Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I am opposed to the House agreeing to conference with the Senate on their cruel and immoral $1.7 trillion tax giveaways to wealthy corporations and the top one percent, but as a member of the Budget Committee, I rise in strong support of the Democratic Motion to Instruct Conferees appointed by the House to conference with the Senate on H.R. 1, the so-called ``Tax Cut and Jobs Act,'' which more accurately should be called the ``Republican Tax Scam Act.''

The Motion to Instruct does two things: first, it directs House conferees to disagree with Section 11081 of the Senate amendment which would eliminate the Affordable Care Act's individual mandate by instructing conferees.

Second, the Motion to Instruct would also oppose eliminating the current tax deduction for state and local property, income, and sales taxes by instructing house conferees to recede from Section 1303 of the House bill.

Instead, we should junk this shameful legislation and start over in a bipartisan manner that provides relief to working and middle class families, does not increase the deficit, and ensures that the government has the resources needed to make the investments required to keep our country strong, safe, healthy, and economically competitive.

H.R. 1, on the other hand, raises taxes on poor, working, and middle class families; explodes the deficit by adding an additional $2.2 trillion over ten years; and will require an estimated $5.4 trillion cut in funding for the programs ordinary Americans depend on for health security, educational opportunity, and economic progress.

Mr. Speaker, in the last several months we have witnessed and borne the brunt of several of the most powerful storms ever recorded, including Hurricanes Harvey, Irma, and Maria.

I remember so well that the President visited Texas and promised the people affected by Hurricane Harvey of his unwavering commitment to provide everything needed to recover.

We need that promise kept now, and approval of this reckless and immoral tax plan will make it virtually impossible to keep the promise.

Residents of Texas who are facing the long road to recovery need at least $61 billion for home flood mitigation, repair, replacement, and home buyouts.

There are other states with pressing needs related to disaster recovery.

My colleagues across the aisle and the President should understand that the Texas and Florida congressional delegations are in full agreement regarding the need to meet the disaster recovery needs of the states and territories.

There are particular concerns for our seniors who survived the terrible storms that ravaged the Texas Coast, Florida, U.S. Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico because so many of them are alone, while trying to do the difficult and hard job of cleaning out their homes, or removing debris from their yards.

That work is nowhere near done in my State of Texas.

Thousands of families have no home because of the storm, and many more thousands are living in gutted out shells of structures they once called home and too many others are sleeping in cars.

Houston's response to the immediate disaster was impressive and all- encompassing for the size and complexity of the disaster caused by unprecedented flooding due to Hurricane Harvey.

The efforts of Houston Mayor Sylvester Turner and the work of the Public Works Department, Police, and First Responders, as well as Federal and State agencies that were joined by citizen volunteers helped save thousands of lives.

We have communities in Texas that are struggling to find the new normal that FEMA officials warned Texans would need to accept following the historic flood.

The effort is being made difficult by a lack of appreciation by the Administration of the true cost of recovery for Texas, Florida, the U.S. Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico.

FEMA has proven that it is excellent at disaster response, but is showing that they are not very good at recovery management for individuals and families.

The Administration risks a shutdown over not adequately meeting the needs of hurricane impacted areas.

Mr. Speaker, Americans are not fooled; they know trickle-down economics has never worked, and they see right through this phony tax plan and recognize it for the scam that it is.

That is why Americans reject this Republican tax giveaway by an overwhelming 2:1 margin according to a poll released recently by Quinnipiac.

Specifically, 61 percent think the Republican tax scam will benefit the wealthy the most; only 16 percent say the plan will reduce their taxes.

59 percent think it a very bad idea to eliminate the deduction for state and local income taxes.

Nearly half of respondents (49 percent) think it a bad idea to lower the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 20 percent.

This Republican tax plan is even more toxic to my constituents in the Eighteenth Congressional District of Texas.

Mr. Speaker, as you may know, my constituents and others in Texas are still struggling to recover from the devastation caused by Hurricane Harvey, the worst storm ever to make landfall in the continental United States.

My constituents understand that it is important that the United States has a tax system that is fair, balanced, smart, and provides the resources and opportunities to allow all Americans to reach their potential.

And by margins exceeding 90 percent, they reject:

1. Any cuts to Medicare or Medicaid to finance tax cuts for wealthy corporations and the top 1 percent;

2. Eliminating the mortgage interest deduction;

3. Eliminating the deductibility of state and local taxes;

4. Eliminating existing deductions for student loan interest or making taxable college endowment funds or college fellowships expenses.

Mr. Speaker, the average annual tax cut for the top one-tenth of one percent is $320,000; for the top one percent it is $62,000, and for those earning $1 million a year it is $68,000.

Nearly 25 percent of the tax cut goes to households in just the top one-tenth of one percent, who make at least $5 million a year (2027).

While super-wealthy corporations and individuals are reaping windfalls, millions of middle-class and working families will see their taxes go up:

1. 13 million households face a tax increase next year.

2. 45 million households face a tax increase in 2027.

3. 29 million households (21 percent) earning less than $100,000 a year see a tax increase.

On average, families earning up to $86,000 annually would see a $794 increase in their tax liability, a significant burden on families struggling to afford child care and balance their checkbook.

It is shocking, but not surprising, that under this Republican tax scam, the total value of tax cuts for just the top one percent is more than the entire tax cut for the lower 95 percent of earners.

Put another way, those earning more than $912,000 a year will get more in tax cuts than 180 million households combined.

The core of this Republican tax scheme is a massive tax cut from 35 percent to 20 percent for corporations, but that is not the only way that the wealthy are rewarded.

The massive tax cuts for corporations are permanent but temporary for working and middle-class families.

Another immoral aspect of this terrible tax scam is that it abandons families that face natural disasters or high medical costs by repealing deductions for casualty losses and medical expenses.

Mr. Speaker, in what universe does it make any sense to eliminate, as this bill would, a deduction for:

1. teachers who purchase supplies for their classroom;

2. moving expenses to take a new job and taxes employer-provided moving expenses; or

3. dependent care assistance, making it harder for families to afford day care, nursery school, or care for aging parents?

This Republican tax scam jeopardizes American innovation and competitiveness by eliminating the deduction for student loan interest, which affects 12 million borrowers, and cuts total education assistance by more than $64 billion.

Under the extraordinary leadership of President Obama and the determined efforts of ordinary Americans, we pulled our way out from under the worst of the foreclosure crisis when the housing bubble burst in 2007.

Inexplicably, Republicans are now championing a tax scheme that will make the homes of average Americans less valuable because deductions for mortgage interest and property taxes are much less valuable than under current law.

A tax plan that reduces home values, as this one does, puts pressure on states and towns to collect revenues they depend on to fund schools, roads, and vital public resources.

Mr. Speaker, the $5.4 trillion cuts in program investments that will be required to pay for this tax giveaway to wealthy corporations and individuals will fall most heavily on low-income families, students struggling to afford college, seniors, and persons with disabilities.

This tax scam is not a revenue policy adapted for the real world that real Americans live in but a fantasy resting on the monstrous belief that the wealthy have too little money and that poor, working, and middle-class families have too much.

Congressional Republicans continue to cling to the fantasy belief that their tax cuts for the rich will pay for themselves despite all precedent to the contrary and evidence that their tax scheme is projected by experts to lose between $3 trillion and $7 trillion.

Mr. Speaker, in evaluating the merits of a taxing system, it is not enough to subject it only to the test of fiscal responsibility.

To keep faith with the nation's past, to be fair to the nation's present, and to safeguard the nation's future, the plan must also pass a ``moral test.''

The Republican tax bill fails both of these standards.

That is why I support the Democratic Motion to Instruct Conferees, even though I strongly oppose the Motion to Go to Conference on H.R. 1, the ``Republican Tax Scam Act.''

Mr. Speaker, it is not enough to subject the GOP tax plan to the test of fiscal responsibility.

To keep faith with the nation's past, to be fair to the nation's present, and to safeguard the nation's future, the plan must also pass a ``moral test.''

This tax plan fails both the fiscal responsibility test and the moral responsibility test.

This tax cut package is a return to trickle-down economics.

This tax bill is a thoughtless and immoral GOP tax scam that will explode our nation's deficit and hurt poor, working, and middle class families.

It will explode the deficit by $2.2 trillion over 10 years.

The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office has concluded that the Senate bill would, on average, raise taxes or reduce federal expenditures for households with incomes below $75,000 by about $60 billion

This tax cut bill is a repudiation of the social contract that F.D.R. announced in the New Deal.

The overwhelming portion of the bill is a lowering of the corporate tax rate, from the current 35 percent down to 20 percent.

In my home state of Texas, more than 1.7 million households earning less than $127,000 would see a tax hike.

The proposed elimination of the personal exemption will harm millions of Texans by taking away the $4,050 deduction for each taxpayer and claimed dependent; in 2015, roughly 9.3 million dependent exemptions were claimed in the Lone Star State.

In this tax bill, by taking away the student loan interest and educator expense deductions, more than 876,000 Texas students will lose an average credit of $1,063, while nearly 354,000 Texas teachers who buy notebooks and erasers for their classrooms will lose an average credit of $261.

The Republicans in Congress ASSUME that corporations will pass down savings to consumers.

But this never works. Corporations simply stash their money in tax havens.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the last time the GOP cut taxes for corporations, they spent as much as 90 percent of their windfall buying back shares, giving dividends to shareholders, stock options and executives.

This ``tax bill'' would lift a 1954 ban on political activism by churches, further blurring the line between church and state.

The House and Senate bills would circumscribe the ability of states and local governments to levy own taxes, which would force states to cut spending on health, care education, public transportation and social services.

The full 10-year plan for the bill reveals how bad it is: by 2027, individuals making between $40,000 and $50,000 would pay a combined $5.3 Billion more in taxes, while those earning more than $1 billion or more would get a $5.8 billion cut.

To quote the former Chief of Staff of the congressional Joint Committee on Taxation: ``[This tax bill] is not aimed at growth. It is not aimed at the middle class.

It is at every turn carefully engineered to deliver a kiss to the donor class.''

According to the New York Times, in a recent survey of from the University of Chicago, only one of 38 prominent economists said the proposed tax cuts would yield substantial growth.

The proposed tax cuts would add to the long term federal debt burden.

This health bill would also alter healthcare in America.

Health Coverage would shrink in the United States, while wealthy estates would not pay at all.

The Senate version of the tax bill would cause 13 million people to lose health care and insurance premiums overall could rise by up to 10 percent.

This would result in savings of about $53 billion, which the GOP will use to fund corporate tax cuts.

America will not be made great by financing a $1.7 trillion tax cut for the rich by stealing $1.8 trillion from Medicare and Medicaid, abandoning seniors and families in need, depriving students of realizing a dream to attend college without drowning in debt, or disinvesting in the working families.

This bill is opposed by colleges and universities, too.

The tax cut proposal would end the deductibility of tuition waivers for graduate students, repealing the deduction for interest paid on student loans and taxing university endowments.

According to the Brookings Institution, the endowment tax in particular, threatens the ability of low-income students to pursue college and graduate studies.

This is because endowments subsidize students from lower-income families, while allowing students across the board to graduate with less debt.

This bill is beyond sinister: the GOP tax bill is written so that in just 10 years, certain tax cuts (benefitting the wealthy) would remain permanent and paid for with other permanent measures that raise revenues or reduce program spending, while letting lower priority tax cuts (typically benefitting lower-income folks) expire.

That is why Americans reject this Republican tax giveaway by an overwhelming 2:1 margin according to a poll released yesterday by Quinnipiac.

Specifically, 61 percent think the Republican tax scam will benefit the wealthy the most; only 16 percent say the plan will reduce their taxes.

59 percent think it a very bad idea to eliminate the deduction for state and local income taxes.

Nearly half of respondents (49 percent) think it a bad idea to lower the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 20 percent.

In fact, the average annual tax cut for the top one-tenth of one percent is $320,000; for the top one percent it is $62,000, and for those earning $1 million a year it is $68,000.

Nearly 25 percent of the tax cut goes to households in just the top one-tenth of one percent, who make at least $5 million a year (2027).

While super-wealthy corporations and individuals are reaping windfalls, millions of middle-class and working families will see their taxes go up:

13 million households face a tax increase next year.

45 million households face a tax increase in 2027.

29 million households (21 percent) earning less than $100,000 a year see a tax increase.

On average, families earning up to $86,000 annually would see a $794 increase in their tax liability, a significant burden on families struggling to afford child care and balance their checkbook.

It is shocking, but not surprising, that under this Republican tax scam, the total value of tax cuts for just the top one percent is more than the entire tax cut for the lower 95 percent of earners.

Put another way, those earning more than $912,000 a year will get more in tax cuts than 180 million households combined.

Mr. Speaker, an estimated 2.8 million Texas households deduct state and local taxes with an average deduction of $7,823 in 2015.

But this is not the end of the bad news that will be delivered were this tax scam to become law, not by a long shot.

Equally terrible is that this Republican tax scam drastically reduces the Earned Income Tax Credit, which encourages work for 2.7 million low-income individuals in Texas, helping them make ends meet with an average credit of $2,689.

The EITC and the Child Tax Credit lift about 1.2 million Texans, including 663,000 children, out of poverty each year.

So to achieve their goal of giving more and more to the haves and the ``have mores,'' our Republican friends are willing to betray seniors, children, the most vulnerable and needy, and working and middle-class families.

The $5.4 trillion cuts in program investments that will be required to pay for this tax giveaway to wealthy corporations and individuals will fall most heavily on low-income families, students struggling to afford college, seniors, and persons with disabilities.

Mr. Speaker, established by the World Health Organization in 1988, December 1st is universally known as World AIDS Day.

World AIDS Day serves to focus global attention on the devastating impact of the HIV/AIDS epidemic.

All governments, national AIDS programs, churches, community organizations and individuals are given the opportunity to display their commitment to fight this deadly disease.

It has been more than 30 years since the first AIDS case was reported in the United States.

It does not seem like it was too long ago, but HIV/AIDS had affected many around the world before the disease even made its way to America's shores.

Since then, countless researchers, healthcare providers, politicians, and educators have contributed to the global initiative to contain and eventually eliminate its presence in all corners of the world.

Although HIV/AIDS is no longer a mysterious and mischaracterized entity, it is the most relentless and indiscriminate killer of our time.

And though a diagnosis is no longer the sealing of an immediate fate, it is the beginning of an indefinite battle for life, adequate health care, and for social belonging.

With an estimated 38.6 million people worldwide living with HIV at the end of 2005, and more than 25 million people having died of AIDS since 1981, December 1st is a date which serves to remind everyone that action makes a difference in the fight against HIV/AIDS.

Let there be no mistake, we are here to acknowledge that AIDS is a deadly enemy against which we must join all our forces to fight and eliminate.

Americans should be reminded that HIV/AIDS does not discriminate.

With an estimated 1,039,000 to 1,185,000 HIV-positive individuals living in the U.S., and approximately 56,000 new infections occurring every year, the U.S., like other nations around the world is deeply affected by HIV/AIDS.

The detrimental effects of HIV/AIDS have also hit home. More than 65,000 people in Texas are living with HIV.

Thirty-six percent more Texans are living with HIV today than just seven years ago. In 2010, studies showed that 1 in every 3 diagnosed persons in Texas were not getting proper medical treatment.

We must make certain that every affected individual receives efficient medical treatment that will afford them long life.

Not only is the state of Texas suffering from HIV and AIDS, but my district, the 18th Congressional District of Texas, has seen an increasing number of people living with the disease.

In 2010, there were over 22,000 reported persons living with HIV (non-AIDS) in the greater Houston area, and more than 9,000 reported persons living with AIDS.

This problem continues to escalate as there have been 1,700 new infections each year among individuals in Harris County, particularly among racial and ethnic minorities.

We must continue to fight a tough fight to reverse all of these costly and tragic trends.

I will continue to sponsor and co-sponsor legislation that addresses the HIV/AIDS epidemic.

The fight is not over.

We must continue to stand strong in our struggle to conquer some old and new challenges that we as Americans and members of the global community encounter.

Today, Friday, December 1st is World AIDS Day.

And, we will focus on HIV/AIDS, prevention and awareness, and continue to fight for life.

Together, we will help all of our friends, relatives, and children live healthy and full lives.

Mr. Speaker, I thank you, and I want to extend my courtesies to the gentleman from Texas for his courtesy as well, Mr. Al Green.

I stand here today because this is World AIDS Day. Since 1988, we have commemorated World AIDS Day. I have on my lapel, if you will, on my shawl, a red ribbon which symbolizes remembrance.

Earlier today I called in to the Thomas Street Clinic, as I have celebrated with them for many years, and while I was in Washington, I wanted to give them the recognition as fighters against HIV/AIDS.

It does not seem that long ago, but HIV/AIDS affected many around the world before the disease even made its way to America's shores. Countless researchers, healthcare providers, politicians, and educators have contributed to the global initiative to contain and eventually eliminate its presence in all corners of the world.

I remember going to Zambia on the first Presidential trip dealing with HIV/AIDS around the world. 38.6 million people worldwide were living with HIV at the end of 2005, and more than 25 million have died of AIDS since 1981.

In December, we remember that, and that is what this day is: a day of remembrance, when an estimated 1 million to 1.2 million HIV-positive individuals live in the United States and approximately 56,000 new infections occur every year.

Mr. Speaker, my district is impacted, upwards of 22,000 people. Texas is impacted.

Today is a day of remembrance to honor those we lost and to commit to those we fight for.

Mr. Speaker, established by the World Health Organization in 1988, December 1st is universally known as World AIDS Day.

World AIDS Day serves to focus global attention on the devastating impact of the HIV/AIDS epidemic.

All governments, national AIDS programs, churches, community organizations and individuals are given the opportunity to display their commitment to fight this deadly disease.

It has been more than 30 years since the first AIDS case was reported in the United States.

It does not seem like it was too long ago, but HIV/AIDS had affected many around the world before the disease even made its way to America's shores.

Since then, countless researchers, healthcare providers, politicians, and educators have contributed to the global initiative to contain and eventually eliminate its presence in all corners of the world.

Although HIV/AIDS is no longer a mysterious and mischaracterized entity, it is the most relentless and indiscriminate killer of our time.

And though a diagnosis is no longer the sealing of an immediate fate, it is the beginning of an indefinite battle for life, adequate health care, and for social belonging.

With an estimated 38.6 million people worldwide living with HIV at the end of 2005, and more than 25 million people having died of AIDS since 1981, December 1st is a date which serves to remind everyone that action makes a difference in the fight against HIV/AIDS.

Let there be no mistake, we are here to acknowledge that AIDS is a deadly enemy against which we must join all our forces to fight and eliminate.

Americans should be reminded that HIV/AIDS does not discriminate.

With an estimated 1,039,000 to 1,185,000 HIV-positive individuals living in the U.S., and approximately 56,000 new infections occurring every year, the U.S., like other nations around the world, is deeply affected by HIV/AIDS.

The detrimental effects of HIV/AIDS have also hit home. More than 65,000 people in Texas are living with HIV.

Thirty-six percent more Texans are living with HIV today than just seven years ago. In 2010, studies showed that 1 in every 3 diagnosed persons in Texas were not getting proper medical treatment.

We must make certain that every affected individual receive efficient medical treatment that will afford them long life.

Not only is the state of Texas suffering from HIV and AIDS, but my district, the 18th Congressional District of Texas, has seen an increasing number of people living with the disease.

In 2010, there were over 22,000 reported persons living with HIV (non-AIDS) in the greater Houston area, and more than 9,000 reported persons living with AIDS.

This problem continues to escalate as there have been 1,700 new infections each year among individuals in Harris County, particularly among racial and ethnic minorities.

We must continue to fight a tough fight to reverse all of these costly and tragic trends.

I will continue to sponsor and co-sponsor legislation that addresses the HIV/AIDS epidemic.

The fight is not over.

We must continue to stand strong in our struggle to conquer some old and new challenges that we as Americans and members of the global community encounter.

Today, Friday, December 1st, is World AIDS Day.

And, we will focus on HIV/AIDS, prevention and awareness, and continue to fight for life.

Together, we will help all of our friends, relatives, and children live healthy and full lives.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for her distinguished leadership and for yielding to me.

Mr. Speaker, I want to focus in particular on where we are and where we have been. I think it is important, as we discuss these issues dealing with the Ensuring a Qualified Civil Service Act of 2017, that we really have the responsibility, as Members of Congress, to engage in safe and fair workplaces all over the Nation.

Certainly, I want to speak particularly about the Civil Service Act, which I am stunned that this would extend the period of time for a probationary period from 1 year to 2 years. But what is most striking, since I am a member of the Judiciary Committee, is that Federal employees will remain at-will employees for a period of time with virtually no due process protection.

I clearly want to try to understand an administration that, first of all, wants to make skinny the government to disallow it to do its work; and then, on top of that, it wants to have temporary employees with no due process rights.

Yesterday, we stood on the floor of the House to insist that there be mandatory training for sexual harassment and, as well, to recognize that there should be zero tolerance for sexual harassment and, of course, sexual assault.

As an African-American woman, over the years, historically, we, along with women all over the world, have seen the plight, or the devastation, of sexual harassment and sexual assault. I was disappointed that this floor could not vote on that resolution. I would really ask for that resolution to be called up again so that this House could go on record for supporting mandatory training.

At the same time, I think it balances, with due process, the work that we have to do to make sure that we have a workplace that is tolerable and allows women who feel insulted, harassed, and, God forbid, assaulted easy, quick access to a pathway of relief.

This legislation and the underlying bill on this rule specifically dealing with taking away due process rights from civil servant women strikes me as the wrong direction to go in light of where we are. So I am questioning this legislation. I think it is the wrong direction to go. I, frankly, believe it should be pulled.

And as that legislation is pulled, I believe that we would do ourselves well to reassert the resolution from yesterday and to cast a vote. Let's get on the record of where we stand on the issues protecting women against sexual harassment and sexual assault.

Finally, let me indicate that we are in the middle of appropriations. We have not been compensated for the devastation of Hurricane Harvey. My constituents are suffering. They are suffering in Puerto Rico, in the Virgin Islands, and in Florida. The appropriation, or the recommendation from the White House, is insufferable, unacceptable, and it is time for us to move as a Congress to bring relief to the people who have suffered from the hurricane.

Mr. Speaker, certainly my deepest thoughts as well to the Hinchey family.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today because I come from an area that saw the greatest catastrophic flooding in the history of the continental United States. Someone asked me: I haven't heard anything from your State.

I said to them: We are still hurting.

We do have 120,000 to 130,000 homes still under water. People are living in shells.

I am not selfish. I know what is going on in Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and Florida. We begged the administration to give us the amount of money in their request for what was needed, and we got $44 billion for every victim from the U.S. Virgin Islands to Puerto Rico to Florida to Texas. I can't stand for that, for the desperate people who are in need.

I ask the President to reevaluate his submission and to submit to us a reasoned response to the devastation of this State and the other States. I ask the appropriators, who I know are very concerned, to come together to give us the emergency supplemental so that homes can be rebuilt, that homes can be bought out, and that, in fact, the infrastructure that is crumbling and caused the major flooding, that reservoir pools that flooded whole complete developments, can be fixed, that we can do infrastructure and save lives.

The people of the floods beg of you, and we will be in the fight.

Mr. Speaker, as a senior member of the House Committees on the Judiciary, I rise in strong support of H. Res. 630, which requires all employees of the House of Representatives--including Members, interns, detailees, and fellows--to complete an anti- harassment and anti-discrimination training program during each session of Congress.

Additionally, each individual would be required to complete the training within ninety days of the start of each session, and each new employee to complete the training within ninety days of their hire date.

This training must be completed every session of Congress.

The resolution directs the Committee on House Administration to issue regulations to ensure compliance and transparency and upon passage of the resolution, the Committee is required to promulgate these regulations within thirty days.

Mr. Speaker, the many allegations of sexual harassment that have come to light involving prominent individuals in the fields of government, entertainment, business, and other fields in recent months are appalling and intolerable.

There must be zero-tolerance for sexual harassment in our society, and this body can set an example for the nation by declaring itself to be sexual harassment free zone and policing itself to hold members, staff, and associated personnel to this standard.

It is important that all persons working in this body understand that everyone has a right to a workplace free of harassment and intimidation and that complaints will be taken seriously and fully investigated by the Ethics Committee or the House Administration Committee.

Mr. Speaker, this is the moment to embrace and affirm zero tolerance for sexual harassment and assault and we must soon reauthorize and strengthen the Violence Against Women Act to provide stronger tools to prevent and punish sexual harassment and sexual assault.

As the Ranking Member of the Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, I am committed to doing all I can to make this happen as soon as possible.

Mr. Speaker, I strongly support H. Res. 630 and urge all Members to vote in favor its adoption.

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

Mr. Speaker, I wish and hope that all of my colleagues and Americans had a wonderful Thanksgiving.

I thank the men and women of the United States military for their service. It is particularly noteworthy that they serve in this time when families are gathered.

I thank Mr. Goodlatte for collaborating on this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2228, the Law Enforcement Mental Health and Wellness Act of 2017. Ensuring the mental health and well-being of our law enforcement officers is paramount to the safety of our communities and the people our officers take a solemn oath to protect.

I am also very pleased to acknowledge Val Demings, a colleague and a member of the Homeland Security Committee, of which I serve. We are better off for the experience, commitment, and professional career that she had as a law enforcement officer and chief. She is one of the cosponsors of this legislation and I look forward to hearing from her.

Let me also take note of the fact that Texas experienced a depth of sadness over the holiday weekend when we lost one of our Department of Public Safety officers, who was killed by a perpetrator during the Thanksgiving weekend. We pray for him and his family.

H.R. 2228 is intended to provide support for law enforcement agency efforts to protect the mental health and well-being of law enforcement officers. I support this legislation as a good first step towards Congress addressing the various matters surrounding the mental health of our law enforcement officers.

We must recognize that law enforcement officers play a special role in our communities, with exceptional responsibilities to protect and serve where they see, encounter, and respond to horrendous situations that are dangerous, stressful, and often life-threatening.

Imagine those officers who came upon that scene Sunday morning in Texas a few weeks ago where 27 Texans were murdered in church and 20 were injured. Imagine churches that are frightened about worshipping. Imagine, as I left my hometown Houston, that there were law enforcement officers who were gathered to meet with pastors to give them comfort. They are there for us.

As well, for example, law enforcement officers have had to respond to several recent tragedies, which include the Pulse nightclub shooting in Orlando, Florida, where 49 people were killed and 53 others were wounded; the killing of 5 officers and the wounding of 9 other officers, along with 2 civilians in Dallas, Texas; the San Bernardino, California, shooting of 14 innocent employees; the Las Vegas, Nevada, massacre, where a gunman killed 58 innocent concertgoers and injured nearly 500 others; and, again, most recently, as I indicated, on November 5, the deadliest mass shooting by an individual in Texas, the fifth deadliest mass shooting in the United States, as well as the deadliest shooting in an American place of worship in modern history, where 26 were gunned down in Sutherland Springs, Texas, including an 18-month-old child, a pregnant mother, and where 20 others were injured.

These horrific occurrences have become all too common in today's society. These chilling tragedies continue to affect us all. Imagine the impact that they have collectively on our law enforcement officers with whom these traumatic situations remain long after the threats are reduced. Everyone has returned home and communities they serve have regained a renewed sense of safety.

Imagine that officer that comes upon a horrific traffic accident that kills a family. Imagine their pain and their concern. Requiring these officers to continue to serve without providing them an effective avenue to process the day-to-day crisis does an injustice to them. That is why this is a very important initiative and I am really excited to support it.

I want to also raise for my colleagues that I have been a longstanding advocate for helping police officers, as we have worked together with the chairman of the committee and other members of the committee.

I want to make mention of the Law Enforcement Trust and Integrity Act, which takes a comprehensive approach to addressing policing issues, including recognition of the importance of sustaining the mental well-being of our officers.

This piece of legislation addresses tragedies where we have seen actions take place. Countless unfortunate incidents have happened maybe because of the lack of deescalation.

This bill, I hope we can move along, as this bill that we have, the underlying bill, requires the Attorney General to perform an initial analysis of existing law enforcement accreditation standards and to recommend areas for development. That gives training, and it also takes into account mental health needs and funding needs.

It authorizes the Attorney General to make grants to States, units of local government, Indian tribal governments to study law enforcement agency management and operations and to develop pilot programs to implement best practices.

It requires the Attorney General to study the prevalence and impact of any law, rule, or procedure that allows a law enforcement officer to delay the answer to questions posed, as quickly as possible, by any of the authorities investigating situations.

It authorizes appropriations for expenses related to criminal and civil enforcement activities by the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department.

It requires the Department of Justice to establish a task force to assist in local investigations, and it requires each Federal, State, and local law enforcement agency to report to the Attorney General on the actions in that particular department to help that department assess its own work.

It requires the Department of Justice to cooperate with the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund--something that was very important to me--to create and provide a distinctive medallion to be issued to the survivors of law enforcement officers killed in the line of duty or memorialized on the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial.

This is in sync with the task force that was held in the last administration that offered to discuss ways to improve policing and to help our individual police officers.

We want to be partners for safety and security and community police relations, and we want them to have good health and the ability to serve the public in a good health mindset.

Under today's bill, the Attorney General shall review current mental health practices and services of Federal agencies and report to Congress, develop resources to educate mental healthcare providers about the law enforcement culture across the board, and develop evidence-based therapies as a result.

I believe this legislation and the Law Enforcement Integrity Legislation, if passed, will create an atmosphere where law enforcement officers will be comfortable in sharing their thoughts or their assessments or best practices.

Under this bill, the underlying bill, the Director of Community Oriented Policing Services shall conduct case studies that focuses on programs designed primarily to address officer psychological health and well-being and submit such a report to Congress.

The Attorney General shall also consult with the Secretary of Homeland Security and the heads of Federal agencies to examine the mental health needs of Federal law enforcement officers and the efficacy of expanding peer mentoring programs; ensure the recommendations, resources, or programs protect the privacy of officers--that is extremely important--and report these findings to the Congress no later than 1 year after enactment.

Mr. Speaker, the key to all of this is to build the trust between community and police, the police community and the police families and families of those who come within the range of law enforcement.

If we can all work together, we can trust each other, we will have a better system of justice. This bill is a good first step, and I look forward to working as well with other law enforcement bills, including the Law Enforcement Integrity bill that I have just so noted.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2228, the ``Law Enforcement Mental Health Act of 2017.'' Ensuring the mental health and well-being of our law enforcement officers is paramount to the safety of our communities and the people our officers take a solemn oath to protect.

H.R. 2228 is intended to provide support for law enforcement agency efforts to protect the mental health and well-being of law enforcement officers.

These horrific occurrences have become all-too common in today's society. These chilling tragedies continue to affect us all. Imagine the impact they have collectively on our law enforcement officers, with whom these traumatic situations remain long after the threats are reduced, everyone has returned home and communities they serve have regained a renewed sense of safety.

Requiring these officers to continue to serve, without providing them an effective avenue to process these day-to-day crises does an injustice to them.

For example, law enforcement officers have had to respond to several recent tragedies which include: the Pulse nightclub shooting in Orlando, Florida, where 49 people were killed and 53 others wounded; the killing of five officers and wounding of nine other officers along with two civilians in Dallas, Texas; the San Bernardino shooting of 14 innocent employees; the Las Vegas massacre, where a gunman killed 58 innocent concert-goers and injured nearly 500 others; and again, most recently on November 5, the deadliest mass shooting by an individual in Texas, the fifth-deadliest mass shooting in the United States, as well as the deadliest shooting in an American place of worship in modern history, where 26 were gunned down in Sutherland Springs, including an 18-month-old child and a pregnant mother, and where 20 others were injured.

This is why I have been a longstanding advocate for adoption of the ``Law Enforcement Trust and Integrity Act,'' which takes a comprehensive approach to addressing policing issues, including a recognition of the importance of sustaining the mental well-being of our officers.

This piece of legislation addresses the tragedies in some of our most recent cases such as: Tamir Rice, Brown, Freddie Gray and Garner and the countless others that do not receive publicity.

The bill provides seven substantive approaches towards improving law enforcement management and misconduct prosecution tools:

(1) It requires the Attorney General to perform initial analysis of existing law enforcement accreditation standards and to recommend areas for development.

(2) It authorizes the Attorney General to make grants to States, units of local government, Indian Tribal Governments, to study law enforcement agency management and operations and to develop pilot programs to implement best practices.

(3) It requires the Attorney General to study the prevalence and impact of any law, rule or procedure that allows a law enforcement officer to delay the answer to questions posed by a local internal affairs officer, prosecutor, or review board on the investigative integrity and prosecution of law enforcement misconduct.

(4) It authorizes appropriations for expenses related to criminal and civil enforcement activities by the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department.

(5) It requires the Department of Justice to estabijsh a task force to coordinate the investigation, prosecution and enforcement efforts of Federal, state and local governments in cases related to law enforcement misconduct.

(6) It requires each Federal, State, and local law enforcement agency to report to the Attorney General data on the following: (1) traffic violation stops; (2) pedestrian stops and detentions; and (3) the use of deadly force by and against law enforcement officers.

(7) It requires the Department of Justice, in cooperation with the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund, to create and provide a distinctive medallion to be issued to the survivors of law enforcement officers killed in the line of duty or memorialized on the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial.

These are all measures similar in nature to those undertaken by the Obama Task Force Initiative. In short, the Law Enforcement Integrity and Trust Act would help law enforcement officers do their jobs, knowing that they have our support. This is why it was endorsed by a broad range of legal, community-based and law enforcement groups nationwide.

Under today's bill, the Attorney General shall review current mental health practices and services of Federal agencies and report to Congress, develop resources to educate mental health care providers about the law enforcement culture across the board, and develop evidence-based therapies as a result.

Under this bill the Director of Community Oriented Policing Services shall conduct case studies that focus on programs designed primarily to address officers' psychological health and well-being and submit such report to Congress.

I support this legislation as a good first step towards Congress addressing the various matters surrounding the mental health of our law enforcement officers.

We must recognize that law enforcement officers play a special role in our communities, with exceptional responsibilities to protect and serve, where they see, encounter, and respond to horrendous situations that are both dangerous and stressful, and often life-threatening.

The Attorney General shall also consult with the Secretary of Homeland Security and head of Federal agencies to examine the mental health needs of Federal law enforcement officers and the efficacy of expanding peer mentoring programs; ensure the recommendations, resources, or programs protect the privacy of officers; and report these findings to Congress no later than one year after enactment.

As this is a good first step, I support the bill and ask my colleagues to do the same.

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for her remarks. We are working together to build that trust and to safely secure the community and our officers.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Mrs. Demings). She brings to the United States Congress very important contributions as the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Intergovernmental Affairs. These voices are well needed. Congresswoman Val Demings is the former chief of police of the City of Orlando, Florida.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler), a distinguished and senior member of the Judiciary Committee, the chair of the Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet.

Mr. Speaker, again, let me thank the two prior speakers, Congresswoman Demings and Congressman Nadler, for very insightful, very important remarks on this particular legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pascrell), someone who I know has a passion for first responders, as we have worked together even more closely after the heinous tragedy of 9/ 11.

I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentleman from New Jersey.

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

Let me, first of all, thank Congresswomen Brooks and Demings for a very astute initiative, and I look forward to us working together, along with the chairman, on other items that impact the service of our officers and the better police practices. And I cite, of course, the Law Enforcement Trust and Integrity Act.

Mr. Speaker, I say to the chairman, I wanted to make mention of the fact that we have been meeting on police issues for almost 2 years in the Police Working Group, and it has been very impactful. I look forward to us igniting another meeting and being able to hear from both police and community, because we want a safe community and we want safe law enforcement.

Let me also say, as I close, that many police officers are veterans, and they have been in a war situation, and that means they have faced crises, they have faced the violence of war, and they, obviously, have experienced bouts, possibly, of PTSD or, as we know that they do, they may not yield to it and may not know it and go right into serving; whether they are fire or police, they go right into serving the community. Therefore, this legislation will be enormously helpful to them.

So, as I said earlier, this is a good first step to helping to enhance the mental health or the mental well-being of our law enforcement officers. These officers endure stressful events on our behalf in the interest of protecting their communities, and so we will all benefit from the effective implementation of this legislation.

Therefore, I support this bill, even as I encourage us to continue our work on additional legislation to help foster better coordination between our police officers and the communities they serve.

One final point, that I have listened to officers, and they have said to me, with all that they deal with, coming upon a circumstance where a child has been injured or killed is one of the most devastating experiences they have had to have. Just imagine that.

This mental health bill will work on all of the issues that they have to address, and I ask my colleagues to support the underlying legislation, which is the Law Enforcement Mental Health and Wellness Act of 2017, H.R. 2228.

Mr. Speaker, as I said earlier, this is a good first step to helping to enhance the mental well-being of our law enforcement officers.

These officers endure stressful events on our behalf, in the interest of protecting their communities. And so, we will all benefit from the effective implementation of this legislation.

I therefore support this bill, even as I encourage my colleagues to work together on additional legislation to help foster better coordination between our police officers and the communities they serve.

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

Mr. Speaker, this is not the American Dream tax plan. This is the American nightmare, a tax scam of the worst proportion.

With over 8,000 of my constituents last evening on a teleconference town hall meeting, overwhelmingly they disagreed with a tax plan that cuts Medicare or Medicaid to finance tax cuts, eliminates the mortgage tax deduction, so that those who are suffering from Hurricane Harvey, trying to rebuild their lives, seeking a new home cannot, in fact, deduct their mortgage.

The same thing with the 200,000 Texans who are going to pay more because we are eliminating the deduction for State and local taxes, and eliminating deductions for student loans, casualty losses; by next year, $25 billion in Social Security cuts.

My seniors on the phone last night asked me about those cuts. They asked me about the medical expenses cuts for seniors. All of that is eliminated.

Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a sample of tele-townhall survey questions and answers

Tax Tele-Townhall Survey Questions and Answers

(1) Do you agree that a tax bill should cut tax at the

expense of Medicaid and Medicare? 95 percent said no.

(2) The current tax reform bill will eliminate the tax

deduction for student loan interest and the lifetime learning

credit. Do you support the elimination of these tax credits?

91 percent said no.

(3) The current tax code allows homeowners to deduct

interest on mortgages. Would you support a tax plan that

includes a reduction in credit for first-time home buyers? 95

percent said no.

Mr. Speaker, this plan will show no growth. The neutral tax policy entity said you will get no growth, no growth in wages, and you will send jobs overseas in waves.

It is a tax scam and it is an American nightmare. Vote against this tax scam

Mr. Speaker, as a member of the Budget Committee, I rise in strong and unyielding opposition to H.R. 1, the so-called ``Tax Cut and Jobs Act,'' which more accurately should be called the ``Republican Tax Scam Act.''

I oppose this cruel and immoral $1.7 trillion tax giveaway to wealthy corporations and the top one percent because it raises taxes on poor, working, and middle class families; explodes the deficit by adding an additional $2.2 trillion over ten years; and will require an estimated $5.4 trillion cut in funding for the programs ordinary Americans depend on for health security, educational opportunity, and economic progress.

Mr. Speaker, Americans are not fooled; they know trickle-down economics has never worked, and they see right through this phony tax plan and recognize it for the scam that it is.

That is why Americans reject this Republican tax giveaway by an overwhelming 2:1 margin according to a poll released yesterday by Quinnipiac.

Specifically, 61 percent think the Republican tax scam will benefit the wealthy the most; only 16 percent say the plan will reduce their taxes.

59 percent think it is a very bad idea to eliminate the deduction for state and local income taxes.

Nearly half of respondents (40 percent) think it a bad idea to lower the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 20 percent.

This Republican tax plan is even more toxic to my constituents in the Eighteenth Congressional District of Texas.

Mr. Speaker, as you may know, my constituents and others in Texas are still struggling to recover from the devastation caused by Hurricane Harvey, the worst storm ever to make landfall in the continental United States.

Yet last evening, nearly 8,000 of them took time out of their busy schedules to join me in a tele-townhall to discuss the tax scheme that has been rushed to the floor for a vote by the Republican leadership in the hope of passing it before the American people learn its insidious details.

But I have got news for them: too late.

My constituents understand and let me know that they believe it is important that the United States has a tax system that is fair, balanced, smart, and provides the resources and opportunities to allow all Americans to reach their potential.

And by margins exceeding 90 percent, they reject:

1. Any cuts to Medicare or Medicaid to finance tax cuts for wealthy corporations and the top 1 percent;

2. Eliminating the mortgage interest deduction;

3. Eliminating the deductibility of state and local taxes;

4. Eliminating existing deductions for student loan interest or making taxable college endowment funds or college fellowships expenses.

Mr. Speaker, my constituents, and Americans across the country, oppose this unfair Republican tax giveaway because nearly half of the $1.7 trillion tax cut goes to just the top one percent.

In fact, the average annual tax cut for the top one-tenth of one percent is $320,000; for the top one percent it is $62,000, and for those earning $1 million a year it is $68,000.

Nearly 25 percent of the tax cut goes to households in just the top one-tenth of one percent, who make at least $5 million a year (2027).

While super-wealthy corporations and individuals are reaping windfalls, millions of middle-class and working families will see their taxes go up:

1. 13 million households face a tax increase next year.

2. 45 million households face a tax increase in 2027.

3. 29 million households (21 percent) earning less than $100,000 a year see a tax increase.

On average, families earning up to $86,000 annually would see a $794 increase in their tax liability, a significant burden on families struggling to afford child care and balance their checkbook.

It is shocking, but not surprising, that under this Republican tax scam, the total value of tax cuts for just the top one percent is more than the entire tax cut for the lower 95 percent of earners.

Put another way, those earning more than $912,000 a year will get more in tax cuts than 180 million households combined.

The core of this Republican tax scheme is a massive tax cut from 35 percent to 20 percent for corporations, but that is not the only way that the wealthy are rewarded.

The massive tax cuts for corporations are permanent but temporary for working and middle-class families.

Another immoral aspect of this terrible tax scam is that it abandons families that face natural disasters or high medical costs by repealing deductions for casualty losses and medical expenses.

Mr. Speaker, in what universe does it make any sense to eliminate, as this bill would, a deduction for:

1. Teachers who purchase supplies for their classroom;

2. Moving expenses to take a new job and taxes employer-provided moving expenses; or

3. Dependent care assistance, making it harder for families to afford day care, nursery school, or care for aging parents?

This Republican tax scam jeopardizes American innovation and competitiveness by eliminating the deduction for student loan interest, which affects 12 million borrowers, and cuts total education assistance by more than $64 billion.

Under the extraordinary leadership of President Obama and the determined efforts of ordinary Americans, we pulled our way out from under the worst of the foreclosure crisis when the housing bubble burst in 2007.

Inexplicably, Republicans are now championing a tax scheme that will make the homes of average Americans less valuable because deductions for mortgage interest and property taxes are much less valuable than under current law.

A tax plan that reduces home values, as this one does, puts pressure on states and towns to collect revenues they depend on to fund schools, roads, and vital public resources.

Mr. Speaker, an estimated 2.8 million Texas households deduct state and local taxes with an average deduction of $7,823 in 2015.

But this is not the end of the bad news that will be delivered were this tax scam to become law, not by a long shot.

The proposed elimination of the personal exemption will harm millions of Texans by taking away the $4,050 deduction for each taxpayer and claimed dependent; in 2015, roughly 9.3 million dependent exemptions were claimed in the Lone Star State.

Equally terrible is that this Republican tax scam drastically reduces the Earned Income Tax Credit, which encourages work for 2.7 million low-income individuals in Texas, helping them make ends meet with an average credit of $2,689.

The EITC and the Child Tax Credit lift about 1.2 million Texans, including 663,000 children, out of poverty each year.

So to achieve their goal of giving more and more to the haves and the ``have mores,'' our Republican friends are willing to betray seniors, children, the most vulnerable and needy, and working and middle-class families.

The $5.4 trillion cuts in program investments that will be required to pay for this tax giveaway to wealthy corporations and individuals will fall most heavily on low-income families, students struggling to afford college, seniors, and persons with disabilities.

America will not be made great by financing a $1.7 trillion tax cut for the rich by stealing $1.8 trillion from Medicare and Medicaid, abandoning seniors and families in need, depriving students of realizing a dream to attend college without drowning in debt, or disinvesting in the working families.

America will not be positioned to compete and win in the global, interconnected, and digital economy by slashing funding for scientific research, the arts and humanities, job retraining, and clean energy just to pay for a tax cut to corporations and individuals who do not even need it.

Mr. Speaker, the tax scheme presented here by Republicans is not a plan but a scam that represents a betrayal of our values as a nation.

This tax scam is not a revenue policy adapted for the real world that real Americans live in but a fantasy resting on the monstrous belief that the wealthy have too little money and that poor, working, and middle-class families have too much.

Our Republican friends continue to cling to the fantasy belief that their tax cuts for the rich will pay for themselves despite all precedent to the contrary and evidence that their tax scheme is projected by experts to lose between $3 trillion and $7 trillion.

Mr. Speaker, in evaluating the merits of a taxing system, it is not enough to subject it only to the test of fiscal responsibility.

To keep faith with the nation's past, to be fair to the nation's present, and to safeguard the nation's future, the plan must also pass a ``moral test.''

The Republican tax bill fails both of these standards.

I strongly oppose H.R. 1, the ``Republican Tax Scam Act,'' and urge all Members to join me in voting against this reckless, cruel, and heartless proposal that will do nothing to improve the lives or well- being of middle and working class families, and the poor and vulnerable `caught in the tentacles of circumstance.'

Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record The Washington Post op-ed, ``The Republican tax plan's five worst dangers,'' by Secretary Rubin, dated November 15, 2017

[From the Washington Post, Nov. 15, 2017]

The Republican Tax Plan's Five Worst Dangers

(By Robert Rubin)

The deficit-funded tax cuts advancing through Congress are

a fiscal tragedy for which our country will pay a huge price

over time. While the details of the tax plan remain in flux,

its fundamental contours will not change. Nor will its $1.5

trillion of deficit funding, the amount stipulated in the

recently passed budget resolution.

Perhaps it's hopeless to expect those in Congress who have

long bemoaned deficits and the debt to oppose the plan. If,

however, as a matter of conscience or renewed reflection they

decide to take heed, here are the fiscal dangers posed by the

plan.

To start, the tax cuts will not increase growth and, given

their fiscal effects, would likely have a significant and

increasingly negative impact. The nonpartisan Tax Policy

Center's latest report estimated that, over 10 years, the

average increase in our growth rate would be roughly zero,

counting the crowding out of private investment by increasing

deficits but not counting other adverse effects of worsening

our fiscal outlook. The Penn Wharton Budget Model, using the

same approach, estimates virtually no increase in long-term

growth. Goldman Sachs projects an increase of 0.1 percent to

0.2 percent in the first couple of years and an average

increase over 10 years of just 0.05 percent per year, not

counting any of the adverse fiscal effects.

These estimates reflect three underlying views held by

mainstream economists. First, individual tax cuts will not

materially induce people to work more. Second, corporate tax

cuts will likely have limited effect on investment or

decisions about where to locate

business activity, given the many other variables at play.

Third, deficit-funded tax cuts will have little short-term

effect on growth, except perhaps for some temporary

overheating, because we are at roughly full employment.

With no additional revenue from increased growth to offset

the tax cuts' cost, the publicly held debt of the federal

government would increase by $1.5 trillion. An additional

danger is that the actual deficit impact would be increased

by abandoning the Congressional Budget Office's nonpartisan

evaluation that has been used for decades by both parties in

favor of partisan calculations by those pushing the tax cuts.

Adding $1.5 trillion or more to the federal debt would make

an already bad situation worse. A useful measure of our

fiscal position is the ratio of publicly held government debt

to economic output or gross domestic product, called the

debt/GDP ratio. In 2000, the debt/GDP ratio was 32 percent.

The ratio is now 77 percent. Looking forward, the CBO

projects the debt/GDP ratio to be 91 percent in 2027 and 150

percent in 2047. After $1.5 trillion of deficit-funded tax

cuts, those future ratios have been estimated to increase to

roughly 97 percent in 2027 and 160 percent in 2047. These

estimates likely substantially understate the worsening of

our fiscal trajectory. That's because they do not account for

the increasingly adverse effect on growth of the difficult-

to-quantify effects of fiscal deterioration.

Exacerbating our already unsustainable fiscal trajectory

with these tax cuts would threaten growth in five respects.

These are highly likely to be substantial and to increase

over time.

First, business confidence would likely be negatively

affected by creating uncertainty about future policy and

heightening concern about our political system's ability to

meet our economic policy challenges.

Second, our country's resilience to deal with inevitable

future economic and geopolitical emergencies, including the

effects of climate change, would continue to decline.

Third, funds available for public investment, national

security and defense spending--a professed concern of many

tax-cut proponents--would continue to decline as debt rises,

because of rising interest costs and the increased risk of

borrowing to fund government activities.

Fourth, Treasury bond interest rates would be highly likely

to increase over time because of increased demand for the

supply of savings and increased concern about future

imbalances. That, in turn, would raise private-sector

interest rates, which could also increase due to widening

spreads vs. Treasuries, further reflecting increased concern

about future conditions. And even a limited increase in the

debt/GDP ratio could focus attention on our fiscal

trajectory's long-ignored risks and trigger outsize increases

in Treasury and private-sector interest rates. The ability to

borrow in our own currency, and to print it through the

Federal Reserve, may diminish these risks for a while, as

might capital inflows from abroad. But these mitigating

factors have their limits; at some point, unsound fiscal

conditions almost surely would undermine our currency and

debt markets.

Finally, at some unpredictable point, fiscal conditions--

and these market dynamics--would likely be seen as

sufficiently serious to cause severe market and economic

destabilization.

We have an imperative need to address our unsustainable

longer-term fiscal trajectory with sound economic policies.

Few elected officials want to face this fact, but, at the

very least, they should not make matters worse. We can only

hope that responsible elected officials will prevent this

irresponsible tax plan from being adopted.

Mr. Speaker, I rise for the very sad task, as we begin the season of Thanksgiving, of announcing the passing of my dear friend,

Steve Mostyn, a great Texan, a great American, husband, father, and friend. We pray for him; his beautiful wife, Amber; and his children.

Today, I ask, in the spirit of our faith, if Members will join me in a moment of silence for the passing of Steve Mostyn.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak in opposition to the Rule for Rules Committee Print 115-39, to H.R. 1, ``Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.''

The underlying bill will cut funding for programs that the American people need by $5.4 trillion over 10 years.

It will raise the deficit by $2.2 trillion 10 years.

This is bad for America.

The chief motivation for House Republicans brings this bill before the House is to say they had a win before we break for the Thanksgiving Holiday.

This rule if adopted will allow the House to take up consideration of a bill that will cost taxpayers because it:

Eliminates the $4,050 personal exemption allowed to each taxpayer for their self, spouse, and each dependent child;

Raises the lowest individual income tax rate from 10 percent to 12 percent

Reduces the tax rate corporations pay on existing offshore profits from 35 percent to 10 percent; and

Cuts the corporate tax rate paid by large companies.

The Jackson Lee Amendments to Rules Committee Print 115-39 were offered as means of improving the bill:

(1) The first Jackson Lee Amendment would delay the effective date of all revenue-reducing provisions in H.R. 1 until the Secretary of Homeland Security submits to Congress a report certifying that the areas covered by Presidential Natural Disaster Declarations for Hurricanes Harvey, Irma, and Maria have fully recovered economically, as measured by a gross domestic product that exceeds by 10 percent the gross domestic product for such areas in the fiscal year preceding the Presidential Disaster Declaration; and the deficit is zero.

(2) The second Jackson Lee Amendment would delay the effective date of all revenue-reducing provisions in H.R. 1 until the Secretary of Health and Human Services submits to Congress a report certifying that the number of U.S. adults without health insurance has not exceeded five percent for three consecutive quarters; and the deficit is zero.

(3) The third Jackson Lee Amendment preserves current law for deductions of student loan interest and other educational incentive.

(4) The fourth Jackson Lee Amendment preserves current law for taxpayer deduction of mortgage interest.

Our work should be focused on lifting people up and not taking opportunities away.

The $4,700 standard deduction for families will be eliminated by the bill governed by this rule to give a tax cut to corporations.

The recovery from Hurricanes Harvey, Maria and Irma which impacted the Texas, Florida, U.S. Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico have long gone, but the efforts of people to reclaim their lives continues.

These families will need that $4,700.

In the State of Texas Hurricane Harvey is on record as the worst disaster to hit homeowners in the United States with over 148,000 homes and 163,000 apartments just in Houston impacted.

There are still 9,100 families in hotels and are in need of assurance that they will be able to return to their own homes.

We know that the costs of recovery will far exceed any natural disaster in memory.

We should set a national goal for extending health insurance coverage not looking for ways to destabilize the health insurance marketplace.

Because of the Affordable Care Act in the state of Texas:

3.8 million Texas residents receive preventative care services.

7 million Texans no longer have lifetime limits on their healthcare insurance.

300,731 young adults can remain on their parents' health insurance until age 26.

5 million Texas residents can receive a rebate check from their insurance company if it does not spend 80 percent of premium dollars on healthcare.

4,029 people with pre-existing conditions now have health insurance.

Today, insurance companies are banned from:

discriminating against anyone with a pre-existing condition

charging higher rates based on gender or health status

enforcing lifetime dollar limits

enforcing annual dollar limits on health benefits

Savings for Texas Seniors on Their Prescription Drugs, Thanks to ACA:

Total Savings: $551,694,997

Total Gap Discount Amount: $201,876,665

Total Number of Beneficiaries: 233,114

Average Discount per Beneficiary: $866

Congress should support expansion of access to healthcare because it will save lives and relieve suffering of those who would otherwise not have care when they need it most.

Our nation is in the midst of an affordable housing crisis. Growing demand for rental housing has resulted in higher rents. More families than ever before struggle to pay their rent each month, and every Congressional district and state across the nation is impacted.

The federal should continue its investments in homeownership that reduce homelessness and housing poverty are sorely underfunded:

Just one in four low income families eligible for federal housing assistance receives the help they need.

Comprehensive tax reform provides one of the best opportunities to end homelessness and housing poverty once and for all. As Congress considers comprehensive tax reform legislation, we urge you to seize this opportunity by reinvesting any savings derived from changes to the mortgage interest deduction into rental housing solutions for people with the greatest needs--not to offset the cost of tax breaks for the wealthy and corporations.

In doing so, we can make the critical investments that our nation needs to help America's families, our local communities, and our national economy thrives.

We know the key to reducing poverty and increasing economic mobility is access to safe and affordable homes. Increasing access to affordable homes bolsters child and family success, economic growth, wages, and productivity. And each dollar invested in developing and preserving affordable homes boosts local economies by leveraging public and private resources to generate income--including resident earnings and additional local tax revenue--and supports job creation and retention.

Congress as in the past should continue to champion homeownership because the benefits that comes to families and communities.

Our nation should be reinvesting these housing dollars into deeply targeted programs that serve people with the most acute housing needs.

Mr. Speaker, this tax bill is not about the future. It is about our past. Millions of Americans, middle class families, will have increased taxes under this tax scam.

In fact, in the State of Texas, 230,000-plus Texans will pay an average of over $6,000 more in taxes. That is a tax scam.

In addition, Mr. Speaker, this is not a futuristic tax bill. This is not a tax bill for our times. This is a tax bill that implodes higher education. For instance, it does not allow the deduction of student loans or interest payments on those loans or tuition or expenses, eliminating the opportunity for educational growth.

It eliminates the tax credit for research and innovation; again, stymieing the growth of the United States as it relates to research and innovation. Then to the large universities, the endowments that are used to help our students to build complexes to educate the best and the brightest are eliminated.

This is a tax scam. It is a tax scam on higher education. It is a tax scam on hardworking middle class Americans. It deserves a resounding ``no'' vote because we don't want to go back. We want to go toward the future.

Mr. Speaker, many times, the American people wonder about the correlation between the work that we do here. As a member of the Budget Committee, I can tell them that the tax bill that is about to move through this House--the Republican Trump tax bill--will bring about $1.41 trillion in revenue decreases in discretionary spending, which means cuts in their Medicare and Medicaid.

Why do they want to do this?

They want to do this so that they can compound the injury to those who need a mortgage deduction, which will be eliminated for any home that you buy in the future.

If you have medical expenses, that will be eliminated. You will not be able to deduct that, whether you are a young family with a catastrophic illness or a senior citizen.

Then those of you who are trying to increase your opportunities for the future--help your children--you will not be able to deduct student loan interest, tuition, and other education expenses.

Elections matter, but actions matter. This tax bill is a crippling, devastating bill, and it will create the complete opposite of what Republicans say they believe in--a huge deficit, with a huge debt, on the backs of the American people. Vote ``no'' on this tax bill.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas for his leadership, his stewardship of these very special ways of communicating to the American people.

I just left a meeting on temporary protected status, so I will try to summarize my remarks, because I think it is very important to join in the Congressional Black Caucus Special Order.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the chairman, Mr. Richmond, and my colleague Mr. Payne and my colleague Mr. Evans, who will join us in that effort, because this is a way to communicate with our colleagues of the urgency of some of these issues.

So let me first of all take a moment that really gives me great consternation, great concern, and that is that, as I said in my remarks, while the President was out of the country, that I will always wish him safe travels and safe return, but you have to think about how we have turned the corner on the dignity of the Presidency when you have to monitor the tweets or the words that are being said by that Office when they are out of the country.

There is one point I have to make, because I am a product of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Barbara Jordan was able to be the first African American from Texas, since Reconstruction, elected to the United States Congress, along with Andy Young from Georgia, after the Voting Rights Act.

Mr. Speaker, there was nothing untoward. It was just simply allowing one person one vote. Heretofore, in the Deep South and in the Southwest, African Americans were denied the right to vote by suppression, poll tax, and a number of tactics; but the Voting Rights Act eliminated or prevented, had to have preclearance, any discriminatory factor that could be raised that would keep minorities from voting, that one vote, one person.

It pains me to read the headlines: ``Trump Says He Believes Putin's Election Meddling Denials.''

I believe that it is important for people of goodwill, for Members of the United States Congress, to denounce these comments and to ask for the dignity of this Office to really put Americans first and put this Nation first, because that is not what is being done.

All of the intelligence agencies, 17 plus, have indicated that not only did they influence, they intruded, they skewed the election. They didn't just meddle. You cannot ask a former KGB officer to tell you that he didn't meddle in our elections. Elections matter.

This is no comment on who won or lost. This is a comment on reality. The elections were skewed to one person, and it was confirmed by the intelligence agencies, and it is time for the highest Office to speak on behalf of the American people.

That brings me right to the Trump tax cuts, the Republican tax cuts. I spoke earlier during 1 minutes to try and correlate between tax cuts and the needs of the American people.

These major tax cuts will offer more benefits to corporations, which, by the way, are having their biggest season of profits that we have ever had. They are succeeding beyond imagination. They have not only stock prices going up, but the profits that they are able to stock away are going up.

Take that in the backdrop of this tax bill, having to cut and violate the Medicare trust fund and Medicaid in order to find the dollars to be able to give the top 1 percent the greatest tax cut and to give corporations a 20 percent tax cut in the United States and a 12 percent tax cut overseas, which, in addition to giving them that money on the corporate rates, which is a reasonable thing to discuss, but by the inequity of the lower amount being overseas, you can imagine that jobs are still going to leave and go overseas.

This is a tax cut that is made for the basket, if you will, of goodies for the top 1 percent. This is not worrying about working Americans.

Let me put into the Record what you will lose.

You will lose the mortgage interest.

You will lose the fairness of the child tax credit.

You will lose the student loan interest, tuition, and other education expenses; personal casualty losses; tax preparation costs; medical expenses; alimony payments; moving expenses--which will impact victims of Hurricane Harvey, my constituents in Kashmere Gardens, northeast Houston, Third Ward, Acres Home, the Heights, Jacinto City, places where individuals have been impacted; this moving expense, elimination of that as a deduction, will impact individuals who are trying to restore their lives--and employee business expenses.

This bill will hurt the average working American. It is a frightening bill. I would almost like to say it is a bill made near purgatory on the way to you know where. This is a disgusting attack on hardworking Americans.

I want to also put in the Record my concern about extending the temporary protected status for Haitians as well as El Salvadorans and a number of other countries that are facing the 6-month deadline that seems to be what has come out of the administration.

All of these countries have devastation, and all of these countries are deserving, if you will, of an extension for the people who are here because they are, in fact, suffering still. Haiti is suffering still from the earthquake. El Salvador is suffering.

I want to mention one of my constituents, Jose, and his wife, who were deported during the horror and the hysteria of the announcement from the administration of: I am going to be hard on deportation.

A hardworking family man, a manager of a paint store, was deported out of this country back to El Salvador where there is no work, there is no opportunity, and they are still suffering from the devastation of years past. This is what we are in the midst of.

Let me, finally, express, as I indicated, my concerns about extending the temporary protected status certainly for Haitians and others. We are working on that as we speak.

Then let me come back to Hurricane Harvey. There are about 50,000 people in the hotels. We are still in need.

I am going to close with this.

We just experienced Veterans Day. What a pleasure to be able to speak with the many veterans, the Buffalo Soldiers, who celebrated at the downtown celebration, the American Legion. The Aldine Mail Route had a parade. Stafford had a parade. Many places had a parade. I want to celebrate our veterans by saying thank you.

When I spoke to young people, eighth graders, I told them about the value of joining the United States military, putting on the uniform. Policy does not relate to the value of the men and women who put on the uniform.

I believe that it is certainly of concern that we should understand what the needs of the military are. And if this proposal goes forward of giving waivers for individuals with depression, bipolar disorder, getting waivers, let me be very clear, I advocate for the full utilization of people, and those people who have mental health issues.

It is very important, as they are recruited into the United States military, that all of the resources needed to have them perform at the fullest of their capacity, we must ensure, as Members of Congress, that that happens. That must be our responsibility because, as we look at our veterans and we see the sacrifice, we see what war means, we have to make sure that we embrace them solidly and respect them and honor them.

So I thank the gentleman for allowing me to share a few thoughts. I will simply say that the gentleman is absolutely right, this tax legislation will be devastating, costly, and hard for the country to dig out of the deepening debt that is going to be created.

Mr. Speaker, I join my colleagues in the Congressional Black Caucus in drawing attention to the Republican Leadership's latest plan to hurt the American taxpayers, especially those who did not support the President during the election.

The Republican tax cut bill will hurt hospitals.

The House tax bill would remove tax-exempt status of private activity bonds for construction of a non-profit facility such as a hospital.

This could potentially impact a fourth of the rural hospitals in Texas and many urban hospitals that may be planning construction or extensive renovation projects in the next few years.

Many non-profit hospitals depend on tax exempt private-activity bonds (PABs) as a financing tool.

PABs are tax exempt for certain entities, including qualified 501(c)(3) organizations including hospital bonds, but under the new tax reform legislation being considered by this body, the tax exemption will be removed.

PABs play a critical role in helping not-for-profit hospitals and health systems access low-cost capital.

Access to low-cost capital financing allows qualifying entities to keep infrastructure expenditures low.

This increases the ability for qualifying hospitals and health system to use these savings to increase more efficient, more affordable care.

Federal tax-exempt financing is part of what continues to help health care providers and hospitals serve our nation and support rural communities.

The Texas Organization of Rural & Community Hospitals opposes removal of tax-exemption for PABs and urges Republicans to stop threatening small and rural hospitals.

The Republican Tax plan amends Title 26 of the United States Code 529 that deals with Qualified tuition programs.

The Code was intended to encourage persons to attain higher education and provide incentives for persons who pursue doctorates.

Most people know that going back to school to obtain a degree is a difficult choice to make with full time jobs and family obligations.

Having a degree can substantially increase income and provide choices that would otherwise be unattainable to the recipient of advanced degrees.

The benefit to the economy and our nation's leadership in the sciences rests with the number of people who attain undergraduate and graduate degrees.

The Republicans have gone into this section 529 of the tax code and extended the tax write-offs to those sending their children to K-12 private schools.

Other ways the Republican Tax bill hurts tax payers who pursue college educations for themselves or their children.

Repeal of Lifetime Learning Credit;

Repeal of the Student Loan Interest Deduction;

Repeal of the qualified tuition reduction;

Repeal of educational assistance program;

Termination of private activity bonds; and,

Creation of a new excise tax on endowments at private colleges and universities.

The Republican leadership of the House is also causing problems for private sector investments in Colleges and Universities.

The tax bill threatens tax write offs for donations to colleges and universities and will limit tax credits associated with university- industry partnerships.

The Republicans claim that their Child Tax Credit proposal would help working families, but it simply does not do enough.

The House tax plan proposes a nonrefundable $600 increase in the Child Tax Credit (CTC), and would make more families earning six figures eligible to claim the CTC.

This proposal wouldn't help the women who need it most.

In addition, whatever benefits this CTC proposal would provide pales in comparison to those that would be received by the wealthy and corporations under this tax plan.

The bill cuts taxes for major corporations who already pay far less than their fair share.

Republicans claim that economic growth will more than pay for the lost revenue but we've tried this before.

When trickle-down economics fails again and this bill explodes the nation's deficit, Republicans will call for huge spending cuts to critical programs that hardworking Americans depend on to make ends meet.

The plan's negative impact on the Lone Star state would be particularly hard.

Independent analyses show the Republican plan would actually raise taxes on about 1.5 million Texas households, or 12.4 percent of households next year.

On average, families earning up to $86,000 annually would see a $794.00 increase in their tax liability, a significant burden on families struggling to afford child care and balance their checkbook.

According to the IRS, 23 percent of tax filers, or 2.8 million Texas households, deduct their state and local taxes with an average deduction of $7,823 in 2015.

The Ryan-McConnell plan eliminates this deduction, which would lower home values and put pressure on states and towns to collect revenues they depend on to fund schools, roads, and vital public resources.

Placing further strains on middle-class Texans is the elimination of the personal exemption, which deducts $4,050 for each taxpayer and dependent on a return from taxable income.

In 2015, roughly 9.3 million dependent exemptions were claimed in the Lone Star State.

The GOP's reckless and irresponsible tax plan is made all the more obscene by its disproportionate and immoral handouts to the wealthiest few.

According to the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, millionaires in Texas, 0.31 percent of filers in 2015 would receive almost 57 percent of the benefits from the tax plan.

Texans deserve a tax plan that puts working and middle class families first, not more deficit-exploding tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires.

We need bipartisan tax reform that creates jobs, fuels economic growth, and puts more money into the pockets of hard-working American families.

A recent Pew Research Center report found little support for cutting taxes for high-income households, which is defined as more than $250,000 or large businesses and corporations.

In fact, 43 percent favored raising taxes on high-income households and 52 percent said corporate taxes should be raised.

The Republicans persist with their scheme of raising taxes on hard- working middle class families to pay for tax cuts for the rich.

It is reckless to explode our deficit which according to the Tax Policy Center, would skyrocket by $2.4 trillion over the first decade.

The wealthy must pay their fair share, but the GOP tax scheme offers them a free lunch at the expense of those who are most in need of a helping hand.

The power of the purse rests with the House of Representatives and it is our job to make sure that the American People are treated fairly.

Mr. Speaker, as a senior member of the House Committees on the Judiciary and Homeland Security Committee, I also rise today to express my strong objection to the announced intention by the Trump Administration not to extend Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for Haiti, Honduras, and El Salvador.

On May 24, 2017, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) redesignated Haiti for 6 months of Temporary Protected Status (TPS), rather than the full 18 months requested by the Government of Haiti, Haiti experts in the United States, and the Congressional Black Caucus, among others.

DHS' decision did not reflect the realities on the ground in Haiti, which include Haiti's food scarcity crisis, cholera epidemic, and the ongoing challenges posed by the unprecedented 2010 earthquake.

In a letter sent on November 3, 2017, the Congressional Black Caucus urged DHS, once again, to fully extend Haiti's TPS designation for 18 months by the November 23, 2017 deadline in light of the aforementioned conditions in Haiti, as well as the exarcerbated damage caused by Hurricanes Irma and Maria.

In a report published in October 2017, the highly regarded Global Justice Clinic concluded that conditions justifying Haiti's qualification for TPS in 2011 remain as acute today as they were then.

The study also found that 40,000 Haitians uprooted by the 2010 earthquake are officially displaced and that many more likely remain unofficially displaced in dangerously inadequate shelters.

The cholera epidemic that was tragically caused by international efforts to aid Haiti in 2010 more than doubled following Hurricane Matthew and is expected to directly affect more than 30,000 people by the end of 2017.

Hurricane Matthew also exacerbated the food insecurity crisis in Haiti, placing 2.4 million Haitians--22 percent of its population--in the grips of an acute food insecurity crisis.

The Haitian government has been working diligently for years to improve its economy, public health conditions, and infrastructure in coordination with the United States government and international community.

In order to accomplish this task, Haiti relies in large part on remittances that its citizens receive from TPS beneficiaries in the United States.

Therefore, the negative consequences of terminating Haiti's TPS designation would be twofold.

It would end essential remittances that significantly contribute to Haiti's recovery while also forcing the poorest republic in the Western Hemisphere to absorb the cost of reintegrating thousands of citizens all at once.

Such actions could be catastrophic to Haiti's recovery efforts and run counter to Congressional efforts to improve American relations in the region through the recently-passed United States-Caribbean Strategic Engagement Act (Public Law 114-291).

Finally, it is essential to note that Haitian TPS beneficiaries directly contribute to the United States.

They pay taxes, spend money, contribute to Social Security and Medicare, and help promote American prosperity in numerous sectors, such as the restaurant and food service, construction, and hospitality industries.

About 30 percent of TPS beneficiaries are homeowners, stimulating the real estate industry and contributing to the local property tax base.

Also, one in nine TPS beneficiaries in the labor force is self- employed, meaning they not only create jobs for themselves, but also create jobs for others.

A recent report found that the expiration of Haitian TPS would cost the United States economy more $2.8 billion over a decade in lost gross domestic product.

Mr. Speaker, we need to be both smart and compassionate when it comes to extending TPS for Haiti.

The compassionate thing to do is extend TPS for Haiti.

But just as important, extending TPS for Haiti is the smart thing to do because it strengthens the American economy and advances the national interests of the United States.

Mr. Speaker, here are the top reasons why temporary protect status (TPS) for Haiti should not be revoked:

1) Trump Administration Actions:

The DHS termination of TPS decision threatens families and key industries in the United States and threatens the stability of nations in our region.

On November, 2017, the Washington Post reported that the State Department irresponsibly recommended that Temporary Protected Status (TPS) be revoked for over 300,000 Honduran, Nicaraguan, Haitian and Salvadorans living and working in the United States.

This is paving the way for the mass deportation of over 300,000 individuals who are legally in the US--many of whom have children who are US citizens.

It was an inhumane, foolish and terrible decision to make, given TPS holders' contributions to our economy including critical hurricane recovery efforts, to say nothing of the national security and humanitarian implications of kicking these individuals out.

That's why everyone from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, to national security experts, to Catholic bishops has expressed strong support for extending this vital program.

These nations are in no condition to receive 300,000 returnees.

In Haiti, forcing the return of 50,000 people would disrupt the fragile recovery, exacerbate the food, housing, and public health crises, and potentially destabilize the new government.

In El Salvador and Honduras, the return of over 250,000 people would strain government services and lead to job displacement in countries besieged by violence, narcotics trafficking and weak institutions.

The revocation of TPS will further destabilize fragile countries in our neighborhood. With remittances making up more than 15% of the GDP of TPS-designated countries, the sudden loss will put an added strain on the U.S. foreign aid budget while families who have long relied on this source of income will have no other option than to attempt to come to the U.S. as undocumented workers.

That's why Congress must act without delay to pass CHC-endorsed bill by Rep. Nydia Velazquez--the American Promise Act--would ensure individuals who have resided in the U.S. under these programs for a period of three years can remain in the country and pursue a path to naturalization.

2) TPS Revocation Is Not in America's National Interest:

Americans with Temporary Protected Status (TPS) are hardworking individuals who are contributing to our economy, our communities and our industries.

TPS recipients have passed numerous criminal background checks and have often been living in the U.S. for over a decade.

With more than 300,000 TPS beneficiaries expecting a Trump Administration decision on their fate, and some 800,000 DACA beneficiaries depending on Congressional action to shape their futures, we are entering a stretch of time that will be of huge consequence to 1.1 million immigrants who are deeply rooted and legally present in America.

Regardless of how you might feel about the policy, TPS holders from these countries have been in legal limbo for at least 16 years.

They are perhaps the most vetted, legally present, and work authorized community in our country.

They have submitted to numerous criminal background checks, once every 18 months.

Life has gone on for these folks--they have families here, are contributing to our economy, and our communities.

There are an estimated that 273,000 U.S.-born children in the country have parents with TPS.

Economic, legal, and policy experts have highlighted the disastrous economic impacts of revoking Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for hundreds of thousands of Americans, as country-specific deadlines loom.

3) Positive Economic Impacts of TPS

Approximately 250,000 TPS recipients are currently employed-- approximately 94% of men and 82% of women.

The average TPS recipient works between 40-45 hours per week.

Given the length of time on the job, many of these workers are senior, specialized and not easily replaceable such as construction site supervisors and nursing home professionals.

The five leading industries that would face mass layoffs are construction (50,000+), restaurants and other food services (32,000+), landscaping services (15,000+), child day care services (10,000) and grocery stores (9,000+).

The mass layoffs of 250,000 TPS recipients would cost employers approximately $967 million in immediate turnover costs.

The revocation of TPS status would cost the U.S. an estimated $164 billion in Gross Domestic Product.

Revocation of TPS status would result in a loss of $6.9 billion in Social Security and Medicare payments over a decade.

Given that 30% of TPS recipients are homeowners, the consequences of simultaneously dumping 60,000 mortgages could disrupt housing markets across the country including Texas (13,000 mortgages), Florida (5,000+ mortgages) and Virginia (4,100 mortgages).

Mass deportations of TPS recipients would cost taxpayers more than $3 billion dollars.

Mr. Speaker, as Members of Congress we know well, perhaps better than most, how blessed our nation is to have in reserve such exceptional young men and women who will go on to become leaders in their local communities, states, and the nation in the areas of business, education, government, philanthropy, the arts and culture, and the military.

We know this because we see them and benefit from their contributions every day. Many of them work for us in our offices as junior staff members, congressional fellows, or interns and they do amazing work for and on behalf of the constituents we are privileged to represent.

Mr. Speaker, I believe there is no higher calling than the call to serve a cause larger than ourselves. That is why I ran for public office. I was inspired to serve by President Kennedy who said, ``Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country,'' and by the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. who said:

``Everybody can be great because anybody can serve. . . . You only need a heart full of grace. A soul generated by love.''

By this measure, there are several other great young men and women who served as volunteers this year in my offices. They may toil in obscurity but their contributions to the constituents we serve are deeply appreciated. That is why today I rise to pay tribute to two extraordinary young persons for their service to my constituents in the 18th Congressional District of Texas and to the American people. They are: Shannon O'Quinn from Texas Tech University; and Lauren Butia from The Madeira School.

Mr. Speaker, the energy, intelligence, and idealism these wonderful young people brought to my office and those interning in the offices of my colleagues help keep our democracy vibrant. The insights, skills, and knowledge of the governmental process they gain from their experiences will last a lifetime and prove invaluable to them as they go about making their mark in this world.

Because of persons like Shannon and Lauren the future of our country is bright and its best days lie ahead. I wish them well.

Mr. Speaker, I am grateful that such thoughtful, committed young men and women can be found working in my office, those of my colleagues, and in every community in America. Their good works will keep America great, good, and forever young.