tv House Session CSPAN March 23, 2015 2:00pm-9:01pm EDT
taking up a measure criticizing attacks in nigeria by the terror group boko haram. also a bill providing military aid to ukraine. votes after 6:30. this is expected to be the last week of work before a two-week congressional recess. and now live coverage of the u.s. house here on c-span. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the prayer will be offered by the guest chaplain, reverend cordetores. the chaplain: let us pray. loving god, source of all wisdom, you lead us in discovering what is true and good so that human society may come to reflect your loving order. bless the work of the people's house. inspire all those who labor in
it with your wisdom and truth. give them a spirit of enthusiasm and joy in their worthy efforts, and may they find fulfillment in their service. as they seek to advance the common good guide them in making right decisions, and carrying them out with true justice helping them to be particularly attentive to the needs of those who cannot fend for themselves or who struggle with little hope. may the work of this house help advance a peaceful society in our nation and foster unity in mutual good will so that in all things you may be glorified. . we ask all this in your most holy name, amen. the speaker pro tempore: the chair thanks the guest chaplain from belmont abby from belmont, north carolina. the chair has examined the journal of the last day's proceedings and announces to the house his approval thereof. pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1
the journal stands approved. the pledge of allegiance will be led by the gentleman from north carolina, mr. pittinger. mr. pittinger: i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the speaker pro tempore: the chair will entertain requests for one-minute speeches. for what purpose does the gentleman from north carolina rise? mr. pittenger: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. pittenger: thank you mr. speaker. president reagan once told us that the nine most terrifying words in the english language are, i am from the government, and i'm here to help you. well the kind of help we received mr. speaker, has been more regulations greater tax burden, a bigger bureaucracy
and no growth for the american family, for american business. this week we have the opportunity, mr. speaker, to change this course by passing the house 2016 budget, which cuts $5.5 trillion in spending while strengthening vital programs. it calls for fairer, simpler tax code to promote good-paying jobs and opportunity economy completely repeals obamacare, it puts effectiveness in all areas of the federal government. now is the time to restore commonsense and fiscal sanity to washington, mr. speaker. i urge all of my colleagues to support the house 2016 budget. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania rise? mr. thompson: mr. speaker request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. thompson: mr. speaker, on
friday, president obama released new regulations for hydraulic fracturing, and once again turned his back on job creation in an attempt to appease a small but vocal group of environmental extremists. these new regulations are unnecessary and threaten the potential growth of jobs on federal lands and across the nation. production of shale resources have groaned by leaps and bounds in recent years and much of this growth has been due to private sector innovation coupled with sensible regulations at the state and local levels. as one of the top producers of natural gas, pennsylvania continues to help drive record-breaking oil natural gas production here at home. since 2006, marcellus producers have contributed over $1 billion in state taxes, along with half a billion dollars in road construction. communities in pennsylvania's fifth congressional district have greatly benefited from the technology and safety advancements that make natural gas readily available. this success has been made possible due to regulations administered at the state level, not by adding the
bureaucracy of the federal government. mr. speaker, i'll work with my colleagues in congress and do all that i can to stop top-down policies such as this that undermine economic progress and energy security and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from arkansas rise? >> to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker last month president obama released his budget proposal. it is as expected increasing taxes and spending without balancing the budget and allows social security and medicare to go bankrupt. the president's refusal to address the compounding national debt emphasizes his disinterest in being a leader. fortunately we in the house are leading, our budget offers a stark contrast. mr. hill: we implement commonsense reforms, balance the budget, eliminate wasteful government spending repeal obamacare in full and preserve social security and medicare for current beneficiaries and
future generations. our budget restores the principle of federalism, the foundation of our constitution, empowering states, local communities and the real drivers of opportunity and prosperity the american people. i look forward to the debate this week in the house and working to ensure the proper balance between our national security interests and our long-term deficit reduction. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair lays before the house a communication. the clerk: the honorable the speaker, house of representatives, sir, pursuant to the permission granted in clause 2-h of rule 2 of the rules of the u.s. house of representatives, i have the honor to transmit a sealed envelope received from the white house on march 20, 2015, at 2:24 p.m. and said to contain a message from the president whereby he transmits the district of columbia fiscal year 2015 budget request act.
with best wishes i am signed sincerely, karen l. haas. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will read the message. the clerk: to the congress of the united states pursuant to my constitutional authority and as contemplated by section 446 of the district of columbia self-government and governmental reorganization act, as amended, in 1989 i am transmitting to -- transmitting the district of columbia's fiscal year f.y. 2015 budget and financial plan. this transmittal does not represent an endorsements of the contents of the district of columbia government's request. the proposed f.y. 2015 budget and financial plan reflects the major programatic objectives of the mayor and the council of the district of columbia for 2015 the district estimates total revenues of $12.vi billion. signed, barack obama, the white house, march 20, 2015.
>> we are getting your reaction to ted cruz's president deppings announcement. join the conversation at facebook.com/c-span and on twitter with the #c-span chat. chris says, cruz reminds me of a really bad motivational speaker you see at one of those seminars where they try to sell you snake oil. from david, frightening to bed wetters on the left. a breath of fresh air to the rest of us.
i'm still thinking walker-cruz 2016. on the democratic side of the 2016 race, hillary clinton spoke in washington today about expanding economic opportunities in america's cities. her remarks were at the center for american progress where we also heard from housing and urban development secretary castro as well as the head of the government employees union leaders of civil rights groups, and the mayor of compton, california. this is about an hour. >> good morning. welcome to the center for american progress. my name is neera tanden. i'm honored to have all of you join us for this very special round table focused on expanding opportunity in america's cities. the host: we are very proud to co-host this event with a union focus and improving our cities. we are also very fortunate to host such a wonderful group of
participants with us today, including former secretary of state hillary clinton. welcome. [applause] host: in a moment i'll introduce our other guests, first i'd like to say a few words about why we are here. america's cities are the engines of our economy. generating opportunity and prosperity not only for the people who live in them, but for suburban rural, and tribal areas as well. our nation's top 100 metro areas alone account for at least 75% of the nation's gross domestic product. today more and more middle class families want to live in cities. and the more remake that -- we make that possible the more our cities and our country will grow. yet urban areas face ongoing challenges. the shortage of affordable housing, struggling schools, and concentrated poverty.
that's why we are here today to bring together leaders from across sectors to address these challenges with new ideas so today's cities are places families can grow and prosper. now it's my great pleasure to introduce today's round table participants. secretary hillary clinton served as the 67 secretary of state. before that she was also the senator from the great state of new york representing our country's largest city. lee saunders is president of asfcme which represents more than 1.6 million public sector workers across the contry. we are also very honored to have secretary castro from the department of housing and urban development. he's also the former mayor of san antonio. asia brown has spearheaded a number of creative initiatives as the youngest person ever elected to mayor in compton, california. glenn is co-founder of sill vear
lake, a technology investment firm. bruce is the vice president of the brookings institution. founding director of the brookings metropolitan program, and an expert on urban competitiveness. janet is president and c.e.o. of the national council of la raza the largest national hispanic civil rights and advocacy organization in the united states. and the executive director of the policy institute which serves more than 100,000 youth and young adults at 125 programs in los angeles. randy is president of the american federation of teachers, which represents 1.6 million educational professionals. and finally seth williams is c.e.o. of rockford technology company, a company with mission to give back to its urban community by creating jobs and manufacturing earth friendly products. so, we have a great group of people here today. i'd like to start out the discussion with lee saunders.
lee, why should we actually care about our urban areas? mr. saunders: first let me thank you for coordinating this and sponsoring it. we believe that this is a discussion that's long overdue. in fact, there is a tragedy going on within our urban centers across this contry. the lack of jobs, good-paying jobs, and we have to talk about t not only on the labor side, but business, academics elected officials, all of us have to think outside the box to talk about the problems that exist in the urban areas right now. you know about the detroits of the world. you have heard about atlantic city. you have heard that some these cities are actually having a comeback, but if you look at those specific comebacks, you will see that in effect it's just in small areas of that particular city. and that, in fact, when you go outside of that area you see a lot of poverty. you see a lot of joblessness, problems with public education,
with the infrastructure, so we believe we have to have a dialogue. we have to have a discussion collectively thinking outside the box and saying that our urban areas are the engines of our states for job growth and john -- job creation. to pay particular attention to resolving this problem and rebuilding our urban centers across the contry. we view this discussion as the -- country. we view this discussion as the beginning not the end. we believe this should be a priority not only of the federal government, but it should be a priority and we should coordinate our activities between the federal state, and local level. to resolve the problems, provide quality jobs, provide employment to provide hope for people who reside in these areas. just want to -- they are playing by the rules every single day. they want to have a chance. they want to have an opportunity to achieve that american dream. so we are very very excited
about this. we are looking forward to having more dialogue on it. host: excellent. secretary clinton, as i mentioned you were a senator from new york. you represent new york city. why should the country care about the city's success or failures? secretary clinton: i join with lee in thanking you and caps for pulling us together on this, i thank you, lee, for motivating this conversation. i did represent new york for eight years and i not only represented new york city i represented buffalo and rochester and syracuse and albany and bingeamton and a lot of other places that had very different challenges, but they all fell under the category of how do we make sure our cities are good places for people to live and work. that's become even more important as we have watched how cities are driving economic prosperity. it used to be that jobs were moving out of cities into
suburbs and rural areas. that trend is reversing. so people want to live in cities. there are all kinds of reasons. and there's research i'm sure we'll hear from bruce about mi lenials wanting to live and work in the same place. so cities have always been the engines of prosperity. but now what we are seeing is, unless we pay attention and come up with some very creative and i would argue effective solutions based on our past practices, we will not see our cities doing what cities do best. it goes to lee's point. a lot of our cities truly are divided. they have a lot of inequality that has only gotten worse. they have some of the most dynamic, well educated, affluent people in the world. and people who are trapped in generational poverty and whose skills are not keeping up with what the jobs of today and tomorrow demand.
so i'm looking not just at what can be done by working across governmental lines because as we said that has to be absolutely critical, but what we can do in partnership with the public and private sector. i'm glad we have people on the panel who are speaking to that. let me just make three quick points. one, i think that we for a long time, especially at the federal level, but also at the state level, shifted resources to follow people. which meant that we shifted resources out of cities. it made sense because roads had to be developed. all kinds of utilities and infrastructure had to be put into place in suburban areas and even further out. i remember having all kinds of conversations as a senator with people who wanted to bring jobs to upstate new york in particular, and they would move out into what they called green areas or clean areas, even though the utilities and a lot
of the other infrastructure was actually in the old cities. and so how do we begin to make what we already have more of an attraction? but then that raises the second point, how do we repair and update a lot of our infrastructure? a lot of the older cities we have terrible problems with water systems sewer systems. to say nothing of not keeping up with an electric grid or broadband access that are the infrastructure of the future. we have to do what i would hope to see as kind of a mapping of our cities. and an understanding that when it comes to the physical infrastructure, we have to take care of what we already have, upgrade it, modernize it. we have had problems here in washington. we have problems in new york. potholes exploding, all kinds of issues. we have to really invest. then we have to throw it into the future. the second big issue is the human infrastructure. that's the most important part of any city. it's the most important part of
our entire country. what do we do to better equip our people to be able to take the jobs? how do we keep middle class families in cities where they want to stay? they don't want to leave. but they are being priced out. so we need to do more to fit the human needs with both the potential that people have starting early with pre-k. i'm very much a supported of what the mayor of new york did trying to create pre-k access for every young child in new york regardless of who that child is and who its parents are. we also have to do more on affordable housing and more of the amenities so that families, middle class families, working families, can actually stay in cities and have a place to go. i want to publicly acknowledge randy because through a clinton global initiative commitment, the afl-cio and building trades pooled their public pension money to train people to do energy retrofits. energy efishency. they have now created tens of
thousands of jobs. that's the kind of creative work that we can do together. i'm obviously proud that c.g.i. was the convenienter to make that happen. the final point is this. we know a lot about social mobility. one of the biggest issues we face is income inequality combined with wage stagnation. they really go hand in hand. we don't have enough good jobs. we don't have people being placed into those jobs. we don't have enough social mobility. really interesting work being done by professor schetti and his colleagues at harvard. it wakes us up as to what we are facing. they have looked at the indicators of social mobility. why do some communities have, frankly, more ladders for opportunity than other communities? how do we promote success and upward mobility? it's not only about average incomes. as important as that is. you can look at cities that on
average have similar affluence but people are trapped and not able to move up in one city and are moving up in another. i'll give you two examples. two cities with similar affluence, seattle and atlanta. have markedly different rates of economic mobility. it's not about race. white and black citizens of a city like atlanta both have low upward mobility. it turns out that places where the fabric of community is strong with a vibrant middle class, places that are more integrated across class, places with good schools, places with unions places with religious organizations and civic organizations help people feel rooted, part of a community, and then being able to pull together all of the aspects that play into upward mobility. so we need to think hard about
what we are going to do now that people are moving back into and staying in cities to make sure that our cities are not just places of economic prosperity and job creation, on average, but do it in a way that lifts everybody up. to deal with the overriding issues of inequality and lack of mobility. and that's why i think this conversation is so timely and hopefully cap and others will continue to work on these important challenges. host: thank you so much secretary clinton. just building off of your remarks cap actually worked a little bit on the issue and found that the size of the middle class actually affects how much social mobility you have in these metropolitan areas. we did that work with him and he applauded that work. i think that's a really important point.
bruce in the 1990's we saw articles about how cities were dying. secretary clinton referenced this. now they are seen as the engines of growth. what are the strategies you have seen that actually succeed in making cities more hospitalible to the middle class families who want to live there? >> the secretary has it right. this is a very different conversation today than 10 years ago. cities have enormous demographic and market wind behind their back. it's the mi lenials. they want communities where they can live, work, and play. it's also companies that are moving to an open innovation model. they are not staying in their sigh lows, inventing only within the four walls of the company. they are looking to interact with researchers and others. that revalues proximity. authenticity. mr. katz: there are four strategies that matter playing out in the past that play out today. innovation. you have to as a city, your companies are clustered
continuously innovate on products, medical exam puses and the companies that cluster around them. skills stem skills. science technology energy, and math. not just people with four-year degrees, but people coming out of high schools, community colleges, business training efforts. fraps, as you said, not just roads, transit, and bridges, but to move energy. to move ideas broadband. ports, airports, logistics, cities are trading entities. and last the quality of place. this probability matters more today than it has in the past 50 years. authenticity amenities, vie brancy vitality. that's really critical to the innovative process which makes cities hum, met trose hum, and the economy hum. there's a -- metros hum, and the economy hum. it's worked for cities. as we go around the country what we are seeing, not just governments, but private, civic,
union, community, philanthropy stepping up and doing some really hard work. louisville lexington they are making manufacturing innovation a priority. charlotte and chicago, they are changing their community colleges to equip workers with the actual technical skills they need. you can go to denver and l.a. they are using local resources to build out state-of-the-art transit. then you can go to the heart of detroit and to the heart of buffalo and you'll see the cities coming back from the core. it's still a very small landmass, but when you put that innovative economy on steroids, one innovative j.b. equals five other jobs. it can expand out into the neighborhoods if we are smart about skills and education. there's not a recipe about there. it's about collaboration. it's about public-private at its core. it will fundamentally, i think, and we can come back to this, change what the national government does. in some cases the national government really does need to
lead, a lot of this advance research is really coming out of the national government. no one else does the same work on basic science or even applied research. but on skills, infrastructure, quality place. the national government needs to be a better partner in the service of city priorities and city vision. so there's exciting work out there, and there is a road map for prosperity, shared prosperity. but it does mean that we need to recognize the world has fundamentally changed. host: thank you so much. secretary castro, i'm going to come back to you to discuss what the federal government should do towards a little -- a little later. first talk about your experience as the mayor of san antonio. you took a number of policies to really address some of those -- these key challenges that we have raised. what worked for you as mayor and what can we learn from your experience? secretary castro: thank you to cap. this is a very timely subject.
i'm convinced we are living in a century of cities. and that here in the united states that america is falling in love again with cities. the census bureau estimates that by 2050 we are going to see 80 million new people in our country, and about 60 million of them are going to live in urban areas. in san antonio, one of the things -- if i had one piece of advice for local leaders around the country it would be to break through the silos that often exist at the local level. one of the things that we saw the administration up here doing very early on was an effort called sustainable communities that was h.u.d. working with the department of transportation working with the e.p.a. we said, hey, i think what we should do is organize ourselves in a similar way. the city government needs to be talking to the community college district needs to talk to the housing authority, to the transit agency to our electric utility, water utility. and it is absolutely surprising
how often that actually doesn't happen. even at the local level. when we did that what we found was that first of all there are a lot of resources out there if they are coordinated in a better way, they could make a bigger impact. that's money and resources you already have. secondly it really allows you as a community to create long-term vision for lifting up parts of the urban core that are most in need. in our case, in san antonio, we focused on the east side of the city. one of the poorest areas of san antonio. and looked at improving the schools, looked at improving the roads. making the neighborhood safer. ensuring we had better bus routes to that part of the city. not only does that help us eventually get promised neighborhood grant, choice neighborhood grant, promise zone, but maybe more importantly we saw the attendance rates going up at the elementary
schools in the neighborhoods. the graduation at this high school going up. you start to see by coordinating and making investments in housing, in education in safer streets the actual bottom line on the ground results that you want to see, and that would be my piece of advice for local leaders out there. the number one thing that you can do immediately is to break through your silos and get into meetings with the community and amongst each other as leaders to look to the future. host: thank you so much. mayor brown, throughout your career you focused on spurring change in disadvantaged communities. what's been working in compton to foster growth? mayor brown: we were busy. before i became mayor i was an urban planner. when i cam into office i brought -- came into office i brought every sector of government, community, faith-based organizations together and i introduced the vision that i
have for the city. it came from hearing what the residents. really wanted in their community. we focused on public safety and crime. when you think about why do middle class families flee from inner cities because they want to raise their kids in a safe environment. we brought together every single level of law enforcement. labor unions, we had our wrap around services. every single entity that touched compton, we came together and focused on two issues. one on eradicating human trafficking, a huge issue and impacts 90% of people involved in human trafficking they are minors. we also addressed gang violence through intervention and prevention measures. through our task force we focused on what factors allow these activities to happen in our communities? we number one for human trafficking we eliminated hourly motel rentals. let's face it, tourists don't rent motels by the hour. we really actually were able to identify really what the hub of
these activities were. we also focused on addressing gang violence. we wrote out prevention programs. we focused on truancy and how can we work with the worst kids and get them back on track. we also focused on -- i asked every single level of leadership in temples our gangs and city to come together. we sat in a circle. there were about 50, could we have peace? who was going to be the last man standing? at the end of the day i think something came really apparent to them they have been in a fight. so they committed to having peace. eight months later haven't crime is down 40%. we didn't spend any additional dollars on law enforcement. we have less long-term on the street. we also focused on creating mentorship programs and bringing in ex-gang members and gang members to make them accountable, but empower them to make their community better. we also focused on the job creation component. and tying it back to infrastructure. 126-year-old city, we have to
like many others, repair our water lines and streets. i proposed a tax measure. we also sat down with labor leaders and said how can we make this a group project? with our community members they are excited about the opportunity not only to have clean streets but also to have jobs. we are creating the employment development programs now. we have community benefits agreement legislation that i practiced where 35% of new highers have to be compton residents. we also have employment development programs at the onset of the project so there can be no excuse there are not qualified residents ready. we have done amazing effort and it's all through collaboration and it's about empowering the stakeholders you have in your community because i learned that everyone who is doing amazing things bus they are in their silos. can we do a few great things together well? we have seen phenomenal results. lastly i think that when we focused back on people, when we think about what america is and the pride of really being an american it's about having
strong people and strong people build strong families, strong families build strong communities. that's where we have a robust nation. we are focusing on the basics in compton and we have had tremendous results. host: thank you so much. that's very inspiring. beth williams, you're c.e.o. of a company that actually also does a similar thing. where you were hiring people, used 10% of your highers or -- hires have a criminal record. what -- you have a particular goal of revitalizing your community as you do business. what has helped enable you to grow your business? ms. williams: first i'd like to thank you for having this conference. now after listening to what i represent, i represent that group, that community we are talking about that needs to be revitalized. we are seeing tremendous revitalization in certain pockets of the cities, but there's certain pockets that are
truly being left out. and historically been left out. basically my company's growth has been focused around green technology and really has benefited from the corporate diversity programs and people wanting to spend x number of dollars as minority women business. we work every day to increase employment opportunities for low-skilled labor force who are often trapped in that circle of poverty as we talked about. they have no real clear path out. when we think about it, this isn't new. america's cities were built on manufacturing. immigrants came here, got jobs. we were able to build skill sets. then move on. the american dream just as you said. people just need an -- opportunities. we have proudly supported core reform,ry which is criminal record information. 20% of our work force are ex-offenders and ex-gang members. we make a big effort to hire young men. i feel like young men,
particularly young men of color are tremendous risk in this country. and that unless we do something about it those communities are at tremrisk as well. -- tremendous risk as well. we really focused on how there are ways to prevent resit vism. you have to create jobs. people want jobs. i felt like i had people at my job, yes, we build imaging supplies for staples. they are my biggest customer. it's not learning how to build a toner cartridge or inc. cartridge. they are learning how to read detailed manufacturing instructionsers warehouse shipping and receiving skills they can take on to other companies. so i feel like i have been successful when i have turned a young gang member around who said ms. williams you saved my life, i'm now working as an apprentice or warehouse at neiman-marcus. those are things that say success to me.
we really made a positive impact. we made manufacturing happening in the city of boston. the value of those companies like that and bringing those partnerships together between corporate and small businesses and minority businesses that have the capacity and ability to do that is that you create a primary business that feeds the secondary business the main streets. when my folks go to lunch my 75 employees, they go to eat, the nail salons, it's sort of that's what revitalization means. someone asked me in our debriefing room. how do you get your people? it's word of mouth. i cannot tell you. we live in a labor surplus. the name has changed so many years since the 1970's. affirmative action hub zone, there are tons of workers we have that just want jobs. when they heard that -- anywhere i go if i say i hire ex-offenders, my cousin, brother, can they fill out a loan camings?
it's really very, very critical that corporations and governments continue their focus to allocate resources to helping small businesses and women and minority businesses. typically when these programs were established they were established, too, with the mind set that minority and women business programs -- companies will hire people from their community. so the government's one of the largest consumers in the contry. i really hope -- country. i really hope as we continue to look at this issue that we try to figure out ways that we can find of tweak some of these programs the government has to make them more effective. in partners -- partnering and looking at ways to help grow these businesses. host: thank you so much. i'm going to turn to you glen.
you invest in companies in range of sifties. innovation is a critical component. i love to get your view what cities are working and what cities are not working. >> after listening to this i want to invest in compton. and in pittsburgh. and in boston. i have some investments in boston. you two are real heroes. i admire what you have done. we saw this. mr. hutchins: i talk very quickly, three minutes, over the course of the last 30 years i have had the opportunity to help build businesses that became world class businesses in both pittsburgh and detroit. over that time period i saw one city go through a renaissance and the other collapse in a bankruptcy. it was -- i had a front row seat to view that. it was interesting. pittsburgh -- both cities were vulnerable to declining basic american industries. basically the same set of problems. in the 1980's pittsburgh lost
75% of its basic metal employment. but over the course of the next 30 years built a world class city. and what i saw was a collaboration between all parties. business, labor, government, universities hospitals, etc. they built a tech hub. based on robotics and computer science around carnegie mellon. built a health care hub base ond the university of pittsburgh. medical center. the if i lan throw byes derived from the steel fortunes invested in education, cultural institutions historical preservation projects. made the city an interesting place to live. government together with private players invested in baunch of brownfield redevelopment projects that revitalized, as well as technology investments to bring companies in. and the students who came to go to universities got good jobs and affordable housing and stayed and created a resurgence in the economy. by 2009 when i will note the automobile industry in the united states was in bankruptcy,
pittsburgh was voted by the economists intelligence unit as the most livable city in the united states. in contrast, in detroit which had the very sim set of challenges, decline of a major industry, loss of high value taxpayers and businesses, collapse of public revenues, massive increase in city obligations, pension health care as a rufflet declining tax base responded what i observed the response was, based upon a culture of contention. rather than one of collaboration. i often thought it was -- they came out of a historical relationship between the largest industry in the community and its labor base. but it seemed pervasive across the community. what i observed was the zero sum zerize -- exercise over a dispute of resources. and the capital defined broadly, financial capital, human capital, all migrated away from the city. notably as bruce has taught me
over the years to ann arbor. a place that flourished at the same time as detroit was in decline. the lesson i took from that is you can have a collaborative approach and forward thinking point of view. or you can find yourself mired in old disputes that you're relitigating in a culture of contention. it seems to be straightforward. it seems also as i have learned more about detroit these days that post bankruptcy its leaders are focused on that. understand that lesson and have the exercise of the bankruptcy are getting to it. but it's a lesson we have to learn and relearn. as a businessperson there's only so much we can do. we can thrive in the cultures of collaboration. and we can succeed in the cultures of contention. it's a lot easier to see it elsewhere >> i hope some folks in washington will take note. >> local not medical. host: my word. not yours. randy, i wanted to ask you about
something that glenn mentioned which is human capital. capital resource as well. you have heard throughout this discussion the importance of attracting business and growth is from the human capital potential. bruce has really referenced that as the high point for cities. what are strategies to make sure that our schools are developing kind of the human capital of tomorrow? >> it's absolutely doable to create these kind of -- it's absolutely doable to create these kind of human capital strategies. the real question is how do we do it for every child? the real question is sustainability and scalability. let me just start with this. three districts quickly. district on the brink of collapse, community fighting its
way back from recession lawrence, massachusetts. could have closed schools, instead decided with a new superintendent to focus on a strategy of, this will sound familiar to both glenn and secretary castro, everybody's been talking about this, engagement intervention, collaboration. working with teachers and working with parents, working with kids. in one year, i don't want it to sound like it is -- that this is going to happen every single year, but they turned around schools so that the -- in massachusetts they had a five point or 10 point increase in school scores in one year. second, school with health and dental care, social workers for students families, guidance counselors support for housing early childhood settings, you say this is school system? yes. cincinnati. half the schools are community schools. the schools have become centers
of community. what we have seen is that cincinnati is the highest performing district in ohio. as secretary castro said breaking down the silos. it was done economically well. third, and this gets to the whole point, think about a school where gets have to learn under water, work with their hands, building and operating boats, harvesting oysters designing subverseable vehicles. i know it's your hubs' favorite school in nork city. this is the new york harbor school. it's one of hundreds of career tech ed schools that got not only new york city butt landscape. this is what's so important about these schools. when you align the work that's in a community, just like you talked about in terms of manufacturing, we are doing this in pittsburgh as well. peoria illinois. when you align manufacturing or the other kind of skills, the employers that are in the city add the high schools and community colleges.
you create this amazing robustness in terms of that pipeline. and in fact that's where someone like nick, chairman and c.e.o. of snap-on tools said we are in a global competition for jobs and the single best weapon is c.t.e. we need to outskill the competition. why do i start with these three? then i'll end. because if we know we can do it then we need to make these the norm not the exception. if we want to help all kids, the way we have to do it to borrow the phrase that the secretary used many years ago, it takes a village. because economic and educational policy have to go side by side. even though it's not an urban set sething, we learn in in mcdowell county, west virginia. where we are building housing, trying to create jobs, the eighth poorest county in the united states, while at the same time working with our ubeon with
folks in san francisco to build housing there. it is this public-private partnership where we are collaborating as opposed to simply engaging in conflict. we can do it but if we don't have the -- we can do it in this ad hoc way. if we don't have, as lee said before, the kind of intervention and strategies that promote this all throughout the contry, they will still be outliers as opposed to the norm. host: thank you randi. randi was talking about strategies. matching up human capital with economic development. i want to talk to you about how a number of urban areas are facing she's issues of inferior housing, failing schools. one of the initiatives that secretary castro talked about was promise zones. which is really looking at the
fact that today research shows that a person's zip code has more to do with their life expectancy than their genetic code. how do we really directly address those -- what's happening to the individual in that community? promise zones someone of the initiatives. can you tell us how that helps tackle some of these challenges and what you're seeing from your experience? >> thanks. i want to echo what an honor it is to be part of a distinguished panel this morning. as we have already heard, there are a host of collective impact initiatives going on in urban communities across the contry. really a modern day war on poverty. the federal government is playing a major role in this work. we are thrilled in los angeles to be at the forefront of this efforts. effort to break the intergenerational cycle of poverty. so teargetting specific geographies, in our case the
community with about 200,000 residents, and saturating that community with resources. the policy institute happens to be the only agency in the country that's been awarded all four of the initiatives, that's the los angeles proom moist zofpblete that's the promise neighborhoods which is modeled on the harlem children zone. there are now 12 promise neighborhoods in the u.s. choice neighborhoods, that of h.u.d. and the byrne initiative department of justice. i'm pleased to announce in the last two years $100 million in new targeted federal investment has come into the los angeles promise zone from seven different federal agencies. mr. slingerland: these are $100 million in programmatic funding for a specific community. what we are learning on the ground there is no silver bullet for these urban challenges. you have to do everything and you have to do it well. in our case that's a focus on
the continue ume from cradle to college and career. with high quality schools and early education and wrap around services for youth and families. targeting disconnected youth who dropped out of school and don't have employment. all of that has to be part of a strategy and results driven. we have a common system that all our partners within the community use so we can track these outcomes over time. and i think you got to have everybody at the table. in l.a. we are lucky the nanenberg foundation has put together something called l.a. in sync to bring lowell philanthropy in. i want to add that leadership is really critical. we have a fantastic mayor in l.a. who is a big believe -- believer in this approach, who is innovating and restructuring at the city government level. none of this would have happened if the obama administration hadn't taken on what i think is
a herculean challenge of getting federal agencies to collaborate break down silos, to better support place base work in communities like l.a. i think it's the best kept secret of the last six years here in d.c. we are just so happy to be part of it and happy to be here today. host: thank you. janet, i want to come to you. one of the areas that we have really seen take off is latino entrepreneurship. that's grown immensely over the last 15 years. we know from research that latinos actually more than any want to stay in cities. how do you we harness that energy as part of an economic development agenda for the future? >> sure. it's great question. latinos are entrepreneurial and we are clearly punching above our weight when it comes to small business area. and the facts show that there are more than three million hispanic-owned businesses in this country. generating more than $1 trillion
into our economy. and one of every five new entrepreneurs is latino, and hispanic women-owned businesses are leading the way. latinas are the fastest growing segment of the small business owner community. many times they are doing that out of shear grit and will. yet they are still not -- there is still not enough support and services to help keep these small businesses sustainable. and the theme that we have heard already today is really one that absolutely needs to be reinforced, and one area, group of i guess sector thade' like to highlight is that community-based organizations. they are doing so much to pitch in and collaborate with those community colleges and with the businesses larger businesses often with the chambers. for us, it's going to be essential that community based organizations who know these communities, particularly in the
latino community can help give them the skills, that support that they need so that they can have that access to capital. ms. murguia: secretary clinton knows, your deputy secretary she was part of a great model with axion international, there's one in texas. there is now a new spinoff called lift that is helping many small business owners, particularly across different sectors, they are doing it by using this model we talked about. breaking down the mariers that are often there and the silos. we at the national council are looking to make sure that our affiliates, dixon here is one of them and a shining example. there's lots of ways we can be doing more. i will say that prince charles was in the washington, d.c. last week. and while he did many things, one of the things he did was visit the carlos rosario center
here in washington, d.c. and he was looking at, i was told the way they were integrating immigrants to have the skills to be able to succeed in the mainstream. oftentimes many of them need small business assistance and learning about the access to capital. but sometimes it's just the language skills that we need to transition so that they can be fully successful and i think that there's much more that we can do. one of the things i would just say as i close is that we are doing a lot as a community, i think, to be part of that vitality in the urban corps. i would say that one reason that oftentimes some of these folks turn to the small business sectors because still the labor market is still not sort of an even landscape. there are limited opportunities. i would hope that we can still look at adequate way that is we
can support our work force development system. because i think we need to be moving on several fronts to make sure that the urban progress we make is inclusive of all of our communities. >> i know i'm not on the agenda. i agree 100% with her with one of the points she made. that is we are looking at partnerships with the community colleges. we are looking at partnerships with the schools of the we are not looking at partnerships with the small businesses, particularly the small minority and women businesses that are there. we don't have the bandwidth to reinvent ourselves as a large corporation. as we are looking at changes in innovation, we need to be partnered with some these corporate partners and be a part of that. be at the able. and we are not. i couldn't agree more -- 100%. that's where i am right now. i know a lot of folks, but i'm looking at the -- my peers and
what's happening and we are seeing a big, big change. wonderful things happening in boston particularly and the innovation district. it's not filtering over. really if we could look at ways corporate and government to pay attention to the small businesses and integrate it into this new process with stem and community college etc., that i think that it would really have an impact. host: did you have anything else you wanted to say? >> no. i was finishing up. it was fifpblete i think that for me it's real important to reinforce this notion that a hidden gem in these core urban centers are these community-based organizations. and they are hustling out there trying to support. i really credit a number of folks in the public and private sector foundations have stepped up in the new way, to offer us models so that we can scale some of these programs. it has to be a partnership and there has to be coordination and collaboration.
there's a lot of folks working really hard out there. they want to make t they want to contribute. they need a little bit of help. and again having a small loan, doesn't have to be a big one, for some of our folks to be able to open those doors but to keep them open for their small business, that's going to be how we are really making sure there's vibrancy in these urban centers. >> we talked about this before. the only thing i would add to this kids who come out of good schools with science and engineering degrees are going to do fine. what we need is to focus on the people who have never had a job. the jobless. the long-term unemployed. and the post incarceration population. and that's a lot about -- not about stem research but it's about skills training. integrated with the local businesses, small and large. and it still amazes me in our unemployment insurance system is based upon job search as opposed
to training. if you're going to break into the employment -- hard core unemployment at those levels we talked about earlier, you have to be able to do that. secretary clin: this is exactly on -- secretary clinton: this is exactly on point. we had 5.6 million young people in america between 16 and 24 who are neither in school or work. and if we don't consciously try to set up better systems to reach out, find these young people, and train them, we are doing something at the clinton foundation called job one, as glenn said, a loft them have never had a job before. and so -- a lot of them have never had the job b they don't have the hard skills, they don't have the soft skills. part of the challenge is working with companies that will do exactly as you're saying that is to make it possible to have these entry points where companies with i think either already existing government support or revamped support for skills training will coordinate.
it's -- the other thing that germany does is instead of an unemployment system, they have a wage subsidy system. you don't let people go in the first place. i think that there are lots of creative ideas both in our own country that are being tried and elsewhere in comparable economies, but we have to focus on that first job and get people into that system so that they then can maybe get better educated and better opportunities will come. host:p randi did you want to say something? >> what we often do is we do top-down rather than bottom-up. this whole notion of neighborhood based and thinking how you work, how you both work with the assets, you leverage the assets, including human assets, and community based organizations, and the faith community to actually find your kids in the neighborhood. and that's part of the reason that what we have seen when we wrap services around schools and try to think about the school as
the center of community or church as the center of community, we find the kids. because kids actually, if we can engage them, they don't drop out. if we can engage businesses small and large in terms of the c.t.e. process, we actually have a pipeline to jobs and pipeline to more learning. 7. mr. saunders: i'm getting a number of things out of this discussion but there are a couple of words that people have repeated and one is collaboration and someone said there should be collaboration rather than contention. unfortunately, that's where we begin in a con tensionous mode. in detroit for example, the first thing when it went into bankruptcy, they were looking at cutting retiree's benefits who earned $19,000 and look at
cutting those benefits by 40%. and we had to react to that. our members live in these communities and they care about the communities and provide essential public services. rather than starting off in that mode, it seems to me there are enough examples that we talked about this morning where we can collaborate and bring all of our community together whether it is the nonprofit community, small business community, government labor, elected officials, corporations, and we can sit down and creatively talk about resolving these problems and i think that's what's missing in many cases. we have got to bring this discussion together and bring everyone at the table so we can honestly have dialogue about how we can rebuild our structures, infrastructure education system provide decent housing provide quality jobs in areas across the country and there are
examples that are out there. people are doing it, but we have to talk about it and put it into a strategic program or plan to get the job done. host: bruce? mr. katz: there is a great phrase, collaborate to compete. any place that is more collaborative than any other metro poll is in the united states is denver. the city and the suburbs came together and invested back into the downtown the suburbs invested in the downtown and you fast forward 25 years later, they are building 122 miles of light rail transit with primarilyly local resources. success goes with success goes with success. if you put your stem economy on steroids, every job in the stem economy yields another five jobs. some that support the stem economy, some that are in the
retail, housing sector. in many respects, the cities, there isn't a difference between the stem economy and nonstem economy or dounts and neighborhood. these are unified communities. you need to think about stoking the fires. you go to downtown detroit downtown buffalo or downtown st. louis, we have to focus more in supercharging those economies because the multiplier effect is really off the charts for people living in those neighborhoods and then we have to connect them. wine wine the arts are critical, too.
host: what are you working on? secretary castro: it has been a wonderful conversation and great points made all around. i got elected to the san antonio city council when i was 26 just last year, in fact. [laughter] secretary castro: and early on, we were trying to make a decision about where to put the limited resources that the city had every year for street maintenance and repair, basic thing that happens in cities all the time. and one of the neighborhood association meetings, i ran into a woman who came up to me and said that they had been waiting in their neighborhood for many years for sidewalks to be created on their street and it
meant something to her because her mother, this was an adult woman, her mother, who was elderly, had diabetes. and the doctor had advised her mother to walk to try and walk to help out with her health condition, but couldn't do that because there were no sidewalks and also dogs in the neighborhood that would harris anybody that tried to walk buy. for me as a policy maker, it drove home that all of these things we do are connected in terms of policy, whether it's infrastructure it's health it's economic development for housing, so the best things that we're doing i believe out there are really bringing all of those issues together, investing in brain power and skills and assuring there is good, affordable housing, making sure that cities are safe. at h.u.d., we are celebrating 50
years this year and what we are proud of are choice neighborhoods that built on the work of hope 6 from 20 years ago that says it is about education housing, safety, sustainability and same thing with promise zones and promise nadse. we need to do more of that in the years to come to lift up the urban coerce of communities out there that have been struggling but at the same time as was noted at the beginning of the conversation, the top metros make up 75% of our national g.d.p. and as the united states finds itself in unprecedented competition with nations that are rising around the world, we need more than ever for those cities to excel. and i think we can do that if we collaborate but also think of the policy in that way that blends all of those areas.
host: thank you so much. lee. mr. saunders: let me thank you for pulling this together. you have gotten a good amount of recommendations and suggestions and perhaps we will be able to resolve this problem by tomorrow. host: our report is coming out tomorrow. mr. saunders: this is just a discussion that i believe is a beginning we should continuity and afscme is committed to that. but let me highlight a couple of things i heard today. one is jobs are the key to building our cities. challenges must be addressed across the country. includes improving education and establishing programs. investing in public safety, addressing health disparities and present vembing affordable housing. here's something else i heard today, we to be included in this
discussion and every community has to have the opportunity to advance and to make a better life for themselves and their families. and we need to invest in our infrastructure across the country. we are going to need help and resources coming from the federal government, but also from the private sector to do just that. i really am excited about this endeavor we are undertaking. i think this is the right thing to do and important thing to do. we have the examples of where we can be successful all across the country. the trick is going to be pool those examples together and bring people together rather than to continue and fight and talk constructively about how to rebuild the urban centers across this country. secretary clinton: amen. i love sessions like this because it's really nice to get
back into an evidence-based discussion about what works and what doesn't work and to try to learn from examples that i think can teach us all a lot of lessons and that to me is the most important takeaway. we have cities that are working well because they have been re-inventing themselves and have done so in a collaborative inclusive manner. they still have work to do, but they at least are demonstrating there are approaches that we can learn from and then try to apply. and we have other cities which we know are having difficulty overcoming the contentiousness and figuring out ways to collaborate, where it is more of a political battlefield than a policy discussion. so i hope that the others
represented here this morning can do together what is so immediate needed and that is to try and stimulate a conversation in cities themselves because i think it is bottom up and top down. if we can get more cities going to state capitals and coming here to washington and saying we need to abolish the silos, we need your help in creating the conditions for coordination and collaboration, we need to have your help in convening and that's something secretary castro is very focused on and then looking at what works and looking at results which i think dixon has pointed to, look at what works. and get out of the very unproductive discussion that we had for too long where people are just in their ideological bunkers having arguments instead of trying to reach across those
divides and come up with some solutions and mayor, i think what you did with gangs and gang members is exactly what needs to be done in so many places in our country. so don't be surprised if you get a call to come and maybe we'll start not too far from here in our beautiful dome building -- try to put everyone in the same room and start that conversation. it could lead to collaboration and better results for our cities and our country. so thank you all very much. host: thanks everyone for participating. [applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] [captioning performed by national captioning institute]
he made the announcement in virginia. senator cruz: thank you so much, president falwell. god bless liberty university. i am thrilled to join you today at the largest christian university in the world. today i want to talk with you about the promise of america. imagine when they were children, imagine a little girl growing up in wilmington, delaware.
during world war ii, the daughter of irish and italian catholic family working class, her uncle ran numbers in wilmington. she grew up with dozens of cousins because her mom was the second youngest of 17 kids. she had a difficult father. a man who drank far too much and frankly, didn't think that women should be educated. and yet this young girl, pretty and shy, was driven. was bright, was inquisitive, and she became the first person in her family ever to go to college. in 1956, my mom, eleanor
graduated from rice university with a degree in math. and became a pioneering computer programmer in the 1950's and 1960's. [applause] senator cruz: imagine a teenage boy, not much younger than many of us here today, growing up in cuba. jet black hair, skinny as a rail involved in student council and yet cuba was not at a peaceful time. the dictator, batista, was
corrupt. he was oppressive, an this teenage boy joins a revolution. he joins a revolution against batista, he begins fighting with other teenagers. to free cuba from the dictator. this boy at age 17 finds himself thrown in prison. find himself tortured, beaten, and then at age 18 he flees cuba. he comes to america. imagine for a second the hope that was in his heart as he rode that ferryboat across to key west and got on a gray hound bus to head to austin, texas to begin working washing dishes
making 50 cents an hour. coming to the one land on earth that has welcomed so many millions. when my dad came to america in 1957, he could not have imagined what lay in store for him. imagine a young married couple living together in the 1970's, neither one of them has a personal relationship with jesus. they have a little boy and they are both drinking far too much. they are living a fast life. when i was 3 my father decided to leave my mother and me. we were living in calgary at the
time. he got on a plane and flew back to texas. and he decided he didn't want to be married anymore, and he didn't want to be a father to his 3-year-old son. and yet when he was in houston a friend, a colleague from the oil and gas business, invited him to a bible study. invited him to clay road baptist church. and there my father gave his life to jesus christ. [applause] senator cruz: and god transformed his heart and he drove to the airport, he bought a plane ticket, and he flew back to be with my mother and me. [applause]
senator cruz: there are people who wonder if faith is real. i can tell you in my family there's not a second of doubt because were it not for the transformative love of jesus christ i would have been saved and i would have been raised by a single mom without my father in the household. imagine another little girl living in africa, in kenya nigeria -- it's a diverse crowd. playing with kids they spoke swahili, she spoke english. coming back to california where
her parents who had been missionaries in africa raised her in the central coast. she starts a small business when she's in grade school. baking bread. she calls it heidi's bakery. she and her brother compete baking bread. they bake thousands of loaves of bread and go to the local apple orchard where they sell the bread to people coming to pick apples. she goes on to a career in
business, excelling and rising to the highest pinnacles, and then heidi became my wife and my very best friend in the world. [applause] senator cruz: heidi becomes an incredible mom to our two precious little girls, caroline and katherine, the joys and loves of our life. [applause] senator cruz: imagine another teenage boy being raised in houston, hearing stories from his dad about prison and torture in cuba. hearing stories about how fragile liberty is. beginning to study the united states constitution. learning about the incredible protections we have in this country that protect the god-given liberty of every american.
experiencing challenges at home, the mid 1980's, oil prices cater. and his parents' business go bankrupt. heading off to school, over 1,000 miles away from home at place where he knew nobody where he was alone and scared, and his parents going through bankruptcy meant there was no financial support at home so at the age of 17 he went to get two jobs to help pay his way through school. he took over $100,000 in school loans. loans, i suspect a lot of you-all can relate to. loans that i'll point out i just paid off a few years ago. [applause]
senator cruz: these are all of our stories. these are who we are as americans. and yet for so many americans the promise of america seems more and more distant. what is the promise of america? the idea that the revolutionary idea that this country was founded upon, which is that our rights, they don't come from man. they come from god almighty. [applause] senator cruz: : and that the purpose of the constitution, as thomas jefferson put it, is to serve as chains to bind the mischief of government.
the incredible opportunity of the american dream. what has enabled millions of people from all over the world to come to america with nothing and to achieve anything. and then the american exceptionalism that has made this nation a clarion voice for freedom in the world a shining city on a hill. that's the promise of america. that is what makes this nation an indispensable nation, a unique nation in the history of the world. and yet so many fear that that promise is today unattainable. so many fear it is slipping away from our hands.
i want to talk to you this morning about reigniting the promise of america. 240 years ago on this very day a 38-year-old lawyer named patrick henry stood up just 100 miles from here in richmond, virginia, and said, give me liberty or give me death. [applause] senator cruz: i want to ask each of you to imagine, imagine millions of courageous conservatives all across america rising up together to say in unison, we demand our liberty.
today roughly half of born again christians aren't voting. they are staying home. imagine instead millions of people of faith all across america coming out to the polls and voting our values. [applause] senator cruz: today millions of young people are scared, worried about the future, worried what the future will hold. imagine millions of young people coming together and standing together saying, we will stand for liberty.
think just how different the world would be. imagine instead of economic stagnation, booming economic growth. [applause] senator cruz: instead of small businesses going out of business in record numbers, imagine small businesses growing and prospering. imagine young people coming out of school with four, five, six job offers. [applause] senator cruz: imagine innovation thriving on the internet as government regulators and tax collectors are kept at bay and more and more opportunity is created. [applause]
senator cruz: imagine america finally becoming energy self-sufficient as millions and millions of high-paying jobs are created. five years ago today the president signed obamacare into law. within hours liberty university went to court filing a lawsuit to stop that failed law. [applause] senator cruz: instead of the joblessness, instead of the millions forced into part-time work, instead of the millions who have lost their health insurance, lost their doctors,
have faced skyrocketing health insurance premiums, imagine in 2017 a new president, signing legislation repealing every word of obamacare. [applause] senator cruz: imagine health care reform that keeps government out of the way between you and your doctor and that makes health insurance personal and portable and affordable. instead of a tax code that crushes innovation, that imposes burdens on families struggling
to make ends meet, imagine a simple flat tax. that lets every american fail out his or her taxes on a postcard. imagine abolishing the i.r.s. [applause] senator cruz: instead of the lawlessness and the president's unconstitutional executive amnesty, imagine a president that finally, finally, finally secures the borders. [applause] senator cruz: and imagine a
legal immigration system that welcomes and celebrates those who come to achieve the american dream. [applause] senator cruz: instead of a federal government that wages an assault on our religious liberty, that goes after hobby lobby, that goes after the little sisters of the poor, that goes after liberty university, imagine a federal government that stands for the first amendment rights of every american. [applause] senator cruz: instead of a federal government that works to undermine our values, imagine a federal government that works to defend the sanctity of human life.
and to uphold the sacrament of marriage. instead of a government that works to undermine our second amendment rights, that seeks to ban our ammunition, imagine a federal government that protects the right to keep and bear arms of all law-abiding americans. [applause] it senator cruz: instead of a government that seizes your emails and your cell phones, imagine a federal government that protected the privacy rights of every american.
[cheers and applause] senator cruz: instead of a federal government that seeks to dictate school curriculum through common core, imagine repealing every word of common core. [cheers and applause] senator cruz: imagine embracing school choice as the civil rights issue of the next generation. that every single child, regardless of race, regardless of ethnicity, regardless of wealth or zip code, every child in america has a right to a quality education.
and that's true from all of the above whether it is a public schools, or charter schools, or private schools, or christian schools, or parochial schools, or home schools, every child. instead of a president who boycotts prime minister netanyahu, imagine a president who stands unapologetically with the nation of israel. [cheers and applause]
senator cruz: instead of a president who seeks to go to the united nations to end run congress and the american people, imagine a president who says i will honor the constitution and under no circumstances will iran be allowed to acquire a nuclear weapon. [cheers and applause] senator cruz: imagine a president who says we will stand up and defeat radical islamic terrorism. [cheers and applause] senator cruz: and we will call it by its name.
we will defend the united states of america. now, all of these seem difficult. indeed, to some they may seem unimaginable. yet if you look in the history of our country, imagine at 1775 and you and i were sitting there in richmond listening to patrick henry say, give me liberty or give me death, imagine it's 1776 and we were watching the 54 signers of the declaration of independence stand together and pledge their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor to igniting the promise of america. imagine it was 1777 and we were
watching general washington as he lost battle after battle after battle in the freezing cold as the soldiers with no shoes were dying, fighting for freedom against the most powerful army in the world. that, too, seemed unimaginable. imagine it's 1933 and we were listening to president franklin delano roosevelt tell america at a time of crushing depression, at a time of a gathering storm abroad, that we have nothing to fear but fear itself. imagine it's 1979 and you and i were listening to ronald reagan and he was telling us that we
would cut the top marginal tax rate from 70% all the way down to 28%. that we would go from crushing stagnation to booming economic growth, to millions being lifted out of poverty and into prosperity and abundance. that the very day he was sworn in our hostages who were languishing in iran would be released. and that within a decade we would win the cold war and tear the berlin wall to the ground. that would have seemed unimaginable, and yet with the grace of god that's exactly what happened. [applause] senator cruz: from the dawn of
this country at every stage america has enjoyed god's providential blessing. over and over again when we faced impossible odds the american people rose to the challenge. compared to that, repealing obamacare and abolishing the i.r.s. ain't all that tough. the power of the american people when we rise up and stand for liberty knows no bounds. [applause] if you're ready to join a grassroots army across this nation, coming together and standing for liberty, i'm going to ask you to break a rule here
today and to take out your cell phones. and to text the word constitution to the number 33733. you can also text imagine. once again tax constitution to 33733. god's blessing has been on america from the very beginning of this nation and i believe god isn't done with america yet. [applause] i believe in you. i believe in the power of millions of courageous conservatives rising up to reignite the promise of america.
it is a time to reclaim the constitution of the united states. i am honored to stand with each and every one of you courageous conservatives as we come together to reclaim the promise of america, to reclaim the mandate, the hope, and opportunity for our children and our children's children, we stand together for liberty. [applause] senator cruz: this is our fight. the answer will not come from washington. it will come only from the men and women across this country,
from men and women, people of faith, from lovers of liberty, from people who respect the constitution, it will only come as it has come at every other time of challenge in this country, when the american people stand together and say we will get back to the principles that have made this country great. we will get back and restore that shining city on a hill that is the united states of america. thank you, and god bless you. [cheers and applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org]
♪ >> u.s. house will be back at 4:00 p.m. eastern for work on five bills. one is a resolution from congressmanening ell the top democrat on the foreign affairs committee urging president obama to provide military weaponry to ukraine. another resolution condemns the cowardly attacks on innocent men, women and children in nigeria. later this week, the house is
expected to take up the budget blueprint for 2016. the house back in 15 minutes live here on c-span. remarks from former governor maryland governor earlic who is considering seeking -- governor ehrlich: you want me to hit everybody up for their dues. thank you for having me today. it was advertised that my book is -- will be here and have the book signing is. the books aren't here. we have tracked the guy down. some more bad news is, he is a
democrat and was ordered about two days ago, but it will be here shortly. so i'm going to impose politics into this policy conference. and we lawyers love to talk about, we republicans like to talk about balanced budgets and debt relief and housing reform and obamacare and welfare fixes and entitlement reform and we tend to like to talk about the substantive issues. and we typically listen to conservative radio. we watch fox and we win the think tank battles and pretty good winning off-year elections and pretty good at nonpresidential election cycles because our base tends to show up in large numbers. and yet, not the case in presidential election years. too often we lose the big one. too often we lose when the
electric torts are more diverse. and we know the numbers. some of these numbers may be surprising to you, but we've lost five out of the last six presidential election cycles with respect to the popular vote. when you add the numbers up, minus 326 million. minus 26 million million. if the electorate in 2016 looks like it did in 2004 when president bush won ethnicity race, we lose this time. the country is changing and it's a fact. and those of us in denial are unfortunately on a dinosaur watch. so it's a pretty serious election and i love when people talk about serious election and every politician says this is
the most important election ever because that person's name is usually on the ballot. very important to that person. we said that in 2012 with a great man mitt romney. absolute wonderful person, husband, leader. and we saw what was done to him. so these numbers are out there. it's minus 26 million. and we are sort of embarrassing to us as substantive people who like to talk about these issues and know that republicans generally are pretty substantive and out there with some good ideas and we look at the earl side and what they sell, what they market. and it's attacking largely successful and degrading wealth and spending endlessly. practicing the politics of yes. always more. remember vice president biden's quote on why that shovel-ready
stimulus didn't work so good. $1.2 trillion. why? it wasn't large enough. it's never large enough. there's never enough government. there's never enough spending. there's never enough, ever. and that's what we sort of deal with. we see the exploitation of class warfare, joe, the plumber. you didn't build that. we see the marginalization of independence, the belittling of sovereignty. the republicans want to build a moat on the southern border? that that, that. one political party in this country in fact, not every member of that party tends to treat sovereignty as a somewhat benign issue. so we see the many of the democrats preaching and
declaring a war on women and retreating from our allies and creating power vackcumes and engaging in moral aquifflens si. this is the winning formula. and as a party, as lawyers as leaders, we need to understand this. so we can't just go in our little cock and and celebrate 2014 when we had an agenda of we're not them, we're not them works in all election cycles. so our challenge as lawyers as leaders is as follows in my view. we need to call them out and we need not to back down and that's easier said than done and we
know we're right. we need to expose their playbook. and here's what we are really bad at as republicans. we tend to go out on principle and when we are successful, we forget to remind the people that we were successful. we don't take credit very well. and the press typically is not going to help us do that. welfare reform, i came in in 1994, gingrich, the contract of america and the crazy majority makers and turn the town upside down and our biggest experiment was welfare reform and it worked. medicare part d, let's go market orientation. look at the c.b.o. numbers when it originally passed that bill and look at what it costs today dramatically decreased because republicans drafted a bill that
focused on market competition. unemployment insurance extension, classic warfare those darn republicans, they want to throw us out on the street and all this stuff we always hear and we are going to go beyond two years and if you don't support us, you hate poor people as a party. and the republicans stood firm and took all the abuse and guess what happened? labor force participation increased over the last year. because the dole had a line drawn. and we haven't taken credit for that at all. charter schools, we own the charter schools revolution. in maryland, we passed the first charter schools bill and that's a joke. and the strenuous objection the
teachers' union and entrenched bureaucracy -- many schools just by any measure dysfunctional. many minority kids being deprived of their constitutional rights. as lawyers, we need to pay attention. we have brought this revolution around the country. and we are allowing poor kids, regardless of their color, to punch their ticket the way our tickets were punched. many of us from poor, working-class backgrounds where we got a break and we should be in the business of giving breaks. we should be in the business of all the above when it comes to dysfunctional schools. i went around to the state of maryland at the time and said, you know what? we can talk about this, but the fact of it is, it's a moral issue, because multi general rational poverty is a moral
issue and constitutional issue because we are did he priving kids of their constitutional rights. it's a public safety issue, because guess where these kids are going to end up? your neighborhood will be less safe. and so will our country. we own these issues. criminal justice reform, great purple issue. the koch brothers and george soros agree on something. think about that one. republican governors are leading on this. the fact of it is a lot of folks on the right get it. as a member of the legislature in the 1980's, i remember debates we were increasing to -- in order to get jufenile offenders waived up into the adult system.
we are going to get tough. we are going to lock them up and throw away the key. at some point in the future, those offenders are coming out and we better pay attention to it. it's being led by republican governors. republican members of the senate and the house as well. this is our issue and it is not counterintuitive. it's justice and fiscal san antonio as well. -- sanity. under john kasich as chairman of the house budget committee, we balanced three straight years. wow. so we well we really need to as a party, as lawyers, get the word out. we are not good at taking credit. we are typicallyly demonized and
i go back to the last presidential election cycles. gives away most of his wealth while a successful c.e.o., all the leadership and executive skills you need as a president and we had silly stuff like dogs on cars and mitt romney on cbs. that stuff worked. it can't work anymore. 2014 worked because they had no message. when everybody shows up in aier and a half we have to a message and it has to be substantive and has to be out there. we talked about burwell. we are going to be ready with freedom alternatives. once the supreme court actually reads what the statute says, which we hope it does. immigration bill borne of
sovereignty and security reflecting our values. senator rubio has a bill out there. all of the above for kids in dysfunctional schools and all of you can play a part of that. criminal justice reform we talked about. fatherlessness. 50 years since moynihan. go read moynihan again please. he was right in every respect every respect. he got torched by the left. called a raceist. icon of the democratic party. read those words and they are true today not with respect to the black family but with respect to all families and as a result we are paying a big price in this culture. big one. dave camp, terrific chairman of ways and means.
good friend of mine, and he had the guts as republican chairman to throw out there and all the arrows came at him and he knew it would, comprehensive tax reform. we all know we have the highest corporate tax rate in the world. and we know about jobs about the jobs going offshore and everybody says, we're going to fix it, it never happens. 1986 ronald reagan sat down with tip o'neill. a president led -- wow, what a concept. a president led. and it got worked out. edtorial pages constantly -- >> we'll leave these remarks from former maryland governor and go live to the u.s. house.
for what purpose does the gentleman from ohio seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i move to suspend the rules and pass h.r. 233 to amend the housing act to allow reviews of certain families' income for every three years for purposes of determining eligibility for certain federal assistance housing programs. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 233, a bill to allow reviews of certain families' income for every three years for purposes of determining eligibility for certain federal assistant housing programs. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from ohio, mr. stivers, and the gentleman from colorado, mr. perlmutter, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from ohio. mr. stivers: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and add
extraneous material on this bill. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. stivers: mr. speaker i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. stivers: mr. speaker, i rise today to support h.r. 233, the tenant income verification relief act and i'm proud to co-sponsor it with my colleague from colorado, mr. perlmutter. it helps relieve stressful burdens of fixed income tenants who purpose in the housing choice voucher and project-based housing programs all across the country. additionally, it's a responsible reform bill that will allow housing authorities to work more efficiently and effective at less cost to the taxpayers. i've heard from housing authorities from columbus, ohio, and other parts of my district as well as throughout the country about how burdensome this requirement is on elderly tenants as well as the housing authorities. current law requires tenant
verification of income at move-in and recertification annually. this legislation allows recertification of resident's income every three years rather than annually for individuals on a fixed income. it will permit housing authorities to verify these tenants' income when they change as well as annually. based on a recent u.s. department of housing and you shallant development study, theseress dents on a fixed income of the two million people about half of them are on a very fixed income that's not changing, most of them are using social security as their main source of income. this bill's a great first step toward ensuring our nation's low-income families have safe places to live while also reducing administrative burdens on families and on these housing authorities and saving taxpayer resources. i want to ask my colleagues to join me and mr. perlmutter in
supporting this commonsense legislation. finally, i'd like to thank the gentleman from colorado for his leadership and his commonsense approach on this legislation. mr. speaker i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from colorado is recognized. mr. perlmutter: thank you, mr. speaker. i want to thank my friend, mr. stivers, for joining with me in h.r. 233, and i want to thank the chairman of the committee, mr. hensarling, and the ranking member, ms. waters for their support of this bill as well. mr. stivers has described it well, but i think we should go through it one more time just so the record is clear for future generations. h.r. 233, the tenant income verification relief act of 2015 represents a bipartisan effort to aid our most vulnerable constituents and provide marginal regulatory relief to public housing
authorities and those who have privately owned rental properties who wish to service housing vouchers. currently private property owners and state and local housing agencies must review income annually for all rental assistance recipients. that includes recipients who receive most or all of their income from fixed sources such as social security or other pensions and therefore see little income change from year to year. our legislation reduces administrative burdens by allowing for the recertification of rent to occur every three years rather than annually on those on fixed incomes. in other words, housing authorities and those who accept vouchers would be allowed to conduct triannual income recertification for households where 90% of their income is fixed. the annual review requirement also places burdens on the fixed income households themselves who must gather and submit information needed to
verify income and deductions and in some cases must go to agencies for in-person reviews. the center for budget and policy priorities who wrote in support of h.r. 233 said, this change would substantially reduce paperwork burdens for low-income seniors and people with disabilities and administrative costs for agencies and owners. more than half of rental assistance recipients are elderly or disabled and they often rely on fixed incomes and income reviews are the single largest source of rental assistance administrative costs. due to ongoing budget pressures, our public housing authorities are struggling to mansion their section 8 housing programs. in fact, it's estimated the amount congress appropriates to fund the housing choice voucher program is only 74% of what it actually requires to run the program. the public housing authority's directors association wrote to me saying, quote both in principle and in practice your
bill is a commonsense approach to streamlining federal rental assistance programs at a time when scarce financial resources are strange housing authority's program delivery, closed quote. since -- we must look at solutions to control expenses or the cost of running the program. this provision or concept is not new. in fact, it has been included in several previous comprehensive section 8 reform bills by both democrats and republicans. in fact the administration includes language similar to h.r. 233 in the 2016 budget proposal. i stand here today with my friend, mr. stivers from ohio, with a reasonable and commonsense proposal making our public housing programs more efficient and we all want to find ways to make our government run more efficiently. i have a number of letters that i would like to introduce into the record without objection.
the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. perlmutter: it is my hope that senate -- that we pass this today here on the floor of the house and that the senate passes it quickly and sends it to the president's desk. i thank my friend, mr. stivers, for joining me in this bill and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. stiversstivers thank you, mr. speaker. -- mr. stivers: thank you, mr. speaker. the gentleman did yield back the balance of his time, i i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: yes. mr. stivers: i just want to ask all of my colleagues to support this legislation. it's common sense. it simplifies an administrative burden. it saves money for taxpayers. it allows people on a fixed income, whether they be senior citizens or disabled to have less onerous burdens. this is a commonsense bill. i thank the gentleman from colorado for his leadership, would urge everyone to support this legislation and yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the
bill h.r. 233. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed, and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new mexico seek recognition? mr. pearce: mr. speaker, i move to suspend the rules and pass h.r. 360, as amended to re-authorize the native american housing assistance and self-determination act of 1996, and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill.
the clerk: h.r. 360 a bill to re-authorize the native american housing assistance and self-determination act of 1996, and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from new mexico mr. pearce, and the gentlewoman from wisconsin, ms. moore, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from new mexico. mr. pearce: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to add extraneous material to this bill. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. pearce: mr. speaker i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. pearce: mr. speaker, we're here today to support h.r. 360, the native american housing assistance and self-determination act. this is truly a bipartisan bill. it's been over two years in the making beginning in early 2013, don young, tom cole, both republicans joined with myself democrats gwen moon
dan heck and tulsi gabbard and a host of others to make a bill -- make a bill that truly works across both aisles and is widely supported by tribes, transformational and its opportunities for native americans has been widely recognized by those tribes. most importantly, it's a bill that we could come together and all be proud of co-sponsoring legislation before us is just that. it shows that colleagues regardless of political affiliation, can come together and get the job done. mr. speaker, with that i will reserve the balance of my time and yield to -- would wait to hear the comments of ms. moore. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentlewoman from wisconsin is recognized. ms. moore: thank you so much, mr. speaker. and i would yield myself such time as i may consume.
the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. moore: thank you. i have said this so many times that it has taken a tremendous amount of work and team effort and goodwill to get us to the place where we are today, so i want to really thank all of our co-sponsors. it really has been a heavy lift. i can tell you how appreciative i am. it has been so wonderful working with mr. pearce. he has just been a level-headed and calm all the way and of course, mr. cole mr. heck, mr. kildee, mr. pearce, mr. young. we've all worked so closely together for two years to craft this bipartisan legislation. i need to also recognize the leadership role of our ranking member, ms. waters. she's had a few concerns but she has been engaging and constructive. the national congress of american indians the national american indian housing council and many individual tribes from
all across the country have provided comments education, energy every step of the way. and i think that this legislation, mr. speaker, honors the trust relationship of the united states government and respects tribal sovereignty of the nations of the first people. and i don't want to make short trips of the concerns that have been raised for example, i wish we could have provided more funding given the dire need. however, this legislation is the product of a truly bipartisan process. and it's not that all of us agree 100% on every provision, but we keep talking and we keep working and we did that until we've come up with a bill that may not be perfect but it serves the people for which it is intended and it is very good for tribal communities. the need for affordable housing in indian country just cannot be understated.
some of the poorest and most remote communities in this country are native american communities. in fact, the three poorest communities in the united states of america are native american. that h.s.a.a provides tribal governments to provide safe and affordable housing to tribal communities, consistent with their status as sovereigns. a few improvements that i'd like to highlight is that it exat the indicts certainly federal approvals. it makes all native people available for that has da funds. it -- nahasda. it won't have delays which is essential due to unique timing and building challenges on reservations. mr. speaker i would now like to yield to mr. kildee of michigan, much time as he might
consume -- oh, do i need to -- excuse me. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves. the gentleman from new mexico is recognized. mr. pearce: thank you, mr. speaker. i would like to join with ms. moore in recognizing the actions of ms. waters, the ranking member. truly asking the questions that needed to be asked but then finally reconciling on some of those issues. also, the chairman, chairman hensarling has been in the same position. leader mccarthy bringing this bill to the floor as he has, i would like to express that to all. with that i'd yield as much time as he might consume to the gentleman from oklahoma mr. cole. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. . . mr. cole: i thank the gentleman for yielding.
very important when we look at this extremely significant piece of legislation to recognize, as my good friend from wisconsin said,s that trust obligation of the united states government. this isn't a housing handout. this isn't some special deal. this is something, an obligation we assumed in negotiation with tribes over many decades, mr. different situations. and if people are living in indian country, particularly on reservations, and don't have adequate house, the federal government has a responsibility to do something about it. something we've recognized since the 1960's something as my friend mr. pearce said we institutionalized in 1996. this has been a good program far long time. it's been a block grant program which has empowered tribes. one of the things i love about this legislation is in a bipartisan sense we continue to do that. we provide a lot more flexibility for tribes to control their own affairs made their own needs. as ms. moore suggested we wish
it could be more. $650 million is a lot of money but spread across a population of almost three million individuals and -- and over 57 million acres an area of land about the size of wyoming, it's maybe not as much as we would like, particularly given the severe needs. but it's a good faith effort and it's appropriate given the difficult financial times we're in. again, we've had tremendous support across indian country as both speakers previously mentioned, national congress of the american indian particularly the national american indian housing council has worked hand in glove with members on both sides of the aisle to build this program. my friends are very fulsome in their praise for various members and i wouldn't disagree with anybody they mention, but i have to hold particularly mr. pearce up not only for his tremendous
work on this, ms. moore as well but for their persistence in this. they brought this legislation to the floor in the last congress, having worked out the difficulties, formed a bipartisan compromise and coalition and frankly brought their leaders along with them, i think educating their respective leaders in the process, and we got that through the house last time on a bipartisan basis. the senate wasn't able to act. i'm very pleased to see that they've come back again this quickly in the session, hopefully we'll have a little bit better response on the other side. i don't think there's any opposition they just didn't get it done in the press of business toward the end of the year. they're going to have plenty of time to do that. this is an excellent piece of legislation. as my friends both suggested, it's an example of how well we can work together when we focus on the problems and -- instead of sometimes the partisan and philosophical divisions that separate us. i reflect as i'm looking here on the floor, i usually like to think of myself as a right-wing
conservative republican but i can't get to the right of my friend, mr. pearce, as hard as i try and my friend ms. moore, we've worked together on treeyow programs, on violence against women, and now this, is certainly well to the left of me on a lot of issues. anything that can bring the three of us together is pretty inclusive in this body and you won't have much excuse -- i'm particularly pleased to see my friend, mr. kildee, on the floor who continues a family tradition of working in the forefront of native american issues. it's a good piece of legislation, it's been worked on hard by people who know what they're doing. i want to congratulate particularly mr. pearce and ms. moore for their absolutely stellar work in this case. would not have happened without their efforts. with that, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. mr. pearce: i reserve.
the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. ms. moore: thank you so much. it is so wonderful always to work with mr. cole. i would now like to yield to mr. kildee of michigan as much time as he might consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan is recognized. mr. kildee: thank you, mr. speaker. i want to thank my friend ms. moore for yielding and for her leadership on this very important issue and also thank mr. pearce, mr. young, mr. cole, on the other side as well as ms. gabard who i have worked with this legislation along with mr. heck and mr. ta chi. -- mr. takai. what this legislation proves is when we set out to solve a problem we can get a lot done. s that good bill. it is not the bill that any one of us individually would have written had we been left alone to produce this legislation with only our oown per spiskets and
our own interests. it is a bill that's a result of compromise. there are elements of this legislation mr. speaker, that i would prefer not have been included and i've made, i'm sure mr. pearce and others are aware that i would have preferred that the pilot program that allows for a form of privatization, a direct grant to private developers, not be included. i would prefer that the entirety of the funds be used specifically to empower tribes and tribes alone, to determine the use of the collars after all they have had the ability to make those decisions and enter into agreements with private individuals as well. but i only say that to make sure that the record is clear and that i state my objection to that particular portion but to help point out a larger, i think more important, point. i'm sure that mr. pearce, mr. cole, mr. young, could find sections, provisions of this legislation, that they would prefer to excise or maybe
something that they would have preferred to have included that they were not able to get in the bill. but because the focus here from the very beginning, in the last congress and again in this one, as mr. cole said, is that we need -- we have an obligation to live up to our trust responsibilities to this nation's first people. and that trust responsibility comes ahead of whatever differences we might have on specific policy approaches. since we took that approach and mr. pearce and ms. moore both deserve a lot of credit for putting aside the differences they had, we're able to get this legislation to the floor with what i think is enormous support within the house of representatives. it's a testament to our recognition of that trust obligation and it's something that i'm very pleased to carry on. i know as was stated mitigating circumstance uncle worked on these issuesing i know he would be proud to see us working together to continue to live up
to that important trust obligation. with that, mr. speaker i will be supporting this legislation, i thank all my colleagues for their work on this, and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. ms. moore: how much time have -- do i have left? the speaker pro tempore: 15 minutes. ms. moore: wow. i would reserve my time. mr. speaker i just want to let mr. pearce know i have two more speakers and then i will be prepared to close. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves. the gentleman from new mexico is recognized. mr. pearce: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield as much time as he might consume to the gentleman from alaska, mr. young. mr. young: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. young: i would like to thank ms. waters and chairman, mr. pearce, for this legislation, it's something we have worked on
together with tom cole, many in this room. i would like to thank the hawaiian delegation, it's always been an honor and pleasure to work on that delegation with alaska, the two noncontiguous states, we work well together and will continue to do that. mr. kildee, i thank you for your father, he and i were dear friends and worked together on a lot of issues and i always respected that. i'd like to thank the staff. let's not all kid ourselves the staffs of all our offices put this bill together with our little bit of advice. alex has worked hard on my side i know your side has worked well, that's a classic example, when staffs are willing to work together with the members members are willing to work together, we can accomplish things. this is not just a bipartisan piece of legislation, this is legislation needed by native americans, alaska natives. it's worked well. i'm hoping, i talked to the senators on the other side, that
we'll get this legislation passed very quickly. s that win-win situation for all of us. i think we should take great honor and recognize what has been, will be done here today and accomplish a goal that many times is not achieve. so again, i thank each member that's been involved in this especially for the first people of america. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. the gentleman reserves. the gentlewoman from wisconsin is recognized. ms. moore: thank you mr. speaker. i can tell you that mr. young from alaska has really made a very important point to have thanked our staffs. i was remiss in doing that and so i would like to add my voice to those members who really, really appreciate the hard work that our staffs provide.
and now, mr. speaker i would like to yield to ms. gabard of hawaii such time as she may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. gabbard: thank you, mr. speaker. i'm rising in strong support of h.r. 360 today. since 1996 this legislation has been authorized twice both times with broad, bipartisan support in both chambers. since its enaxment, it has strengthened indigenous self-determination by empowering nations and assisting with housing needs. it has increased home ownership among native hawaiians by 2%, bringing hope to many people who are living paycheck to paycheck. at the same time we're seeing poverty and public assistance have decreased. today, more native hawaiians are likely to be employed in professional or managerial occupations than in the past and life expectancy has increased by almost three years.
this legislation makes a difference to real families. one of these families is francis pal aumbings i and her sisters. they inherited a home from their parents who passed away which was built in the 1940's and was in dire need of repairs. there were large holes in the roof and floors. walls for buckling with broken windows covered with tarps. the sisters did not have the means to pay for the needed repairs and couldn't afford a new home. they also didn't qualify for an f.h.a. loan or any other loan. the department of hawaiian homelands made a grant available because of this legislation for $15000. just $15,000 gave this family the ability to make a down payment with assistance from a low interest usda construction loan. they were able to build a structurally safe and comfortable home for them and their children to live.
this is just one example of the many families whose lives have been directly impacted and changed because of this legislation. it's an important step toward removing roadblocks to economic success not knowledge hawaii but in fative communities across the country and it reaffirms the house's long-standing commitment to tribal sovereignty and self-determination. like all those who spoke before me, i'd like to thank my colleague, representative pearce, for introducing this bill, for his persistence and leadership continuously in bringing this about. to representative moore for leading the charge courageously on our side of the aisle, ranking member waters for continuing to move this bill forward. also to my longtime colleague and friend from alaska, representative young and my colleague dan kildee all of whom worked very hard on this legislation. i urge my colleagues to join this bipartisan coalition in supporting the passage of h.r. 360. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the
gentlewoman yields. the gentlewoman reserves. the gentleman from new mexico is recognized. mr. pearce: thank you, mr. speaker. there are many, as i go through my district who wonder why do we have a bill like this and frankly it's a treaty responsibility. the responsibility has been signed by the native -- between the native americans and the federal government saying that we have a trust responsibility to them and as i travel around the reservations in my district begin to be aware of a circumstance i have not previously been aware of, housing that -- houses that were maybe several hundred years old people still living in those, there's one area with no sewer at all there are cardboard shacks, people living in situations that they should not be living in today.
those things exist what the legislation in front of us today does, it doesn't change the responsibility of the government, doesn't increase the amount of the dollars flowing to it, it simply tries to make the process a little more streamlined. i would like to acknowledge that h.u.d. at one point was rigorously opposing the transparency, rigorously opposing those reforms we were putting into their system. they had duplications of processes that would literally take years in order to get approval to build houses. and and we simply said it does not have to be that way. a second thing that struck me, as i had watch my family grow out of abject poverty into a homeownership culture our first home that we purchased was $800 and then we moved up
to $1,500 one. finally we thought we had really arrived when we got to the $2,500 one and a $15,500 acre property. and mr. kildee -- the pilot project is inserted in the bill in order to facilitate, to allow native americans to own their own homes on the reservations. it's been very difficult up to now. we have addressed the problems which created a culture of poverty through the years, and so even though we might have a different view on how to get there we do not, as democrats and republicans, disagree on the fact that prosperity will begin with homeownership and this pilot project in here, completely voluntary, allows people to move directly into the homeownership. it allows the native american tribes to start to encourage homeownership on the
reservations in order to preserve the cultures there. the reforms that we put in for the native americans themselves were extremely important. some of the processes have worked very badly. i've had extraordinarily frank conversations with native americans across the country, talking about the need to move into more -- to more transparent processes, to more processes that make sure the money gets into the homes they are building. that's the purpose of this legislation. i, again, commend congresswoman moore because she and i really started the process and then denny heck, dan kildee, don young, tom cole, they are all sitting there and we chipped away at it from each side. we got the reforms in. we got the wording in that would allow indian tribes across this country to feel like they're participating in this. it's a very difficult process. again, a three-year process and
i'm proud of the legislation we're bringing to the floor today, proud of the efforts on behalf of each one of the people who have been involved here. i would reserve the balance of my time, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentlewoman from wisconsin is recognized. ms. moore: thank you so much, madam speaker. i'd like to ask unanimous consent to enter into the record the statement from the honorable maxine waters. without objection. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. moore: thank you. at this time i am so pleased to yield to my good friend from hawaii, mr. takai. for as much time as he might consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from hawaii is recognized. mr. takai: thank you mr. speaker, and aloha. today i stand in support of h.r. 36 0 the native american housing assistance and self-determination act of 2015. this legislation reaffirms the united states trust responsibility to american indian and alaskan natives and
provides necessary tools to the native people of our country. for sustainible solutions to poverty that often plague their communities. i'd also like to thank chairman pearce ranking member waters, mr. young, ms. moore mr. kildee and my senior member from hawaii, ms. gabbard and the numerous other congressional members who have fought for years to re-authorize nahasda. for also including support to native hawaiian housing organizations which provide adequate housing to the disendents of hawaii's indigenous people. nahasda's re-authorization does not only provide funding for adequate housing programs, it also provides vital resources to foster the indigenous cultures of our great nation which face near extinction between the atrocities committed to expand our nation and the federal assimilation policies of the 20th century. for some indigenous people
living upon their aboriginal lands is a vital part of preserving and living their culture. unfortunately hawaii has one of the highest cost of living in the nation, so support through nahasda is essential to native hawaiian families who wish to remain on their ancestral lands but face the ever-growing price of homes, land, utilities and food. so many families who have lived in hawaii for generations upon generations are now moving out of our state because of the cost of living. i hope my colleagues understand not only the vital importance of adequate housing for the less fortunate among native communities but also its vital importance forering the indigenous cultures of our democracy. this diversity of culture is what makes our nation great. so please join me in supporting this measure. thank you, mr. speaker, and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. ms. moore: thank you mr. speaker. i am so happy that the hawaiian and alaskan contingencies have
commented on this. i think it's important that this bill includes all native people, and i am so happy that the senate is now working on a version of nahasda that's similar and i hope that we'll all be able to reconcile our differences and get a re-authorization to the president's desk. i look forward to him signing this -- h.r. 360 into law. and with that mr. speaker, i would yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back the balance of her time. the gentleman from new mexico is recognized. mr. pearce: thank you, mr. speaker. one point, chairman hensarling, earlier in the process said he was not wildly ecstatic about the bill coming before his committee. if 100 years from now native americans were going to be in the same circumstance they are again today so, again that was one of the elements of trying to find a -- and facilitate homeownership among native
americans to where they could begin their growth towards prosperity. when indian tribes see this bill, they say if you can actually get that through, tuck -- if you can actually get them to agree on it will be transformational. i wanted to not just drift along and re-authorize. and so it's with that backdrop that we began to construct the bill. again, would like to thank ranking member waters for her support would like to thank chairman helling sarling for his support -- hensarling for his support and leader mccarthy. i'd like to thank my friends on the other side of the aisle for working through the very difficult discussions so we were able to find a bill that does reach market efficiencies, does make the government more effective and more efficient, that does do things that both
political parties want to achieve. we all want to achieve the same things we approach it from a different point of view so i can't say enough to my friends on the other side of the aisle, thank you very much for your hard work, your dedication. with that, mr. speaker, i recommend and request that everyone support this bill, would yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 360, as amended. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed and without objection, the motion to reconsider -- for what purpose does the gentleman from alabama rise? >> i'd like to request a recorded vote. the speaker pro tempore: does the gentleman ask for the yeas and nays? >> yes. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested.
all those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this motion will be postponed. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i move to suspend the rules and pass h.r. 216, as amended the department of veterans affairs budget planning reform act of 2015. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 216 a bill to amend title 38, united states
code, to direct the secretary of veterans affairs to submit to congress a future-years veterans program and a quadrennial veterans review, to establish in the department of veterans affairs a chief strategy officer and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from florida mr. miller, and the gentleman from south carolina mr. clyburn, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from florida. mr. miller: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and add extraneous material on h.r. 216, as amended. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. miller: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. miller: thank you very much mr. speaker. h.r. 216 as amended, would revise the process by which the department of veterans affairs prepares its annual budget. as a means to provide congress
with greater transparency regarding v.a.'s alignment of resource for climates with its strategic goals. the bill directs the secretary of veterans affairs to submit annually to congress a future-years veterans program reflecting estimated expenditures and proposed appropriations that are included in the budget for that fiscal year and the subsequent four fiscal years. the bill would also require the secretary in 2019 and every four years thereafter to conduct review of the strategy for meeting the nation's commitment to veterans and the resources needed to implement the strategy. to assist the secretary in carrying out the five-year plan and the quadrennial review, the bill would require the secretary to designate a chief strategy officer to advise the secretary on long-range v.a. strategy and implications. finally the bill puts in place a 10-member panel to study the
quadrennial review and report back to the congress on the panel's opinions on the review's findings. a combination of the five-year budget look-ahead, the quadrennial review and the panel is intended to increase our ability to determine v.a.'s future needs in a manner that provides checks and balances that currently do not exist. mr. speaker this really is a commonsense bill. no longer would v.a. be able to announce ambitious goals such as ending homelessness or eliminating the claims backlog without members of congress and the public having insight into the estimated long-range resources that are going to be needed to meet those goals. with a $168 billion budget, veterans and taxpayers deserve full transparency when it comes to how scarce resources are planned to be allocated.
i must also add that this bill makes no additional funds available and would require v.a. to accomplish this bill's requirements within its existing resources. and with that i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from south carolina is recognized. mr. clyburn: thank you, mr. speaker. i'll yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. clyburn: mr. speaker, i rise in support of h.r. 216, as amended, the department of veterans affairs budget planning reform act of 2015. this bill represents a bipartisan effort of the veterans' affairs committee building on the work of former ranking member michael michaud and current ranking member corrine brown of florida. i also want to thank chairman jeff miller, mr. doug lamborn of colorado and all of the members of the committee for their efforts on behalf of this
bill. h.r. 216 would codify and strengthen efforts by the v.a. to improve the manner in which it matches resources with requirements. h.r. 216 will improve transparency and give us in congress veterans and the american people -- in congress, veterans and the american people a better sense of where the v.a. is going and how it intends to get there. it is often said that the journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step. far too often it seems that in terms of budget planning, the v.a. is focused on the single step and not the thousand-mile journey. currently, the majority of the v.a.'s programs are provided
funding on what is called advanced appropriations. this means that the v.a. budget is put in place well before the start of the fiscal year in which it will be needed. this also means that the v.a. is attempting to estimate the demands it will face many, many months down the road. . h.r. 216 will assist the v. namplet ensuring that these -- assist the v.a. in ensuring that these estimates are as reliable as possible. h.r. 216 will provide the necessary framework for the v.a. to strategically determine hour -- how best to meet the needs of veterans while ensuring that this framework and these decisions are transparent and justified. this will assist our work here
in congress and give veterans the peace of mind that the v.a. is looking to the future and not caught in the past. h.r. 216 would require the v. toomplet lay out a five-year budget plan beginning in fiscal year 2020. this budget plan would be informed by a quadreenall review initially required in fiscal year 2019 and then upgraded every four years. this would give the v.a. plenty of time to ensure that its internal processes can support these requirements. h.r. 216 would also provide the secretary, or require the secretary to provide annual policy guidance to ensure that
near-term budgets are aligned with the v.a.'s longer term strategic outlook. many of the challenges the v.a. is facing today are remark pli similar to the problems it was facing when i served on the committee two decades ago. there's always a challenge to fit the available resources to the immediate needs and to focus on what it will be -- on what will be required in the months ahead. it is easy to lose focus on where we are going while meeting the emergencies and crises of today. i believe that h.r. 216 will assist all of us in keeping the entire journey in mind and not a single step. it will provide the information
we need to look ahead, enable veterans and the american people to have the information they need to be ensured that we are on the right track and better enable the v.a. to get the resources it truly needs to meet the challenges it faces. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the chair recognizes the gentleman from florida. mr. miller: we have no further speakers. if the gentleman is prepared to close we will be prepared also. mr. clyburn: thank you, mr. chairman. i urge my colleagues to support h.r. 216 and yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from florida is recognized. mr. miller: thank you, mr. speaker. i do want to thank my good friend, mr. clyburn for helpinging in bill for ms. brown. also to say -- helping to manage
this bill for ms. brown and also to thank our colleague mr. michaud who worked long and hard to get this piece of legislation brought to the floor. once again, i encourage all members to support h.r. 216 as amended and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 216 as amended. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 being in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. the gentleman from florida is recognized. mr. miller: on that, i request the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having risen this eyeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 -- rizzing
ms. ros-lehtinen: i move that the house suspend the rules and pass house resolution 16 2. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the resolution. the clerk: house resolution 162, resolution calling on the president to provide ukraine with military assistance to defend its sovereignty and territorial integrity. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from florida, ms. ros-lehtinen and the gentleman from new york, mr. engel, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from florida. ms. ros-lehtinen: thank you, mr. speaker. i ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the resolution. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. ros-lehtinen: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. ros-lehtinen: thank you, sir. as always, mr. royce, the chairman of our committee on foreign affairs appreciates the ranking member, eliot engel of
new york's leadership in support of the people of ukraine. last week, march 18, mr. speaker, marked the one-year anniversary of russian president vladimir putin's invasion and occupation of crimea. during the past year, rush has strengthened its -- russia has strengthened its hold over the peninsula, and increased its oppression of the minority tatar population and others who refuse to bend to their ockpigs. putin's success in ukraine emboldened him to expand into eastern ukraine. last weekend chairman royce led a delegation to ukraine and traveled to russia. the many ukrainians that ranking member engel and mr. royce met with wanted to be ukraine's and not separatists yet moscow move to supporting militant
separatists in eastern ukraine. today the conflict in the east has resulted in over 6,000 deaths, at least 15,000 wounded, and more than one million displaced persons. this carnage is the work of the separatist forces controlled by moscow. which has supplied them with massive amounts of weapons and has even sent in russian military forces in combat supporting roles. as assistant secretary victoria newland testified before the foreign affairs committee this month russia, quote, has thousands and thousands, end quote of soldiers orping in ukraine. as she summed up quote,s that manufactured conflict controlleded by the kremlin, fwiled russian tanks and heavy weapons, financed at russian taxpayers' expense, end quote. mr. speaker, the administration's response to this crisis has been tepid at
best. six months ago, the president of the ukraine stood in this very chamber and while thanking the united states for our assistance so far asked for defensive weapons to enable ukraine to defend itself against superior forces. pointedly he told both houses of congress, quote, one cannot win a war with blankets, end quote. which is what we are providing. earlier this month, members met with first deputy speaker of the ukrainian parliament who said that his country urgently needs anti-take weapons such as the javelin radar to pinpoint enemy fire, and communications equipment to overcome russian jamming. ukrainian forces cannot match the advanced equipment that russia is pouring into eastern ukraine. there is no shortage of the will
to fight, only a shortage of testifiesive weapons. legal -- of defensive weapons. legal authority of such assistance was made crystal clear by the congress in december by passing the ukraine freedom support act and top administration officials, including secretary of defense carter and chairman dempsey of the joint chiefs of staff have indicated support. indeed this weekend nato's top military commander asked, quote is inaction an appropriate action? end quote. we know his answer is no. unfortunately -- unfortunately for ukrainians and for international security, president obama has chosen inaction in the guise of endless deliberation. but there's far more at stake here than the state of ukraine mr. speaker. this unprovoked attack on a peaceful country. the forcible occupation of its territory. and an effort to unilaterally
redraw its internationally recognized borders will undermine the foundation of the international order that was established and has been defended at great cost by the united states and our allies. the world is closely watching what we will do to help ukraine defend itself from outright assault. if it is too little too late, those with designs on a neighboring country will feel all that more emboldened. the people of ukraine are not asking for us to fight for them. they are only asking for the weapons they need to defend themselves. i ask our colleagues to vote for this bipartisan resolution, urging the administration to provide this critical assistance to ukraine before it is, indeed, too late. and with that, mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of our time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves. the gentleman from new york is
recognized. mr. engel: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise in strong support of this resolution and yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. engel: first of all i want to again thank our chairman emeritus of the foreign affairs committee, my dear friend from florida, ileana ros-lehtinen, who is very eloquent. i want to stand by every word she uttered. i agree with her 100%. i want to also thank our chairman ed royce who also has been steadfast in fighting for the freedom of the people of ukraine and it's been a pleasure to work with him on a bipartisan basis. this is a bipartisan issue. policy like this should not be partisan. and that's why we are rising today as democrats and republicans, really as americans, say enough is enough in ukraine. as i've been saying for month well, can't view the crisis in crew yain -- ukraine as some
faraway crisis or somebody else's problem. this has left thousands o-- thousands dead, tens of thousands wounded and millions displace and has begun to threat then post cold war security of europe. mr. putin is knocking us back into the bad old days of the cold war. the battle is being rage -- waged in the haze of a campaign aimed at eroding confidence in the west and democratic institutions. the same propaganda permeating allied countries on the russian frontier that we are treaty-bound to defend. under the corrupt rule of vladimir putin, russia has become a clear threat to a half century of american commitment to and investment in a europe that's whole, free and at peace. a europe where boarders are not changed by force. what putin is doing is changing borders by force since on the continent of europe for the first time since world war ii. this cannot stand. the united states cannot turn a
blind eye to it. the united states cannot put its head in the sand and act like any other country and pretend that maybe this will go away. in 1938, another dictator named day dolph hitler invaded -- adolph hitler invaded czech czech. -- invade czechoslovak yasm president putin said he was going to crimea for the same reason, to protect the people. hitler got away with it in 1938 and there were people who said you know if we give him this area, he'll be happy, he'll be content, he'll leave us alone, his aggression will stop. same people are saying -- some people today are saying the same thing. just give putin crimea. just give putin a little bit of the eastern part of ukraine. and he'll be happy, he'll go away he won't threaten anything else. you don't satiate a bully by giving him what he wants early
on because it only whets his appetite for worse things to come and end at the point later on -- and at the point later on when you have to go at the bully, it will be much, mucharder -- harder to defeat him, to stop him, than it would be if you simply stood up to him and stopped him when he started his aggression. this is what is happening now in ukraine this war poses the greatest threat to european security since world war ii. we shouldn't take it lightly, we shouldn't be idle, and we shouldn't let other countries tell us what to do last year ukrainian president por sean coe stood in -- poroshenko stood in this chamber and related to the challenges of the people of ukraine who desired to retain their dignity and rebuild their future. we asked that we help the men and women fighting a neighbor they once looked to as a friend. he told us they needed weapon, defensive weapons.
he said blankets that we're sending do not win a war. last month, i saw president poroshenko again in europe and he again pled for military assistance, not to attack moscow or defeat the russian army, or even to push the russians out of the ukrainian territory. but simply to hold the line and give his government breathing room to focus on other threats such as keeping the ukrainian economy afloat. we cannot allow europe's borderlands to once again become europe's bloodlands. fortunately there's still time for the united states to act in a moderate but decisive fashion to help ukraine defend itself. . and our friends in ukraine in particular, and to safeguard our interests and defend our values across this country region. across the country, some nato members, some of them not some of them part of the former souf
yet union, some of them, some of them east block nations, some of them not all bordering on russia are worrying because they think that putin can get away with what he wants to get away with in ukraine will they be next. the united states is not being asked to send ground troops to ukraine. the united states is not being asked to get itself involved in another war. we are simply being asked to give the ukrainians the methods to defend themselves. the weapons to defend themselves. i can't think of anything more reasonable. we've held hearings on ukraine. we've passed resolutions of support. we sent legislation to the president's desk. it was the last thing we passed in the last congress. the president signed it into law, authorizing an array of assistance including the defense of arms ukraine so desperately needs. and here we are again to renew this call, to remind the people of ukraine that they're not alone and to send an
unambiguous message to the administration to the president and to our allies in europe the time has come to do more. we must meet this threat together because we all have a stake in how this ends. thank you, mr. speaker. i thank ms. ros-lehtinen and chairman royce and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentlewoman from florida is recognized. ms. ros-lehtinen: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield the remainder of my time to chairman royce and ask unanimous consent that he be allowed to control that time. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. ros-lehtinen: thank you sir. mr. royce: i thank the gentlelady for yielding, mr. speaker, and as my good friend eliot engel from new york explained last april we took a delegation to ukraine, not just to the western part of the country but most importantly we went to the east. we went as far east as we could
go up against the border there and we had an opportunity to have a dialogue with the ukrainian people. and we reached out to civil society. we set up meetings with women's groups and lawyers groups and across the spectrum in eastern ukraine speaking to russian-speaking ukrainians, we got, i believe, a good idea of what was on their mind. i think there were about eight members of our delegation. and they were sharing with us these words, what putin is doing, what the russians are doing right now is going out on the internet and recruiting every skinhead and malcontent in the russian-speaking region they can find and then they train these young men and then they send them over the border to create mayhem and what we're
trying to do here -- this was the explanation from the ukrainians -- we are trying to catch them. they speak a different accent than we do, so we can catch them and we try to hold them until this -- until this war is over but increasingly we find that what is happening is the russians are sending their own troops over. they're sending their own armor. they're sending -- they're sending over military equipment that we cannot defend against and what they said to us is we're not asking you for your assistance in this fight, all we're asking is that we might have the defensive weapons to check this assault so we can defend ourselves in this city. we need anti-tank weapons. and you and i know by the way, mr. speaker, that when those tanks done they are not going to be -- those are not going to
be ukrainian -- ukrainian separatists driving those tanks. those are going to be russian tankers in those tanks. so what -- this is what they're asking us form, and they've asked for month after month after month in order to set up a strategy that would cause the russians to believe there was some kind of credible deterrence but you know instead we now see that russia may try to secure a land bridge to crimea. in other words, this conflict might escalate because of additional russian aggression, or they might seize strategic ports along the black sea, additional ports. you have 6000 people so far that have lost their lives that i know of in the conflict from the reports i've read. you have a million ukrainians that have been made refugees, that have pulled west out of the area, and obviously to date
the actions taken by the u.s. and our e.u. allies, including economic sanctions and aid and diplomatic isolation, all of the talk, none of that has checked russian aggression or i should say putin's aggression here. and over the past year he has clearly become bolder, even menacing nato countries as he seeks to divide the alliance. now, the obama administration and our european allies have put hope in diplomatic and cease-fire arrangements, but frankly that is not working. so we come back to the request and this month we met with the first deputy speaker of the ukrainian parliament, as eliot engel shared here today on the floor who said that his country urgently needs anti-tank weapons such as the javelin and radar to pinpoint enemy
artillery fire that is coming into their towns and communications equipment to overcome russian jamming. that's the request. ukrainian forces cannot match advanced equipment that russia is pouring into eastern ukraine, and there is no shortage of the will here on the part of the ukrainians. we saw many volunteers in their local militia there taking up their position, but what they have is a shortage of defensive weapons. at this committee's hearing last month, secretary kerry said that the obama administration has still not made a decision on whether to send lethal military aid to ukraine. six months. this is six months after president poroshenko told us, as we sat here in this joint session of congress to hear his remarks that one cannot win the war with blankets. so we are at a turn point and one i agree with mr. engel on this. it's one of historic
importance. if we allow aggression against ukraine to stand without us at least offering the ukrainians the ability to defend themselves, we will signal to the world that our willingness to defend the postworld war ii order is crumbling -- post-world war ii order is crumbling. it will be severely weakened. the result could usher in an era of instability and conflict in many regions with consequences no one could predict. or we can allow the ukrainians to defend themselves and that's what we do with this lgs legislation. the ukrainian people are asking for our help to stop russia's efforts to sever their country. they are not asking us to do any of the fighting for them. they are only asking us for the defensive weapons that they need to defend themselves and by passing this bipartisan resolution overwhelmingly the house will send a strong
message to the administration that it must act quickly and decisively if the u.s. is to help the ukrainian people save their country. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. engel: thank you mr. speaker. it's now my pleasure to yield four minutes to my good friend from maryland democratic whip, steny hoyer. mr. hoyer: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized. mr. hoyer: mr. speaker, i rise in strong support of this resolution, supported strongly by the chairman of the committee and the former chair of the committee, ms. ros-lehtinen. this resolution is bipartisan and reflects the will of congress that the nation of ukraine deserves every opportunity to chart a future based on democracy territorial
integrity and freedom from russian aggression. i'm the former chairman of the security of cooperation of europe signed in helsinki in august 1975. in that agreement the soviet union, the then-soviet union and 34 other nations signed a document which said that you could not change borders by other than peaceful means. vladimir putin has broken that agreement but he's also broken the agreement that in 1994 we entered into with ukraine in consideration of their giving up their nuclear weapons. vladimir putin has sent russian troops into another nation. he's tried to mask it. he's tried the pretense this is simply separatists who are
active, but very frarningly those troops in ukraine have admitted to the press that they're from russia. vladimir putin's support for violent separatists has destabilized a large region in eastern ukraine and led to the illegal -- illegal russian occupation of crimea. and the world hasn't done much to discourage not only the actions of mr. putin but others who would learn the lessons of his actions. the sanctions that united states and allies have imposed against putin and his closest supporters as well as measures to isolate russian businesses that have been able -- are having serious effects but not the effect that we want.
but i believe that our nation also has a responsibility to stand shoulder to shoulder with the people of ukraine and their democratically elected government by sending them the tools they need to defend themselves. this is not a new position for me. when the seshes -- when the serbs affected a genocide in bosnia herzegovina we had an arms embargo on the people of bosnia. while arms were flowing in from other parts of the world to serbia. i thought that was wrong. i think today the unwillingness or inability to create a consensus for giving to the ability the ability -- to the
people the ability to defend themselves is not good policy. if we continue to do so, there is no doubt in my mind that mr. putin will continue on his path of aggression and acquisition. mr. speaker we must continue to support ukraine on its march towards greater democracy, stronger human rights and a brighter future for its people. i urge my colleagues to join in supporting this resolution and yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. royce: mr. speaker, i'd like to yield three minutes to the gentleman from new jersey mr. frelinghuysen. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. frelinghuysen: mr. chairman i thank the chairman
for yielding, for his sponsorship of this resolution with mr. engel and ms. ros-lehtinen. mr. speaker, isil is on the march civil war appears imminent in yemen, libya has become a full-fledged terrorist training center iran moves closer to nuclear capacity every day so it's understandable the attention of the media and the american people seem to be focused elsewhere other than on ukraine. but i just returned a week ago from leading a bipartisan delegation of the defense appropriations committee to ukraine, and i'm here to report that situation there is downright alarming. . vladimir pute season using ukraine as a test bed for a new type of warfare by using proxy insurgents and russia and special forces army troops to
carry out his campaign to reclaim ukraine as part of the old russian empire. after annexing crimea a year ago, he's transforming that peninsula into a heavily armed russian camp. a platform indeed. mr. speaker, blankets, night vision goggles and meeting -- meals that are ready to eat are not enough. ukraine needs nonnate -- non-nato ally military support and it needs it now. ukraine's courageous president appealed to us again to provide lethal weaponry anti-tank weapons, small arms and anti-aircraft systems to help defense their territory -- defend their territory from the russian onslaught. it's all about preserving and protecting ukraine's independence. that is what this is all about. the largest country in europe. he knows he cannot win the war against russia but he believes the lethal support will at least raise the price of aggression for russia and i think our committee tends to
agree. our delegation left kiev believing that the future of ukraine is a matter of significant importance to national security of these united states. my colleagues, western and eastern europeans are watching intensely, with apprehension, how our president responds. they are looking closely. as are our adversaries. and the russian leadership. what future steps will they take if we do not act now? i urge the house to show the leadership, our president, that -- and this administration that this resolution makes sense, they need to give ukraine this non-nato ally support and they need to do it now. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from new york is recognized. >> thank you, mr. speaker. it's now my pleasure to yield
to mr. david scott. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. scott: thank you very much. ladies and gentlemen, on the bleached bones of many past great nations are written those pathetic words, too late too late. we moved too late to save them. history is cluttered with them. we are all -- almost at that point with ukraine. anyone who has followed the russian model under putin knows full well what his aim is, to reclaim that territory that empire of the old soviet union. now if ukraine goes, what happens to lithuania, estonia,
latvia? and just today, in the news, we hear where russia has threatened a nuclear response i believe it's to denmark. now, now what is happening in the world? the world now is a very dark a very dangerous and a very evil place. and when those three things get together, there must be that shining light on the hill that shows the way out of the darkness. and throughout history that light has been the united states of america. we must act here. let us hope that president obama will hear our plea as democrats and as republicans. we've got to help save ukraine.
from russia. i serve on the nato parliamentary assembly. for 12 years i've served on nato. i've served as a chairman of the science and technology committee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. scott: i'm here to tell you, ladies and gentlemen -- mr. engel: i yield another minute. mr. scott: thank you. i'm here to tell you, ladies and gentlemen if we don't act here, there will be a devastation on the european continent the likes that we have not seen since world war ii. we don't need to repeat that. let us rise to this occasion. let us do the right thing. let us be that shining light on the hill that shows the way out of this darkness. there's sometimes in life you've just got to stand up to
the bully. the united states must stand up to putin and let him know that there's a light in this world and the united states is going to show the way. and the best way to do that today is to pass this resolution and let's send ukraine the military help that they need to protect themselves and the legacy of this fine country. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. royce: i'll reserve the right to close. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. engel: thank you mr. speaker. i'll close now and let me say that by passing this resolution the house sends a clear message of support and solidarity to
the people of ukraine. it's past time that our government does more to help these true friends of liberty defend their land and deter further aggression. and i know that if the united states shows leadership here, others will follow. i'm very pleased to be the primary sponsor of this important resolution. i thank chairman royce for working with me on this. the two of us have worked very, very closely together, particularly on ukraine, and we both feel very, very strong. i agree with every comment that was uttered today by all the people speaking on this resolution. we are the united states of america, we're a beacon of freedom to the world and if we don't act now who will? again, let me reiterate the people of ukraine are not looking for american troops. they're not looking for american boots on the ground. there is no slippery slope here. they are just looking for the weapons to defend themselves. they don't have those weapons. we do. if we care about freedom and we
care about fighting aggression, we need to give people of ukraine the right and the means to defend themselves. i urge my colleagues to support this very important resolution, i again thank chairman royce and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. royce: yes mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. and i would just go to the words that mr. davis scott reminded us, that echo down through history too late, too late. we have given the authority to the administration many months ago to transfer defensive weapons to ukraine that can be used to check further aggression. that has not happened.
this bipartisan resolution will direct the administration to take that step so that ukraine yan -- ukrainians can defend themselves. and i ask my colleagues to vote for this bipartisan resolution urging the administration to provide this crucial assistance to ukraine before it is in fact too late for the ukrainians to defend themselves. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is, will the house suspend the rules and agree to house resolution 162. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair 2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended the resolution is agreed to -- for what purpose does the gentleman from kentucky rise? >> i request a recorded vote of the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. all those in favor of taking
this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20 further proceedings on this motion will be postponed. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? mr. royce: mr. speaker, i move that the house suspend the rules and pass house resolution 53, as amended. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the resolution. claudia: house resolution 53, resolution -- the clerk: house resolution 53. the resolution condemning the cowardly attack on innocent men, women and children in the nigerian town of baga. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california and the gentleman from new york each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from california. mr. royce: thank you, mr. speaker. i ask unanimous consent that
all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to include any extraneous materials in the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. royce: and, mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. royce: mr. speaker, as always, i very much appreciate the assistance of mr. engel in moving this resolution today to the house floor. and i commend ms. kelly, a new member of the committee, for her focus on this important issue. the africa subcommittee chairman, chris smith, and ranking member of that committee, karen bass, have also done in depth work on nigeria and on boko haram in particular. i appreciate their travels to nigeria. and, mr. speaker nigeria hold as critical presidential election this weekend. it's expected to be the continent's most consequentialal political event
in years -- consequential political event in years. africa's most pop us will nation has -- populous nation has 100,000 polling stations. i had the opportunity with don payne to lead a delegation years ago for an election observer responsibility there for one of these national elections in nigeria and along with general colin powell at the time. let me tell you, the political environment is always tense, but it's especially tense now. and the leading candidates, they're neck and neck, as was the case then. i just have to say that we have seen nigeria transition from military rule to democracy in the election that general j powell and i witnessed -- that general powell and i witnessed and that was a very peaceful time. but recent elections in nigeria have seen political violence. and we are right to be concerned. and this resolution urges all political candidates to respect
their pledges of nonviolence and insist that the government hold a free, fair credible election. and that they do so on time. this election date has already been postponed once. meanwhile, nigeria continues to face grave insecurity in the north at the hands of boko haram. which loosely translates to western education is sin. this islamist terrorist organization indiscriminately kills en masse and pillages villages in their quest to establish a shari'a state. satellite images document that after boko haram comes through, v.i.m.ages are literally wiped off the -- villages are literally wiped off the map. the group is responsible for 5,000 deaths last year in 2014 and displacing over a million people last year. and making this organization,
by the way, one of the world's most deadly, but this weekend forces fighting boko haram reported discovering another 100 bodies in a shallow mass grave. we don't really know how many they've killed out there in total. but we know that the killing continues. and after watching boko haram's violence, i wasn't surprised to see that that group pledges allegiance to isis. isis publicly accepted the overture claiming this new relationship expands their self-declared caliphate to west africa. at the same time we've seen boko haram's propaganda increase in quality, minimum -- mimickinging the production of isis videos -- mimicking the production of isis videos. so the good news is that nigeria's neighbors, chad niger, cameroon, they've all been making progress in the fight against boko haram under a newly established african union regional force.
they have rescued more than 30 northern nigerian towns to date from boko haram and from that harsh rule. and this is a good beginning. but this african union regional force lacks equipment and it lacks training. and this resolution expresses the house's support for robust security assistance to these troops in their fight against boko haram. nevertheless, we cannot rest solely on the other countries of the region. nigeria's security forces should have the lead role to play. if dismantling boko haram is the goal, we need a well-trained well-equipped nigerian military. we must make sure there are no impediments, legislative or otherwise, to providing this much-needed assistance. and i reserve the balance of my time mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. engel: mr. speaker, thank you and i rise in strong
support of h.res. 53. and i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. engel: i'd like to begin by commending our colleague, robin kelly, colleague on the foreign affairs committee. she's a new member of the committee. i'd like to commend her for introducing this important resolution which condemns the brutal terrorist group boko haram and calls for free, fair and on time elections in nigeria. i also want to commend our colleague, frederica wilson of florida who has raised this issue time and time and time again with resolutions on the house floor and just in general. so i want to thank ms. wilson of florida. i want to thank chris smith and karen bass of our committee the africa subcommittee, who have also together pushed for a resolution of importance as this. for five years mr. speaker,
boko haram has torn a path of violence and destruction across northeastern nigeria, ruthlessly killing civilians kidnapping children and looting and destroying towns. in the last year they have started to swallow up territory and just a few weeks ago they pledged allegiance to isis the islamic state. the nigerian government has the responsibility to protect its citizens, but obviously it hasn't done nearly enough to confront this horrific group. only in the past month with presidential elections looming has nigeria seemed to get more serious about turning back the tide of boko haram. in recent weeks, neighboring countries including chad, niger and cameroon, have stepped up their efforts to combat the group and we've seen real results. in some cases troops in those nations have had to occupy towns they have liberated
inside nigeria because nigerian forces simply aren't showing up to do their part. that's obviously disgraceful. instead of providing professional security forces and long-term economic investment into a long-neglected region of the country, what i see are last-minute political stunts to persuade nigerian voters to re-elect president jonathan. that brings me to the second subject of this resolution. nigeria's upcoming elections. presidential elections was supposed to take place on february 14 but were delayed until march 28 because of concerns about boko haram. many believe this delay was politically motivated. elections lacking legitimacy in nigeria, which is africa's most populous nation, could obviously send a destabilizing shock wave across the couldn't -- shockwave across the continent.
this resolution urges the government of nigeria to hold elections on march 28 without further delay and for all parties to refrain from violence. mr. speaker, nigeria is a huge nation. it is the largest nation population-wise in africa. what happens in nigeria is very important. what happens in nigeria counts. nigeria needs to send a strong example -- to set a strong example for the region and for the continent by holding credible elections and by getting serious about boko haram. nigeria needs to send a very strong message about that. so i strongly support this resolution and urge all my colleagues to support it as well. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. royce: i'm going to yield four minutes to the gentleman from texas, mr. hurd, chairman of the information technology subcommittee of the committee
on oversight and government reform. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. hurd: thank you, mr. speaker. thank you chairman. i had the honor of serving my country for almost a decade as an undercover officer in the c.i.a. i was in the back alies and bizarres of -- balance alleys and bizarres in south asia. i was collecting intelligence on threats to our homeland so i know a little something about dealing with bad guys. i looked our enemies in their eyes and i know what they're capable of. those who are committed to spreading terror, murdering and destroying the lives of the innocent, such as boko haram cannot be reasoned with because they are not reasonable. they cannot be bargained with because they do not value the lives of others. they have nothing to lose. only their destruction will stop their reign of terror on the men, women and children of northeastern nigeria so i encourage the united states to help. let's help nigeria and other
nations such as chad, niger and cameroon to help their citizens. when terrorists such as boko haram are allowed to operate unchecked, our world is less safe and less free. as the greatest and the freest nation in the world, let's extend a hand to our friends in nigeria and let them know we stand with them on this war on terror. i want to thank the chairman for this resolution and i want to thank my colleague from illinois, congresswoman robin kelly, for her hard work and leadership on this resolution and i encourage all of my colleagues to support it. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. engel: thank you, mr. speaker. it's now my pleasure to yield three minutes to the gentlewoman from texas, my friend sheila jackson lee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. jackson lee: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house and revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. jackson lee: thank you. let me with enthusiasm thank the chairman of the full
committee and mr. royce and the ranking member, both my friends, but my friend from new york, mr. engel who we have worked together on a number of issues. i am both a student of nigeria and a member of congress who has one of the largest -- on being polite i believe i have the largest population of nigerian people in my area of houston texas. we're very proud of the contributions that africans from the continent but in particular in this instance nigerian americans have made over the years. i am also privileged to chair with congressman chabot the nigerian caucus and i invite my colleagues to join because nigeria is the largest economy in -- largest population, i think the largest economy. i know south africa has been touted as such but the numbers go up and down. and there are many good people
in nigeria who want for a better education for their children and for that economy to help develop all of nigeria. i represent a number of energy companies who have been in nigeria for at least half a century, but more importantly we have seen nigeria do some very positive things and might i first make sure that i mention congresswoman robin kelly who i know is en route. i want to thank her for her leadership on this legislation. was delighted to co-sponsor. i had likewise introduced legislation that was legislation sponsored by myself and congressman chabot, but i'm delighted to have the opportunity to support this legislation which is in essence a combination of our points about nigeria and also to acknowledge congresswoman carolyn maloney and congresswoman frederica wilson working on boko haram.
nigeria has positive successes. t and successfully overcome ebola, to have the kind of medical care and science to make sure that they eliminated ebola in nigeria even though one of the first cases was in nigeria by way of someone traveling to nigeria. but of course we have faced a crisis, not of the makings of the nigerian people but in the northern state, unfortunately, through the misunderstandings and the horrors of believing but not only believing but evidenced that the resources of nigeria did not reach the northern state. isis was able to root its evilness and of course it has been in nigeria for a period of time. however, the acts of boko haram came to our attention with the taking of 165-plus girls and
boys that we all know in terms of the tragedy of taking the girls. can i get two minutes? mr. engel: yes, i yield the gentlewoman an additional two minutes. ms. jackson lee: i thank the gentleman. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. jackson lee: and we began this campaign of bringing the girls back. in the spring of 2014, i led a bipartisan delegation to the state and met with families whose girls had been taken and whose girls were still taken. i met with jubilee an organization that saved some of the girls and are educating them. this resolution is particularly important because it tracks the legislation i offered, h.res. 143, and condemning the cowardly acts of what has occurred through boko haram, particularly in the town of baga, where it's alleged that thousands were killed. and it also focuses on the nigerian election where we're asking that elections pending this weekend will be held expeditiously and safely. and i want to mention that we
understand that boko haram is a heinous, evil group that kills children and men and women and innocent persons and burns down villages and intimidates people who just want democracy and an opportunity to live. that means these elections are crucial and those who stand for election, they must stand for democracy and the ending of the siege of boko haram in whatever way it can be. let me express my gratefulness of the african union of which i raised a question with them led by chad and nigeria and other countries to fight off the siege of boko haram. but let me be very clear that boko haram wants to be associated with isis. they want to continue to be heinous and evil and dangerous, and they must be weeded out in the continent -- and the continent of africa must stand with them. i do want to acknowledge there has been a victims fund set up and it's important for the government of nigeria to fund that victims fund and use that victims fund for the broken families and broken children. and we know that boko haram has caused the death of over 9,000 persons. this resolution asks for the
recognition of the dangers of boko haram and the elimination of boko haram and the safety and security of a strong election. mr. speaker, as i close let me simply say i urge the candidates to do and to stand for peaceful elections. i urge the people to exercise their right to vote. i urge the international community to continue to promote and have a safe and free election. i urge the winner to bring the people together and to stop this horrible siege. again, i thank my colleagues for yielding. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's time has expired. ms. jackson lee: support the resolution h.res. 53. i yield back. i thank the speaker very much. mr. royce: reserve the right to close mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. engel: thank you, mr. speaker. it's now my great pleasure to yield five minutes to the author of this resolution, the gentlewoman from illinois, ms. robin kelly. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. kelly: thank you, mr. speaker. i want to thank chairman royce and ranking member engel for their bipartisan leadership in
helping bring the attention of congress to the vial acts of the terror group dvile acts of the truer group boko haram. the international community was told that a mask grave was uncovered in boko haram formerly held territory in northern nigeria. america will never tolerate terrorism and this congress will never abide terrorists. despite their beliefs, a few things about boko haram are quite clear to the world. the acts are cowardly. he remains a man who fears the power of the people of nigeria a man afraid of the promise and potential of girls who are educated and whose minds will change the world. history will not celebrate boko haram because they are on the wrong side of it. they have mistaken cowardess for courage and their crimes against innocent men, women and children cannot be forgiven. it has been 10 months since the
world demanded that boko haram bring back the 200 school girls they kidnapped because they wanted to be educated. they defied these calls. boko haram has murdered scores of innocent nigerians, an estimated 17,000 since 2010. and this month we received the news they have sworn allegiance to isis. i, like so many across the world, was outraged at the brutality and senselessness of boko haram's crimes. victimizing innocent men, women and children for perverse ideological gain will never be tolerated or treated as just by the international community. with our vote today, this committee and this congress can affirm that we stand for the human rights, dignity and security of the nigerian people, that we will not tolerate a world in which boko haram or any terrorist organization can slaughter innocent civilians, that we respect the right of women to be educated without the threat of violence, and that we
support free and fair elections, free of suppression and intimidation. we say this positively on this house floor, and we stand today with the force and confidence that is way stronger than groups as the likes of boko haram. i thank chairman royce and ranking member engel congresswoman frederica wilson for her constant leadership on this issue, congressman will hurd from texas who came across to lend his support on this resolution and for all the other members who stood out and spoke out against the cowardly acts of boko haram and isis. i to pass this important resolution, and with that i yield back the balance of my time. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields. . the gentleman from california is recognized. . the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. royce: thank you mr. speaker. just in conclusion, we heard the testimony of deborah peters, a young girl from northern nigeria, in our committee. and she survived, but she was tied to the body of her father and her brothers who were
massacred by boko haram. she came to tell us about what it was like, her girlfriends or her schoolmates, of course, have never been returned. and her chilling account of the practices committed as that village was decimated. decimated is not the right word. as that village was eliminated. i mean we're talking about communities here villages, in which there's a handful of survivors when boko haram come through. young people like deborah, who are left with a world shattered, with their families massacred in her case in fronlts of her very eyes -- in front of her very eyes. now, as this country of nigeria prepares for elections, this insurgency that's burning in the north is creating a huge problem. u.s. support for the africa
union force that is making some gains, stomping out boko haram's violent march, has got to be stepped up. the region's stability depends on it. in the meantime, i just want to say that the presidential election in nigeria's going to be critical. not just for nigeria, but for the region. nigeria has the largest population, largest economy. the outcome could have far-reaching impact, so this resolution puts the house's views on record. i thank ms. kelly for that. it spells out the need for a nonviolent, free and fair election. and not only do i thank her for drafting this resolution but i thank her and eliot engel and chris smith and all our committee members who have been focused on nigeria and boko haram, and it's a necessity that we devote more time and energy to this mission of trying to figure out how we can
bring support to the nigerian military and their effort to suppress boko haram. i yield back the balance of my time, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. engel: thank you mr. speaker. i'm going to close. i would like to once again thank congresswoman kelly certainly chairman royce, along with other members who have worked on this issue. i mentioned frederica wilson. for helping to highlight the major challenges facing nigeria today. nigeria's a critical ally of the united states and congress must stay strongly engaged on these key issues of democracy and security pertaining to nigeria. and lastly, let me thank the leadership for moving this resolution to the floor in a timely manner, before the upcoming election in nigeria. i yield back the balance of my time. i urge a yes vote. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time.
the question is, will the house suspend the rules and agree to house resolution 53, as amended. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended the resolution is agreed to and, without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. without objection, the title is amended. pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1, the chair declares the house in recess until approximately 4:30 p.m. today.
>> thank you for joining us. this is a great way to start a week. it doesn't get any better than when you have the chairman of the armed services committee saying he wants to kick off a week of discussion and have it here, so i'm pretty happy this morning. i want to say thanks to chairman thornberry for doing this today but also for becoming such an important leader at this time. we were just chatting when we were waiting for everybody to gather. probably not been a time when the country and the congress faces more complex issues, security issues, than now. and honestly the country's
fatigued about the military. i mean, we've had 12 years of wars and there are an awful lot of americans that just want to forget it. they just don't want to think about it. but the point of genuine national leadership is to bring issues of long-term significance to the public debate so that we don't ignore this. this is a very important time. we're having a huge debate in the congress right now about the budgets and how much money we should be spenting on -- spending on national defense. i think chairman thornberry, i know this is his view, that the reason he's pushing so hard on the question of acquisition reform is because if we're going to ask more money from the american public for defense, they want to know that the money they were already spending is being well spent. and i think we just have have to honestly say we've got a lot of reform that we need to bring to the defense department, to
validate our request for a stronger budget. and we do need a stronger budget. i don't know how many of you feel comfortable every night when you look at the daily news, but i don't. to think that we are drifting without a strategic plan for our long-term defense posture at a time like this is genuinely scary. now, the chairman has spent the last two months taking the committee down deep to understand the risks and the threats we face all over. i think it's a tremendous foundation for the markup that's coming, but also for the next two years. today he's going to spend some time talking with us about acquisition reform. it is a crucial and central part of his overall strategy and agenda. i think we're very fortunate to have a man of his character and his leadership perspective leading the committee at this time. so would you please, with your applause welcome chairman mac
thornberry. [applause] mr. thornberry: thank you, doctor. i appreciate those kind words and i appreciate the chance to be back at csis and also everything that you and this organization does to help inform and educate and guide many of us, as we try to think our way through the national security challenges that we face. you know how when you're on an airplane they're about to close the boarding door and somebody says, if you're not going to dallas, this is it's time to get off? i'm kind of thinking that anybody who is here who is thinking this is a texan about to announce something about the presidency, you're in the wrong place. [laughter] there's another speech that you may have a chance to get to if
you run. it's ok to slip out the back. i was here in november, 2013 to launch a defense reform project that former chairman buck mckeon had asked me to work on. so i thought it made sense to come back here to unveil the first installment of where we are. when i was here before, i mentioned that nobody that i'd run into thought that everything at the pentagon was going fine. what i more frequently got was a reaction that, an eye-rolling reaction that, oh, yeah, y'all are going to try that again, it's not going to make much of a difference. and it's absolutely true that change is hard especially for a military. which brings me to a subject of vital importance which is trousers. now, when you talk about
defense reform, you probably think about fighters, not fabric. but in 1912, just before world war i, trousers were heavy on the mind of the french ministry of defense. see, the british had learned from the war that having those bright red coats on tended to make them more of a target. so they switched to khaki. the french by comparison still wore blue coats and bright red trousers. the french minister of war saw an advantage of being slightly less visible on the battlefield and sought to institute the same reform that the british had taken on, but a general way to describe the debate would be to say that the french have always held a high regard for fashion. so, taking away trousers would be, as a president bushan newspaper wrote contrary to french taste and military function and of course they put taste before function. one former general even took to
a particle meantry hearing -- parliamentary hearing, screaming that -- to ministers that they would never eliminate our red trousers. well, later on, after a bloody conflict, the french minister of war wrote that the blind and imby sile attachment to the most visible of all colors was to have cruel consequences. so far we've been fortunate enough not to have had a general scream about the color of military pants in one of our committee hearings. but i do think the french experience is instructive and as we all know their reluctance to change in the next war was to have even more serious consequences for their nation. militaries are tradition albie nature. it's part of their strength -- traditional by nature. it's part of their strength. it means that change, even necessary change, can be slow and hard. as the doctor just referenced, i think one of the reasons that
military reform is necessary for us is that under any budget scenario resources are tight and we have to make sure that we get more value out of the money we spend. we have to show our colleagues on the hill and the taxpayers that we're carefully overseeing how their money is used. but i believe in even -- an even more critical reason for reform is the need for agility. as the doctor again just referenced, we've had witnesses over the last two months in congress testify that we face a wider array of national security challenges now than at any point, certainly since world war i, and maybe in the history of the country. we know from the headlines that the threats to our safety and well-being are multiplying and we know from the polls that the public is pretty uneasy about it. just think for a second, if you will, about what's happened in the last 16 months since i was here to start this reform probably.
china is pushing out its territory, even building islands on the south china sea while our justice department has indicted p.l.a. members over their cyberactivities. now, north korea's been busy in cyber as well but they shoot off a few missles from time to time just to keep everybody on edge. u.s. military was sent to africa as the first response to the ebola epidemic and the national guard in texas was sent to our border to help cope with tens of thousands of unaccompanied minors that were flooding in from central america. . threatening the peace of europe and post-world war ii stability and putin won't stop talking about where to put his nukes. they have shot from copen haguen, brussels and marchries, across africa and south asia in
malls, museums, grocery stores and even schools. that's not to overlook the success of isis drawing thousands of foreign fighters, humiliating the iraqi army. nor the fall of the government of yemen, the source of the most serious threats to our homeland over the last few years as iran spreads its influence throughout the middle east and maybe a threshold nuclear state with the blessing of the international community setting off a nuclear arms race in the middle east. old problems haven't gone away from afghanistan pakistan, somalia and palestinians where there was a seven-week summer offensive in gaza. several airliners got shot down with hundreds of people dying. in short, it has been a difficult time in the last year or so.
and the truth is nobody can see what is going to happen but the velocity of change is accelerating. the question is how well do we or how well can we respond. so to help us be better prepared for a world of proliferating threats, including those we can't predict, we need to have reforms in at least three areas, one is personnel to ensure that we can attract and keep the top quality folks who serve our country. and we are looking at the military retirement modernization and i suspect we will try to do that. organization and overhead, that classic tooth-to-tail ratio as the end strength of the services has declined the bureaucracy in
the pentagon and elsewhere has stayed as they say robust. so we need to streamline the bureaucracy partly to save money but partly to streamline the process because every office has a right to make their presence known and there is a good chance we can work with secretary carter. but the third area of reform, is improving the way we acquire goods and services. the definitive edge that our military enjoys comes from two sources, our people and technology and if we use our technological edge, our troops will lose as well. our military has got to be both strong and agile and people are going to get tired of me talking about the importance of agillity. the army that can outmaneuver
its foes wins and and why the germans valued their formations. russia and china are trying to outflank us using technology whether it is using missiles or building radar that can detect stealth. the only defense is to adapt quicker than they do. i don't want to see america outflanked. the hearings and briefings we have had this year point to an eroding technological superiority. several factors have contributed to thatting clueding the general pace of change, our broken budget process and acquisition process where we have a hard time getting modern technology fielded in a timely way. last week when secretary carter testified in front of our committee for the first time as secretary, i pulled off my shelf, a book that he had edited
and partially written from 15 years before. as you can imagine it can be a cruel thing to do to somebody to cloak their own words to them. but in this case, i think he was right and i think he is still right because what he wrote, is to maintain a technological edge we have to align our procurement system with market forces and we have to be the fastest sbriggetr integrator of commercial technology into defense systems. we have moved further away from those goals rather than closer to them over the last 15 years. one of the many lessons i learned from dr. hamre is our unique government-industry partnership in the united states has been one of the key factors in our success to becoming and staying a world leader. it is a fundamental strength but also been a persistent problem.
since i was last year 16 months ago, i have spent the time listening and hasn't just been me. many of our committee members on both sides of the aisle, especially ranking member adam smith have listened, read and stud yesterday about past reform efforts and how well they have succeeded or not. we have listened to folks in the pentagon such as the under secretary and the service chiefs. we have listened to industry including trade association companies and individuals and people who have spent years studying the acquisition process . we have listened to former military and pentagon officials and industry officials. we have listened to people working in the system now managing programs trying their best to get capability delivered
on time and on budget and we have consulted with people completely removed fl the defense acquisition system to learn about best practices that could be incorporated into the system. i know this is shocking, but we have listened to each other, because there are members of congress and staff that have a tremendous wealth of experience and expertise in these areas and we have taken that input and compiled the data base with more than 1,000 specific proposals some of which as you can imagine better than others, more realistic than others, but it's a data base we can continue to mine for years to come. despite the fact that there are a lot of smart well-intentioned people in this field, i don't think anyone has all the answers or to understand all of the consequences to any particular change. so on wednesday of this week, i'm going to introduce in the
house a bill that will serve as a discussion draft for the first traunch of legislative proposals to improve our acquisition systems. folks will have a month to do it because our full committee markup of the next year's national defense authorization act will be april 29. so there is a month to make comments. in offering this legislation, i expect at least two reactions, one is it doesn't go far enough. and you know what? that is exactly right. it isn't enough and doesn't try to be enough, but it's a start. and it's a start that tries to focus on the basics of the acquisition process. our people the strategy and the decision-making chain to buy goods and services.
another reaction is well, it does too much. well, i don't think that's right, but that's why i want to put it out there. my first rule is the doctors do know harm. this is the best application i know of that overused phrase of trying to fix the airplane engine while the airplane is in flight. this plane cannot go off duty and land for several months while we fix the engine. it has to keep flying while we make improvements. but if we don't try to fix the engine, it's not going to be able to defend the country. so in the proposal that i'm going to introduce, i really break down the changes into four categories people, acquisition strategy streamline the chain of command and thin out the regulations and paperwork and let me give you a brief summary of each of those. it starts with people. that's our most valuable
resource in acquisition. we would remove some of the obstacles that make it more difficult for top military talent to serve in acquisition. and we make permanent the defense acquisition work force development fund to help to make sure it can be used more effectively. we would require training on the commercial market, including commercial market research to help close that gap between industry and government. to be the world's fastest incorporator of commercial technology that there has to be a lot of interaction between industry and government. and so we require there to be mandatory ethics training on that acquisition-related interaction so it's clear what you can and cannot do. secondly on acquisition strategy we require every program start out with an acquisition strategy.
it has to be done in writing and upfront and dated as needed. this strategy would consolidate at least six different requirements into that upfront strategy and has to include what is the most appropriate type of contract for this particular acquisition. this is another area where one size clearly does not fit all. it has to consider whether multi-year is appropriate and include risk mitigation strategies just like commandants have to have war plans, and we need to have it for our plan. and it has to consider incentives. so for example, one of the things we want to consider is shared savings on service contracts, which are not currently allowed. and the third area, we want to simplify the chain of command tore acquisition decisions.
so a number of requirements on milestone a and milestone a are going to move from a legal certification to just a decision. and as a recovering lawyer, i can attest that the fewer lawyers that are involved in the process, the smoother it's probably going to go. one of the reasons i think we have gotten so bogged down in bureaucracy is we have tried to paperwork our way all of the risks. not only does that never work, it slows everything down and creates a situation where no one is responsible or accountable for the success or failure of a program. this will raise the dollar thresholds on a number of authorities such as simplified acquisition to make it easier for people to get things done. and we make it clear that the role of the testing community is to test and advise, not to make
decisions. fourth, we thin out regulations and get rid of paperwork. in fact, there are going to be dozens of reporting requirements that are going to be eliminated. over and over again, i hear that program managers and industry are forced to manage the process rather than manage the program. g.a.o. came out with a report that evaluates the usefulness of a bunch of these certifications that apply to every single program. some are useful, some you won't be surprised to learn are not. so for example, several years ago, congress was concerned that several programs were not paying proper attention to corrosion resistance. what got interpret d by the bureaucracy was that every program had to have a corrosion prevention report which had to be staffed and written before that program could proceed. it even applied to computer
software, not generally known as a high-corrosion risk. now, in truth is, d.o.d. has taken some steps to fix this issue, but this is an example of how the system has gotten so bogged down. the best summary of the current system that i heard over the last 16 months was by one of the leaders working in the system every day. the current system is like a bus, where the driver is the program manager and he or she is responsible for getting that bus or that program to a certain place on time and on budget. yet, the bus is full of passengers and every passenger has their own steering wheel and their own brake. so that makes the driver's job pretty hard. and when the bus ends up in the ditch as too often happens, then all those passengers scatter
away and climb on another bus. the driver is left there trying to figure out out how to get out of the ditch and back on the road. we need to eliminate those steering wheels and brakes and then we can hold that driver accountable for getting the bus where it needs to be on time and on budget. that's what i hope these proposals move us toward. finally, let me just mention three other things. there's more to the proposal than i have outlined here in addition to the changes in law. we are going to make public this week a separate document that is draft report language. and that includes several studies and markers for future legislation. so for example, one area where we need to do a lot more work is in service contracts. but we are having trouble to get
the information we need to look at that, so we're requiring the department provide us additional information in that area. and that will help guide our steps in the future. second point is part of improving the acquisition process involves changing the way congress operates. we are also pretty tied to tradition and often, difficult to change. but our military cannot be acknowledge i will without congress taking steps and encourage that agillity. third, i agree with those who argue we have the unique opportunity now to make needed reforms. few secretaries of defense know the pentagon -- have known the pentagon better than secretary carter. he along with the service secretaries and the joint chiefs are all committed to reform. they understand that it's essential. that commitment is strong on the
hill as well. chairman mccain and i agree that reform must be one of our top priorities and we have excellent partners in that effort with senator reed and adam smith. many others on our committees are involved as well on a bipartisan basis. several long-term observers have pointed out to me that never before have all the stars been so favorably aligned where we have the necessity of reform in key positions and commitment to make it happen. the point is, we can't waste this opportunity. as long as i'm privileged to hold this job, this is for the sake of ensuring that our military is prepared as possible for the wide array of threats we face today and the challenges that confront us tomorrow. we will never get all the way there, but we have to move steadily closer to a department
of defense that is efficient, effective and accountable with military capability that is strong and agile. the impet us of existing plans is always stronger than the impulse to change. we have to overcome that and we have to set aside our skepticism. we cannot allow blind aattachments or inertia to cause our men and women to suffer cruel events. if we are smart and persistent, we can say on top. for there is much in our country and around the world that depends on whether we are successful. thanks. [applause]
host: thanks for coming back to csis and great privilege to host you and listen to this preview. it's very exciting. i liked what i heard and i think a lot of others did too. for the benefit of the audience. i'm andrew hunter, director of the defense initiative and had the privilege of working in the past for the house armed services on acquisition reform. mr. thornberry: we shouldn't have let you get away. mr. hunter: i didn't go too far and this is an issue we are tracking closely. i want to ask you a few questions and once you had the opportunity to respond to that we'll open it up to the group here. we have folks with microphones that will come around.
let me start out by -- start at the end, i'm curious as to what you see as the ideal or successful outcome for this effort both in terms of this year's activity and i think you have indicated in the past that this is not a one and done exercise. if you could speak about what does success look like for this year and what might success look like over a five and 10-year type of a time frame. mr. thornberry: this is not a one-year effort. and if you try you are probably going to make more mistakes than help. so this is just the beginning. and what we are trying to do at the beginning is deal with some of the fundamentals. i talked about the essential nature of the acquisition work force and some tools to help
improve that. the acquisition strategy and the chain of command in making decisions about acquisitions, which i think is fundamental. that's where we start. what i hope, if all of this is enacted and all of this works out perfectly, what i hope is that we have a more streamline change of command and more accountability that goes with that chain of command. again, this is never a destination that you reach. this is just trying to swing back the other way from that pendulum that has gone so far. mr. hunter: you mentioned senator mccain and his support for this and that also matches obviously my understanding and his public reputation, but the senate doesn't always follow the will always of one person and not clear that it follows the
will of even the senators at most points in time. but how do you see this playing out in the senate? how does the picture look to you on that side? mr. thornberry: the key place to start is, i think senator mccain is just as committed to this as we are in the house. so it will be a major part of his efforts. we have talked about this from day one when each of us were chosen for these positions and we are coordinating closely every step of the way. you are right. doesn't mean the senate committee is going to have the same language as the house committee. certainly both of us will go to our respective floors, various amendments come and go, and so we'll have to reconcile all that. but i think there is a tremendous amount of common perspective here and that's part of the reason i'm persuaded by people who say this is fairly
rare especially those skeptics who said i have heard this before, it is fairly rare to have that commitment in the senate and house and the department and you really do have it this time and it takes that, in order to make the changes, not just at a superficial level but in a deeper cultural level. but people who work in the system are hungry for that. that certainly came across to me in the meetings i had with program managers inside government, industry people. people want to do things. they don't want to fill out useless reports. and so much of their time, effort and money is spent on paperwork these days. mr. hunter: i like the way you framed it, the importance of agill ti in the system. and and certainly a lot of folks have commented and we have been looking at it here how defense
technology and commercial technology and interplay between the two is going to make change. you mentioned the pace of change and just sort of the nature of where technology development is happening, both in terms of commercial versus defense and a much more global exercise. so as you look down the road, how do you see that changing the way the acquisition system needs to operate, both in terms of the laws that you are working on, but you mentioned the regulations? well, i think it is just fundamental because we cannot take 20 years to field a new airplane with technology moving at this speed. and so that's why streamlining the system is absolutely essential. and the point about commercial technology being where much of the innovation happens means --
in fewer instances can we start from scratch from the military developing the requirements and doing all of the work. there has to be that much greater cooperation and integration of commercial -- with military and that's part as i mentioned, part of the reasons that we have the proposals that we do. but i think your point gets to what i think -- part of what you got to change here is the culture and the incentives and a lot of people who work in the system have been criticized in the past say, for being too close to industry, so now they have the stand-offish sort of attitude. too often the current system rewards people who take the lowest bidder and we'll figure
out the rest of the stuff later. it's important for us to start with these fundamentals. the acquisition strategy where you do the work upfront and thinking through what do you need to have a successful acquisition here. and then streamline that chain of command so you can hold accountable the people who actually make the decisions without the other people having their own steering wheels and brakes. i think we are going to have to do that or else we really will be left behind in not having that technological edge that has been key to our success, at least since the end of world war ii. mr. hunter: you mentioned industry and the big focus and the partnership between industry. industry filled with very patriotic individuals who work hard on these problems but they
are responding to share holders who have expectations, which is reasonable. how do you see that dynamic in terms of incentives for not just the folks in industry but the share holders to make sure their incentives are outlined with what we are trying to do? mr. thornberry: i quoted from ash carter 15 years ago, we have to align our procurement process with market incentives, because if you are going crossways it's not going to work. and too often it may not be crossways, but they aren't going in the same direction. what that requires is that streamline process so you can have more accountability. but it also means more innovative sort of contract types. i mentioned shared savings on service contracts where if you win the contract and you can do it a little cheaper, you can keep part of the savings and the government keeps part of the
savings versus where too much of the time is now, you spend money in your account and if you don't it, you will get less. that's going the wrong direction. and so part of the reason i'm insistent this has to be a multi-year effort in order to really understand the incentives now and begin to change them, because that's what's going to change behavior, it's going to take time and a more streamlined accountable system is a key first step, but there are many more steps to go in order to have that alignment going in the right direction and be the fastest integrate -- integrator leader of technology but hopefully this is a positive step. mr. hunter: about time for
someone else to ask a question. could say your name and where you're from and microphone is headed your way. >> so i'm a professor from george washington university. it's wonderful to hear you talk about things like incentives and you acknowledge some of the difficulties for change. but i just want to say before i get to my question that i think when you talk about reducing the bureaucracy, any focus you have on reducing the coast drivers they would have direct effect on the bottom line. don't lose sight of the fact that every one of those you eliminate has direct benefit to the government. one of the things dave did before he left csis talked about the fact since the economy tightened up, the single biggest change has been the reduction in money spent on research and development and the most
dramatic reduction has been in independent research and development. you talk about maintaining technical superiority. thoorn thorn i share that concern completely as budgets are tight. you have to pay the fuel bills and you have to send the paychecks out and what gets cut is the r&d and broken budget process, what does industry see they see disfunction and tend to put less of their own money into it. as we evaluate the president's budget proposal and move toward our own defense authorization bill, i think we will look at some key technologies that are -- [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] [captioning performed by national captioning institute]
pearce, to suspend the rules and pass h.r. 360 as amended on which the yeas and nays are ordered. the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 360, a bill to re-authorize the native american housing assistance and self-determination act of 1996 and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill as amended? members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a 15-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representiv. any usofhelod-caiod coverage of the house proceedings for political or commerci purposes is expressly prohibited by
members clear the well and please take your seats. the house will be in order. the chair would ask all present to rise for the purpose of a moment of silence. the chair asks that the house now observe a moment of silence in remembrance of our brave men and women who have given their lives in the service of our nation in iraq and afghanistan and all of those who serve in
the armed forces, and their families. without objection, five-minute voting will continue. the unfinished business is vote on the motion of the the gentlewoman from florida, ms. ros-lehtinen, to suspend the rules and agree to house resolution 162 as amended on which yeas and nays are ordered. the clerk will report the title of the title of the resolution. the clerk: house resolution 162. resolution calling on the president to provide military
assistance to ukraine. the speaker pro tempore: will the house suspend the rules and agree to the resolution as amended. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representis. any usef e osecaptioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commerci purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]
. the chair will entertain requests for one-minute speeches. ms. foxx: the house is not in order. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. please take your conversations outside the floor. the house will be in order. without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. speaker. we have had -- we have all had hands-on experience balancing the budget. shuffling through bills and pay stubs and we know the feeling. balancing our budget isn't just a priority but a requirement. we must view the budget in the same way. we look forward to a stronger america. our budget not only balances in
less than 10 years it does so without raising taxes. it places our country on a path to pay off the overwhelming debt and create a simpler tax code to ensure we continue to flourish. the voices may be louder, but the same rules apply. it provides american families with the security they deserve. i yield back, and mr. speaker, the house is still not in order. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from new york seek recognition? without objection the gentlewoman from new york is recognized for one minute. mrs. maloney: mr. speaker, we aapproaching the one-year
anniversary of the kidnapping of nigerian girls. since their abduction almost every week has brought fresh reports of outrages and slaughters by the terrorists, but only silence about the girls. there have been some unconfirmed reports that some of the girls have been taken across nigeria's borders and some have died from snake bites and illness. the there was a challenge to speak up and put an end to boko haram. that's a good start, but let's call on all of the leaders of africa to unite, to rid their government and end their continent of boko haram. and as one to do everything in their power to bring back our girls. let's reunite them with their families and end this horror and
let's bring back our girls. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from minnesota seek recognition? >> permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: wocks. >> i rise today in honor of jim smith the long time coach of st. johns university basketball team. coach smith just completed his 51 season as the wingest college basketball coach at any level in minnesota history. he is ranked 14th with a career record of 786 wins and 556 losses. his legacy lives beyond the statistics on the court and in the community. coach smith is known for being inspiring, competitive and one of the friendliest person. he leaves behind big shoes to
fill. enjoy your retirement. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from new york seek recognition? >> permission to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. clarke: mr. speaker, i rise today with a very heavy heart. this weekend, my district experienced an unspeakable loss one of our families in brooklyn lost seven of its children to a horrific fire. and i wanted to come to the floor to extend our condolences to the family where mother and daughter are currently are hospitalized and wishing them a speedy and healthy recovery and to the extended community, to
say that we all mourn in the loss of these children and that we will do everything we with going forward to impress upon the community, those with large families, the importance of fire safety that we make sure that keep our loved ones safe by having fire detectors on every floors of our homes and fire extinguishers. and with that, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? without objection, the gentleman from texas is recognized for one minute. mr. poe: mr. speaker, my mother makes wonderful double chocolate brownies. as a kid i would take them to school and the p.t.a. would sell them in the school bake sale to sell money for projects like uniforms for the school band and cheerleaders. when our four kids were in school, they'd take brownies for school bake sales as well.
now my grandkids can still use their great-grandmother's brownie recipe for school bake sales. but warning mr. speaker. the federal food police are regulating school bake sales. now the government wants to control and in some cases prohibit school bake sales in the name of making cades -- kids healthier. no more home-made cupcakes unless they meet government calorie, sugar and fat standards. not healthy, sayeth the bake sale police. the federal government is becoming the parent of america's kids. wheaks next? are they going to tell school kids what they can wear? parents and schools should decide whether to have bake sales or not. unk sammle sam doesn't know better. -- uncle sam doesn't know better. parents know better. that's just the way it is. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: occupy
ants of the gallery, we'd ask you to refrain from applauding. for what purpose does the gentleman from minnesota seek recognition? mr. paulsen: i'd ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute, revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman from minnesota is recognized for one minute. mr. paulsen: mr. speaker, today is the fifth anniversary of the president's new health dare law and it's apparent that the law has made it much more difficult for hardworking americans to have flex wblet their own health care choices -- flex wblet their own health care choices -- flexibility with their own health care choices. the new health care law prohibits someone from using their own money in their own health care saveings account or flexible spending account to purchase simple over-the-counter medications liked a vill or collar tin unless they fste doctor'prcptio this makes absolutely no sense. today i'm introducing the fami health care flexibility act tha will restore the ability for parents to take control of their own decisions when it comes to the care of their children in purchasinging over-the-counter medications
without a doctor's prescription. mr. speaker, instead of a top-down, one-size-fits-all centralized health care system, we need solutions that provide patients with greater value, more choices, and lower costs. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: thank you. the chair announces on behalf of the speaker and minority leader of the house of representatives, and the majority and minority leaders of the united states senate, their joint reappointment pursuant to section 301 of the congressional accountability act of 1995, as amended by public law of the following individuals on march 23, 2015, each to a two-year term on the board of directors of the office of compliance. the clerk: mr. allen v. friedman of los angeles, california. ms. susan s. rob fogele of rochester new york. ms. barbara childs wallace of ridgeland, mississippi.
the speaker pro tempore: the chair lays before the house the following personal requests. the clerk: leaves of absence requested for mr. danny davis of illinois for today. ms. granger of texas for today. and mr. hultgren of illinois for today. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the requests are granted. under the speaker's announced policy of january 6, 2015, the gentlewoman from illinois, ms. kelly, is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader. ms. kelly: first i would like to yield time to the gentleman from washington state congress wol delbene. -- congresswoman delbene. ms. delbene: i want to thank the gentlewoman for yielding. i rise today to honor, recognize and remember the events from one year ago, when lives in my district changed in a matter of seconds. part of a mountainside slid
into the steel haven neighborhood claiming 43 lives. numerous homes and damaging public infrastructure. the people of oso darington, arlington, the tribe and the tribe will never be the same. but i have great faith in these communities. the highway 530 -- 530 -- 530 mud slide was a disaster. even through such a painful tragedy, it's been inspiring to see how the community has come together, people doing everything they can to help each other. their response in the face of calamity has been incredible. i join these communities -- i joined these communities yesterday to honor the memories of those we lost and recognize everyone's efforts including the first responders who selflessly risked their lives to save others. recovery continues to be a slow, difficult process. but i'm confident that through our work together, we'll continue to get through these difficult times, stronger and
closer than ever. federal, state and local agencies like the federal emergency management agency, or fema, and the state department of transportation responded to calls for aid when our communities needed roads rebuilt, an extension for filing taxes help to get kids to school or to find new housing. i'll continue to push for resources until these communities are fully restored. but instead of simply sending aid after a disaster lawmakers need to do more to ensure that we fund programs and research efforts to prevent future natural disasters from becoming national tragedies. one thing that struck me most while spending time in these communities and with local emergency command centers was the spirit, currently and cooperation of everyone who pitched in to help. fema officials even commented that this was the first time they allowed locals to be so heavily involved in rescue efforts. they did so because the people of these communities brought
unique skills, experience and determination. for example, loggers understood how to use heavy machinery in a challenging environment with 40 feet of mud, rocks and trees. it was the first natural disaster where everyone federal and local, worked together so well. lawmakers in our nation's capital could learn a lot from the people of those communities. we too need to work together to ensure our communities are better prepared for natural disasters and landslides in particular. during this session of congress, i plan to introduce legislation that would standardize and share research and mapping methods across the country while increasing funding for research and hazard asassements in -- assessments in high-risk areas. determine a national strategy to increase public awareness of the risks associated with landslides and identify slide-prone areas. we must also create education programs and increase the rapid response efforts, because as
we all know too well, disasters strike with little warning. we will never forget those that were lost in the slide. and the incredible community that continues to be oh, so strong. thank you and i yield back. ms. kelly: mr. speaker, as we enter the final week of women's history month, the black caucus would like to use this hour to examine unique challenges that women face in america today. many of these experiences are shared across the socioeconomic spectrum and some are more specific to african-american women. the late poet and author, maya anglo, once said, each -- maya angelou, once said, each time a woman standing up for heffssm -- herself, she stands up for all women. there's much truth to these words. and our nation has been strengthened by women who have taken stands for their rights. but tonight the congressional
black caucus also stands up for millions of women across america. tonight we'll examine gender pay gaps, work force treatment family issues, health disparities and a host of other concerns women face in america. each women's history month, we recognize those pioneers who broke glass ceilings and paved the women for womens' rights and equality. abigail adams so he your honorer truth, harriette -- so he journaler truth, harriette -- sojourner truth, harriette tubman. ruth bader ginsburg and the honorable loretta lynch. still wees that we main for women. we must all continue the work needed to eliminate gender inequalities once and for all. 50 years after president john f. kennedy signed the equal pay act into law women continue to earn less than money -- than men.
women make only 78 cents for every $1 earned by men amounting to a yearly gap of $11,000 between full-time men and women. that $11,000 lost could purchase 9 more weeks of food or more than -- 9 more weeks of food or more -- 89 more weeks of food or more than one year of rent for a woman's family. for african-american women and latinas, the pay gap is even larger. african-american women on average earn only 64 cents and latinas on average earn only 55 cents for every $1 earned by white, non-hispanic men. nearly 2/3 of minimum wage workers are women. yet the minimum wage has not yet kept up with inflation over the last 45 years. the minimum wage now, using inflation adjustmented -- a-- inflation adjusted terms, minimum wage women are earning 30% lower than they were in 1968. these economic disparities are just a few of the issues facing women that we'll address
tonight. i want to thank the chairman of the c.b.c. the honorable g.k. butterfield for allowing us to address this important topic tonight. and now i will yield to the gentlelady from the great state of ohio, congresswoman beatty. mrs. beatty: beat thank you to -- mrs. beatty: thank you to my colleague, the gentlewoman from illinois, for leading us in tonight's special order. to address the unique challenges black women face. it is certainly fitting mr. speaker that we are discussing the contributions of women in our society during march. as we celebrate women's history month. let us acknowledge those who have sacrificed and led the charge in women's rights, vote ers' rights, civil rights -- voters' rights, civil rights and rights in this chamber. black women have consistently played a critical role in our
nation's history. in congress women like congresswoman cheryly chisholm first african-american female to serve in congress and to run for president of these united states congresswoman barbara jordan, first black woman in congress from the deep south. when i think of shirley chisholm, i remember the words that we still hear and say so often when we talk about women. unbought and unbossed. women like carol moseley braun became the first african-american female woman elected to the united states senate. patricia roberts harris, the first black woman to serve in a presidential cabinet and the first woman to hold two cabinet positions. the secretary of housing and urban development, and later to
serve as secretary of health and human services. and then from my great state of ohio, the seventh largest state in this nation stephanie tubbs jones. only to be followed by two women congresswoman marcia fudge, and myself, representing the third congressional district. even in the face of grave opposition and unequal treatment throughout our nation's history, black women have continued to stand strong and contribute to the well-being of their families and our country as a whole. women like the women who serve in the congressional black caucus. women like the women who serve in this chamber. women like the only female to serve as speaker of this house nancy pelosi. and yet, mr. speaker here we
are in 2015, and a black female leader is waiting to lead the critically important office of the united states attorney general. no one can say she's unqualified. no one can say she's inexperienced. no one can say she hasn't or didn't perform well, mr. speaker. just a couple weeks ago, eight hours of testimony, more than 900 questions answered, and yet she's left waiting. waiting longer than the previous combined times of the seven previous attorney generals. for 132 days mr. speaker ms. lynch has been waiting for a vote. mr. speaker, that's three seasons. in the fall, the senate failed to take up the nomination. in the winter, the senate dithered on her nomination. here we are, now in the spring
and waiting. mr. speaker, what is the senate waiting for? our nation needs an attorney general and holding this nomination hostage is senseless and reckless. i strongly urge the senate republican leadership to stop playing politics with the law enforcement and national security and vote confirmation of loretta lynch to serve as our next attorney general. . she is qualified and a proven leader with a great record at the department of justice brilliant and educated and experienced lawyer, twice before confirmed. it is well past time for the united states senate to move forward with this nomination with loretta linch, a plaque woman, a nominee for the united
states attorney germ and possibly another first in our history. and always as i like to say, firsts are never good unless there can be a second, third and a fourth. if we make this first happen as we have done in the past there can be other women standing here and sitting where you are sitting. i urge all the black women who have paved the way for each generation, for my granddaughter that she can know there are women who can stand up in this chamber and speak on this floor. this is what the congressional black caucus is about. every day, black women hold their families together as primary caregiver. and continue to preserve as
equal rights and pay equity health care and education, all priorities for me in this congress and for millions of women across this nation sm the pay gap is startling but it is real, because we know when women succeed, america succeeds. in ohio, and across the nation women make 77 cents to every one dollar of white men. and for african-american women is 66 cents dollars. five years ago today, president obama signed affordable care act into law. our nation took a giant step, a giant leap toward saving lives, a right for all, not just for privileged few. the affordable care act has important implications for black
women, as they face long standing and persistent disparities in health care and health. i would like to thank my colleague, the congresswoman from illinois, for bringing for the this topic and i would like to thank all the members of the congressional black caucus for hosting this special order hour. there are countless black women whose names may not appear prominently in our history books who may not appear prominently on this floor women, like my 1-year-old mother in dayton ohio, who reared four daughters and told us and taught us about the value of standing up for what you believe in. women who won't appear in our history books, but who sweat in blood and strength, are would
haven into our national identity. i honor all of these women. they continue to inform me and inform my sense of pride and dignity as an american. and i'm going to end with the same quote that my friend and colleague started with, a quote by the late maya agelou. a woman stands up without claiming it, mr. speaker, as i stand today, she stands up for all women. i thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: thank you migrate friend from the great state. ms. kelly: your points are so pertinent. despite the gains we have made, we still have a long way to go. i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and stepped their remarks and
include extraneous remarks on my special order. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. without objection. ms. kelly: i introduce my colleague congressman coalman. mrs. coleman: i thank my colleague from illinois for providing this opportunity for me to share with you this evening and also am honored to join congressional black caucus colleagues on the floor and i'm particularly grateful to our chairman chairman butterfield. the women who have shaped this nation are important in this body because for the first time fighting for working families
and fighting for better wages and better education and the many other policies that will make our nation stronger and our families healthier. i'm horpped to be the first african-american woman to represent the state of new jersey in congress and the only woman in this congregs. but this is 2015 and we shouldn't still be speaking about first and only when it comes to women. there may be 104 of us but and we make up more than half of the pop lation. women across this country earn 78 cents and we have heard that african-american women earn less than this. women are questioned about
fields. a culture that doubts that women are capable of making choices about their own health without the interference from lawmakers who are in the majority are men. women's history month is about celebrating trailbraisers but honoring the strength of all women and we are just as capable as men and just as ready to bring something to the table. we just celebrated the 50th anniversary of the marches from selma to montgomery and we paid tribute to the leaders who risked their lives on the bridge that day. most connect their events. but one was the first to bring the organizers and fewer know,
who paid the ultimate price of joining the march after she saw men and women brutalized because of the color of the skin. i mentioned those because when it comes down to it, women have been leading to generations. i join my colleagues in paying whomage to a long history of amazing women, but i ask every member of this body to make history, what are we doing to make history a and what are we doing to make the phrase, the first woman of history an unnecessary question. when we look at the opportunities before us, we know, mr. speaker, that it is now that we have the opportunity to make history right now. we have the opportunity to make history with the first woman and african-american, u.s. attorney
general of this great country and we have the opportunity to say there has been a woman elected president of the united states. thank you, and i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: thank you to the great lady of new jersey. ms. clarke: -- committee ms. kelly: many of these women have had careers from president roosevelt secretary of labor, to the current secretary and national security adviser. women like these have a proud and established record of providing wise and exciting counsel. right now the obama administration is awaiting senate confirmation for a woman
who is qualified. our chief's law enforcement officer. the first woman was to hold was this janet reno. she promoted civil liberties. the second woman, but not the last woman to hold the position of attorney general will be loretta lynch. once confirmed, she will make history being the first african- american woman to seve as attorney general. she will join secretary rice and alexis herman and patricia roberts. served as secretary of housing and urban development. loretta lynch as we know is
qualified to be attorney general, a graduate of harvad university. ms. lynch has had a distinguished career and known for her skills and her passion for the law. ms. lynch serves the role atal critical point. as u.s. attorney for the eastern district of new york, she serves for brooklyn queens, long island and staten island. i turn the microphone over to congressman jeffries. mr. jeffries: i thank my colleague for presiding over this c.b.c. special order this opportunity for members of the congressional black caucus to talk to the people on matters of
great importance and certainly members of the congressional black caucus recognize the intelligence, the importance of african-american women in the african-american experience in this country and the american experience consistently, they have fought hard to bring it to life, to continue the march, to perfect a more perfect union. i think more the role of harriet tubman, that bold fearless woman who managed to free herself from the bond acknowledge of slavery and make it to the north and then decided at great sacrifice to her own potential well-being to go back down south an
additional 169 times, freeing more than 200 black slaves. i find it fascinating when harriet tubman who spent her final years in new york, when asked about her heroics was dismissive. she said i could have freed more if they only knew that they were slaves. i think harriet tubman gave us words of wisdom that conserve many communities that are struggling to deal with economic injustice and said i could have freed more if they only knew they were slaves. folks are trapped in their own circumstances because they have a mindset. harriet tubman helped to perfect
our democracy that was mentioned by some of our distinguished colleagues and contributions that were made burg the civil rights struggle and many african-american women who wouldn't always get the credit, but played a leading role in the civil rights movement designed again to perfect democracy dealing with jim crow and racial segregation in the south and in many parts of this country. one said i'm sick and tired of being sick and tired when asked why she stepped forward at great sacrifice to herself. i think there is still a lot of americans in many parts of this country when it comes to the
prison industrial complex when it comes to the problem of police excessive use and income and inequality and would draw inspiration from the words of being sick and tired of being sick and tired. now i also stand here today as someone who proudly represents the 8th congressional district in new york, a district that in part was represented by the honorable shirley chisholm and others stand on her shoulders, she was the first african-american women elected to the house of representatives in 1968. i'm proud to represent part of the district that she once served. she was one of brooklyn's gifts.
but this country and in fact, to the world. and i'm struggling today because brooklyn is prepared to share some of our tremendous human capital and wealth with this great country in the form of loretta lynch by the way of north carolina. . i haven't been able to figure out what the holdup is. why it's so difficult for senate republicans and for the majority simply to hold a vote so we can confirm loretta lynch as the nation's chief law enforcement executive. we've heard every excuse in the book as to why loretta lynch is twisting in the wind. and none of them are legitimate. i don't want loretta lynch to be confirmed because she'd be the first african-american woman to serve as our nation's
attorney general. leading the department of justice. i want her confirmed because she's the best qualified person for the job. don't trust me. rudolph giuliani of all people, the great law and order mayor of new york city former federal prosecutor, u.s. attorney for the southern district of new york. and many, many others, democrats republicans, people from the north, the south, the east and the west have all said, loretta limpling is a talented -- lynch is a talented law enforcement professional and right person for the job at this particular point in time. what in the world is the holdup? i can't figure it out. is it a problem with her personal background? let's see. she's the daughter of a school librarian and a baptist
preacher. that can't be the issue. what's the holdup? is there a problem with her legal education? i don't think so. she's a graduate of harvard law school. what's the problem? does she not have enough law enforcement experience? she's practically a career federal prosecutor. who clearly has the ability to allow the law and the facts to dictate her decision making process. is there an issue that she hasn't been adequately vetted? well, she's actually been unanimously confirmed by the united states senate not once, but twice, to be the u.s. attorney for the eastern district of new york. i think she's been vetted.
well, is it that the senate doesn't have the ability to walk and chew gum at the same time? as mitch mcconnell indicated. week of got to deal with other matters -- we've got to deal with other matters. other matters? i don't get it. she's been waiting longer than the five previous attorney general nominees since being voted out of the judiciary committee combined. we need all hands on deck. there are terrorists all across the world who want to strike the united states of america. and we're holding up chief law enforcement -- a chief law enforcement officer of this country? and then we hear the excuse well, we don't like her position on the president's executive action on immigration. you don't like her position? she's the president's nominee. what position do you expect her to have? and that's not even a
legitimate argument. because you had no problem confirming ash carter to be the secretary of the department of defense and my good friends on the other side of the aisle and the other side of the capitol are obsessing about two things. the president's executive action on immigration, as well as the president's negotiations with iran, along with or as part of the p-5-plus-1. ash carter presumably supports those negotiations. you can't stand him. so much so that you even wrote to the iranian mullahs. i mean, that just shocked the conscience of the american people. you can't stand the iranian negotiations, but you didn't hold up ash carter's nomination. so for the life of me i'm trying to go through a process
of elimination to figure out what is the reason that you've held up loretta lynch's nomination? what's the reason? why are we waiting so long? you have to come up with a good answer to the fact that she's being treated like a second class citizen. and unfortunately, as we go down the check list of excuses that you've provided, not a single one of them hold up. so i'm just hopeful over the next couple of days, as we bring women's history month to a close that you'll have the decency to do what's right for the american people and allow loretta lynch to have an up or down vote so we can finally allow democracy to flourish in
what allegely is supposed to be the world's greatest deliberative body, allow democracy to flourish, give loretta lynch a vote so we can get back to doing the real business of the american people. and i yield back to my good friend, ms. kelly. ms. kelly: thank you very much. thank you for continuing to lift the nomination of lore et -- loretta lynch and thank you for highlighting harriet tubman. a fine example of someone who helped improve the quality of life for her fellow brothers and sisters. i'm psych and tired of being sick -- i'm sick and tired of being sick and tired. many women can say that in regard to the pay gap, unemployment and still trying to break the glass ceiling. in the past year, we've seen the greatest economic growth in decades. more and more women have been able to re-enter the work force, reducing the unemployment rate among women to a six-year low.
unfortunately black women have yet to reap the benefits of the economic rebound. in fact, while the overall unemployment rate for women declined, the black female unemployment rate has increased over the past two months. according to a recent analysis by the national women's law center, the black women's unemployment rate is more than twice the unemployment rate of white women. in february the black women's unemployment rate was 8.9%. up from 8.7% in january. and 8.2% in december. by comparison, the unemployment rate for adult white women was 4.2% in february down from 4.4% in january. despite having comparable levels of education, black women have the highest unemployment rate of any other group. a possible factor in this stubborn unemployment rate for black women is that we are disproportionately employed in the public sector. which is experiencing a much
slower recovery than the private sector. the national women's law center said the stagnant job situation for black women is a red flag in the employment landscape and urged lawmakers to act to promote a stronger, more widely chaired recovery. i couldn't agree more. we need to invest more jobs in job training and retraining programs that help black women adapt to the changing work force and prepare for the creators of tomorrow. and we must work to promote diversity in hiring and encourage employers to model their work forces on the communities in which they operate. as we look for ways to help women succeed, we must be mindful of the unique challenges black women face and develop targeted policies that help level the playing field for all women. in closing, we have heard from many of my colleagues gathered here tonight. they have mentioned, as we recognize women's history
month we're reminded that we are constantly in the midst of new history being made. tonight i had the privilege of being joined by my c.b.c. colleagues, one who is a member of the freshman class, and another person who wasn't here tonight but she's the 100th woman ever elected to congress. congresswoman alma adams of north carolina. gentleman net ranking of montana was the first -- jeannette ranking of montana was the first woman to serve in this body. many more followed. women like shirley chisholm. women like joyce beatty, mrs. lawrence from michigan alma adams ms. plaskett and mrs. watson coleman from new jersey. despite our gains though, there are only two black women who serve in state-wide office across the united states.
-- offices across the united states. veterans who come to serve this congress, like my good friends, ms. gabbard of hawaii and tammy duckworth of my home state of illinois, many diverse districts across this country are well served by the women they elect to congress. when women succeed america truly does succeed. this is why we must continue to fight for equal pay for equal work. this week paycheck fairness legislation will be introduced. i urge folks across the country to call their representatives to co-sponsor this important legislation. we must also fight for affordable child care and other economic policies that support working women. allowing us to continue shattering the glass ceiling and reach the greatest heights of all sectors of society. thank you mr. speaker, for this wonderful hour of debate. i thank all of my colleagues for caring enough to get involved and participate. i yield back the balance of my
time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. under the speaker's announced policy of january 6, 2015, -- the gentlelady yields back the balance of her time. under the speaker's announced policy of january 6, 2015, the gentlen omeoiamr woodalls recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader. mr. woodall: thank you mr. speaker. i sure do appreciate that. i appreciate you being down here with us. i enjoy this time of the evening. it's a little quieter on capitol hill. folks are coming and going but i always learn something that i wouldn't have learned otherwise, for all the differences that we have here when you talk to each other 15, 20 seconds at a time, those differences get accented. when you listen to one another for an hour at a time, it's easier to find those strains that bind us together. i hope that i'm able to touch on some of those topics tonight myself, mr. speaker. i've got the house budget on my
mind. it's bigget week. i don't know if everybody else is as excited about it as i am. this is budget week in washington, d.c. what that means is, i just finished a hearing in the rules committee, and we had folks come up and testify about all of their different budget ideas. what it means to be budget week is that we just voted in the rules committee to make every single budget that any member of this body, whether they be the most liberal democrat, the most conservative republican, or anywhere in between, north south, east and west, youngest to oldest, any member of this body that has an idea about how to grapple with the budgetary challenges that face this nation mr. speaker, their idea is going to get a full -- a vote on the floor of the house this week. this week. it's heavy duty writing a budget, mr. speaker. i serve on the house budget committee. one of the reasons it's so
hard, i have here you can't see it, mr. speaker, it's a pie chart of the spending in the united states of america. now, you and i, we go through bill after bill, day after day month after month of talking about appropriations bills. but as you know, mr. speaker appropriations bills, they just deal with what i've shown here in the blue areas, the kind of nondefense discretionary spending, and defense spending. candidly that's what everybody thinks of as being the budget. they think of transportation, roads, bridges, they think of the environment, parks, they think of the judiciary, they think of law enforcement they think of all of these components of government. well, the truth is, all of those things, mr. speaker we have to jam into this little bitty piece of the pie. these two blue pices of the pie are the things that -- pieces of the pie are things that congress focuses on every year in the appropriations cycle. this red piece of the pie is
all of that spending that's on auto pilot. now, i've read the constitution just as you have now i've read the constitution just like you have and it says the spending originates in the house of representatives. you've been here three months and you haven't got ton vote on this spending at all. i've been here four years and i haven't gotten to vote on this spending at all. all of this spending, trillions of dollars a year, because some of our colleagues in the house, 10 years ago, 20 years ago, 40 years ago, even 80 years ago voted yes to turn on an auto pilot spending bill. that bill is still on auto pilot, still spending today. our opportunity to grapple with this red area, mr. speaker, this that they call mandatory spending is by outlining a strategy in a budget.
now mr. speaker, four years i've had the voting card of the seventh district of georgia. it's an honor to carry that card every day. and for four years we have been doing budget committee work in this institution that should make every american proud. every american proud. but as you know, mr. speaker, i think as most americans know, the senate has not quite been as fortunate. they've been stymied trying to pass a budget. now we have a new american senate that's working -- that's working side-by-side with the house because if the house can pass a budget and the senate can pass a budget and we can come together and deal with those differences, we'll have a document that allows us not to -- to deal with not just the little blue area but the entire
budget, $3.5 trillion in 014. why is that important? that's important because we've boar road $18 trillion from our children and grandchildren. it's immoral. it is immoral and not even intellectually defensible. if you're from the part of the congress that doesn't want to raise taxes -- and i'm in that part of the congress -- don't pretend that borrowing a dollar today so you don't have to raise taxes is failing to raise taxes. it's not. if you borrow a dollar today, someone is going to have to raise taxes, sometime in the future. they'll have to pay that dollar back plus interest. a vote to borrow money is a vote to raise taxes. it's just not a vote to raise taxes on you. it's a vote to raise taxes on the next generation. conversely if you're in the part of this congress that likes to spend money -- i'm not in the part of this congress that wants to spend money, i want to shrink the size and scope of government, i want to make it more accountable and more effective. i want to shrink the size and
scope of government. but if you're on the side of the congress that wants to grow spend a vote to grow spending without paying for it today, a vote to borrow is a vote to cut spending on someone else years from now. we've seen it in all the countries around the planet, mr. speaker, that are struggling with economic collapse. when government has to shrink, when austerity measures kick in, the people who pay the price are not the wealthy in society. the people who pay the price are those who are most dependent on government benefits. a vote to spend money today that we don't have a vote to borrow today is a vote to cut the benefit of our children and our grandchildren who will need it more than we do today system of whether you're focusing on balanced budgets from a tax perspective or whether you're focusing on them from a spending perspective mr. speaker, we should be able to come together and decide that
grappling with those issues, putting forward a plan to deal with those issues, better than hiding our head in the sand. here's why. what i've graphed here mr. speaker, the red line it's traditional revenues. tax revenues in this country. take all the taxes we bring in together. i charted them as a percent of g.d.p. of course gross domestic product this looks like a level line but of course the economy continues to grow and every time the economy grows, tax revenues grow system of this is level as a percent of the size of our economy but it's a growing number of taxes every year, again, up to $3357b9 trillion now up to $3.8 trillion for f.y. 2016. these blue lines represent spending on those mandatory spending program us just talked ability. those programs on auto pilot. those programs we don't deal with in this institution every year. those programs that escape the
collaborative struteny of this body. here's what you see this chart goes back to 1965, mr. speaker. back in 1965, interest on the national debt was a small part of our economic pie. social security a large part of our economic pie but smaller than it is today. medicare, very small part. medicaid, very small part. what you see on this chart, mr. speaker is that they grow larger and larger and larger. that's not larger and larger and larger in terms of actual dollars. they are growing larger and larger in terms of actually dollar bus this chart is reflecting them growing larger and larger and larger as a percent of everything the united states per produces. and what you see is, mr. speaker that even though all the tax revenue we've been able to squeeze out of this country, whether it was republicans as president or democrats as president, whether it was republicans running the country or democrats running the country, america was unwilling
to contribute more than 17% or a 18% of g.p. -- g.d.p. in tax revenues. if you go out to the end of our budget window here about 2025, you'll see that based on current law, current spending, spending just rising at that rate of inflation as required by current law, the combination of medicaid, medicare social security, and interest on the national debt will consume every penny that the federal government raises. every penny. i showed you on this chart earl wrer -- earlier, mr. speaker, what congress deals with here in blue, the defense and nondefense, that most people think of as government, that's only about a third of the pie. social security, medicare, medicaid, those mandatory spending programs, that's where most of the money is being spent today that wasn't true 30 years agoing back in the 1960's, 40 years ago,, mr.
i'd say about a third of government spending -- mr. speaker, i'd say about a third of government spending was what we'll call income support programs, direct spending programs on behalf of citizens. about 2/3 of what we spent was investment in america. we were building things. the eisenhower interstate highway system. the national institutes of health. the centers for disease control. we were building things. we were defeating the evil empire. national security, larger piece of the pie in those days. 2/3 of that the budget was investment in america. by today, mr. speaker, those numbers have exactly inverted. we spend about one third on investment and national security. 2/3 on income support programs. by 2025, mr. speaker, those programs threaten to consume
every penny the federal government has. look out there at the end of this window, mr. speaker. we're not talking about raising taxes a little, we're talking about just to fund these programs, no parks new york courts, no judge, no prisons, no roads. no environmental regulations. nothing except medicaid, medicare social security interest on the national debt. we would have to increase taxes almost 50% just to pay for those programs. that is not sustainable. everyone in this chamber knows it's not sustainable. and my frustration, mr. speaker and i hope you haven't found the same one quite yet, is we all know what the truth is, but we don't all want to admit what the truth is. there's no question that we can't pay for these programs. there's no question that social security is headed toward bankruptcy. who is doing anything to solve
it? social security disability is going to go bankrupt 18 months from now. in the year 2016. social security disability insurance, that trust fund that's available for folks who have been stricken with disabilities and can no longer work, runs out of money. everyone in this chamber knows that that's not rob woodall conservative republican predicting that that's the social security trustees, the nonpartisan trustees, tells us we're going to run out of money. the nonpartisan trustees of the medicare program are going to tell us it's going to run out of money. the nonpartisan trustees of the social security retirement program tell us it's going to run out of money. where are the reform proposals from this institution? it's hard, mr. speaker. we all know what the truth is, but folks don't want to admit it. i'm going to bring us back to budget week. what i love about this week, mr. speaker, is that we focus
on those big problems, those big drivers of spending, those social safety net programs that are so esen torble so many americans. this is the week we lay out our plans to save them. this is the week where we talk about doing the heavy lifting that we don't talk about the rest of the year. and i want the courage that we show in this week mr. speaker, i want the idea that we discuss this week mr. speaker, i want those to be the outline by which we live the rest of the year. i always hope for that. i don't always get that. i'm hoping for that again this year. let's talk about the plan mr. speaker. the plan that came out of the house budget committee. the house budget committee is a fabulous group of people. if you've not gotten a chance mr. speaker, it's budget.house.gov. it's completely transparent. you can see anything you want to see about the house-passed
budget and our deliberations. we just had a markup last week. we started around 10:30 in the morning. finished just a little after midnight that day. we came back the next day. went for about an hour more. we discussed every single amendment that anyone had to offer, mr. speaker. we talked about the big ideas. we talked about unemployment. we talked about job creation. we talked about job training. we talked about national security. we got deep into every single issue that matters. to families back home in my district. every single one. and back home in your district, mr. speaker. this is the plan we've laid out. what i've charted here is the path of debt. the path of debt runs from back in world war ii where we had to borrow about 100% of the size of our economy, now granted, the economy was much smaller then, but as a percentage of the size of our economy, that's way economists take a look at
what we do to make sure year still on good financial footing. 100% of the size of our economy to defeat the nazis to win world war ii. mr. speaker, we're almost back to those same high levels today. you see it represented here by the dark blue line. we're almost back there today. do we have severe economic challenges today? of course we do. is the world a dangerous place today? of course it is. are we united as a nation and fighting those challenges the way we were fighting world war ii? of course we're not. of course we're not. but by engaging in this degree of borrowing, when we're not facing an international challenge of the size of winning world war ii, we are trading away our opportunities to face that challenge, should it arise in the future. we're borrowing today, mr. speaker, for consumption. we borrowed in 1945 for investment. we're borrowing today to pay the current bills of just
running the nation. we borrowed in 1945 to defeat evil. what are we going to do when we're forced to confront evil of that magnitude again? i'm not sure. because we have traded away through borrowing and spending on today's consumption the opportunity to spend big to win those global -- those global challenges system of look out beyond the dark blue line, mr. speaker. this is what you're going to see now. the red line of debt which you see rises far above world war ii level borrowing, in fact, double world war ii level borrowing that red line is what happens if we close the doors of the congress today. if we turn out the lights and never pass a new law. if we turn out the lights and never make a new promise.
if we turn out the lights and promise not to spend one more penny than that that is already required by the laws on the books and the white house does the very same thing, turns out the lights, that red line represents the level of borrowing necessary simply to keep today's promise. no new promises. today's promises. i laid out the future that we're trading away. i laid out the opportunities to react to crisis that we're trading away. i laid out the burden that this is putting on future generations. that's just where we are today. if we do nothing and let current law continue, the problem doesn't just get worse, it gets twice as bad. but, mr. i'm tired of hearing folks complain about what happens here and there madam speaker, i'm tired of hearing folks say, i know what all the
problems are but i don't have any solutions to offer. i just want to tell you who to blame for your woes. i don't want to be responsible for providing solutions. nonsense. nonsense. this body is not filled with men and women, madam speaker who came here to find blame. this body is filled with people who came to solve problems. blue line. problem solved. that blue line that light blue line, madam speaker, represents the house budget committee mark. if this institution passes the budget for f.y. 2016 for the next 10-year window if they pass the budget that we worked out in that budget committee we don't just avoid the economic catastrophe that is represented by current law, we reverse the trend. . madam speaker, it's hard. golf bally, i want to be able to -- golly, i want to be able to tell children and grandchildren across this country that we're balancing the budget tomorrow. we're not.
we're not. we can't. unless you want to raise taxes right through the roof and crush working american families, unless you want to cut spending right to the floor and crush our opportunities at national security, you can't balance the budget tomorrow. the problem is too big. but we've laid out a 10-year glide path that doesn't put the tough decisions off for 10 years, but begins making the tough decisions today. begins bending that curve of borrowing today. madam speaker 4.-- $4.7 trillion in interest. is what we're projecting to spend in the 10-year window. $4.7 trillion on interest alone. madam speaker, the budget for the entire united states of
america last year was only $3.5 trillion. we're only proposing as a budget for next year $3.8 trillion. our interest payments borrowing at the record low teaser rates that that we're borrowing at today, record low rates are going to see us pay $4.7 trillion in interest over the next 10 years. it's like taking 18 month it's off. think about that -- months off. think about that. if our budget's about $3.8 trillion for f.y. 2016 $4.7 trillion it's about a year and a quarter off. again, turn out the lights. send everybody home. no more national security. no more schools. no more roads. that's what debt is costing us. a year and a quarter of productivity out of the next 10. and that's when we take these important steps to begin to curb it.
compare, compare the difference in visions madam speaker. this blue line represents our vision, the light blue line represents our solution to the red line which represents current law. madam speaker, why is it so hard to do? because this chart represents the president's vision. leadership is a two-way street. we need folks leading on both sides of the aisle, we need folks leading on both sides of the congress. we need folks leadinging on both ends of pennsylvania -- leading on both ends of pennsylvania avenue. leading often means taking something that you disagree on and selling the other guy on why you're right. for us, madam speaker, we take our balanced budget proposal, we take it to the other side of the aisle, we take it to the other side of the capitol, we take it to the other end of pennsylvania avenue and we try sell it, we believe that balancing the budget is the right thing to do. we believe that borrowing from our children and grandchildren is immoral.
the president takes a different view. and i don't fault him for taking a different view. i question his math, i question the economic guidance that he's relying on. i don't question his motives. but his view, which is represented by the deficits here in blue, our annual deficits e prend red, rrentheudth ede stcat thi. this budget is substantially similar. to the budgets he's sent to capitol hill every year. if the president was standing here tonight, madam speaker, i don't think i would be mischaracterizing him if i say, what he would tell is you he wants to freeze our debt as a percent of the size of our economy. and as long as our economy's rising then, he believes we can continue to let our debt rise. he calls that primary balance, when you lock in your debt as a static percent of g.d.p. but continue to borrow forever.
forever. what i'm showinging you here on this chart, madam speaker -- showing you here on this chart, madam speaker, is while our budget alternative, produced by the budget committee, to be voted on in the house tomorrow, what our budget does is take deficits from about $350 billion next year down to zero. i don't even know if you know this word, madam speaker, it says surplus. no reason you should know it. we haven't seen one in your time on capitol hill. i wouldeen one imyifim we tabemni i the 1990's, but that was a little funny math there with the social security trust fund and other issues. it's been a long time since we've seen a surplus in our budget. but that's what our ideas produce. that's what our tough choices produce. that's what our commitment to solving problems produces. the president on the other hand raises taxes over $1 trillion, new taxes over $1 trillion, and
continues to spend so much so that in the years that we're balancing, madam speaker, the president is borrowing an additional $1 trillion a year. and he would tell you that the reason he's borrowing it is because of investment in america -- is because investment in america is important, and it is. he'd tell thought reason he's borrowing is because if we don't -- he'd tell you that the reason he's borrowing is because if we don't invest today, we can't reap the benefits of those tomorrow. and he's right. we're not arguing in this institution, madam speaker. we're not debating in this institution. we're not grappling in this institution about the merit of investing in america. we all believe that we should. what we're talking about is whether or not we should pay for that investment. if we think it's a good idea, should we find the money for it today? or do we just think it's enough of a good idea for our children
to figure out how to pay for it, or our grandchildren to figure out how to pay for it, but it's not so much of a good yt that -- idea that you and i would burden ourselves with making the tough decisions today? nonsense. i reject that vision. i reject the president's growing deficits. i regret the president's budget that says, not only am i not going to balance tomorrow, not only am i not going to balance in the next 10 years, i'm not going to balance the budget ever. that's not a small thing we're arguing about. this isn't just some sort of partisan sniping that happens between republicans and democrats. there's a fundamental disagreement about who we are as americans. about what the role of the federal government is. house budget committee says, let's try to balance this budget in the next 10 years. the time to stop burdening our children and our grandchildren with debt is now.
and the president says, i have spending priorities for america , let's grow the amount of money we're borrowing every single year, let's balance the budget never. i don't know if you get this in town hall meetings back home like i do, madam speaker, but folks say, rob, why can't you guys just work this out? why can't you get together, close the doors, work this out? we have serious problems, you need to solve the serious problems. madam speaker i've got a president who is prioritizing balancing the budget never and i've got a house budget committee that's prioritizing balancing the budget in the next 10 years. those aren't small differences. the differences could not get much larger. i don't expect to sell everyone in this institution on the budget committee's ideas for balancing this budget, madam
speaker. i'm not going to get every vote in this chamber. i'm going to keep selling it but i'm not going to get every vote in this chamber, i recognize that. what i am going to prioritize is selling folks in this chamber on the fact that if we choose to borrow money, we're either taking it from the next generation's benefits, or we're taking it from the next generation's tax bill. the bill is going to come due these deficits that the president proposes are going to come due. these deficits that we've already run are going to come due. it's either a benefit cut for the next generation or a tax increase for the next generation. there is no free lunch. i don't purport to have all the answers madam speaker. though we got a pretty good blueprint here. what i do propose, though, is that we're going to be closer to finding the answers if we bring all of the ideas together. i see my friends from the rules committee sitting here in the corner tonight, madam speaker. they've been upstairs grinding
through the paperwork. it was a little more complicated rule tonight than it ordinarily is because we took every single idea that any member of this chamber had about balancing the budget if you wanted to write your budget, it is made in order for debate this week, budget week. i don't know which budget's going to win, madam speaker. though i have my preferences. what i do know is, that if you're in the solutions business, you had your shot this week. if you're in the solutions business you had a chance to put your money where your mouth is literally your money, all of our money, all taxpayer money, these budgets together in a document. we're going to debate some doozies this week. we're going to debate some budgets that purport cutting spending virtually in half. and we're going to debate some budgets that virtually double
taxation in this country. we'll see where those chips fall. but, madam speaker, at this time it is my great pleasure to send to the desk a privileged report from the committee on rules for filing under the rule. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title. the clerk: report to accompany house resolution 163, resolution providing for consideration of the concurrent resolution, house concurrent resolution 27, establishing the budget for the united states government for fiscal year 2016, and setting forth appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2017 through 2025. the speaker pro tempore: referred to the house calendar and ordered printed. mr. woodall: oh madam speaker. that didn't sound like the exciting thing that it is. that is what is so interesting to me about the work that goes
on, everybodyous out in front of the cameras all -- everybody's out in front of the cameras all day long, every day, talking about the issues that the pundits want to talk about. what our reading clerk just did here, in 15 uneventful seconds, is set into motion the most open, the most comprehensive, the most optimistic week of public policy debate this institution will see in 2015. i'm honored to be just a small part of that. with that, madam speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. under the speaker's announced policy of january 6, 2015 the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas, mr. gohmert, for 30
minutes. mr. gohmert: thank you madam speaker. well, here we are, the fifth anniversary of, well at least this weekend what many affectionately or disaffectionately call obamacare, kind of hard to call it the affordable care act because we, many of us know exactly how much jeopardy it's put finances for people all over the country. there are some people that are getting back enough in subsidies that they like it. but it's important i think as
-- there was a groot -- as a great follow-up to the gentleman from georgia talking being the budget, to follow up and look at the predictions that were made five years ago about the bill that passed without a single republican vote, because we'd done our home wsh. i did read the bill -- homework. did i read the bill before i voted against it. i didn't have time to enmetch all of the references -- enmesh all of the references, the other bills that were referenced and the changes that would be made in those bills, but i could certainly tell from what was there, what i was reading, and the 2,500-page bill, that it was going to be a disaster for health care. but in any event, here's an article from sam baker, five years in, five busted predictions about obamacare. march 22 2015. when president obama signed the affordable care act into law
five years ago, many republicans essentially predicted it would grow up to be a serial killer, that seniors', -- seniors, medicare, would die by its hands. it turned out to be far more well-adjusted. many democrats thought the law would quickly make it through its awkward phase and turn into the most popular kid in school, like by most respected by all, a sophisticated winner, possessed of all the latest technology, but also with unassailable presents. it's turned out to be a much -- principles. it's turned out to be a much bigger screw-up. . i might add parenthetically here into the article that actually there were republicans like me that knew that it was not going to die. we knew that it was going to shrivel up the number of insurance companies, as it has. we knew that medicare was going
to take a hit because obamacare cut $716 billion from seniors' health care and even though the president and all the king's horses and all the king's men were promising that gee, that $716 billion in cuts to medicare, it's not going to affect you seniors, they were told. no, no, that's only going to affect the health care providers. i don't know about the rest of the country, but the seniors i talked to around texas figured out, wait a minute if you're not going to reimburse the people that provide us health care, we're going to have a harder time getting health care. they figured it out. that's exactly what's happened. so mr. baker, talking about, i guess, the worst of the projection by republicans were not what i projected, but there
are people that have not gotten the care they need. they have been put in dire fiscal straits because of obama care. -- obamacare. some have lost their insurance. i had insurance, i liked my insurance, i liked my doctors. obamacare changed all of that. this article though, says say what you will about obamacare if nothing else it's a survivor. that's the point, madam speaker that's important to note. any kind of socialized medicine is always a survivor. some were saying, we don't have to worry about obamacare, it will go broke, it will dive its own accord. no, that's what happens to socialism. but socialized health care socialized medicine in any form, even in this beginning stage as the president once
said on video that he wanted a single payer and -- in other words total socialized medicine where the government gets to tell everybody what they get and pay for it so people get rationed health care is what it amounts to, socialism dies of its own accord, as margaret thatcher once said it eventually runs out of other people's money. socialized medicine in any form doesn't die of its own volition. it doesn't happen. because what happens when you're dealing with government-run health care, it doesn't die of its own accord. no what happens is people have more and more health care rationed. more and more people have health care they don't get because they're put in line. like the young man from canada in my district that said his
father died of a heart attack because he had been on the list in canada for two years and he never got the bypass he needed. and until obamacare came along, it bay -- basically if you needed bypass surgery, whether it was in east texas or elsewhere, if you needed it now, you were going to get it now. but, over time as the government takes over health care, no, you get on a list. like my constituent's father was put on a list. i said, two years that's incredible he said yeah, people getting moved in front of him. i said, my understanding was that it was a crime to do anything to get yourself moved up the list. and he said well that's true but there is a board a group that decides who gets moved up the list in priority and they kept moving people in front of
his father until he died. but anyway, some critics, this article said, didn't even think they would need to kill it just that they could help it along. the law's opponents argued for years that the law would never work. predictions that reached new intensity when healthcare.gov launched in 2013. but that's not true of all of us. some of us knew it would not die of its own accord. we knew, it's like any government-run health care. you just ration it, people get less of it, and there is a board, whether anybody wants to acknowledge that sarah palin had a great point, she did, whether you want to call ate death panel or not, it's a panel that will get to decide the parameters for people getting, you know pacemakers, one of my staff had a parent
who was told one year, the year before obamacare kicks in he could get a pacemaker, after it kicked in he, couldn't get a pacemaker. that's the power of the government to tell you who lives, who dies. but obamacare is not going to die of its own accord. people may d die because of the new health care laws and the decisions of the death panel or whatever you want to call the ipab, but they will make decisions that will affect people's ability to live. anyway, the article further down says, talks about prediction it would get popular. quote, i think as people learn about the bill and now that the bill is enacted it's going to become more and more popular, unquote senator chuck schumer said, in 2010, just a few days after obamacare -- or obama signed the law. quote, i predict by november
those who voted for health care will find it an asset. those who voted against it will find it a liability. unquote. schumer was hardly the only one expressing the optimism. the process of getting obamacare passed was brutal for democrats. but many in the party truly thought the heat would die down between 2010 and 2014 when the law's central provisions kicked in. the debate got to a point where there was no way to win the rhetorical wars over health care system of democrats planned -- democrat's plan was largely to get it done, wait it out and hope people warmed up to the law once it transitioned from a political abstraction to a set of real world policies, most of which get pretty boring. it didn't work. the kaiser family foundation has been measuring public approval of the health care law every month since it was signed. and the bottom line has stayed
the same. people are closely divided over the law and lean against it. this month, kaiser's poll found 43% disapproval for the law compared to 41% approval. which is within a few points of most months. there have been a few blips. where approval topped disapproval or where one side cleared 50% but they never lasted. anyway, the article goes on, i skipped down to the part, you like your plan you can keep it. says obama made some prediction he is probably shouldn't have, including his promise that people wouldn't lose their coverage because of obamacare. for starters, policies sold in the individual insurance market were largely one-year contracts
before the affordable care act. in other words, there was never a guarantee that consumers could keep their same policies. moreover, though, obamacare did cause insurers to cancel millions of individual policies and it wasn't an accident or a side effect. the law set new standards for policies in the individual market. they have to cover a set of essential benefits, for example and can't impose an annual or lifetime cap on benefits. a lot of plans that existed before obamacare didn't meet those criteria, hence, passing a law to make them. those policies could technically seek grandfathered status but it was hard to get. they could barely make any changes in their plan designs without losing their status. and it was hard for a reason. the law set new standards for insurance and wanted to shift people into plans that met those standards. all of this was entirely
foresee nble 2010. it was even spelled out in subsequent regulations. political uproar might have been -- might not have been as bad if healthcare.gov had been working when people started to receive their cancellation notices. well, i would submit that it would have been as bad because there were a will the of lies -- there were a lot of lies about obo -- obamacare. yes there were some dire predictions but i knew that obamacare was not going to die of its own volition. because when government controls health care, it doesn't. and as an exchange student in the soviet union, when i saw their poor pitiful health care system in the soviet union i was literally thanking god that we had the health system we did in america.
and my family didn't even have anything like insurance at the time growing up in east texas. it was just that we knew that we had good doctors, we had good system, and you know if you got in a bind that you hoped and prayed neighbors would help out. but then that's where insurance came along. that you could pay a very small monthly, quarterly semiannually annually premium to insure against something unforeseeable so you could take care of the small things. but once the government get into something, it doesn't work so well. and the more government get into it, the worse it is. and if we don't turn this thing around and get some free market competition back in place in
health care, allow people to have their own relationship with their own doctor of their own choosing, where people can actually compare the prices and decide if this doctor or this hospital is worth it one may cost more, one may cost -- one may cost more one may cost less, but you compare the pros and cons. that's what that competition -- that's what competition is about and we haven't had it in health care in many many -- in many, many years. why? because the government got involved. we do need a safety net and that's a good thing. it's what caring people do. but when the government takes over everything as obamacare will undoubtedly eventually do, why? because if they get to dictate health care then they're going to get to dictate your life. an article from john nolte,
today points out, number one premiums are 24.4% higher than they would have been without obamacare. and i guess this comes from the new york daley news, canned -- "new york daily news," candidate obama boasted, we'll lower premiums up to $2,500 for a typical family in a year. the article says not quite. a report examined the nongroup marketplace where families and individuals who don't get coverage through work shop for insurance. the report concluded that 2014 premiums are 24.4% higher than they would have been without obamacare. completely wrong.
obamacare sent the price of insurance dramatically up. madam speaker, i'm sure you, like i have people ask regularly why is my health insurance so much more? my deductible is so high, i'll never have enough money to pay my deductible. and i've got a co-pay on top of that. and i don't have as much covered that i did before in my other policy. and i don't get to choose my doctor, the doctor i had before that i liked, i didn't get to keep him system of why is it costing so much more? the answer is very easily given. you're paying for lots more i.r.s. agents. we knew when obamacare passed there would be 17,000 18,000 new i.r.s. agents you'd have to pay for. they're not going to ever help you with a head injury of a --
or a skinned knee. nothing. no. they're going to come after you. they're going to give you stomachaches and headaches, they're not going to help you with health care. and what about all these navigators? they're never going to help you with a knee injury or a backache. no. they're going to give you a -- going to give you back bakes because they're gange to -- going to make it harder and harder to figure out what to do even though they say they're there to help you. when government workers say they're there to help you, grab your wallet and run for the door. . you're paying for government workers who will be government union workers and you have to help pay the union wages, we always apparently do that. paying for part of the costs of the union. that's because republicans are real good at allowing democrats to have laws that help fund
their campaigns. done it for years. there was a good book out on shadow bosses that explains the concept. here's another point from john 's article number two, less choice for patients from 1232 private market insurers to 310. rather dramatic. but that was very foreseeable. many of us talked about it. we knew that this would eliminate many of the insurance companies. it would eliminate so much choice. same way dodd-frank promises, gee, we're going to fix the banking industry. no, you're going to make it hard for small banks to compete and the big banks chew them up be a sword them when they can't make it -- be a sword them when they cake -- absorb them when they can't make it and then you
have fewer choices. that's what obamacare's doing it. as the article says, prior to obamacare, the individual insurance market, nongroup, nonemployer, offered a wealth of choices and healthier options. obamacare has devastated that market and with it the quality of health care. keep in mind the cost of people willums and deductibles have in-- keep in mind, the cost of premiums and deductibles have increased as the choice has collapsed. patients may also have fewer doctors to pick from. more than 60% of doctors planned to retire earlier than anticipated, by 2016 or sooner, according. the physicians foundation reported in the fall that nearly half of the 20,000 doctors who responded to their survey especially those with more experience considered obamacare's reforms a failure. number three, deficit exploded to $1.2 trillion with a t.
forget the original lies that obamacare would be a deficit-neutral or even cut the deficit. the obamacare deficit is now in the trillions. this month the c.b.o. estimated the law's 10-year costs will reach $1.2 trillion, a far cry from the president's initial promise of $940 billion. well i have to point out, actually, in fair tons c.b.o., congressional budget office originally predicted it would be over $1 trillion. but since the president promised it would be less than $1 trillion, the director of c.b.o. was called to the white house and magically, after he went back and reformulated things, and i know this defends him, but it's still the truth, it's what happened, he went back, recal later and it was less than -- recalculated and it was less than $1 trillion. the president said, see, i told you to would be less than $1 trillion. then it passes and we found out, oh, you know what, it really is more than $1 trillion. that's why i think c.b.o. needs
competition and the best thing that could happen is if we started encouraging and even gave rewards to entities, any entity, whether it's universities, private groups, that begin scoring bills, they get within a certain margin if a bill passes, they get within a certain margin -- it would sure beat the heck out of c.b.o., then you pay them. we need competition scoring bills. so that we don't have the disasters we've had in the predictions of the cost of obamacare. number four, median government lying about obamacare expanding coverage to millions. you keep hearing about how obamacare is covering millions, when it really isn't. a huge majority of those, the white house and its media throne sniffers are advertising as newly insured are in fact
victims of canceled policies who were forced into the obamacare exchanges. they already had insurance. and are therefore not newly inshoe -- insured. even some of those newly insured under obamacare's expansion of medicaid were once paying for their own insurance. now they're on the government dole. further, as many as 89%er -- 89% of the americans who signed up for obamacare when the exchanged opened in 2013 already had insurance. in other words, many exchange enrollees simply switched from one plan to another. so we were told, gee, there's this 30 million 40 million people without insurance, we have to insure them. that's why we've got to force so many tens of millions of americans into losing their insurance, because we got 30 million, 40 million we have to take care of.
and what happened? we're told, well, maybe seven million or so, eight million, they got insurance, when all these millions lost theirs. that was worth the damage that this administration has done and is doing to the best health care system in the world? number five obamacare's deductibles are killing families. one of the great untold stories about obamacare is that while obamacare has skyrocketed premium costs in the individual market, deductibles have also increased. obamacare's really nothing more than a catastrophic insurance priced like regular insurance. this year obamacare's lower price bronze plans have 51 -- $5,181 in individual deductible and $10,545 in family deductible. the more expensive silver plan
has $2,927 individual deductible and $6000 in family deductible. on top of your monthly premiums, the deductible is the amount you have to pay out of pocket before your insurance kicks in. the last time i looked, if i enrolled in obamacare, my out-of-pocket expenses premiums plus deductible, would exceed $8,000 before insurance started paying anything. one result of this has been an increase over the last five years of the percentage of people who put off treatment due to cost. unless something catastrophic happens to you in most cases you are still paying out of pocket for all of your health care. on top of that you're paying for premiums that are doing you
absolutely no good. it's just free money for the insurance companies. also when you're insured your out-of-pocket expenses are usually higher. most health care outlets offer steep discounts for the uninsured. basically obamacare is nothing more than a massive tax increase disguised as insurance. a massive financial boone to the -- to sustain big insurance companies democrats have demonized for years. a massive redistribution of wealth that primarily soaks the middle class while diminishing their quality of health care. in summation, the health care victims vastly outweigh the beneficiaries. it is not even close. john knowlty, for the record. then from "the weekly standard," feds say the cost of health care.com estimated that $1.7 billion. of course when the disastrous
rollout of this government website happened, we heard from people that really knew what they were doing that said, gosh we could have done this for just $6 million or so. well, not if you're close friends with the occupants of the white house. if you're close friends with the occupants of the white house you go run up ads 1 billion bill for ads 6 million, $7 million website that doesn't have the security that's required. so we're in big trouble here. health care has not been helped. and we have more and more government workers who are telling people who know how to provide health care what they can or can't do all to the detriment of the patient. think about one of my constituents. he's no longer practicing medicine.
he was there to help my wife when she first went into labor eight to 10 weeks prematurely. he was telling me that he had done a surgery, one of the best he'd ever done, because of all his training and his many years of experience, he was good at what he was doing. a couple days after the surgery got a call from somebody, i think he said in pennsylvania, guy had no kind of medical degree at all, he is a government worker, said, i was looking at your recor o s it was one of the best he'd ever done of this type said, well, the average is over three hours and you only took 59 minutes. and normally you lose over three to four pinalts of blood and you only lost 10 c.c.'s so you're going to have to either have to change the records or we can't reimburse you. as this honest, experienced,
excellent physician said, i'm not changing my records for you or anybody. well, then we can only reimburse but 1/4 of what you should have gotten otherwise. he said, i'm not practicing medicine like this. some idiot doesn't even know what he's doing is going to tell me, one of the best surgeries i've ever done that i can't be reimbursed? and he's retired. he gave it up. he said, i planned to practice a lot longer but i'm not practicing medicine like this. so who's hurt? his patients. so what happens when you socialize medicine, as we're moving into here? well, you have fewer doctors that are as well trained. the best and brightest don't apply. we've already seen a drop in the quality of people and the numbers of people, i'm told from medical school.
good people still applying. but eventually, as i saw in the soviet union when i was there, you have people who are physicians some, you know, like florence nighting gale, they do it out of a sense of service, dedication, but some just because, you know, hey, it's a job. but as people are finding out, if you're not going to get reimbursed, then you're not going to be able to pay back a quarter of a million dollars of loans for college medical school, getting you through the internship residency, until you're actually out making good money, because you're not going to make it as good. therefore, you can't afford to go through as many years. so you end up, over years, you see the college, the medical school, all these years of training experience, squished together. what's the result you? don't have as good of physicians, but you also have wonderful nurse practitioners you have physicians' assistants
that start taking up the jobs that people went through college and medical school internship, residency, they start picking up the slack that you used to have quality well-trained doctors to do. and they're doing a good job but it lowers further and further the quality of care any time the government gets involved to the extent that it is now. it's not too late. it's five years in. it has been a disaster. one broken promise after another after another after another. and i hope and pray that people don't have to continue to suffer the indignity of much too high health insurance and not near the quality they were getting until we get a new president and can finally get a new health care system and have true reform. i hope and pray that this president does not end up being
so stubborn that he will not hear the cries of the people across america who are saying, please let us have back our cheaper health care, our own doctors our better policies, that should be the conclusion after five years of this disaster. with that, madam speaker i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. pursuant to clause 12 of rule 1rk the it chair declares the house is in recess subject to