakeview resident, I've had the privilege of joining the WOOGMS parade since 1983. As the event has grown, so have the participants. It's been heartening to see the children who marched 30 years ago come back to join the WOOGMS parade with children of their own.

Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join with me in recognizing the WOOGMS parade as one of Chicago's most unique events. Let us look forward to another 50 years of continued success for this patriotic tradition.

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to clause 1, rule I, I demand a vote on agreeing to the Speaker's approval of the Journal.

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

Madam Speaker, I rise today on National Teacher Appreciation Day with an oft-forgotten remedy to our economic downturn: investments in early childhood education.

Successful nations invest in three things: infrastructure, research, and education. To compete in the global market, we need to have the most highly skilled workforce in the world. And to develop that workforce, we have to start at the beginning with early childhood education.

Research from Stanford shows that rich students perform better than middle- and low-income students. Quite simply, they enter kindergarten more prepared thanks to high quality preschool. Nobel Laureate economist James Heckman found a 7 to 10 percent annual return on investment in effective preschool.

Every child deserves a chance to succeed in school and throughout their lives. Providing early childhood education can give them that chance, and the entire Nation will be better off for it.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Peter N. Silvestri, retiring President of the Village of Elmwood Park and current 9th District Cook County Commissioner. Mr. Silvestri has served Elmwood Park for twenty-four years as Village president and chose not to seek reelection this year in order to focus his complete attention on his position of Cook County Commissioner.

Mr. Silvestri has lived in Elmwood Park since 1971, and is a graduate of Elmwood Park High School. He attended DePaul University for undergraduate studies, as well as for his law degree. In 1977, at the age of twenty, Silvestri became the youngest person in Illinois elected to a local school board. He served on Elmwood Park's school board for two years, and was president of the board when he left to serve the Village in other offices.

Following Mr. Silvestri's exit from the school board, he served on the Zoning Board, Plan Commission, Civic Foundation, and as Village Trustee before his election to Village President. Under the leadership of Silvestri, the Village of Elmwood Park has been able to prosper and continue to pursue the village's goal of being a great place to raise a family and start a business. Mr. Silvestri oversaw numerous beautification projects in the Village, as well as efforts to modernize the police, fire, and public works departments. Silvestri also holds a good financial track record with the Village, which is seen through the Village's high bond rating, minimal debt and a reduced tax levy coming next year.

Mr. Silvestri leaves the office of Village President in the wake of numerous accomplishments. Recently, the Village opened a new library, and the aquatic center and the new Centennial Park are scheduled to be opened this spring. Other accomplishments while in office include an expanded recreation center, the creation of Mills, Torpe and Central Parks and an expanded Bambi Park. Silvestri has overseen the development of numerous projects within the Village of Elmwood Park which have contributed greatly to the reputation of Elmwood Park as a great place to live and raise a family.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all of my colleagues to join me in recognizing the years of dedication and public service Peter N. Silvestri has contributed to the Village of Elmwood Park. Mr. Silvestri has helped the Village prosper through the changing social and economic climate of recent decades, and he will surely be missed as the Village's president. I want to thank Mr. Silvestri for his years of service to the Village of Elmwood Park, and I look forward to his continued service as Cook County Commissioner.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today because last week my district experienced its second ``storm of the century'' in the last 3 years, its third since 2008. More than 7 inches of rain turned the streets of Hinsdale, Elmhurst, Franklin Park, and Albany Park into rivers.

Clearly, we need to revisit our definition of the 100-year storm; because, while some may doubt the reality of climate change, it is a fact that stronger, more destructive storms are pounding our region with distressing regularity and resulting in huge costs. While some don't believe in climate change, I hope they believe in funding flood control. We owe it to our constituents.

I spent most of this past weekend touring the flooded streets and basements throughout my district. Everywhere I went, I encountered residents who had lost their homes, their belongings, and their peace of mind. The residents I talked to wanted to know two things: What was their government going to do to help, and why was this happening again so soon after the horrific flooding of 2010?

I told people that my office would do everything it could to bring Federal disaster relief to their homes and businesses; but, unfortunately, Federal help for big States can be an uphill fight. Aid is based, in part, on a population-based formula that penalizes larger States like Illinois. Big States have to suffer more damage before meeting the aid threshold.

This process of rewarding aid is unfair, and we need to change it. I raised this concern last summer with my colleagues on the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. I was pleased to see language in Superstorm Sandy legislation requiring FEMA to review its processes in rewarding disaster aid. But reviews and bill language are of little immediate consolation to people who have lost their homes or businesses. With 44 counties declared a disaster area after last week's flood, we don't need another study. The people of my district and others across the State need our help.

FEMA needs to act--and act without delay--to get Illinois back on its feet. Every town in my district has projects that will help lessen the impact of the next storm. Storm sewer improvements, berms, swales, planting more wetlands, permeable pavers, detention ponds, and the Deep Tunnel Project can lessen or even prevent disaster.

We need to find the funds for these local projects that will avert the next flood and ultimately save millions in tax dollars in damages. For the Chicago area, that means demanding the $35 million per year in Federal funding that is needed to complete the McCook and Thornton reservoirs. These reservoirs are part of a larger flood mitigation plan put in place over 20 years ago by the Army Corps of Engineers. The Federal Government is now holding up their completion because of budget issues.

Local budgets are just a start, though. We also need to address the question of why 100-year storms are recurring so often. Climate change is here, and we must address it now. With a sensible energy policy, development of alternative energy sources, and commonsense conservation, we can begin to confront one of the great challenges of our time. If we don't, then the storms of last week in the Midwest and last fall on the east coast will be the new normal, and that's a normal none of us can afford.

Mr. Speaker, the founder of Earth Day, Wisconsin Senator Gaylord Nelson, was asked in 2005,

just before his death at the age of 89, if Earth Day should be celebrated. ``Our work is not finished,'' he replied. ``There's a lot more that needs to be done.''

As we enter wildfire season, watershed infrastructure that would mitigate future contamination of local rivers and reservoirs is still being rebuilt from last season, and funding for rebuilding is only now being allocated, having been delayed under sequestration, affecting lives and homes.

We've yet to craft an agenda that talks of a multiyear transportation plan or climate change. And, of course, the green legislator at heart would love to see tools like the Antiquities Act as a job-creating mechanism rather than spending time on the floor fighting against rolling back NEPA as we're doing this week with H.R. 678, unnecessarily, at the expense of supporting hydropower, as we should.

No, our work is not finished. There's a lot more to be done.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to celebrate Chicago Blackhawks television announcer Pat Foley, who is celebrating his 30th season with the team. As the voice of the Blackhawks, Pat has come to define the Chicago hockey experience. In fact, it's impossible to imagine watching stars like Jonathan Toews or Pat Kane without his play-by-play running through your head.

The hockey bug bit Pat early in his life. As a child at bedtime he would hide his radio underneath his pillow from his parents, Rob and Mary, so he could listen to his broadcasting idol, Lloyd Pettit, a great in his own right, call Blackhawks games, but only the last two periods.

Much like the players, themselves, Pat worked his way up to the Stanley Cup winning team, calling baseball and hockey games at his alma mater Michigan State before landing his first professional job with the Grand Rapids Owls of the International Hockey League. Pat joined the Hawks broadcast team in 1980 at just 25 years of age and has been a fan favorite ever since. The Glenview native has earned two Emmy Awards for his work and was inducted into the Chicagoland Sports Hall of Fame, joining broadcast legends Jack Brickhouse and Harry Caray. He's also been active in the local community helping numerous charities, and he recently joined me on the ice in a game with wounded warriors from the USA Warriors team.

For his hard work and dedication and for making some of the greatest moments in Blackhawks history even more memorable, I say thank you to Pat Foley. Lloyd Pettit would be proud. And, of course, go Hawks.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Mary Stephany, a former teacher and current registrar at Guerin College Preparatory High School in River Grove, IL. Guerin College Preparatory High School is a Catholic learning community committed to the education and faith development of young men and women, and these goals are reflected in the work of Ms. Stephany.

Ms. Stephany began her career at Mother Theodore Guerin High School in 1965, and during her tenure she has taught numerous courses in the social science field and was Academic Coordinator for the school. Courses she taught were: Law, Humanities, AP Government, Citizen Politics, U.S. History, AP U.S. History, Interdisciplinary (Theology, English, Social Science), World History, AP European History, Economics, Geographic Concepts, Introduction to the Social Sciences, American Studies, and Sociology. She also coached the volleyball team and developed and moderated Educating Women for Leadership and Life, as well as the Mentor Program.

Ms. Stephany has earned professional honors including The Cardinal's Award for Distinguished Service in Education, recognition in the Congressional Record for work in Education, and selection for the three year program with the National Endowment for the Humanities. She was also chosen as an Ambassador to Chicago's Field Museum for 2003-2004. In this role, Ms. Stephany served on education advisory committees to the museum and mentored other teachers.

Ms. Stephany earned a BA from Marian University in Fond du Lac, WI, with further programs of study at the University of Chicago, University of Illinois, University Colorado (Boulder), Northwestern University, University of New Hampshire, St. Mary's College (Walnut Creek, CA.), Trinity University (San Antonio, TX), Bradley University, Northeastern University, University of Wisconsin (Madison), Kansas University, The Art Institute of Chicago, and Loyola University Chicago.

Since 1999, Mary has served on the Illinois 5th Congressional District Academy Review Board. She has evaluated many nominees on their qualifications for a Congressional Nomination to our U.S. Service Academies. These qualifications include character, leadership, academic preparation, community service, and extracurricular participation.

Thanks to Ms. Stephany's dedication, many young men and women in the 5th Congressional District have received ``Offers of Appointment'' to the U.S. Service Academies and are in leadership positions serving our Nation today.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all of my colleagues to join me in recognizing the years of dedication Mary Stephany has shown in education and service. Ms. Stephany has helped change the lives of many young women and men by providing them with the tools they need to succeed in their future endeavors. She is truly an inspiring figure in our community and I thank her for her years of service.

Mr. Speaker, as this April marks the 38th anniversary of the brutal Khmer Rouge regime's rise to power in Cambodia, I join Cambodian Americans to commemorate this tragedy in the community's past. Yet even as we solemnly recognize this moment, we can also look at the hopeful future that lies ahead for the Cambodian American community.

The Khmer Rouge regime seized power in Cambodia on April 17, 1975, and began a reign of terror and systematic genocide. Upwards of 3.4 million innocent men, women and children lost their lives at mass grave sites now known as the Killing Fields. Thousands of refugees escaped these atrocities and were given sanctuary in the United States; many came to the state of Illinois.

Thanks to the Cambodian Association of Illinois and our strong Cambodian-American community here in the United States, we are aware of the Cambodian genocide and its devastating effects. Organizations such as the Cambodian American Heritage Museum and the Killing Field Memorial carry out the vital mission of ensuring that we do not forget the atrocities of this period. The Cambodian community is committed to remembering and paying tribute to those lost in the Killing Fields while enhancing the public's awareness of these atrocities and healing the survivors and their families.

As Illinois and other states recognize April 17th as the Cambodian Day of Remembrance, I rise today to join my Cambodian American friends to commemorate the atrocities of the Killing Fields and to provide comfort and hope to the victims' families. Let us take this moment to recognize that group-targeted violence and bigotry still exist in nations across the world, and we cannot ignore its presence.

Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in solidarity with the Cambodian-American community in remembering those who were lost to the Khmer Rouge regime and in recognizing our hope for a more peaceful future.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to call for continued reforms to our health care system. The Affordable Care Act was a huge step in the right direction, but we can do more because the path we are on is unsustainable.

The U.S. spends approximately 18 percent of its GDP on health--close to twice as much as other developed Nations--and yet we don't have better health care outcomes. Health care costs are rising faster than inflation and wages, meaning they are eating a larger portion of Americans' paychecks and the government's budget.

If we continue on our current path, the Medicare trust fund will be insolvent by 2024. And Medicare and Medicaid will grow from 24 percent of the Federal budget to almost 30 percent, crowding out other needed investments.

We have to reduce health care costs in both the private sector and the public sector in order to ensure America remains competitive in the global market. But there is a right way to reform our health care system and there is a wrong way. With all due respect, Mr. Ryan's plan is the wrong way.

Mr. Ryan's plan for Medicare and Medicaid misses the point. His solution simply shifts the costs from the government to patients, rather than reducing health care costs. Under the Ryan budget, seniors would pay as much as $1,200 more each year by 2030, and $6,000 more by 2050. For over half of Medicare beneficiaries with incomes less than $21,000, a $1,200 increase is a huge piece of their budget.

He also proposes block-granting Medicaid, which would cut Medicaid funding by approximately $700 billion over the next decade and result in 14 to 19 million people being kicked off Medicaid, many of them children and seniors.

These steps might make the budget look better, but they do nothing to actually reduce the cost of health care, and they hurt patients. We can reduce health care costs without harming beneficiaries.

Here are five steps we should take to reduce health care costs the right way:

First, and most importantly, we have to change the way we pay providers. Right now, we pay for each individual test and surgery. We pay for quantity rather than quality of care. Providers across the country are adopting payment for quality models, but they need Medicare, the largest payer, to get on board and pay for quality as well.

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid, or CMS, just completed a pilot where it bundled payments for 37 procedures and reduced spending by 10 percent. This needs to be replicated across the board, and CMS needs to move the majority of its patients to physicians off fee-for-service over the next 10 years.

Second, CMS needs to restructure and expand competitive bidding. It just completed a competitive bidding pilot for durable medical equipment and was able to reduce prices by double digits. While I have some concerns about the structure of that competitive bidding program, I believe it does need to be restructured to prevent suicide bidding and expanded to include more medical tests and services such as lab tests, CT scanners, and other items.

Third, States need to be empowered and incentivized to reduce their health care costs. States like Arkansas have taken bold steps to reduce their health care costs by requiring their two largest insurers and their Medicaid program to join a shared savings plan. They are expected to save the State's Medicaid program $4.4 million in FY '13 and $9.3 million in FY '14. We should be encouraging other States to follow the path of Arkansas and reduce Medicaid costs and improve care.

Fourth, we have to modernize Medicare cost sharing and ask a bit more from those who can afford it. We should combine Medicare part A and B deductibles and cap them. We should increase means testing for premiums for part B. And we should limit first-dollar coverage for high earners. We have to protect our sickest seniors from high costs while asking a bit more from those with greater means.

Finally, we have to improve price and quality transparency. We should prohibit gag clauses, which currently

prevent hospitals from sharing health care pricing information. Without pricing transparency, hospitals can't negotiate for the best price for medical devices and physicians can't make cost-conscious choices for their patients.

We do have to reduce health care costs, but there is a right way to do it and there is a wrong way. Mr. Ryan's plan is the wrong path. It harms seniors and fails to reduce underlying health care costs. By pursuing the five proposals I just outlined, we can reduce costs and improve quality, strengthening both our budget and our citizens.

Well, if this is for all and this is for everybody, why attempt to strip out essential protections for immigrants, tribal, and lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender victims? Do they not feel the same pain?

Once again, we have to stand up and fight for equal protections for all victims. The Senate seems to get what this body does not: we are all in this together.

These victims are not nameless, faceless members of some group of ``others.'' They are our friends, our neighbors, our family members. We are a Nation built on justice, fairness, and equal protection. We are all stronger when we uphold these ideals and protect the most vulnerable among us. The Senate-passed VAWA embodies these principles and protects all victims. We should pass it today.

Madam Speaker, I rise today because we have to get our fiscal house in order, but sequestration is not the way to do it.

There is no question we need to address our unsustainable debt and deficit. Our debt remains above 73 percent of GDP--up from 36 percent just 6 years ago--and our deficit still hovers just below $1 trillion. But the solution must be a big, balanced, and bipartisan deficit reduction plan modeled on plans like Cooper-LaTourette over a 10-year period, not the meat-ax approach of sequestration.

We can't pursue deficit reduction at all costs. The cure shouldn't be worse than the disease. The sequester will undermine our growing--but still fragile--economic recovery.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office predicts sequestration would halve economic growth for 2013. Another study projects job loss in 2013 alone would hit 2.1 million jobs, mostly from small businesses. We just went through this not more than 2 months ago, as we remember, the fiscal cliff. Sadly, we seem no wiser for that experience. We continue to bicker rather than plan; we posture rather than negotiate; we delay rather than decide. We go from one crisis to the next, thereby threatening our economy and further undermining the public's tenuous faith in its political institutions.

We lack a comprehensive approach to just about every challenge we face, including climate change, energy, transportation, health care, social insurance, defense spending, immigration reform and gun violence. It is management by paralysis. It's budgeting with a meat cleaver. It's absurd, and it has to end.

The sequester lops off $1.2 trillion from the Federal budget over the next decade, cutting $85 billion just this year.

Over the last week, I have met with dozens of groups for whom the sequester is not some abstract budgeting term. For these organizations and people back in my district, sequestration will have real, damaging effects.

I met with the AIDS Foundation of Chicago, which explained that under sequestration in Illinois, 125 AIDS-afflicted families will lose their housing. Another 613 people in Illinois won't receive their medication through the AIDS Drug Assistance program, which will be cut by $3 million. I also met with the Illinois Partners for Human Service and heard from the Ounce of Prevention Fund. Both groups informed me that 4,000 children in Illinois won't receive Head Start services under sequestration. Thanks to sequestration, 4,100 college students in Illinois won't receive Federal work-study assistance.

The bigger picture in Illinois is equally devastating. Sequestration will cost Illinois more than 53,000 jobs and $5.3 billion in the State's economic output. Nationwide, sequestration threatens our physical safety as well as our economy. Ten percent of the FAA's workforce could be furloughed, resulting in reduced air traffic control, longer delays, and economic losses for our tourism industries. Meat and poultry inspectors at USDA would also face furlough, potentially shuttering meat processing facilities and even affecting restaurants and grocery stores. Layoffs at the FDA would mean 2,100 fewer safety inspectors. There would be 25,000 fewer breast and cervical cancer screenings for low-income women. Mindless cuts to military and law enforcement affect our ability to protect our borders and meet the ever-present threat of terrorism, both here and abroad.

Madam Speaker, this is unacceptable. Somewhere along the way, buried in the din of the 24-hour news cycle and partisan bellowing, we lost the art of compromise. But that's what allowed the passage of civil rights legislation in the 1960s and saved Social Security in the 1980s. Legislators of both parties sat down and talked to each other, not past each other, to hammer out their differences and achieve something that made this country better.

I have no illusion that everyone in this body agrees with my ideas about reshaping Pentagon spending or reforming entitlements to ensure they provide benefits for generations to come; but I do know that making the changes that are best for the long-term interests of this country can't be accomplished overnight. These decisions require our best effort and precise planning. As the threat of sequester has painfully revealed, a chain saw is no way to create a budget for the most powerful country on Earth.