Floor Statements

I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I thank you for the time and for your leadership as the ranking member on the Foreign Affairs Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to reiterate my strong belief that one of the basic objectives of U.S. foreign policy is to build a world free of nuclear weapons. I applauded President Jimmy Carter at his inauguration in 1977 on a cold January day; I saluted President Reagan when he made his visit to Reykjavik, Iceland; and the commitment that many of our Presidents have made, including President Obama on this score.

One of the pillars of our foreign policy must be to end the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction; that is, to get rid of them. To meet that task today, our actions must be clear and our commitment must be unwavering. It must be to continue this policy of the United States to prevent any country from developing a nuclear weapons capability. That is why I offer my support for this bill today, the Nuclear Iran Prevention Act.

This legislation recognizes that an Iran with a nuclear weapon would be an urgent threat to regional security and to global security, and, therefore, to the security of the United States of America. This measure builds on the progress made in 2010 when we enacted the Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability, and Divestment Act. That law imposed sanctions to companies that sell Iran technology, services, know-how, and materials for its energy sector. It was the strongest Iran sanctions legislation ever passed by the Congress, but we must do more.

With President Obama's strong, clear, and effective leadership, with broad bipartisan backing for a comprehensive strategy to halt Iran's nuclear program, we are seeing the results of the actions we have taken. More and more, Iran is being cut off from the financial system. Iran's oil is coming off the market. Iran's partners are cutting off ties of trade, business, and commerce. That's the way I think we should get this done, with economic sanctions.

In short, Iran is feeling the bite of our sanctions, but we must keep the pressure on. Iran's nuclear pursuits continue. Iran's leaders refuse to change their approach and their policies. Iran's neighbors still feel the threat of the regime's declarations and actions. So our message must remain firm: Iran must suspend uranium enrichment, return to the negotiating table, and abandon its reckless pursuit of nuclear weapons.

Now I appreciate and I have listened carefully and have the highest respect for Mr. McGovern and others, Mr. Ellison, who are opposing the resolution and have a different idea. I think as we weigh the equities, as they say, with all due respect to that approach, which I think is a reasonable one if we were dealing with a reasonable country with a reasonable leadership, but we are not.

I know that the proximity to Israel is a cause for concern for Israel, our partner in the Middle East, and a concern for those of us who value the Israel-U.S. relationship. Israel has proximity, but we all have the problem. If Iran were to go farther in the development of a nuclear weapon, who else would want one in the region? What message does that send about our resolve to arrive at a world free of nuclear weapons?

Anyway, I hope, as our colleagues say, a new regime is going to do all these things. I happen to think that no matter who is in power in Iran, that they probably would not abandon a nuclear program, calling it one for domestic and civilian use. That may be true. I hope it is. But I do think it is really important for us, because we have to make this opportunity--I hope that the inauguration of a new President, talks with the U.S. and the European allies and all the rest, can bear fruit. We can only hope that those reports prove true. We hope that progress is made toward an agreement that puts an end to Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons and advances the cause of peace and security in the Middle East and around the world. Until that day comes, the Congress must continue to apply pressure. We must pursue all avenues of diplomacy and international leadership.

Again, what are the pillars of our foreign policy? To promote our economy, the creation of jobs by promoting exports--that's on the economic side; export our values, the commitment to freedom and democracy throughout the world. What does that mean? To protect the American people and our national security. An important part of that pillar of our foreign policy is to rid the world of weapons of mass destruction and make sure that we're not adding countries to that club. For that reason, we must prevent a nuclear armed Iran. Let's do it diplomatically. Let's do it with economic sanctions. Let's do it by encouraging dialogue, engagement, and the rest. But let's do that engagement from strength.

I urge a ``yes'' vote on the resolution.

Mr. Speaker, on the floor today we've heard some of our colleagues in the majority, starting with the Speaker of the House, demand the President work with Congress to create jobs and grow the economy. If Republicans were willing to spend time on these issues, that would really be good news.

I think it is necessary for us to have a reality check. In the 6 months of this Congress, with the Republicans in the majority, there has been no jobs bill brought to the floor; there has been no budget bill brought to the floor. The budget is the blueprint for job creation, for deficit reduction, for growing the economy, for creating jobs, for keeping America competitive, for making sure that America is number one.

At the beginning of the year, the Republicans said, we want regular order, we want to pass a budget bill--and we did--and then the Senate will pass a budget that is not a good budget and not a statement of our values, but nonetheless, a bill passed the House. They said, we want regular order, we want the Senate to pass a budget bill before we can proceed with any jobs legislation.

Over 3 months ago--I think nearly 4 months ago--the Senate passed a budget bill--again, a blueprint for job creation, deficit reduction, growth in the economy. The minute the Senate passed the bill, the Republicans said, Never mind.

Never mind? No. It is our business to mind, to mind this Congress to make sure that we create solutions, that we get results, that we are in the business of job creation in the public and private sectors with public and private partnerships. With no budget and with no jobs bill, that cannot happen.

So when the Speaker of the House comes to the floor and makes demands on the President--and the President has made offer, after offer, after offer. He has extended the hand of cooperation so many times that I want to count his fingers to see how intact his hand is because of the reaction from the Republicans. The Republicans' response to the President's offer of cooperation? Nothing.

``Nothing'' is our agenda.

Does ``nothing'' work for you, Mr. President?

Our timetable: ``Never.''

Does ``never'' work for you? Because that's the only time that we are going to work together with you to pass a jobs bill.

Previous speakers talked about jobs being created. Why? By giving tax cuts to the wealthiest people in our country?

I am so glad that the President is out there today, saying that we are going to build jobs and build our economy from the middle class out. It's really important that the prosperity of our country is enjoyed by many more people and, in fact, is inspired by their ingenuity, by their creativity, by their entrepreneurship; and we have to have policies that incentivize that.

Today, the President will put more ideas on the table to grow our economy. He recognizes--and I think we on the Democratic side all agree--that the economy best works when it grows from the middle out, not by the trickle down, top down.

Our friends on the Republican side said, Trickle down, what's wrong with that? If it trickles down, it could create jobs. If that happens, that's great. If it doesn't, that's the free market. If it doesn't create jobs, in their words, so be it.

So be it? No, I don't think so.

Our country has come a long way since the depths of the Great Recession, which was caused by these very same trickle-down policies. Tax cuts

for the rich, that is the Republican jobs program.

Do you know what is interesting to me? Coming up in September is the 5-year anniversary of the meltdown, of the announcement of the meltdown during the Bush administration. Under the trickle-down policies and the laissez, laissez, laissez, laissez, laissez, laissez-faire attitudes of the Republicans in Congress and in the White House, we were facing a great meltdown of our financial institutions, a great recklessness by some--not all--on Wall Street, causing joblessness on Main Street.

And what's interesting about it is, when we were notified finally-- when we asked, what's going on here? and they finally told us what was happening--no less a person than the Chairman of the Fed said, in response to a description given by the Secretary of the Treasury, Secretary Paulson, about the seriousness of the meltdown that was occurring--and this was Thursday night--that we could, by Monday, have no economy.

Have no economy? That is the place that these trickle-down policies-- this laissez-faire attitude toward no regulation and no supervision-- took us in our economy coming up 5 years ago in September.

That's why it's really important for the President to be out there and for the public to understand, not so that we can create divisions between Democrats and Republicans, but so that we can come together as a people and make the decisions here about a budget that does grow the economy by creating jobs while reducing the deficit at the same time, keeping America number one--that we build the infrastructure of America, that we make it in America by giving incentives for jobs to stay here rather than, as the Republicans suggest, to give tax breaks to businesses that send jobs overseas. Building the infrastructure of America. Make It In America. Have our communities suggest how they would like to grow with the proper education of our children, with the safety of our neighborhoods, with the security of our people.

So, really, it's almost like another universe to listen to the Republicans talk about the economy when they have had a complete ``never, nothing'' agenda and timetable for bringing a jobs bill to the floor that really does address the challenges that working families in our country face.

On the positive side, I am very pleased that the President's strategy for growth, of course, which is centered around the middle class, ensures that every American has the opportunity to have a good job that pays enough to support a middle-income life, a strong education that equips our youth for the job market, a home that is not at risk of being taken away as it was 5 years ago, a retirement free of financial anxiety, secure health care with decent benefits, a higher minimum wage.

And when I talk about what happened 5 years ago, what's interesting to me is that the Republicans still have the nerve to be asking the question: Are you better off now than you were 5 years ago?

Five years ago, we weren't going to have an economy by Monday. We weren't going to have an economy by Monday under their policies. The President has led us out of that Great Recession. He did so in the first 2 years with a Democratic Congress that had a recovery package and initiatives to grow the economy. Since then, it has been, again, the ``never, nothing'' timetable and agenda of the Republicans. How much faster our economy could be growing if the Republicans would cooperate with their ideas and the President's, working together in a bipartisan way to get the job done for the American people.

While I'm at it, I want to put in a word for our agenda for America's women and families.

When women succeed, America succeeds. It's an agenda that recognizes and values the work of women in the workplace by having pay equity, by raising the minimum wage, by rewarding work. It's an agenda that helps women balance home and work by saying--and we will be celebrating the 20-year anniversary of the implementation of family medical leave--that we need some paid sick leave as well and paid maternity leave as well. Third is the need--and a bigger issue that will take a longer time in facing the challenge--for affordable quality child care for all of America's families so that our children can be learning while their parents are earning. An important component of it is the entrepreneurship of women in the workplace. Women's business ownership is the fastest growing rate of small business growth in our country, minority women-owned businesses as well.

So we do believe that our economy will grow, that our families will prosper, that our Nation will continue to be number one to the extent that we invest in the middle class and in those aspiring to it, and that we should place a special emphasis on women in the workplace, because, again, when American women succeed, America succeeds.

That's how we want to ignite the American Dream--to build ladders of opportunity for all who want to work hard, play by the rules, and take responsibility.

We have work to do. Let's do it instead of living in a world of illusion in which the leadership won't bring a real jobs bill to the floor that can be enacted into law. The Speaker has said that it isn't a measure of success as to how many bills you can enact; it's about how much law you can repeal.

You haven't even succeeded in that. You haven't repealed anything. So let's get to work on the positive side to create jobs. That's the best thing that we can do for the American people, and let's do it soon.

``Never'' doesn't work for us.

I thank the gentleman for yielding. I thank him also for his leadership on this health care issue. I've watched him lead this debate for nearly three decades, and I'm so pleased that you are here to defend the Affordable Care Act on the floor today, as our Republican colleagues try for the 38th time to repeal it. It is nothing more than a waste of time. This matter has been settled in Congress, at the Supreme Court, and at the ballot box. It is the law of the land.

Mr. Speaker, this bill that is on the floor today is something that the President has very clearly said he will veto. Yet Republicans still want to vote for the 38th time to repeal the Affordable Care Act while we're still waiting for the first time to vote for a jobs bill.

The American people expect and deserve this Congress to work together to grow the economy, creating jobs, and strengthening the middle class, the backbone of our democracy. It's been over 6 months since this Congress took office. It's been over 3 months since the Senate passed a budget bill. For all of that time, Democrats have proposed a budget that would reduce taxes on the middle class, strengthen the middle class, reduce the deficit, create jobs, and grow the economy. And for 6 months the Republicans have said ``no.'' Instead, for 38 times they have wanted to waste the public's dollar repealing, once again, the Affordable Care Act.

What does a vote for this bill mean? A vote for this bill means that--just on the provisions already in place--you are voting so that children with a preexisting medical condition can now face discrimination. Because you will eliminate the end of that discrimination. Right now, children no longer face discrimination on the basis of a preexisting condition. A vote for the bill eliminates that.

Right now, young adults are gaining coverage through their parents' plans. A vote for this bill strikes that down. Right now, seniors are paying less for prescription drugs and getting better treatment at a lower cost. A vote for this bill strikes that down. Americans no longer face lifetime limits on care. A vote for this bill eliminates that. Families are receiving rebates from insurance companies because of the medical loss ratio. It's very important in this bill. Insurance companies were overly profiting at the expense of policyholders. This is a vote for the insurance companies and against policyholders. Soon, being a woman will no longer be considered a preexisting medical condition. The Republicans don't like that.

And when I say don't like, what will also be coming up in the bill is it will take away access to affordable coverage for 129 million people with a preexisting medical condition. Just think of it. Do any of you know anyone with heart disease, cancer, diabetes, or a child born prematurely? That's a preexisting condition forever--one that also has lifetime limits on it, if you have your way.

It takes away the guarantee that women pay the same premiums as men for the same coverage. Women have so much to gain in this bill because for so long we have been discriminated against on the basis of being a woman. You want to take that away from us again. It takes away the new cap on America's out-of-pocket health care costs. The list goes on and on about what is the law now that will be taken away and what will become the law in fewer than 6 months that was very helpful for America's families.

The gentleman told us a story about a small businessman. We always say the plural of anecdote is not data, but we all have our stories to tell. They are illustrative. Ninety-six percent of America's businesses are not affected by this law.

Mr. Speaker, last year, in San Francisco, I met with Julie and Matt, parents of a little 2-year-old girl, Violet. Violet was born with a rare and life-threatening form of epilepsy. For Violet and her family, the Affordable Care Act was life-changing. Before the act, Violet had a preexisting condition. So she would be discriminated against in terms of health insurance. Violet had lifetime and annual limits on the coverage that she could get. A little child with such an early preexisting condition could possibly exhaust her lifetime limits before she was in third grade.

Imagine being in their shoes. Imagine Julie and Matt watching this debate, following the work of Congress, and what it means to them. What it means to them is the health of their child, the financial security of their family, and hope for the future. Imagine the fear, the uncertainty, the frustration they feel when they hear this debate. Imagine what it would be like to witness it 38 times and the threat that it is to your family's security.

So there are Violet and other children like her. We hear stories over and over again. Whatever we're doing, I always like to envision what it means to children and what it does for our children. This means a great deal to our children and to their families. It honors the vows of our Founders of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. A healthy life, the liberty to pursue your happiness, to be whatever you want--an artist, be self-employed to start a business, to change jobs. To be able to follow your passion, not policy. And not to be confined because there's a preexisting condition in your family or to be confined because of fear of someone getting ill.

Really, what is important today is what it does or how it damages the health security of America's families. But it's also the missed opportunity. When, if ever, do the Republicans intend to bring a bill to the floor that will create jobs for our country? When are we going to have a budget that does just that?

You said you wanted the Senate to pass a bill and then we would go to conference. That's called regular order. The Senate passed a bill 3 months ago. And still, the Republicans resist. What are you afraid of? Are you afraid that the public will see the contrast between a Democratic budget, which invests in people, which builds the infrastructure of America, which has provisions to bring jobs home to America, and that strengthens the middle class instead of the exploitation of the middle class that is contained in the Republican budget?

So all this is a smokescreen. It's just make-work projects. It's just subterfuge. Let's do anything other than what the American people expect us to do here. They expect us to work together. They expect us to compromise.

They expect us to find solutions. They expect us to get results for them. They expect us to act the way we used to here and be respectful of each other's views, instead of having a Republican anti-government, ideological agenda which says nothing--nothing--is our success, to do nothing is to succeed, and never is our timetable.

So let's not waste the public's time, and the taxpayers' dollar on initiatives that are going no place. They're political stunts and an excuse for a legislative agenda that is not worthy of this House of Representatives, that is not deserving of the respect of the American people, and the form of this legislation will not have my support.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding and for his tremendous leadership on behalf of feeding the American people. It seems a very fundamental thing, Biblical in nature, family-wise, and a very important priority for all of us--except maybe not in this House of Representatives.

I want to thank Congresswoman DeLauro for her relentless, persistent advocacy to feed the hungry in our country.

But I rise today--and I've thanked them over and over again--to once again thank the Congressional Black Caucus. When they came to the floor today to speak in the manner that they did against this legislation and for values that our country shares about being a community, they spoke not just for the Congressional Black Caucus and for their constituents, they spoke for America.

They have fought this fight over and over again. The inference to be drawn from their leadership on this is not that the black community is a community that benefits from food stamps. Some people in the community do. Overwhelmingly, there are people in your districts in rural America, there are people in rural America who really need us to pass this legislation. You are taking food out of the mouths of your own poor constituents.

Poverty in America--poverty--I'm saying the word on the floor of the House: poverty, poverty, poverty. Poverty in America seems to be a word that people get nervous about. Poverty in America among our children is something shameful, but it is a reality. It has an impact on children to have the uncertainty in their lives that poverty brings. And when that poverty says to those children, one in four of you are going to sleep hungry tonight, that's just wrong, and it's wrong for America. It is not consistent with our values. It does not represent the sense of community that makes America strong and that makes America great.

So to Marsha Fudge, the distinguished chair of the Caucus, to Mr. Cleaver, the former chair, to Mr. Clyburn, our distinguished assistant leader, to all of my colleagues in the CBC--and a champion on the poverty issue, Congresswoman Barbara Lee--I could name all of you because you've all been out there on the forefront of this.

Our democracy is as strong as we are as a people. The middle class is the backbone of America. The aspirations of Americans to become part of the middle class is what we should be addressing in Congress. And what are we doing? One hundred ninety days we've been in this session and no jobs bill yet.

The leadership of the Republican Party says they want regular order. They want regular order. They passed a budget bill. Over 3 months ago, the Senate passed a budget. The regular order would be to go to conference, get rid of the sequester, and to proceed with a bill that invests in America--Mr. Hoyer's Make It in America, invest in innovation in America, build the infrastructure of America, create jobs, and to do so in a way that builds community, strengthens the middle class, and grows our economy with jobs.

The distinguished leadership of this Republican Party in the House said they want regular order and they have respect for their committees. Well, the Agriculture Committee, in a bipartisan way, passed a bill out of the committee.

I didn't like the bill. It wouldn't have been a bill I would have written. When Republicans had the leadership, Democrats cooperated, and a bipartisan bill came out of committee.

The rumor was--and I guess it was just a rumor, but it floated--that then it would respect that bill. If they could come out with a bipartisan bill, it would be taken up on the floor.

The bill that we have here--as little we know about it because it emerged in the middle of the night--bears no resemblance to the bill that came out of committee. Actions of the Republican leadership have been disrespectful to the committee process, so don't hand us the regular order argument.

The audacity to split off the nutrition parts of this bill is so stunning it would be shocking, except this is a ``House of shocks.'' I would say it is one of the worst things you have done, but there is such stiff competition for that honor that I can't really fully say that.

But when you take food out of the mouths of babies and you prevent a bill from going forth that addresses our food banks and our nutrition needs and the rest for our country, what are you thinking? Or are you thinking--or are you thinking?

I thank you, CBC, for your leadership on this. I thank you, Jim McGovern and Rosa DeLauro, and all of you, because this is a fight that you are making for every person in America to live in a country of values, of values that include our faith. Our faith tells us that to minister to the needs of God's creation is an act of worship; to ignore those needs, as this bill does, is to dishonor the God who made us.

This is very wrong. This, even in this place, crosses a threshold that we should never go past--should never go past. This is totally out of the question.

I am a mom. One of the reasons I am involved in politics is I see this as an extension of my role as a mother of five kids, and now many grandchildren. God blessed us. But what drove me to this was that I saw all that my kids had, all the opportunity, all the love, all the concern, all of the rest of it; and I thought the best thing that we could all do is to make sure that our children, for their own welfare, grew up in a country where all of America's children were treated with respect as we meet their needs. That's just not happening here today.

I call upon our friends in the faith community, and they are here on this issue, as well as most of the farmers groups and all the rest. There is nobody--there is nobody outside this body who supports this bill who cares about the values that we all profess to have within these walls.

Again, taking food out of the mouths of babies, that's a good policy? I don't think so. Vote ``no'' on this rule.

Mr. Speaker, this past weekend as the Nation celebrated the Fourth of July, the birth of our country, tragedy struck. As all the world knows, a plane crash landed at the San Francisco airport, something very uncommon, but something that shared a common interest.

Our thoughts and prayers today rest with the passengers and the crew who were on board Asiana Airlines Flight 214, with the families of the victims of the horrific tragedy, the men and women recovering in hospitals across the Bay Area.

Our prayers are with the families of the two young girls, Ye Mengyuan and Wang Linjia, who lost their lives on Saturday. Indeed, we know that no words can console their loved ones today. All of San Francisco shares in their shock and grief. We will do everything we can do to care for those affected and their families.

The sudden crash shook the grounds of San Francisco International Airport, testing the training, strength and courage of those who would be the first on the scene.

As a Representative of San Francisco in the Congress, a privilege I share with Congresswoman Jackie Speier--the airport is actually in Congresswoman Speier's district--we will join together to observe and mourn the losses tomorrow when some more of our Members are here, back from the Arizona tragedy.

But for now, I wanted not another day to go by before commending the crew. They performed so heroically. The crew was so magnificent, and a reminder to us that the first responsibility of the crew is safety, that they are trained for it, and they performed magnificently. And the flight attendant, the lead flight attendant was the last person to leave the plane, not until everyone else was off.

First responders responded in characteristic fashion, with bravery, with valor, without regard for their own safety, with their sights set only on the safety of others. Their stories are so remarkable. Their stories are so remarkable about what they saw on the plane and how people responded.

And it was also the coolness and the cooperation, not only of the crew, but of many of the passengers, that enabled so many people to be saved. Seeing the sight of the plane and the crash, it was almost miraculous to think that so many people would survive the crash.

There was only minutes to react, and within minutes, the flight crew and the San Francisco and San Mateo police officers and fire departments were climbing up the rescue chutes, running through smoke- filled aisles and leading passengers out to safety.

Within minutes, Fire Rescue Captain Tony Molloy and his team had set up a triage-and-treatment area so they could immediately evacuate the most severely injured.

Within minutes, the air traffic controllers and airport staff were effectively diverting traffic and travelers to secure the area.

Within minutes, local hospital staff had prepared, made ready and visited to provide the injured with the necessary care and support.

As we speak, the injured are recovering at San Francisco General Hospital, the source of pride to us in San Francisco. It is a major trauma center. And if you have to go to a trauma center, San Francisco General is the gold standard.

UCSF Medical Center, Stanford Hospital and Clinics, Lucile Packard Children's Hospital, St. Francis Memorial Hospital, St. Francis Medical Center, California Pacific Medical Center.

The swift and fearless response of each of the men and women who responded--each of these are heroes--saved the lives of many on the Asiana flight. Their actions are a hallmark of their professions and a testimony to the strength and selflessness that defines the San Francisco Bay Area.

The story of Asiana Flight 214 is not over. Long after the news of the tragedy fades from the front pages and nightly news reports, the National Transportation Safety Board will continue to investigate what happened, and we will all work to ensure that it never happens again.

I want to particularly commend the Board and Chairwoman Deborah Hersman for being on the scene immediately with an investigative team in the most professional, thorough manner.

We will continue to work with the Federal Aviation Administration and San Francisco International Airport to ensure that our planes are secure, our passengers are safe, our U.S. aviation remains the safest way to travel.

It's been decades since we had any incident at the San Francisco airport. I can't remember any.

We will honor the acts of the first responders, the flight crew, the flight crew, the flight crew--weren't they magnificent, weren't they all--the traffic controllers, the hospital staffs.

We will remember those lost in the tragedy and will do what we can to always ensure the safety and security of all travelers in America.

Again, our prayers are with those who suffered through that tragedy and the trauma that many experienced that is beyond physical but, hopefully, comforted by the prayers and interest of others.

Madam Chairman, I rise with the greatest respect, admiration, and appreciation to congratulate the distinguished gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey), who has served nearly 4 decades in the House of Representatives.

Two weeks ago, in their wisdom, the people of Massachusetts elected him to the United States Senate. I'm pleased to yield to the skillful leader, this person of great vision, a legislative virtuoso, a person who has served with great values. It is a bittersweet moment for me to yield for the last time to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey).

I thank the gentleman from Philadelphia for yielding and for giving us this opportunity to sing the praises of a great man, Chairman Bill Gray, Democratic Whip Bill Gray.

Mr. Speaker, I had the privilege just a few weeks ago of receiving a call from Bill Gray. And I said, oh, it was just out of the blue, wanting to know how my family was doing, challenging my husband to tennis, as always, telling him is he ready to get beaten by me, and this or that.

He said, I just want to know how things are. And he asked me how things were going here, just a call of friendship. And it was just so remarkable to me that about 2 weeks later we had the word.

He told me he was going to Wimbledon, he was taking his sons to

Wimbledon. He was going to go. He loved tennis.

And then when we got the word, it was just so strange, and I felt that God had really truly blessed me because I had that opportunity to speak with him, just out of the blue and within a matter of weeks before his passing.

I did have the privilege of serving with him. As I look around and see all these much younger Members, maybe they didn't all serve with him, but they knew of his great leadership for our country.

Anybody who did serve with him, or knew of the leadership of Bill Gray, knew that he was, in a word, a giant, a giant of Philadelphia, a giant of the Congress, a giant of our country. He was a leader and a trailblazer, a proud Representative of the people of Philadelphia. He just loved his district, a man who left his mark on the history of his city.

His time in Congress was an extension of his family business, public service, serving the community, acting on the values of his faith, giving back to his neighbors and the less fortunate.

Others have spoken about how he made this choice. This is a man who could have done anything in life. He had the talent. He had the stamina. He had the energy, the values and the rest. He was a success in anything he strove to do, but he chose the path that his family had laid out for him, ministering to the needs of people.

In the House of Representatives, Congressman Gray will forever stand as a first. He was the first African American to serve as chair of the Budget Committee, a very big deal, the first African American to serve as the majority whip in the House.

He sounded the alarm, not only about the injustices of apartheid in South Africa, but about what America and Congress could do to end it.

He broadened the reach of his public service beyond Congress, helping send more young people to college, as president and CEO of the United Negro College Fund, and how excited he was about that.

He did everything with gusto, whether it was serving as a Member, as a chairman, as the whip, and then to have his values be the focus of his work at the United Negro College Fund.

To serve alongside Bill Gray, I'm sure all of my colleagues will attest, was to be inspired by his passion and his commitment, by his focus on the future, and by his belief in the common good. It was an honor and privilege to know him as a colleague, a special privilege for any of us who had that privilege to call him friend.

We only hope it is a comfort to his wife, Andrea, whom he adored. I hope it is a comfort to Andrea and to William IV, to Justin, and to Andrew, that so many people mourn their loss, are praying for them at this sad time.

Well, he went doing what he enjoyed, at Wimbledon. Watching Wimbledon all weekend, all I could think of was Bill Gray being there.

So many people loved him. So many people share the grief of the Gray family. All I can say is that, knowing him over all of these years, he lived life to the fullest.

Though he left us too soon, what he packed into his years of life and service and leadership was something so remarkable. So that's why I thank the gentleman for recognizing Bill Gray and giving us the opportunity to do so on the floor with the admiration and affection that you have brought to this meeting this evening through all of the voices of our colleagues.

I'm sure we'll be saying more and more about Bill Gray. He wasn't into titles. He liked having the titles, but he liked the friendship of being called Bill Gray.

Mr. Speaker, on December 8, 1941, a page stood on the House floor as President Franldin Roosevelt spoke of a ``date which will live in infamy'' and asked the Congress to declare war on Japan.

The son of a Congressman, ready and willing to serve his country, this young man enlisted in the Army in 1944 and fought on distant shores in World War II. In 1955, he followed in the family tradition of public service, ran for his father's seat in Congress, and won.

Today, that page, that young man, is the Dean of the House and the longest-serving Member of Congress in history: John Dingell.

Over the course of nearly six decades, John Dingell has had a hand in almost every issue vital to the American people: from the air that we breathe and the water that we drink, to how the government serves its citizens, to essential consumer protections.

Yet, among his countless achievements, none hold greater significance than his contributions to the health of the American people. Indeed, it has been the constant theme of his career.

Health care was the family families--as his father had introduced the first-ever national health care legislation. In 1955, carrying forward that legacy, John Dingell ran for Congress on the platform of health care for all. In 1965, Medicare became the law of the land with the bang of John Dingell's gavel.

With each new Congress, he would introduce bills, hold hearings, build momentum for health reform, And in 2010, after half-a-century of fighting for his cause, he sat by President Obama's side to see the Affordable Care

Act signed into law--a dream long overdue, a dream of the Dingell family, a dream finally realized for all Americans.

To work alongside John Dingell is to be inspired by his strength and passion, by the history of our institution, by the seriousness of our work. This year, we recognize John Dingell as the longest-serving Member in Congress. But it is not only about the length of his service--it is about the quality of his leadership.

It is an honor to serve with him as a colleague. It is a privilege to know him as a friend. It is a source of pride to work with this living legend in the Congress of the United States.

May we all continue to be moved and strengthened by the dedication, commitment, and conviction of the great John Dingell.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding; but more importantly, I thank him for his outstanding leadership for helping us live the Bible here in the Congress. He has been a relentless, dissatisfied, persistent champion for feeding the hungry in America and throughout the world. He is the living example, personification of the Gospel of Matthew, and I appreciate the statements you made earlier about priorities and the least of our brethren.

I thank you, Mr. McGovern, for your leadership day in and day out of the task force on hunger and working with Congresswoman DeLauro, an appropriator, who shares your value on this subject. You both have been magnificent.

And I thank you as a mom, because we all have our motivation for going into politics or deciding that we're going to run for office, and my motivation can be described in three words: the children, the children, the children. As a mother of five myself and as a grandmother, I know how children thrive when they have the attention, the love, the food, and the care that they need.

It is always a wonderment to me that in this, the greatest country that ever existed in the history of the world, that one in four or one in five children goes to sleep hungry at night. So it is another wonderment to me why we should even have to have this conversation on the floor of the House as to whether we, as a nation, are prepared to feed our children.

We are all familiar with the comment, ``from the mouths of babes.'' From the mouth of babes. It's sometimes followed by ``come gems.'' In this case, ``from the mouths of babes comes food.'' Food to live, to be sustained, to be healthy, food to study and do well in school, food to have respect in their family and their friends and all the rest.

What's really interesting about it, though, for all the sentiment that is involved about feeding the children of our country, it makes economic sense to do so as well. The CBO, the Congressional Budget Office, says that rate increases of SNAP benefits is one of the two best options to boost growth and jobs in a weak economy. For every $1 invested in the SNAP program, for every $1 invested in that initiative, $1.70 is injected into the economy for economic activity. This purchasing power given to families who will spend it immediately because this is a necessity, this purchasing, injects demand into the economy, creating jobs. Don't take it from me. The Congressional Budget Office says this is one of the two best ways to boost growth.

Another economic aspect of this is that, as has been said over and over again, nearly 20 million children--20 million children--are the beneficiaries of food stamps.

Why do those families need food stamps? Well, some of them are families that are making the minimum wage. In fact, if you're a family of four and you have two wage earners, Mr. Chairman, the income you make from two wage earners making the minimum wage still has you below the poverty line and eligible for food stamps. Two wage earners making the minimum wage cannot afford to put food on the table; hence, they qualify for food stamps.

These food stamps in some ways are subsidizing a too low minimum wage in our country. So, speaking of the children, the children, the children, I hope that one of the other things that we will do here is to raise minimum wage, because that is the decent thing to do.

But many of the same people who want to cut food stamps--in fact, 2 million families out of food stamps--are the same people who are opposed to increasing the minimum wage. So it's a question of fairness. It's a question of decency. It's a question of respect for all of God's children. It's also a question of doing the right thing not only for the children but for our economy--$1.70 of economic growth injected for every $1 spent on food stamps.

Now, to cut food stamps and, therefore, reduce that economic growth might be considered one of the least smart ideas that you will hear here, but there is so much competition for that designation that it just fits comfortably among initiatives to suppress the wages and to cut food stamps. It's all part of a package, and it is not a pretty sight.

That's why, Mr. McGovern, your relentless, persistent, dissatisfied advocacy is such a beautiful thing in this arena where people take very lightly cutting 2 million people off of food stamps.

I urge our colleagues to support the McGovern amendment.

Madam Chairman, do you ever wonder what the American people think when they tune into C-SPAN to see what business is being attended to on the floor of the House? Do you ever wonder what the American people think when they are saying, What is happening to create jobs? What is happening to agree to a budget that will promote growth and reduce the deficit for our country? What is happening to make progress for the American people? Do you ever wonder about that, when they tune in and see debate on bills that are going no place? Do they think, Well, here it is, just another day in the life of the Republican-controlled Congress; another day without a jobs bill, another day without a budget agreement, another day ignoring the top priorities of the American people by the Republican majority?

Our constituents have made it clear time and time again we must work together to create jobs, to strengthen the middle class, and to grow the economy. Yet, once again, Republicans refuse to listen. Instead, we are debating legislation that endangers women's health and that disrespects the judgment of American women and their doctors on how to make judgments about women's health.

This bill would deny care to women in the most desperate circumstances--sad and desperate circumstances. It is yet another Republican attempt to endanger women. It is disrespectful to women; it is unsafe for families; and it is unconstitutional.

At the start of Congress, Republicans took great pride--and we joined them in that pride--in reading the Constitution, start to finish. It is a great day; it is a great document. Then the Republicans proceeded to ignore it. One example: this clearly unconstitutional bill.

Each day, Republicans claim they want to reduce the role of government, except when it comes to women's most personal decisions about their reproductive health. Leading groups of medical professionals and experts across the country believe that this legislation is dangerous and wrong.

That is the message we have seen from doctors and health care providers who have pointed out that this legislation would put medical professionals in an ``untenable position'' when treating ``women in need.''

That is the same message we've heard from national religious organizations, who have called on us to ``offer compassion, support, and respect for a woman and her family facing these difficult circumstances.''

I have a copy of a letter from 16 national religious groups that was sent to Speaker Boehner and to me, as Democratic leader, which I wish to submit for the Record.

Just another day in the Republican Congress: more extremism, more dead-end bills, and less progress on the real challenges facing all Americans. The American people want bipartisanship. They want progress. They don't want obstruction and delaying tactics.

Enough is enough. Let's vote ``no'' on this dangerous bill and let's get to work together to work on a fair budget that replaces the across- the-board cuts of the sequester with a plan to create jobs, grow the economy, and strengthen the middle class as we reduce the deficit.

Let's act now to put people to work and strengthen the middle class. I say it over and over.

Let's discard this assault on women's health and work together to make real progress for the American people.

I urge my colleagues to vote ``no.''

June 18, 2013.

16 National Religious Groups Oppose Ban on Abortion Care after 20 Weeks

Hon. John Boehner,

Speaker of the House, House of Representatives, Washington,

Mr. Speaker, our hearts are broken, but our spirit is not. That is the Sandy Hook promise.

Tomorrow marks 6 months since the tragedy in Newtown, a tragedy seared in the minds of every person across America--indeed, in the minds of millions across the world. Like the anniversaries of the shootings in Tucson, Arizona, in Oak Creek, and in so many other communities, tomorrow marks an anniversary of shock, uncertainty, violence, horror. Tomorrow marks another solemn reminder of the persistent plague of gun violence in our society and of the ongoing challenge to end it.

Over the past 6 months, many words have been spoken to offer our love and support to the community of Newtown and to the students and teachers of Sandy Hook. Yet, from the start, we have known that words of comfort would never be enough, that there would be no substitute for the action that we must take that would be a truly fitting memorial to the 20 children and six teachers and administrators lost that day.

Yesterday, we had visits from the families, who brought pictures of their loved ones who were lost--Daniel Barden, Lauren Rousseau, Benjamin Wheeler, Mary Sherlach, Dylan Hockley--heartbreaking photos of these children and family members who were lost. I don't know how much more motivation we need than to see the tears in their eyes and the resolve in their voices to use their grief as a source of strength to help save other people.

That would start with a vote on bipartisan legislation by Congressman Mike Thompson, Congressman Peter King, and 180 cosponsors to expand and strengthen our background checks. No one knows better than the people of Newtown--the men and women, mothers and fathers, brothers and sisters--who lost their loved ones on December 14, 2012. Since that dark day, the families of Newtown and their supporters have turned their sorrow into strength, their pain into perseverance, their unspeakable loss into unmatched courage and determination to carry on.

Yesterday, these mothers and fathers met with both Republican and Democratic leaders. Yet they had come with

no partisan agenda. They came as Americans who wished to spare their fellow parents and family members the mourning, fear and terror they felt 6 months ago. Their message is clear: honor the memories of the little children of these educators by helping to ensure that no other family is forced to endure such an unimaginable tragedy.

It had been unimaginable. Now we have seen it. Now our task is plain. We must restore confidence in the safety of our communities by taking clear, effective steps to prevent gun violence in our schools, homes, and neighborhoods.

I just read the names and showed the pictures of a few of the people whose lives were lost that day. For them and for others and for the lives we want to save, again I mention the bipartisan Thompson-King, King-Thompson legislation, which means to use this anniversary, certainly, to memorialize the victims of Newtown, but also to answer the call of their families to give gun violence prevention legislation a vote in the Congress of the United States.

Six months ago in Newtown, a lone gunman took the lives of 26 Americans. We all know that. It's emblazoned in our minds and in our souls. Since then, nearly 5,000 more Americans have fallen victim to gun violence. Now in Congress we must summon the courage to act. We must take inspiration from the courage of the Newtown families, from the courage it has taken to turn their grief into action. We must heed the moving words of the Sandy Hook promise: our hearts are broken; our spirit is not. As we mark this anniversary, we must uphold our most basic responsibility: the oath we take--the oath of office--to protect and defend the Constitution and to protect and defend the people of the United States.

Mr. Speaker, I thank our colleague Congresswoman Esty and our colleague Congressman Mike Thompson for their leadership in bringing us together this morning so that we cannot only remember but so that we can have the courage to act.

Mr. Speaker, today, our country mourns the loss of Senator Frank Lautenberg--a man whose life embodied the American Dream and who dedicated his career to putting that dream in reach for all Americans. The longest-serving senator in New Jersey's history and the last remaining World War II veteran in the Senate, he served us all with the strength, perseverance, and compassion that exemplifies the greatest generation.

A proud son of hard-working immigrants, Senator Lautenberg rose from humble beginnings to meet great success in business and public service. He was an entrepreneur who turned a small business into one of the largest computing services companies in the world. He was a soldier who put his life on the line to protect our country. He was a Senator who helped ban smoking in airplanes and around children, who worked to ensure parents could take time off to care for sick family members, who helped modernize the G.I. bill to ensure today's veterans could benefit from the same opportunity that he received,

Senator Lautenberg spent each day fighting to protect and improve the health, security, and well-being of every American. His lifetime of service leaves a legacy we must follow, and an expectation we must meet. We only hope it is a comfort to his wife Bonnie, his children and grandchildren that so many mourn their loss at this sad time.

The previous question was ordered.

Mr. Speaker, seventy years ago, a young man was ordained as a priest of the Congregation of Holy Cross and immediately volunteered to serve as a Navy Chaplain in World War II. At the time, duty to his church and commitments to his studies prevented him from serving in the Navy. Yet earlier this year, Father Theodore Hesburgh finally realized his dream: earning recognition as an Honorary Navy Chaplain.

This honor paid tribute to Father Hesburgh's extraordinary contributions--as a patriot of our country, as a leader of his Church, as a teacher and mentor, as a champion of the civil rights movement. He has been recognized by American presidents from Eisenhower to Obama. President Lyndon Johnson awarded him with the Presidential Medal of Freedom; President Clinton presented him with the Congressional Gold Medal, the highest honor Congress can bestow. These all paid tribute to a life that exemplified and gave meaning to the Navy Chaplain motto: ``vocati ad servitium''--``called to serve.''

It is only fitting that Father Hesburgh would be honored by the Navy, which has a rich history with Notre Dame. As he has noted in the past, during World War II, ``The Navy came in and kept us afloat until the war was over,'' using the Notre Dame campus for the Midshipmen's School, constructing drill halls and headquarters at the school, and building classrooms on the site of what is now the Hesburgh Library.

Father Hesburgh was called to serve his faith and his fellow Catholics. He would take his first job at Notre Dame as chaplain for married veterans and would rise to serve as President of the University. But what he has embraced most is performing the most basic duties of a C.S.C. priest: saying mass; assisting the needy and giving voice to the voiceless; serving the poor and the abandoned, the hungry and the homeless.

Father Hesburgh was called to serve the future of our country through his leadership in the field of higher education. He led Notre Dame for an incredible 35 years, yet his imprint extended further than a single campus. He demonstrated how to transform Catholic universities into exemplary institutions of higher education in modern times. He championed academic freedom and the pursuit of academic excellence. He has earned 150 honorary degrees, more than any other person in history.

Father Hesburgh was called to serve to advance the cause of human dignity and justice in our society. Appointed by President Eisenhower to the Civil Rights Commission in 1957, he would shine a light on the need for voting rights in the south. He would become known as an architect of the Civil Rights Act. He would find himself standing hand- in-hand with Martin Luther King Jr. at Soldier Field in Chicago, singing ``We Shall Overcome''--a photograph of which is proudly displayed in the National Portrait Gallery.

Known as ``Father Ted'' to many, he understood the purpose behind the call to service, once charging a gnpup of graduates to ``be the kind of person who not only understands the injustices of this life, but is also willing to do something about them.'' That is what Father Hesburgh has done every day for the past 70 years.

His students have been inspired by his message. Our country has been blessed by his leadership. The people have been strengthened by his presence. We are all grateful that he answered the call to serve.

On the 70th anniversary of his ordination and as we approach his 96th birthday, we know that Americans will long be blessed by the legacy of Father Theodore Hesburgh.

Mr. Speaker, it's with great sadness that I rise today to extend sympathy to the people of Oklahoma, and especially to our colleague, Congressman Cole, and his constituents who have been affected by the tornado. We just heard our President talk about how our prayers and our deeds are with the people of the community. We also just heard Mr. Larson talk about our acting immediately to provide the assistance to the people there; and to the extent that Congress can act quickly upon that, we should.

We've seen natural disasters come and go. They're all terrible. The loss of life is tragic, as well as the loss of homes and belongings. It's very hard to see how people can be made whole, but we are always hopeful that they will be. People say, Where do you find hope in a situation like that? It sits there comfortably between faith--we believe, and therefore we have hope--and the charity of others, that we can work together to come through this.

Whether it's earthquakes in California, storms in the Northeast, or hurricanes in the South, like Katrina, it's always tragic. There's something especially deeply saddening about what happened in Oklahoma City. It reminded me immediately of something that I carry in my heart.

I went to Italy as a representative of President Carter in 1980. It was a congressional delegation to deliver U.S. assistance following an earthquake in southern Italy. In one small town in the mountains that we visited, the roof of the church collapsed. And what was tragic about it that resembles what happened in Oklahoma is that in that church that day was the first grade. They were practicing for First Holy Communion. So every 7-year-old child in that village was a casualty. Every one died.

And so when there's loss of life, of course, it's always tragic. Everyone is a valuable life. But when every 7-year-old in the village dies, it just does something to your psyche. It's so sad. You grieve so deeply. It's so hard to console people. And it's sad to see what happened to the school in Oklahoma City. Twenty little children lost their lives, each one of them precious, all of them the future of the community. How deep the grief must be there. We must try to help wipe the tears away from that community. So many little children.

It was a beautiful sight to see the first responders trying to dig people out--and successfully. There was a picture today of a little boy pulled out from the rubble. Teachers made a valiant effort to cover children so that falling debris did not harm those who were still alive. And so whether it was first responders or teachers or families, it was a community coming together. This community has suffered a great loss of lives, a horrible loss of homes. What was a home became debris in a matter of minutes.

And so I hope that we all know what our responsibility is, because these children are America's children. Those that died have such an impact on the community. We must all appreciate the depth of the grief, the depth of the tragedy that has befallen. I'll never, ever forget the desperate look in the eyes of the people in the village of the mountains of Italy. As I said, we're always hopeful through prayer, which gives us strength; faith, which gives us hope; and the charity of others, which helps us to go forward.

So I hope it is a comfort to the people of the region that their loss is one

that is shared and mourned by our entire country, definitely in this Congress of the United States, and across the world. Whatever is in our power to be helpful to them, we will do--and we will do it quickly. Most importantly, they will always and ever be in our prayers.

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I thank him for his leadership and that of Mr. Levin and Mr. Waxman as the chairs of the three committees when this legislation, so transformative in the lives of the American people, was passed by the House of Representatives and now for coming to the floor today--I don't know what the word is--to even counter some of the ridiculousness that is being said on the other side of the aisle in relationship to the Affordable Care Act. The fact is that what's happening today is the Patients' Rights Repeal Act. That's what they want to do is repeal patients' rights.

Why are they doing this? Do you think it's a good idea to do this on Women's Health Week, to repeal legislation that gives a wide range of free

preventive services to women, protection being dropped for women when they are pregnant or when they are sick and they no longer will be charged higher premiums than men? Of course the Republicans want to repeal that today on Women's Health Week. But knowing soon that a woman will no longer be a preexisting medical condition is just one piece of it.

The fact is this is not a serious effort to repeal the act. That's not going to happen. What this is is another example of jobs evasion in several ways.

First of all, it is our job to come here and act for the good of the American people. Right now, the American people see that good as the creation of jobs. What is it, 134 days into this Congress and the Republican majority has yet to vote one bill out to create jobs? That's job evasion.

Here we are today with yet another one of their subterfuges. Let's not talk about jobs; let's use up time. What does it add up to? Up until now, it has been $54 million and 43-some days spent on this, the 37th effort to repeal the Affordable Care Act.

What we should be doing is what the Republicans have asked for, regular order, to go to the budget table, to reconcile the differences between the House and the Senate so that we can put forth a budget that creates jobs, that reduces the deficit, that strengthens the middle class. Instead, we're wasting the taxpayers' dollars and time on legislation that is going to undermine protections for the American people when it comes to their health and well-being.

This bill today just gives us another opportunity for our side to talk about the transformative nature of the Affordable Care Act.

If there were no reason to pass such a bill, if everyone loved his or her own health care and health insurance premiums, if that were the case, we would still have had to pass the legislation because the status quo in health care in our country was unsustainable from a financial standpoint. It was unsustainable for families, for individuals, for small businesses, and for corporate America.

The cost of health care was a competitiveness issue. As we try to retain our position as number one in the world--a competitive issue-- the cost of health care was rising. It certainly was unsustainable for cities, States, and the Federal Government. Our budget could not sustain the rapid increase of health care to our budget.

That is why, when the Speaker asked, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office responded by informing House Republicans in a letter sent yesterday reiterating that repealing the Affordable Care Act would increase the deficit by $109 billion over the next 10 years. They said that this is a figure that they had given the Speaker last July. There may be some little changes in it between now and then, but that was approximately where the figures were.

So if you want to reduce the deficit, you don't repeal the Affordable Care Act because you will increase the deficit by $109 billion over the next 10 years. The purpose of the bill was not only to improve the quality of health care, increase accessibility to many more people and to lower the cost, but that in lowering the cost, it would reduce the deficit.

So it's a bill, and pretty soon many more Americans will be taking advantage of it. So far, over 100 million Americans have taken advantage of the preventive services and over 100 million Americans are no longer subjected to lifetime limits on their insurance coverage. That's a remarkable thing. Seniors who are in the doughnut hole have seen their prescription drug costs reduced by around $6 billion. Right now young people can stay on their parents' insurance policy until they're 26 years old.

The list goes on and on about the preventive exams that are free to seniors. The list goes on and on about what benefits the action that the Republicans are taking today would repeal that are good for the health and well-being of the American people. This bill is not just about health care; it's about the good health of the American people.

It's about prevention. It's about wellness. It's about electronic medical records that will change everything in terms of access to care and the quality of your care because your records are wherever you are. It's entrepreneurial.

Our Founders, in their dedication, in their sacrifice, in their courage called for life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness as goals of our new Republic, of our democracy; and this bill honors the vows of our Founders in just that way--a healthier life, the liberty to pursue your happiness. If you're an artist or if you're a photographer or a writer, if you want to be self-employed, if you want to start a business, if you want to change jobs, whatever it is, you are no longer job-locked because you can only go as fast in reaching your passion and your aspirations as your health insurance program will take you.

If you have a child with a preexisting medical condition, or if you're concerned with being sick yourself, you no longer are confined in your pursuit of happiness by the cost of a health care premium or the ability to even get one. It is entrepreneurial.

We even see articles now, and, Mr. Chairman, you have pointed them out in the public media about young people, or not even young people, but people who want to leave companies and start their own businesses. They're waiting for this bill to be fully implemented so they have that freedom to go forth.

So while I think it is a waste of the public's time to take this bill up on the floor of the House, to hear my colleagues talk on the floor, you think either they don't know what they're talking about, or they do. But in either case, they're not presenting the facts about what this legislation does.

It is going to be right up there with Social Security and Medicare as pillars of economic and health security for the American people. It is going to make us more competitive internationally because our businesses will not have an anvil of the rising cost of health care. It reduces the deficit, improves the health and well-being of the American people. It's about the entrepreneurial spirit of America. It honors the vows of our Founders of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

This legislation should be rejected; and pretty soon more people, as they take advantage of the legislation, will see just how important it is to them individually and how important it is to the health and well- being of our country.