Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I thank our whip for trying to whip some common sense into this debate.

I want to focus on the claims of the Republicans that this is a middle class tax cut. Halloween is over, but the masks of the Republican are still on. I think the largest and the most dangerous one is the claim that this is a middle class tax cut.

Mr. Speaker, I want to quote the President: ``It is a tax bill for middle class.''

Again, the President: ``We will cut taxes tremendously for the middle class--not just a little bit, but tremendously.''

The Speaker: ``The focus is on middle class tax relief.''

The chairman of the committee: ``The truth is this is whole tax reform is designed for the middle class family that is working so hard or that Main Street business that is working so hard.''

The majority leader in the Senate:

To keep growing again, like we need this code to do, to get

new jobs, opportunity, and significant tax relief for the

middle class.

Mr. Mnuchin: ``On the personal tax side, middle-income people are getting cuts and rich people are getting very little cuts or, in certain cases, increases under the Republican bills.''

Mr. Mnuchin again: ``Any reductions we have in upper income taxes will be offset by less deductions, so there will be no absolute tax cut for the upper class.''

Senator Hatch: ``Tax reform will provide relief and bigger paychecks to low- and middle-income families, make America a better place to start and grow a business, and allow American businesses to compete in the global marketplace.''

The Joint Tax Committee and other entities have shown that this is not at all a middle class tax cut. The main beneficiaries are the very, very wealthy.

Also, in terms of passthrough, there is so much talk that this will help the small-business person. The truth of the matter is that the vast majority of the benefit for passthroughs is going to go to the very wealthy.

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Hoyer has been taking the lead on this and I salute him.

Mr. Speaker, I just want to close by saying one thing about the deficits. You know, I don't think they called Mr. Hoyer a deficit hawk because he always wanted a balance, and he always said: ``Look, deficits by themselves aren't the only issue, but they are deeply relevant.''

Mr. Hoyer and I have stood together with others. When bills came up, which seemed so attractive, but were unpaid for, hundreds of billions of dollars, we said to the Republicans and anyone who voted with them: ``You are increasing the deficit, and it is very risky.''

Mr. Speaker, as true as that may have been--and Mr. Hoyer and I thought it was some years ago, or last year included--it is now even more relevant and more dangerous because here we have a proposal in the House and it is going to be duplicated in the Senate. It is going to increase the deficit at least $1.5 trillion, and the notion is it will be taking care of growth.

Mr. Speaker, I close by saying maybe that is the second biggest Halloween mask on the bill here and in the Senate. The notion of ``Don't worry about tax losses all of a sudden, don't worry about the deficit increasing, because growth will take care of it,'' we have seen that mask before.

Mr. Speaker, I just wanted to join Mr. Hoyer, but also to salute him for his dedicated and endless determination to really talk sense and talk the truth.

Mr. Speaker, I thank Mr. Hoyer for yielding to me.

And I will keep doing it.

And now Mr. Hoyer is going to yield to another champion who has worked how many years on these issues?

Don't say it is a long time.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding and for all of his work he has done over the years.

The Republican tax bill is built on massive deception. The deception is that, as the Speaker put it: ``The focus is on middle class tax relief.'' That is simply not true.

As the nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation said, roughly one out of every four Americans with income between $50,000 and $100,000 would pay higher taxes in 2023, far overshadowing the $1,000 or so for other families. In 2019, those earning over $1 million would get an average tax cut of $73,000.

Even as modified in last-minute desperation, the wealthiest would receive 90 percent of the new tax break for so-called passthrough income.

Another deception is that tax breaks pay for themselves. On this, some people may have been in the past fooled once, fewer twice, but none thrice.

A further deception is that exploding the deficit and national debt to $1.7 trillion will disappear as it promotes growth. Not only is this a 180-degree Republican turn, but it threatens Medicare and other critical programs and will worsen the vast inequalities in income and wealth in America.

It is said that necessity is the mother of invention. In this case, Republican political necessity is the mother of desperation and deception.

I don't think so. Mr. Neal has spelled out, and you have, the atrocious approach here. So I think we can sum it up. The process has been terrible. The product is worse. That is what happens when you have a very terrible process, you get a frightfully bad product.

Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Speaker, I wanted to ask you to yield just at this moment. The gentleman talked about a tax cut for the middle class. The problem with this terrible process is there isn't time enough to challenge those who say something that is false. I just want to read again what the Speaker said relating to your point.

He said this: ``The focus is on middle class tax relief. The focus is on directing that tax relief to the people in the middle and the people who are trying to get there.''

This bill is the opposite. As we discussed with our ranking member at the markup, and we challenged it, the Joint Tax said to us: Well, I think--and we will show this to you--that there are going to be millions of people in the middle class who, in subsequent years, will have their taxes increased, not decreased. Millions.

When we asked about the passthrough--picking up on the gentleman's point about the middle class--he pointed to tables which showed that the vast majority of the moneys that are going to go through passthroughs, that are going to get some tax help, the vast majority are for very wealthy people. While we don't have the final figures, it is likely that 85 to 90 percent is going to go to the very wealthy.

I think so much of what they have said is so untrue. They say that necessity is the mother of invention. In this case, necessity, their political necessity, has been the mother of deception.

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

Mr. Speaker, this is really the question: Why in the world are we taking up a bill to terminate a board that does not exist? Why in the world are we doing so when premiums are rising and action should be taken to strengthen them? Why in the world are we passing a bill that would increase the deficit by $17.6 billion? Pay for CHIP, the Republicans say, but not this bill.

So however you feel about IPAB, this is the wrong time and the wrong bill for addressing it. The ACA enrollment period began yesterday, and because of actions of the Trump administration, consumers across the country face confusion and instability in the market.

Rather than addressing these urgent issues, we are engaged today in a political exercise to repeal IPAB, a board that has no members under a provision that has never taken effect and is not projected to be triggered before 2021, according to CMS actuaries.

In September, every Democratic member of the Ways and Means Committee wrote to Chairman Brady urging bipartisan action to stabilize the insurance market. But after repeated requests, we never received a response from the chairman, and, to date, the House has taken no action on behalf of consumers.

In the meanwhile, the Trump administration has continued to work to undermine the law and access to healthcare by: one, cutting off funding for cost-sharing assistance for moderate-income enrollees; two, slashing funds to navigators that help consumers enroll in coverage-- the biggest navigator in Michigan had its funding cut by 90 percent; three, shortening the enrollment period; four, shutting down healthcare.gov on weekends; and five, proposing to chip away at consumer protections through executive fiat.

These actions have significantly contributed to insurers exiting the market and raising premiums. It is nothing less than direct and deliberate sabotage; so, instead, the Republicans today bring up a bill about a board that does not exist, and the latest is it would not until 2021, at the earliest.

There are simple actions that we can take today to repair some of the damage and, thereby, improve the insurance markets. Senators Lamar Alexander and Patty Murray recently came to a bipartisan agreement that would provide funding for the cost-sharing reductions and outreach and enrollment activities that strengthen the risk pool in the marketplace.

Unfortunately, as we see today, my Republican colleagues continue to ignore these and other important issues, while allowing an administration, obsessed with repeal of ACA, to do so through executive action what could not be done legislatively.

What is more, they are bringing to the floor today a bill that the Congressional Budget Office estimates will raise the deficit by $17.5 billion over the next decade. I repeat, raise the deficit by $17.5 billion over the next decade. And this is just a small preview of the coming GOP tax bill, which would increase our Nation's debt by $1.5 trillion according to the Republican's own budget resolution.

And whatever happened to the crocodile tears we used to hear from Republicans about the deficit? In terms of today's bill lacking any offset, how about at least starting to address the staggering cost of prescription drugs, a step that would save both senior citizens and the Medicare program money.

Mr. Speaker, the American people need Congress to take action to lower their healthcare costs and to stabilize the markets. They do not need today an irrelevant political bill such as H.R. 849. If you support real steps to lower health insurance premiums now, vote ``no'' on this bill.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Kind).

Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the gentleman from Wisconsin.

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

Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time, unless Mr. Paulsen is ready to close.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I want to say this to my colleagues, whom I very much respect, who signed on to this bill, many of them early on this year. There have been three changes of circumstance:

First, right then, it appeared that IPAB might come into existence in 2017. Now the actuary has made clear that will not happen under these circumstances until 2021.

Secondly, since the bill was introduced, circumstances have changed. The administration has taken steps to undercut healthcare for Americans. So because of cost-sharing and other issues, premiums have been rising. That is a second change of circumstance why this is the wrong bill at the wrong time.

Third, the last time it came up, it was paid for. In the Committee on Ways and Means, when we raised this issue, we were told, as always: Well, we don't have to pay for it in the committee, but it can be paid for on the floor.

This is totally unpaid for, zero, no effort to pay for it, and it would add $17.5 billion to the national debt. Already, it is at its record level with, now, the threat of $1.5 trillion more.

So I really urge, no matter what were the circumstances when you signed on, in almost every case they have changed, and so there is such good reason why this is the wrong bill at the wrong time, and I think to vote for this is really the wrong vote.

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

Mr. Speaker, the Republican budget politically paving the way for their tax reform proposals can best be described as an elixir of growth, a magic cure-all. Instead, it is a fake, indeed dangerous, potion.

History has shown that a huge tax cut, primarily for the very wealthy and large corporations, does not promote growth, and will make life harder for the middle class and everyone else.

This budget calls dangerously for raising our debt by $1.5 trillion, creating a future deficit tax for middle-income families; cutting Medicare by nearly $500 billion; cutting Medicaid and other health programs by $1.3 trillion; and assuming $4 trillion in cuts to a broad range of programs, which could include education and health research.

Mr. Speaker, vote ``no'' on this budget.

Madam Chair, I am disappointed that this bill, H.R. 2824, injects needless controversy into reauthorizing the Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting Program.

Home visiting is an evidence-based approach that connects pregnant women and families with young children to nurses, social workers, and other professionals. Through these programs, parents learn skills that help reduce abuse and neglect and improve child development during the crucial early years of life.

Most importantly, home visiting is backed by strong evidence that shows these programs are an effective way to improve outcomes for at- risk families. Unfortunately, H.R. 2824 ignores the proven successes of home visiting in favor of harmful, partisan changes to the law. In particular, I am troubled by language in this bill that would cut off funding to States and Tribal organizations that are unable to match Federal spending on home visiting. The bipartisan bill in the Senate does not do that; you do.

Advocates are concerned that this could cause States to scale back or even end their programs altogether. In addition, this bill makes a number of ill-advised changes that have little or no apparent justification. Research shows that home visiting programs are working well, yet only 6 percent of eligible individuals currently participate. We should be looking at expanding, not undermining, access to home visiting.

We need, at the very least, a clean bill that reauthorizes the home visiting program in a bipartisan way. Unfortunately, H.R. 2824 is not that bill, and, for that reason, I urge that we vote ``no.''

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the 100th Anniversary of Selfridge Air National Guard Base. Selfridge ANGB is home to the Air National Guard 127th Wing, which operates KC-135 Stratotankers and the A-10 Thunderbolt II. The base is also currently home to more than 20 tenant units from all branches of the military, the Coast Guard, and Border Patrol.

Opened in 1917, the base, then called Selfridge Field, was one of only nine military air fields in the United States as we entered World War I. The field remained a training ground through World War II. In 1943, the 332d Fighter Group of the historic Tuskegee Airmen was garrisoned at the base.

After World War II ended, Selfridge expanded its borders to its current size and was renamed Selfridge Air Force Base. The base continued to train pilots and stand ready through the Cold War. For twenty years, Selfridge AFB provided ground-controlled interception coverage for interceptor aircraft and surface-to-air missiles. When the Air Force's mission at Selfridge ended in 1970, the base was transferred to the Michigan Air National Guard, becoming Selfridge Air National Guard Base.

Today, Selfridge ANGB continues to be an important member of the southeast Michigan region, and a vital resource in the defense of our nation. The base works to bring aviation themed math and science education to our community through the STARBASE program. Selfridge ANGB also continues to excel at its mission, and was most recently awarded both the Carl A. Spaatz Award and the Air Force Meritorious Unit Award.

I encourage my colleagues to join me in celebrating and honoring the 100th Anniversary of Selfridge Air National Guard Base and the men and women of the 127th Wing who continue to serve our country admirably. As a beacon of community involvement and military excellence, we look forward to Selfridge ANGB's continued service for many years to come

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to mourn the passing of the Chinese human rights advocate and Nobel Prize Laureate, Liu Xiaobo, who died last Thursday in China, under guard.

The world has lost an incomparably courageous advocate who was dedicated to advancing human rights and the rule of law, and paid for them with his own freedom and life.

Liu's passing last week in Chinese custody marked a tragic end to over a decade of persecution by the Chinese authorities who relentlessly mistreated him as he gradually became a symbol of the pro- democracy movement around the globe.

In 2010, the Nobel Peace Committee awarded him the Peace Prize for his thoughtful advocacy for reform and for his courageous support of the pro-democracy document Charter 08.

A year prior to the Nobel Peace Prize being awarded to Liu, in 2009, Chinese authorities tried him for subversion of state power, for which he received an 11-year sentence. Given his rising stature in the international community, they imprisoned him in secret locations away from family, supporters, or international media. They kept him from receiving the Peace Prize and put pressure on the committee to rescind the award, in addition to doing everything they could to prevent Liu's supporters from attending the ceremony in Norway.

They routinely censored and continue to censor the internet for references to Liu and other pro-democracy advocates and ideas.

China was so afraid of the power of his words and the bravery of his actions that while Liu was suffering from severe illness, Chinese authorities adopted the ultimate cruelty of not letting him leave China for medical help that experts said might save his life. For China, the supreme goal was his silence.

The more we care about human rights and freedom, the more we must now mark his death and remember him not by being silent ourselves.

I first came to know about Liu's work a few years after the Congressional-Executive Commission on China was created as part of the debate over China's ascension to the World Trade Organization and concerns from Members of Congress over China's human rights record.

In 2000, I coauthored the legislation that created the China commission to help advance and monitor human rights abuses in China. The commission continues to do important work and continues today by shining a spotlight on many issues such as abuses in labor, environment, and freedom of speech and association.

While he was the most prominent voice in China against its repression of human rights and democratic values, Liu was not as well known in his life as another brave voice, Andrei Sakharov. His voice and action occurred during the Cold War, where there was a full press against the Soviet Union, including its suppression of freedom. He supported numerous efforts for freedom, including those of another noble warrior for freedom, Natan Sharansky. Like Sakharov, Liu was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, but both were kept in virtual imprisonment and not allowed to go to Stockholm.

Liu's battles for freedom occurred when China's economic and political power were rising. The United States and other nations were wrestling with how to adapt, and relations with China have been increasingly infused with concerns about security, including the nuclearization of North Korea. So there has been a tendency for concerns in other nations about human rights and freedom in China to take a back seat.

This is a major change from the days of Tiananmen Square, and events elsewhere then in China. My son, Andy Levin was in Chengdu during demonstrations there for freedom and he managed amidst all the dangerous turbulence to cable a vivid article about the struggle for freedom there to the Detroit News.

Chinese authorities have also relentlessly harassed his widow, Liu Xia (Lew Tsia), by keeping her in isolation, under house arrest for weeks at a time, and monitoring her every move. For as long as she remains there, the

authorities will continue to see her as a symbol of dissent, and continue to harass her in every way imaginable.

The U.S. government at all levels, including the highest, must speak up clearly for her freedom.

I end today by leaving you with Liu words to his wife on the last day before his trial for subversion of state power in 2009:

``Even if I am crushed into powder, I will embrace you with ashes. I will calmly face the impending trial, with no regrets for my choices, and will look forward with hope to tomorrow.''

Mr. Speaker, this act jeopardizes American families' ability to afford health insurance.

The so-called Verify First Act would require a new verification process of an individual's Social Security number before he or she can receive any tax credit for health coverage, either under the ACA or under the disastrous House-passed TrumpCare bill.

This bill does nothing to address the reality that more than 23 million Americans would lose health insurance under the Republican healthcare legislation; nor does it address the harm caused by cutting $800 billion from Medicaid by eliminating the expansion

for moderate-income workers and by imposing per capita caps on program spending; and it does nothing to address higher premiums for older workers and discrimination against Americans with preexisting conditions that will occur under the TrumpCare bill that this legislation is amending.

Instead, this bill takes that one step further by making it harder for children, including newborns and survivors of domestic violence and sex trafficking, to obtain a tax credit for purchasing their own health coverage. Under the legislation, Social Security numbers would be required before receiving a tax credit, and it prohibits the use of an individual taxpayer identification number, which those without a Social Security number use to file their tax returns.

Mr. Speaker, as has already been said, there are already protections built into the law to ensure that tax credits are issued to qualifying individuals. Under current law, eligibility for tax credits is verified when an individual applies to enroll in coverage. The eligibility is then subject to a secondary verification process that identifies ineligible individuals and terminates their coverage. This system strikes a balance between rigorously verifying eligibility, while also ensuring that eligible individuals are not subject to financial hardship because of red tape.

Mr. Speaker, this bill would make it more difficult for American families to access affordable healthcare. I oppose this bill, and I urge my colleagues to do the same.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to two remarkable people from my home state of Michigan, Madeleine Berman and her late husband, Mandell Berman. The Bermans are being honored by the Detroit Symphony Orchestra (DSO) at its seventh annual Heroes Gala on June 10, 2017 for their significant contributions to the DSO, which plays a vital role in the vibrant cultural fabric of Southeast Michigan.

For many of us privileged with the long and warm personal friendship with Madge and Bill Berman, who passed away at the age of 99 last December, this Heroes Gala provides the opportunity to give thanks for the blessings of their generosity to the DSO, as well as a very broad range of community interests.

In recognition of his leadership, Bill Berman was given the Russell G. Mawby Award by the Council of Michigan Foundations in 2012, and he was inducted into the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. Madge Berman has served two terms on the President's Committee for the Arts, to which she was appointed by President Bill Clinton in 1994 and reappointed by President Barack Obama in 2009, and received the national Legacy Award from Americans for the Arts, which she has served as a board member since 1989.

Their passion for the arts and education truly came together in Bill and Madge's support for the DSO, particularly in their vision and support for its ``Live from Orchestra Hall: Classroom Edition'' program. Grounded in her background in music, communication and theater, Madge Berman wanted to find a way to use technology to help bring the experience of the orchestra to young people in Detroit who may otherwise not be exposed to it. She and Bill brought the idea to the leadership of the DSO, and ``Live from Orchestra Hall: Classroom Edition'' was born. This one of a kind webcast series aimed at youth is made available at no cost to every classroom in the Detroit Public Schools Community District, and students from throughout the United States and the world have experienced the beauty of orchestral music through its availability on the

DSO's website. A Teacher's Resource Guide is also available on the website to enable educators to create lessons accompanying the concerts.

With their devotion of time and financial resources, they have supported a wide array of organizations in the promotion of education, animal welfare, the arts, and hunger alleviation. Bill Berman was for nearly endless decades a uniquely inspirational force in the Jewish community. In education, he was cofounder of the Jewish Education Services of North America and funded the University of Michigan Hillel, which bears his name, as well as holding vital posts in a large number of Jewish organizations in Michigan and nationally. Combining their love of theater and Jewish education, Bill and Madge Berman founded the Berman Center for the Performing Arts at the Jewish Community Center in West Bloomfield, Michigan.

As Mark Davidoff, chairman of the DSO's board of directors, told the Detroit Jewish News, ``What I learned from the Bermans is the art of stewardship. The manner in which they curated their financial and community commitments is a lesson for us all. They created a sustainable legacy in areas important to all of us, including community cohesion, education, and arts and culture.''

When the Detroit Symphony Orchestra performs, from Beethoven to Gershwin, on Saturday, June 10 at the Heroes Concert and Gala, it will indeed be sounding fervent notes of tribute to two true heroes.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Dr. James Jacobs, who is retiring at the end of June from a 50-year career at Macomb Community College (MCC). Since 2008, Dr. Jacobs has served as President of MCC.

On its face, the pairing of Dr. Jacobs and Macomb Community College was improbable. A native of Brooklyn, New York with a Ph.D. in Politics from Princeton University, the notion that Dr. Jacobs would accept a faculty position at a Midwestern community college seemed, to his university peers at least, to be highly unlikely. As Dr. Jacobs told the Detroit Free Press in January of 2016, ``They said, `Do you need help finding a job? We can help you find something.' ''

What those colleagues did not understand was that Jim Jacobs' passion for activism and his belief that, as a profile written about him for Advancing Macomb put it, ``. . . as a college professor he could be a positive change agent for the country,'' was deeply held. At the request of a friend, Dr. Jacobs accepted an invitation to speak to students at MCC. As he explained in the same profile, ``Two things immediately impressed me. First, the students were real people and included Vietnam veterans, auto workers and homemakers, who were in college asking good questions based on their life experiences. They brought a refreshing perspective that was dramatically different to my experience at Princeton.'' So, when he was offered a part-time position at MCC as a professor of economics, Dr. Jacobs brought his commitment to helping working class people build their futures to Macomb County.

Dr. Jacobs has been an enthusiastic advocate for the importance of helping people to deal with the challenges of a changing economy through new skills training. During his tenure as President, MCC has enhanced its reputation as a pre-eminent institution for workers displaced by economic change to gain the skills needed to achieve career success. As a testament to the high regard in which MCC is held, former President Barack Obama visited the college three times to highlight the importance of workforce development and worker retraining.

Dr. Jacobs is also widely known for his annual ``Macomb County Economic Forecast,'' which he delivers to a coalition of the county's local chambers of commerce. In his report, Dr. Jacobs delves deeply into the state of the county's economy--including employment, wages, home values, demographic changes, and more--which he places in context with state and national economic trends, and projects future economic change based on his analysis of the data. This report is highly valued not only by chamber of commerce members, but by county, state and federal policy makers.

My office and I have turned to Dr. Jacobs on innumerable occasions to better understand an education or economic issue, to fully

immerse ourselves in local demographic developments, and to collaborate on local economic development issues. He was instrumental as chair of the local committee that oversaw the return of federal property to the City of Warren for economic development during a Base Closure and Realignment Commission (BRAC) process. He was proactive in talking about the economic opportunities that exist in the defense sector for Macomb County and Southeast Michigan, and in ensuring a vital role for MCC in training and re-training efforts in this sector. In recent years, he has spoken out eloquently about the role of new immigrants in the County and at the College. Each of these examples highlights how Dr. Jacobs combines a unique ability to look to the future, with an appreciation of the past and always a grounding in the realities of working families. We have benefitted tremendously from his expertise, but more importantly from his passion and commitment for all of these issues.

While he is retiring from Macomb Community College, he will continue the important work to which he has been committed for five decades. He will join the Ralph C. Wilson Jr. Foundation, which focuses its philanthropic efforts in Southeast Michigan and in Western New York, advising it on how it can best support programs which will help working class families receive skills training and education to better secure their futures.

The President of the Center for Automotive Research, Jay Baron, told the Detroit Free Press, ``Jim can talk to presidents and he can talk to the guy in the tool and die shop.'' Jim Jacobs has always known that presidents are important, but his life's work has been to help that person in the tool and die shop achieve economic security for his or her family in an ever-changing economy. Mr. Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to join me in thanking Dr. James Jacobs for his immeasurable contributions to Macomb Community College and to the people of Macomb County, and in wishing him the very best as he retires from the important institution which he served for 50 years.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my gratitude to Carmella Sabaugh, who retired from her position as Macomb County Clerk at the beginning of this year. This week she is being honored for her 40 years of distinguished public service.

Carmella Sabaugh began her public career in 1975, when as a young mother of 5 children she was elected to the Warren City Council. She was elected as Warren City Clerk in 1979, a position she held for 11 years, and in 1992, she was elected as Macomb County Clerk. She was subsequently re-elected as County Clerk five times, and chose not to run again in 2016.

As Macomb County Clerk, Carmella was singularly focused on providing model customer service, and worked with her office's team of committed public employees to introduce innovations which made citizens' interactions with the Clerk's office as simple as possible. During Carmella's 24 years as Clerk, her office received 65 Achievement Awards from the National Association of Counties (NACo). These awards highlight innovative programs instituted at the local level, and the programs are shared with clerks around the country as models they can look to as they seek to improve their own operations.

Among her many accomplishments, Carmella and her team made it easier for people to register and exercise their right to vote, created programs to help prevent real estate and other fraud, brought innovations to the operation of the jury room at the Macomb County Circuit Court, and created county photo ID cards for veterans and a program to help veteran's survivors access benefits. And over the years, as new technology and other ways to improve the operation of the Clerk's office became available, Carmella made sure that her office never stopped innovating. Two examples related to awards the Clerk's office received from NACo help to illustrate Carmella's commitment to using new advances to modernize her office, even if that advance replaced something which just a few years earlier had been recognized as a best practice. In 2010, the County Clerk's office received an award for providing jurors waiting to be called for duty to receive pagers so that they could be notified that they were due in court. In 2016, the office received an award for using

text messages to do the same thing. And in 2005, the Macomb County Clerk's office was recognized for providing free bus rides to jurors, while in 2016, they received an award for providing jurors with Uber rides to the court.

Those who know Carmella Sabaugh well, as I do, know that her excellence in public service is matched by the quality of her friendship. In the many years I have known her, I have deeply appreciated her warmth, kindness, and generosity of spirit.

Mr. Speaker, Carmella Sabaugh provided the people of Macomb County with truly outstanding service for 40 years. I encourage my colleagues to join me in expressing deep appreciation for all she has done, and in wishing her well in retirement.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Dr. David DiChiera, who is retiring from the Michigan Opera Theatre. While he began his distinguished and impassioned career in California, he became known in Michigan and beyond as Mr. Opera. He is retiring from the Michigan Opera Theatre, which he founded in 1971 and which he served as General Director and Artistic Director. After completing his undergraduate studies in musical composition at UCLA, David DiChiera continued his scholarship in Italy on a Fulbright scholarship, and returned to UCLA to join the faculty and to complete his PhD in musicology. In 1962, Dr. DiChiera was recruited to join the faculty at Oakland University as a professor. He later became chairman of music at the university.

While at Oakland University, Dr. DiChiera created ``Overture to Opera,'' a program featuring local opera singers which brought opera to communities throughout Michigan, and which planted the seeds for the creation of Michigan Opera Theatre. As Dr. DiChiera explained in an interview, ``I would cast the wonderful local singers who otherwise had limited opportunities . . . we started taking this program to community centers--every year, I took it to The War Memorial and area schools. This was all throughout the 1960s. Then, in 1970, I thought it was time to do a full-length opera, and to create the beginnings of an opera company.''

It is important to keep in mind the backdrop for Dr. DiChiera's efforts to create an opera company in Detroit. By 1971, when Michigan Opera Theatre was established, the city itself was experiencing a major loss of population and many people were skeptical that this endeavor could succeed. But Michigan Opera Theatre not only succeeded, it thrived--first at the Music Hall in downtown Detroit which was restored with the support of the Kresge Foundation and Detroit Renaissance, and later at the Detroit Opera House, which was formally opened on April 21, 1996 with a performance by the great tenor Luciano Pavarotti.

Dr. DiChiera's impact extends beyond his building of this important institution. He has been a vital center of gravity for arts and culture in and around the City of Detroit. He has been committed to nurturing and showcasing the broad diversity of talent in opera, something which he viewed from the inception of Michigan Opera Theatre as central to its mission. ``Building bridges into the community was a primary mission,'' he said in the Theatre's blog, ``making sure that the African American community, the majority of Detroit's population, was represented on the stage.'' In addition to producing works which reflect the African American experience such as Porgy and Bess and Tremonisha, the Michigan Opera Theatre commissioned and produced the world premiere of Margaret Garner, based on the novel Beloved written by Nobel Laureate Toni Morrison. Ms. Morrison wrote the libretto for Margaret Garner, and the production starred famed mezzo-soprano Denyce Graves. Dr. DiChiera has ensured that Michigan Opera Theatre has performed works reflecting the rich cultural fabric of Metro Detroit, including the Armenian opera Anoush, King Roger and The Haunted Castle, which celebrate the region's Polish community, an opera based on the life of the Mexican artist Frida Kahlo, and The Passenger, an opera about the Holocaust.

In addition to founding, building, and leading Michigan Opera Theatre, Dr. DiChiera is a noted composer as well. In further tribute to him, the Michigan Opera Theatre is featuring this month Dr. DiChiera's full-length opera, Cyrano, based on Edmond Rostand's timeless play, Cyrano de Bergerac.

Mr. Speaker, like innumerable opera aficionados, I know that David DiChiera has brought boundless joy to experienced opera lovers while helping to create countless new ones. Along the way, he has nurtured young artists and has ensured that the Michigan Opera Theatre reflects the diversity of the community it serves. Dr. DiChiera built an enduring institution in Michigan Opera Theatre, and in so doing, he has established himself as one of Metro Detroit's true treasures. I encourage my colleagues to join me in congratulating and thanking much beloved Dr. David DiChiera for the immeasurable contribution he has made to the arts in Metro Detroit and far beyond.

Mr. Speaker, it has just been said that no one with a preexisting condition will be denied treatment. That is a cruel falsehood. Roughly 129 million Americans today have a preexisting condition.

Here is what the AMA says to refute what was just said: ``The history of high-risk pools demonstrates that Americans with preexisting conditions will be stuck in second class health coverage, if they are able to obtain coverage at all.''

Now we have a proposal for $8 billion. That is a deceitful fraud. I intend going back home to travel the State of Michigan and elsewhere and tell the American people that although those who have said that are simply not being truthful, they essentially are turning their backs on 129 million Americans. We Democrats will never turn our back on the people of the United States of America. When it comes to health care, it is a vital need.

Mr. Speaker, we are seeing President Trump attempt to repeal the Affordable Care Act, both breaking his own promises and making it worse for American families.

He promised to protect Americans with preexisting conditions, but any State could allow insurers to raise premiums for Americans with preexisting conditions and make their insurance too expensive to afford. Any State could jeopardize access to mental health, emergency, maternal, and prescription drug coverage. And any State could charge older workers an age tax that would devastate middle class families.

The proposals will steal $1 trillion from Medicare and Medicaid in exchange for giveaways to the very wealthy and corporations.

The President and Republicans are turning their backs both on their own rhetoric and the real needs and lives of American families.