tv House Session CSPAN July 8, 2015 10:00am-8:01pm EDT
comment, i think real estate is always a good investment. and i agree it is important for the self-employed always pay their taxes because they're paying into programs that will be there for them when they retire. greta wodele brawner: we will have to leave the conversation there for now. katie vlietstra, vice president with the national association of the self-employed. thank you. katie vlietstra: thanks, greta. greta wodele brawner: and now we bring you to the house. live coverage of the house here on c-span. from the speaker. -- the chair lays before the house a communication from the speaker. the clerk: the speaker's rooms washington, d.c. july 8, 2015. i hereby appoint the honorable george holding to act as speaker pro tempore on this day. signed john a. boehner, speaker of the house of representatives. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the order of the house of january 6 2015, the chair will now recognize members from lists submitted by the majority and minority leaders for morning hour debate. each party limited to one hour and each member other than the majority and minority leaders
and minority whip limited to five minutes. but in no event shall debate continue beyond 11:50 a.m. the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas, mr. poe, for five minutes. mr. poe: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, the president, quote, avoid the battle, complains, and misses opportunities. those were the words of leon panetta president obama's former secretary of defense and c.i.a. director in 2011. at the time panetta, along with military commanders and joint chiefs of staff, recommended that the united states leave 24,000 troops in iraq to prevent that country from falling apart and becoming chaos. according to panetta the administration was so eager to rid itself of iraq that it was willing to withdraw rather than lock in arrangements that would preserve american influence in our interests.
so the president ignored the advice of his own secretary of defense and top commanders and pooled troops out of iraq in 2011. the timing just before the 2012 presidential leaks to me appeared to be based on the politics of political convenience not our national interest. in any event, what's taking place today 2015? entered the islamic state, isis, isis took advantage of the power vacuum left by americans' absence. so today isis is stronger than ever spreading its reign of terror throughout the reason. they practice religious genocide against people who don't agree with t they have redefined the term barbarian to an all new o low. they rape pillage, loot, behead and burn those in this isis war against the world's people. isis not only controls a massive amount of territory in the middle east, it also controls the minds of thousands of foreign fighters many from the united states.
it is a sophisticated criminal enterprise that uses any and all ways to recruit fundraiser, and spread terror, including american social media companies. through american companies like twitter, isis is instantly and freely spreading its cancer of islamic extremism to teenagers, recruiting them to join the jihad and launch attacks on the streets of america. since the president announced his campaign against isis, we have seen embarrassing results. even the president admitted that the united states did not have a complete strategy. the isis terror has been going on for over a year, and we don't have a plan to defeat them? this doesn't make a whole lot of sense. the united states must answer this question, is isis a national security threat to us? if the answer is yes, then we must defeat them. and congress needs to weigh in on this and make this decision.
if we decide that isis is a national security threat then, of course, we need a strategy, a complete strategy. the administration plans so far -- plans so far is to train mercenaries to fight isis. however, just this week secretary of defense carter admitted that the united states has trained get this, 60 so-called modern siron rebels to fight isis. just 60. the $500 million program that was supposed to fund 3000 fighters before the end of 2015 has trained 60. so if i do my math correctly, mr. speaker, we are spending about $8 million per fighter right now. that's abysmal. that's no way to fight and win a war against terror. also there are more americans fighting with isis rebels than we have trained to fight against isis. meanwhile, in iraq, just 8,800 fighters have been trained to fight isis compared to the goal
of 24,000. this administration's strategy to defeat isis seems to be in chaos. even the kurds want to do their own fighting, and they have asked us for military support. our allies want to send direct aid to the kurds, but the administration won't let them do that, they have to send it through baghdad for some reason. it's time for the administration to stop being indecisively weak and do the obvious. he needs to lead in this war against isis. it needs to listen to the commanders. the united states needs to act and have a plan to defeat this determined well financed enemy. it is a terrorist enterprise that is at war with us. and that's just the way it is. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from oregon, mr. blumenauer, for five minutes. mr. blumenauer: last month congress dealt with a trade package that centered on trade
promotion authority. those actions, while important, were really just the beginning of a very long process. many important provisions of the transpacific partnership, the t.p.p., are still unresolved. there's a meeting at the end of this month in hawaii where the finance ministers of the 12 countries come together in an attempt to resolve these final questions. as i pointed out in my last meeting with the president while i think trade promotion authority is important and worthy of support, that support does not imply support for the transpacific partnership. indeed, because of the protections we built into the trade promotion authority, it sets an appropriately high standard for approval. everybody in america will have several be months to examine the promisal if an agreement is reached to see if it measures up before the treaty can even be voted on by congress. i am hopeful that we can use this time to clarify and refine
areas. for example, the investor state dispute process. while the united states investor state protections were public health and consumers are stronger than for most countries and separate from the foreign investor state models that are being used by the united states chamber of commerce to promote the interest of big tobacco to undercut efforts to discourage smoking there is still room for us to improve and clarify the american model. and we should do so. another important area deals with trade enforcement. agreements that look good on paper if they are not enforceable or enforced are essentially meaningless. it's extremely important for the administration to demonstrate its commitment to enforcement. we are trying to help with legislation that i introduced in the house that we have been able to get in part of the
senate package that would create a trade enforcement fund dedicated to help make sure agreements are enforced. but another step the administration could take immediately is to deal with disturbing actions in peru that seem to undercut commitments that were made in the existing peru free trade agreement dealing with illegal logging. it appears that peru has backtracked on its commitments and that illegally harvested timber is finding its way into international markets and into the united states. it would be a simple act for the administration to take that would demonstrate its commitment to strong enforcement by starting with peru right now. another area that i'm working on deals with access to medicines. it appears that the trade promotion authority draft --
the t.p.p. draft, excuse me, falls short on incentives for affordability and consumer protections. and that the trade promotion authority objective to, quote, ensure that medicine -- that agreements foster innovation and promote access to medication. we need some work here. the may 10 agreement that was struck in 2007, which i was pleased to participate in, struck the right balance creating incentives for innovation in pharmaceutical research and access to timely and affordable medicine for developing countries. this was achieved in part by requiring changes to provisions dealing with patent linkage where it looks like t.p.p. is moving in the wrong direction. the t.p.p. includes new provisions which, while not addressed in the may 10 agreement, are inconsistent with its spirit and intent of ensuring timely access to affordable medicines in developing countries.
for example with biologic medicines, it appears the united states is seeking both patent linkage and 12 years of data exclusivity for all countries. the farm -- former would provide changes us in us law and latter would prevent us from changing our laws. the combination of these two would have enormous cost implications, both at home and abroad. these are examples where i am working to make sure the time agreement measures up to the criteria we have established in the trade promotion authority. i urge the administration and my colleagues to be clear about our intent and our expectations in order for any final agreement to be worthy of broad support. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from west virginia, mr. mooney, for five minutes. mr. mooney: thank you, mr. speaker. last week i had the pleasure of
meeting with doug erwin. doug is an extraordinary member of our west virginia community who started a charitable organization called, backpack buddies. in the summer, backpack buddies gives meal supplements to children in elementary, middle, and high schools who received free or reduced lunch during the school year. oftentimes the meal that they receive at school is the only food that they eat all day. doug became concerned about what these children did for food during the summer. that's when doug started backpack buddies. the last three years communities in my district, the great state of west virginia, have come together to raise money to provide food to these children so they can get the extra help they need during the summer. backpack buddies is serving now over 1,600 children in putnam
boone, and kanaw counties this summer. i would like to thank doug, business leaders in our community, and the volunteers who help make backpack buddies possible. on a separate issue, mr. speaker several weeks ago president obama sent two of his top cronies in his war on coal, interior secretary sally jewel, and office of surface mining director to my home state of west virginia. the apparent purpose of their visit was to seek input for a new obama regulation that is estimated to kill 80,000 coal jobs. but the rule had already been submitted for final review. they are not interested in hearing from west virginians about the impact of their policies. instead, they are checking a box. it is clear that nothing will stop this president from trying to implement his radical
environmental agenda. and i will ten to do everything in my power to fight back on behalf of all west vanians -- virginians. that's why this year i introduced the stream act which will stop the president's anti-mining regulations. i also included a provision in the house budget resolution that calls for defunding that regulation and i will work with the appropriators to make sure it is not funded. i hope my colleagues in this chamber will join me in this fight. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from california, mr. schiff, for five minutes. mr. schiff: mr. speaker thins since the supreme court decision in citizens united, we have seen a massive wave of secret spending in our political system. it was over $100 million in dark, unregulated, and
anonymous moneys spent in the 2014 midterm election cycle, and with the presidential race right around the corner, that number is expected to balloon to over 600 million. while the problem is easy to identify, the solution is far more difficult to achieve. reluctantly i concluded it's necessary to amend our constitution to address a long line of case law that began before citizens united, and prevents the congress from meaningfully regulating campaign expenditures. the constitutional amendment must not only he overturn citizens united, but the arizona free enterprise versus bennett decision which struck down an arizona law that allowed public financing of a candidate if their opponent exceeded certain spending limits. the amendment is simple. it would allow congress to set reasonable limits on expenditures and allow states to set up public financing for candidates if they choose to do so. i first ran for congress in 2000 in a campaign that turned out to be the most expensive in
u.s. histories and helpedpropel new campaign finance reform. it was this first inexperience that convinced me our elections have increasingly come to be polluted by ever increasing amounts of unregulated outside spending. millions of dollars in soft money spending that avoided limits because of misguided legal distinctions between contributions to a candidate and independence expenditures in support of a candidate plagued that 2000 race and almost every major federal race since. . i co-sponsored the mccain-feingold act, which allowed for public financing of campaigns. the bill passed and for a brief window the campaign finance system became more transparent and limited. that was sadly short lived. with citizens united the supreme court struck down decades of restrictions on
corporate campaign spending and free corporations to spend unlimited funds to run campaign advertisements. the court has also allowed wealthy individuals and groups to spend with impunity with only a theoretical restriction that they do not coordinate with campaigns. but the reality is that the f.e.c. has dismissed 29 cases in which super p.a.c.'s were illegally coordinating. with a candidate to contend with super p.a.c.'s with or soft money, as i was, the special interests are behind those expenditures. candidates being drowned out in a tax paid for by dark money however, don't have that luxury. they exploit i.r.s. regulations saying they're social welfare nonprofits which you a lao them to operate tax-exempt and raise
unlimited money completely anonymously. nothing about funneling millions of secret dollars to support campaigns can be construed to be in the interest of social welfare. nothing. social welfare nonprofits are supposed to limit their political activity, but i.r.s. audits even of groups that spend vast amounts of their time and budget in support of candidates are extremely rare. investigations into complaints of abuse can take years at which point an election will long be over, the damage done. the supreme court has overturned decades of legal precedent. the regulatory process is at a stand still and still we watch billions pour into campaigns and increasely anonymous fashion and so sadly we're left with one option, a constitutional amendment that allows congress to set reasonable limits on both donations and expenditures and shines the light of day on both.
i thank you and yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentlelady from north carolina, ms. foxx, for five minutes. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i rise today to join my colleagues to express a deep concern about the ongoing negotiations with iran over the country's nuclear capabilities. as many of my colleagues have noted on the floor of this house, preventing iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon is critical to securing peace in the region and protecting u.s. interests including our close ally, israel. it was good to hear secretary kerry's recent commitment not quote, to shave anywhere at the margins in order to just get an agreement, end quote. and to work for an agreement that will pass scrutiny. however, media reports from the negotiations in vienna indicate that iran has tried to renegotiate the previously
released framework and continues to demand further concessions from international negotiators. among the latest demands from tehran is that all united nations sanctions against the country including the ban on the import or export of conventional arms be lifted as part of any deal. well, i have a response to that demand. unacceptable. lifting the arms embargo would serve only to further destabilize the middle east and accelerate iran's army of shiite militias. the iranians have also sought to keep hidden iran's current and previous efforts to gain nuclear weapons capability. how can the international community know with certainty that iran is complying with an agreement to reduce significantly its enrichment activities if the full extent of these activities is kept secret? it defies logic that such a
request should be made and makes far less sense for such a request to be given any serious consideration. likewise, demands to limit iaea inspectors to select sites to install absurd bureaucratic processes to access to additional sites and to prohibit altogether inspections of so-called military sites should be fully rejected. ultimately, it's critical that any deal prevents iran from gang nuclear weapons capabilities and can ensure that inspectors can validate their negotiated terms. if iran cannot negotiate in good faith, then perhaps it's time to leave the negotiating table altogether. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from connecticut, mr. courtney, for five minutes. mr. courtney: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, in a few short hours we're going to be voting on in this chamber a rewrite of
the elementary secondary education act which is long overdue. it has been 13 years since the no child left behind act was passed in many -- and many educators and probably all members have heard a lot of the clumsy and unworkable provisions that need a rewrite. more importantly, there are other reasons why it's time for a new law for our k-12 system. educating our system is a dynamic process and everything from technology in the classroom over the last 13 years has changed as well as the work force needs of our national economy which has drastically changed in the last 13 years. clearly as a nation, we need to use this where he write of federal education law as an opportunity to equip our nation and particularly our children and grandchildren the tools which they need to succeed. one area which we all know needs updating and strengthening is the area of stem education, science, technology, engineering and mathematics. employers all across the country are desperate to try
and find young -- incoming young people into our work force that has these skills to succeed. the good news is that stem occupations in the last 13 years has grown three times faster than non-stem occupations. in addition the average income is two times higher in terms of the wages of stem educated workers compared to non-stem. that's the good news. the bad news is that only 16% of graduating high school seniors are interested in stem. and if you drill down deeper, young girls and young minorities are woefully unrepresented in the single digits. so clearly we need to move as a nation stronger in the area of stem. if you look globally, china is producing 23% of the world's stem degree graduates. the u.s. only 10%. mr. speaker if you go back 58 years ago, our 38th president -- 34th president dwight eisenhower, confronted a similar moment of crisis in terms of our education system.
in october of 1957, the soviet union launched the sputnik satellite which shocked our nation which realized we were falling behind and we needed to step up our game in terms of our educational system and research system, and this president, this republican president led the charge to pass the national defense education act in 1958 which boosted and set a national goal and national priority for science and research across our country. at the time that he signed the bill in 1958, he said that in both education and research we need to redouble our exertions which will be necessary on the part of all americans if we are to rise to the demand of our times. he also noted that this bill, the national education security act back in 1958 would do much to strengthen our american system of education so it could meet the broad and increasing
demands imposed on it by national security. fast forward 57 years, we now have a national stem education coalition made up of employers like microsoft the national association of manufacturers, the american farm bureau who have come together with a corset of principles how we can today in 2015 boost teachers with these hard science degrees in our elementary and high schools, how we can drill down and encourage, again underrepresented groups such as young girls and minorities to get involved and engaged in education. we came forward on the education committee with an amendment supported by the stem coalition and it was rejected on a party line vote by the republican majority who said that the national government had no business being involved in local and state education policy. that is totally unacceptable in terms of the challenges that our nation faces today. unfortunately the rules committee rejected our amendment from even being voted on today.
as part of the update of the no child left behind bill. again it is the ultimate measuring stick of the failure of this bill to address the needs that our nation faces in terms of k-12 education policy. we should follow the example of this gentleman who understood that we've got to at times rise up as a full nation. we can't rely on one local wealthy school district to invest in science, technology, engineering and mathematics and leave behind other populations in this country because as a nation we need to come together to address and succeed and face this challenge, and it will bring good things in terms of higher income and more growth for our country if we embrace these types of policies. the good news is that the republican chairman of the senate education committee did embrace the stem education coalition provisions and they have put it in there bill. so today unfortunately we are going to go through this exercise, this theater of passing a bill which woefully fails the test in terms of what our nation faces today but
hopefully later in the process a conference committee will come where we will follow the example of dwight eisenhower in our bipartisan coalition back in the 1950's to allow this nation to have the tools to succeed and we need to pass strong stem education policy for our children. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the chair recognizes the gentleman from oklahoma, mr. bridenstine, for five minutes. mr. bridenstine: thank you mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i rise to salute more than 40 citizen airmen of the 513th air control group deploying to southwest asia this month in support of operation inherent resolve in iraq and syria and also continuing operations in afghanistan. the 513th is the nation's only reserve unit flying the e-3 awacs. i'm proud that it is based at tinker air force base in my home state of oklahoma and is commanded by current robinson.
i flew the navy return, the hawkeye, both on active duty and the reservist. the awacs is the air force's quarterback in the sky, calling the plays and managing it from an airborne platform. i know it's absolutely essential to projecting power. without it our forces would be like an orchestra with no conductor. mr. speaker, we just celebrated yet another year of independence. we should remember that our war of independence was fought almost exclusively by citizen warriors. ordinary citizens who put their lives on hold and at risk, many of them giving the ultimate sacrifice for our independence. the 513th continues our great citizen warrior tradition. among the citizen airmen deploying are realtors, i.t. specialists and even a pastor. we should recognize that this is a voluntary assignment. these reservists have raised their hands and answered the call voluntarily when less than 1% of our fellow citizens serve in the military.
mr. speaker, the 513th demonstrates the value of our military's reserve component and national guardsman. looking across the 513th you'll find skill standards capabilities and operational readiness rates equal to or better than the active component. when i was in the reserves flying the e-2 hawkeye i can tell you the amount of talent we held in the reserve component was amazing. it was very clear that these folks had the confidence, the capability the institutional knowledge to carry on the tradition of excellence that was in the navy when they moved to the reserve. it's true also of the air force, the amount of talent and skills. we saw -- when you think about the fighter squadrons that fought in afghanistan in the opening days of the war in afghanistan, the reserve fighter squadron was the one squadron that had the highest percentage of bombs on target. the reserve and the air national guard are critical to our nation's military readiness. it is the -- it is important to
retain and even expand the reserve component size, missions and capabilities. finally, mr. speaker, while i rise to give thanks to the 513th reservists deploying to southwest asia, let me mention this unit's other recent accomplishments. to say that the 513th is in high demand would be a huge understatement. in the past six months, the 513th has controlled training missions for over 200 fighters and bombers supported critical flight tests managed air operation center support in germany and controlled eight large force exercises including felix vergo in louisiana, northern edge in alaska and tupex in florida. mr. speaker, let me conclude by once again recognizing the citizen airmen of the 513th air control group from tinker air force base. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentlelady
from texas ms. eddie bernice johnson, for five minutes. ms. johnson: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today in opposition to the current version of h.r. 5. the house republican bill which seeks to re-authorize the elementary secondary education act and encourage my colleagues to adopt the democratic substitute offered by ranking member bobby scott. . let me start by reading a quote that truly strikes me as telling from where we have come from and where we find ourselves today. on may 22, 1964, at the university of michigan, president lyndon baines johnson remarked, in many places classrooms are overcrowded and curricula are outdated. most of our qualified teachers are underpaid. and many of our paid teachers are underqualified.
so we must give every child a place to sit and a teacher to learn from. poverty is not a bar for learning. and learning must often escape from poverty. president johnson went on to say but more classrooms and more teachers are just not enough. we must seek an educational system which grows in excellence as it grows in size. this means better training for our teachers. it means preparing our youth to enjoy their hours of leisure as well as their hours of leab. it means exploring new techniques of teaching. to find new ways to stimulate the love of learning and the capacity for creation. let's just take a moment to let that sink in. those were words written in 1964 during president johnson's great society speech.
almost every single point in president johnson's remarks is direct in part by the peril of education system faces today. teach remembers still underpaid and in so many areas underqualified. classroom sizes are increasing, and the quality of education is continuing to deteriorate. hunger and poverty continue to afflict our inner city students in alarmingly disproportionate rates, and disparity of resources and access to a quality education seems at times to ten expanding. -- to continue expanding. the achievement gap between our students remains high to the wealth gap and the numbers are discouraging. instead of moving forward by improving on and implementing lessons learned from the failed policies of no child left behind h.r. 5 guts the core
intent of the original elementary, secondary education act of 1965. h.r. 5 is like a blast from the past and fails our students and their families in a myriad of ways. among some of the most egregious provisions in this proposed iteration of eses, h.r. 5, includes the concept of portability or title 1 funds. sold and messaged as a promotion of choice. portability instead adversely affects students who are in school and-n districts with the highest concentration of poverty and need. in short portability is a ruse. one that takes resources from rather than gives to our most underserved and needy children. additionally, as the ranking member of the science space, and technology committee and a long time advocate of stem, science technology mathematics, and engineering
education, i was alarmed by the utter and complete exclusion of any reference to stem education within this base text. we should be retooling our education system to fit the needs of our ever evolving globalized economy, not running back to the factory style education that doesn't provide our children with the skills they need to compete. education is the ladder to opportunity and central to keeping alive the american dream. we must fight to ensure that every single child, regardless of their background, is given the opportunity to reach their god given potential. no matter what race black, white hispanic, asian or native american, rich, poor, immigrant, or not we must remain steadfast in our dedication to equality and equity and opportunity. i strongly urge my colleagues to take this bill back to the drawing board and make sure
that education in america is reflective of our principle as a nation. i urge my colleagues to make sure that we protect the mesh dream -- american dream and keep america the land of equal opportunity. if you work hard and play by the rules everyone deserves a fair shot and a fair shake of fulfilling life. the zip code you grew up in should not determine the life you live. thank you. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. the chair recognizes the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. thompson, for five minutes. mr. thompson: thank you, mr. speaker. though we have recently entered into july, i rise today in recognition of national dairy month which takes place every june since 1937. as i travel across pennsylvania and throughout the pennsylvania fifth congressional district, i'm always inspired by our
farmers and our farm families. they work hard. they work seven days a week. their work is arduous and the challenges of running a farm are never-ending. mr. speaker farming isn't just a business to these hardworking folks. it is the fabric of rural america. the commonwealth's history is rooted in agriculture and the dairy industry continues to be the largest sector of this industry. most about 99% of our dairy farms in pennsylvania are family owned. and operated and our average herd size is about 72 head. the commonwealth robust dairy industry produces 10 billion pounds of miling annually and that number continues to surge. in fact, pennsylvania ranks fifth in the nation when it comes to dairy production. mr. speaker, i rise today in support of national dairy month and support of our dairy farmers and farm families. and to also say thank you to
all these folks for providing us with food and fiber. thank you, mr. speaker. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentlelady from ohio ms. fudge, for five minutes. it ms. fudge: -- ms. fudge: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, today we find ourselves on the house floor yet again debating h.r. 5. after several months of delay, the majority party has yet to realize that this bill is not in the best interest of america's children. we all agree that congress must re-authorize a strong elementary-secondary education act. h.r. 5 does not meet the test. any re-authorization must ensure that education is properly funded at the state and federal level for all of america's children. that all students have access to a well-rounded education, which includes subjects like physical education music, and the arts.
and that students are annually assessed, which allows for parents and teachers to measure students' progress. h.r. 5 does none of these things. instead, it fails our students, our teachers and our families. the bill drastically reduces education funding, eliminates and weakens protections for disabled students, fails to provide a well-rounded education for all students, and generally makes it more difficult to educate those for whom the act was designed to protect. the bill turns title 1 funding into a block grant. the program would disproportionately harm disadvantaged and low income students. schools across the country, including some in my own congressional district, rely on these funds to help ensure children are given a fair chance to meet state academic standards. h.r. 5 also allows title 1 dollars to become portable which would divert much needed funds from the highest need poverty schools and districts.
h.r. 5 removes requirements that states ensure students graduate from high school, college, and career ready. the bill focuses primarily on math and reading assessments without providing any programmatic support for literacy or stem and other subjects that provide a well-rounded curriculum. it eliminates wrap around support services which are very important to needy students. it eliminates after school family engagement, physical dental, and mental health programs. this year we commemorate the 50th anniversary of the elementary and secondary education act. the bill essentially, a civil rights law reaffirmed that every child has the right to an equal opportunity for a quality education. however h.r. 5 undermines the law's original intent, turning back the clock on equity and accountability in american public education. and ignores the needs of
america's most vulnerable students. h.r. 5 is a step backward in our country's education system. this legislation fails our students and their families. america deserves better. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. costello for five minutes. mr. costello: thank you, mr. speaker. this week the house will be considering the appropriations bill for the department of interior for the upcoming fiscal year. i rise today to express my support for a robust and continued funding for and the permanent re-authorization of the land and water conservation fund. over this past independence day weekend, i was particularly reminded of how so many of us enjoy the natural wonders of our hometowns and communities. from picnics to playgrounds, baseball games on municipal recreational fields, honoring our heritage and celebrating
our independents with fireworks music, and parades at parks. that's part of why the land and water conservation fund is so important. it helps our communities protect critical lands by providing state and local governments with necessary funding and flexibility to develop and improve lands for public access and recreational enjoyment. it is part of highlighting the heritage and character in my district in southeastern pennsylvania. my home state of pennsylvania has received approximately $295 million in the past five decades from the land and conservation water fund. it's protected place was national significance such as gettysburg national military park valley porge national historic park, and john hines wildlife refuge. in addition in my congressional district, we can thank the land and water conservation fund for helping fund the building of the waters forest legacy
project, protecting critical woodlands expanding the bridge in east bradford township, and enhancing potstown burro memorial park with a ballpark, pavilions, and walking trails. it was interesting how important our areas are to our heritage, civic identity, and local community. i believe the land and water conservation fund is one of our most important conservation programs. and an excellent example of a bipartisan commitment to safeguard natural resources promote our cultural heritage, and expand recreational opportunities. not just for a moment in time but for future generations as well. i also believe it's a program that allows our local communities to dream big about how to best go about enhancing their communities for their residents. as an original co-sponsor of
h.r. 1814, which would permanently re-authorize the land and water conservation fund i'm looking forward to working with my colleagues in an effort to help communities across this country create lasting legacies of public access to the cultural and recreational opportunities identified by officials in their local communities as being worthy of funding for future projects. with that i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentlelady from alabama, miss suewell, for five minutes. -- ms. sewell, for five minutes. ms. sewell: today i rise to express my strong opposition to h.r. 5, the so-called student success act. i'm deeply disappointed in the majority for bringing such an economically careless and socially egregious bill to the floor today. if passed h.r. 5 would take more than $7 million from the highest needy schools in my home state of alabama.
it is really an abomination that this body and -- would do this to our constituents and do this to our students. h.r. 5 abandons the federal government's historic role in elementary and secondary education. furthermore, this bill neglects our sacred responsibility to ensure that all children irrespective of race, class, disability, or socio-and economic class are given the opportunity to attain a high quality education. each of us in this body has the opportunity to send our own children to the finest k through 12 institutions in this country. but our privilege isn't universal, and we shouldn't legislate as if it is. in the seventh congressional district of alabama, that privilege, the ability to send our children to the private schools or public schools of choice is nearly nonexistent.
more than 70% of the public school students in my district receive free and reduced lunch and they live in families that live below the poverty line. and of the 26 school districts that serve my constituents, only two of them have a poverty rate that is less than 56%. . the act was first written in rebling anything of the impact -- recognition of the impact that concentration education had to adequately support the educational programs needed to serve vulnerable communities. but h.r. 5 would strip the esea of the protections for these students by diverting title 1 frunds. this approach is backwards, and our children deserve better. if i were grading this bill, i would definitely give it an f. as a proud product of selma high school, this is deeply
personal to me. today more than 90% of the selma high school students in my district from my old high school receive free and reduced lunch. under h.r. 5 this school would lose nearly 20% of its federal funding. the greatest opportunity that we can give any child is a quality education. this is why i cannot support this bill which diverts title 1 funds from 92% of the schools in my district. this would further tilt the playing field against poor kids. these children belong to all of us. unfortunately, this bill is proof that somewhere along the line we've abandoned the most sacred american principle, that all children, i mean all children are our children. we cannot deny that a rising tide lifts all boats. the economic and social costs of refusing to accept these facts are steep. when president johnson signed the elementary and secondary
education in 1964 he states, as president of the united states, i believe deeply no law i have signed or ever will sign means more tore the future of america than this bill -- more for the future of america than this bill. president johnson was right then and he is now. we must replace no child left behind with a strong bipartisan bill, one that advances what works and improves and -- improves upon what does not. unfortunately, this bill does neither. i urge this body to oppose this reckless bill h.r. 5. our children deserve better. our constituents deserve better. this nation deserves better. mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the chair yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from new york, mr. reed, for five minutes. mr. reed: thank you mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i rise this
morning to highlight an issue that i believe we must pay closer attention to in this chamber and in this congress. you see, on june 23, mr. speaker, we mark the 10th anniversary of an important supreme court case. that case was kelow vs. new london. the title of the case really means nothing but i point to sue zet who i have here depicted in this picture -- suzette who i have here depicted in this picture. she was the plaintiff in that case and what happened in that case was a real tragedy. she was told by her government that they were going to take her home and give it to another private owner for another development. you heard me right mr. speaker. she was told that her home was going to be taken by our government because they were picking the winners and losers because they felt they knew best how to utilize her
property and give it to another private owner to develop it the way that private owner wanted to. well, mr. speaker suzette kelo stood up. she fought this fight. she was told by her friends, she was told by her real estate agents, she was told by her lawyers, just roll over. the government always wins. and they're going to win this battle but she fought it all the way to the supreme court. and what happened, however is that advice from her friends and from her real estate agent and her lawyers came true. the government won. but that day we all lost as american citizens. because here is what happened after that case. she lost her home and this is a picture of her property -- well no longer her property, but that property as it exists today. they demolished her home, they took her property and she lost her piece of the american dream. and the result of it is a vacant lot that sits in new
london. mr. speaker, i highlight this case today because it reminds us of an issue that we must fight for and that is a fundamental freedom that we all enjoy as american citizens to own and to use our property. it is something that is fundamental to our u.s. constitution. it is something fundamental to us as american citizens. and it is time for us to unite, as republicans and democrats, and say enough is enough. we must push back on big government. we must stand with individuals. this land belongs to them, not our government, and that is something that i'm afraid that started 10 years ago and continues to this day with actions of big government day in and day out where government regulations, government overreach, local, federal,
state level act in a way that takes away these fundamental property rights that so many have fought for. so in congress i have led the fight. i formed the private property rights caucus with members from maine to alabama to california. i have sponsored and authored the defense of property rights act to say enough is enough. we're going to stand with individuals and we're going to fight this big government overreach. and mr. speaker, these hard-fought rights have come at the expense of so many. the blood of those who fought to preserve our freedoms, the blood of our founding fathers and the vision they set forth in our constitution. and this kelo case was a moment in time at a drop of a gavel when those fundamental rights were threatened and lost. so i stand today and ask my
colleagues and all the people across america to stand with us, to stand with me to make sure we coordinate our efforts to make sure that our fundamental property rights are protected and individuals, like susette kelo are rewarded for her bravery and taking the fight, though she may have lost that battle i stand with her to win this war to protect our fundamental property rights that so many have fought for over the years. and with that i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from north carolina, ms. adams, for five minutes. ms. adams: thank you, mr. speaker. today i rise in opposition to h.r. 5. education is a civil right, and when the elementary and secondary act was passed in 1965, its purpose was to ensure access to a quality education for our neediest students that are often low income and minority. we can all agree that esea
re-authorization is long overdue. however, the proposal put forth by republicans falls short and makes a bad situation worse. each day that no child left behind is law is one more day that we are in fact leaving children behind. h.r. 5 is not the answer. voting for this bill means voting against our students, our teachers and our schools. a vote for h.r. 5 is a vote to take money from our poorest and most at-risk students. it's a vote to erase the educational gains we have made over the past 50 years. it's a vote to deny many of our students a chance at real success. it's time to wake up. it's time to vote no on h.r. 5. congress passed esea 50 years ago with the intent of protecting our students by providing quality and equal education. today instead of putting forth a bipartisan bill that moves us closer to equal and quality education for every child,
republicans have introduced a bill to roll back the hands of time and undo our progress. h.r. 5 turns our back on some of our most vulnerable populations. it ensures students success. a report from the southern education foundation found that more than 50% of our public school students live in poverty. title 1 has always been the main source of federal funding for our country's poor students. h.r. 5 would reverse this long-standing practice and instead remove money from our school districts with the greatest need. diluting their ability to meaningfully have programs that support our low-income students. it's time that 40% of college students take remedial courses and employers continue to complain of inadequate preparation for high school graduates. we must ensure that all students are college ready and career ready. h.r. 5 states -- h.r. 5 allows
states to lower standards, to leave -- lead students to graduation unprepared. how can we compete in a global economy when they are not prepared? we must invest in the futures of our children, support our teachers and our principals, ensure that the success of our neediest students are met and that's why i'm proud to support mr. scott's amendment and thank him for his leadership in challenging h.r. 5. this amendment reaffirms the federal government's proper role in education, addressing many of the problems that's around no child left behind. students and low-income families already have obvious disadvantages. this amendment prioritizes early education to help our students start out strong. it puts protections in place against bullying and it supports the physical, mental and the emotional stability of students. gets rid of a.y.p. and also makes important investments in stem education. education should be an issue
that unites us, not divides us. the scott amendment is exactly what our schools and our students and our teachers need. i urge my colleagues to vote for the scott amendment and not for h.r. 5. because h.r. 5 fails on all accounts. it fails our neediest students. it fails to invest in our teachers and principals and it fails to prepare students for college and careers and to address the core principles of federal education policy. h.r. 5 deserves an f. i urge my colleagues to join me in opposing it. mr. speaker, i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas mr. olson, for five minutes. mr. olson: mr. speaker this past sunday the day after our
independence day, u.s. women's world cup team gave us the best fireworks show ever. they lit up the team that beat them four years in the world cup, japan. we scored in the third minute, the fifth minute, the 14th minute and the 16th minute. 4-2 in 16 minutes. we had gone through over 5 1/2 hours without giving up a goal. japan was done. our women won every game because they left their egos in the locker room. they jogged onto that field. they were a team full of love.
love of soccer, love of america and love of each other, their teammates. the best example of that love was a small blue armband. it's worn by our team captain. if you missed this band's journey through our victory on sunday, i'll recount it for you. it was on christine's left arm as her gold medal was placed around her neck. it was her second gold medal in a world cup match. she's closer to my age than all of her teammates. sunday was her last world cup game.
she got that blue band from aaby the greatest woman's soccer player in american history. that's her picture beside me. abby has scored 23 goals in world cup matches but she only had a silver medal in world cup matches. never a gold. she knew that was changing when she jogged onto that field in the 79th minute of play. like christine, this was her last world cup match. a teammate stopped abby before she entered the game. team captain carley lloyd stopped her idol abby to make sure abby's uniform was
complete. there was a problem that carley had to fix so she helped abby by putting that blue armband on her left sleeve as our team captain. . carli plays soccer in my hometown of houston, texas. we texans believe bigger is always better. carli has been a texan for a few months she knows how to go big, real big. she scored a hat trick, three goals, in the first 16 minutes. the 2015 women's world cup gold medalists gave us a priceless gift. the joy of being alive, feeling
american pride surge through your vains -- veins, and that breath, short breath of excitement, or having that extra heartbeat knowing that you're alive. america thanks our gold medal winners, our women's world cup champions of 2015. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yield back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from puerto rico, mr. pierluisi, for five minutes. mr. pierluisi: mr. speaker, the u.s. territory of puerto rico home to 3.5 million american citizens, stands at a crossroads. the governor recently announced that puerto rico cannot payal of its debts. the governor's comments were not constructive because they lacked rescission.
puerto rico -- precision. puerto rico's total debt is about $72 billion and the structure of this debt is complex. about 17 entities in puerto rico have bonds outstanding from the central government to corporations. the terms source of repayment, and level of legal frokes for each bond varies. -- for each bond varies. bonds issues receive priority payment under the puerto rico constitution which was authorized and approved by congress. accordingly, when the governor asserted that puerto rico cannot pay its debts, the sweeping nature of his comments raised many practical and legal questions and generated considerable anxiety. the crisis in puerto rico is real. and it must be confronted with composure competence, and candor. to this end i want to articulate a simple truth but
one that is often overlooked. namely the challenges we face are structural in nature and requires structural solutions at both the puerto rico and the federal level. within puerto rico more discipline by the territory government is imperative. we must learn to live within our means. puerto rico's political leaders have shown capacity to develop sound strategies but have not always demonstrated the same ability to effectively execute those strategies. performance, not planning is the problem. we can do better. and for the sake of our constituents, we must do better. honest, self-appraisal and self-criticism are essential, but cannot be limited to puerto rico. if the american public is under the impression that puerto rico is solely to blame for this prycies it is profoundly
mistaken of the. the source of the problem in puerto rico is not its people who are talented and hardworking. nor is it our political leaders who are no better than their counterparts in other u.s. jurisdictions who at times also overpromise and underdeliver. instead, the root cause of the problem is our political status which has given rise to a system of severe and entrenched inequality that makes it exceptionally difficult to succeed and exceptionally easy to fail. the direct link between puerto rico's political status and its economic problems was explored at a recent congressional hearing. the hearing served to underscore that there are more american citizens in puerto rico than in 21 states. that they serve in the u.s. military in large numbers but that they cannot vote for president or senators, and have only one nonvoting delegate in the house.
the hearing highlighted that as a territory puerto rico can be and often is treated worse than the states under federal laws from medicaid to the earned income tax credit to chapter 9 of the bankruptcy code. to compensate for the deficiency in federal economic support the puerto rico government has borrowed heavily which explains the excessive debt. in recent years, 250000 island residents have move to the states, and these numbers are only growing. once in the states, they are entitled to full voting rights and equal treatment under the law. rights they were denied in puerto rico. this is an intolerable situation. my constituents have tolerated it for too long, and they will tolerate it no longer. they voted for statehood in a local referendum in 2012 and
they will vote for statehood again in even greater numbers in a federal referendum in 2017. my message to my colleagues is simple. if you give us the same rights and responsibilities as our fellow american citizens and let us rise or fall on our merits we will rise. but if you continue to treat us like second class citizens don't profess to be surprised when we fall. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 12 section a of rule 1rk the chair declares the house in recess until noon today.
>> we have plans out there available that includes fish and wildlife dnr's, wildlife services on the collection of these samples and it will cut across all four flyways. in addition, we take samples from up north of alaska there in the bearing strait area where these birds are to see what's happening right now
today. >> the thing that as i looked at the spread of this and looked at the industry which i think is interesting i want to direct this question to dr. clifford as well. the statistic i think is very interesting is that there are 56 privately held farms that account for about 90% of all of the egg production in the united states. 90 farms. so we do have -- we have some small family farms, but there aren't very many small family farms. that's faded away. we have large family farms, we have large corporate farms. now we have just 56 farms that have 90% of the production. that's an incredible concentration of animals. i want to get your sense we have a very large amount of birds in a very small space, and this is not just in poultry, it's in other types of agricultural production as well. does that put us at greater risk when it comes to disease?
because you have that kind of concentration? or does it not? address that for me as far as what we are looking at in terms of our challenges. ms. schuchat: i can briefly comment from the human health perspective, i think dr. clifford will be better. we need biosecurity to be strong at every level. one level is what's the geographic location of the establishments. but we need within any establishment concentrated or not the right kind of procedures and protocols and the work force practicing those because there's risk of spread between the facilities. so the specifics of the agricultural practices would be in the usda arena. the workers on this premises and the contractors and so forth who help with remediation really need to be tracked to make sure they are ok following their exposures.
and that they don't develop illness that could be human case of ambian influenza. -- ambian -- avian enflue wednesdaya. -- influenza. >> with regard to issues whether you have intensive farming practices or less, this virus doesn't care. mr. clifford: the more birds you have in a location the more virus production, the wider spread can occur. what we need to be thinking about in the way of biosecurity and why this is different than what it has been prior, this is the first time it in north america that we have had a high path a virus travel through wild birds from europe and asia to north america. the first time. and it's because it's adapted itself to these dabbling ducks and it's moved across the bearing strait. it -- bering strait. it never happened before in the high path. low path maybe, but not high
path. what is different now is that we have to consider biosecurity where it was fine and well and good for what we were dealing with prior to this we have to consider now this different. you have to look where there's wild waterfowl as the entire environment being affected, potentially. doesn't mean it is but you have to consider that as a potential every single house that a bird exists in, or every single location, you have to think in ways of trying to protect house from house to house to house. and that is -- it's not about the facility being safe. it's only the safety within each of those houses where those birds are kept. they have to be looked at as single biosecurity facilities. which is much different than what we have had to do prior. >> it is better to have a few large concentrations or more -- mr. clifford: it's more about the biosecurity.
obviously any viral infection, the more birds you have, the more virus, the easier the virus can spread, the more virus production. that's why it's critically important to get birds put down quickly. >> 56 operations, 90% of all eggs in america. mr. clifford: it's a highly integrated operation. senator peters: do you want to mention? >> i'll answer this from the meat chicken perspective in delaware as senator carper indicated was the birthplace of the modern broiler meat industry. it it mr. gelb: he we often -- mr. gelb: we often brag about the efficiency of our poultry production. bow this concept of having highly density of poultry within a given house but even more importantly the density of farms in that area.
that does fassel tate the potential for more rapid transmission. we are dealing with a very contagious virus. we are dealing with a situation where the ventilation fans that are used to maintain the proper environment of the chickens are turned on virtually all the time, and material, duft, other material that is coming out of the -- dust, other material that is come out of the barns will have virus. that virus will travel to some degree. not miles and miles. in delaware within a one square mile area we might have four or five farms. and each of those farms might have 60,000 to 80,000 chickens on them. they are all contract growers. and those contracts are probably with -- there are four different integrated operations, four different companies. you have a situation as dr. clifford indicated where you may have these very large
single farms, layer operations, for example, but some other areas of the country you have independent facilities owned by different companies. it's essentially the same thing. even though maybe the travel on and off those particular farms is different when birds are taken to market, they are caught, put in cages. those trucks take them to what we call processing plants or slaughterhouses. and they may go by 15 different other farms. the dust and feathers are coming from these live haul trucks as they are called. so there's a lot of complexities here. we really need to think this all through. that's why in delaware we are concerned -- concerned is not the right word thinking about what might happen here. >> real quick clarification. there may be 56 poultry
companies, but there are a lot of locations, right? mr. clifford: sure. there's 20 states that we would consider to be major poultry producing states across the united states. senator johnston: we are talking about probably thousands of locations correct? mr. clifford: correct. there are areas across the country where there's higher concentrations than others. senator johnson: thank you. senator baldwin. senator baldwin: thank you, mr. chairman. this year's avian flu outbreak has had a deep impact as i'm sure you talked about in my home state of wisconsin. the outbreak has wreaked havoc on our farms where producers have faced the devastating reality of sick and dying birds. i am so pleased that we were able to be joined today by mr. schneider of lake mills, wisconsin, to share his story of his farm and his livelihood. the impacts as we have
discussed of avian flu are broad on farm workers, individuals working at processing and packing plants whose jobs depend on those lines running. as well as on the broader farm community where depends upon demand for grain, supplies and services from our poultry growers. so this avian flu crisis is also a community crisis. wisconsin is proud to play a role and host to research labs that are laser focused on the key questions that are in front of us. questions about how the virus mutates, how its harbored in wild birds as well as diagnostic labs that help us track its spread and track viral strains as they emerge. dr. clifford producers in my state have relied on the tireless work that you do. and your team has put in lots of time and energy into
addressing this crisis over the past many months. so i want to thank you for your leadership. we know that research labs responding to this virus span several different federal agencies. and are supported also by state labs. madison, wisconsin, is home to the usgs national wildlife health center, and conducts research to determine which wild bird species might carry and spread various viral strains. i want to just note parenthetically that i'm quite concerned that the lab's agenting infrastructure is not allow -- aging infrastructure is not allowing it to fully perform as needed during this crisis and it's something i have paid great attention to. dr. clifford, as you know, this wildlife health center conducts research that supports the industry focused research at
usda. i'm wondering if you could share some general comments about the importance of interagency collaboration and research investments and coordination on this crisis. mr. clifford: i think interagency, across agencies, across states and the industry, the collaboration across all of them is extremely important. i think that was well stated earlier by the testimony of chris curry -- curry -- currie. we actually collaborate on an ongoing basis with c.d.c. we work very closely with usgs. we work very closely with the department of interior as a whole. the money and funding we provide for the wild bird surveillance, some of that money would get -- to help support that testing that usgs and others would be doing. collection and testing of those samples. we work with customs and border
patrol, the d.h.s., f.d.a., a whole host of food safety inspection service within our own agency we have an internal group within the department of agriculture that stood up that brings across alt agencies to help address this issue. as well as with the state agencies. so it's critically important that all this -- because every piece of this as senator ernst was talking about the land phils -- landfills. there's issues with e.p.a. transportation, a lot of these things that have to be coordinated across. there could be issues with availability of water. these farmers that we use for depopulation of birds requires water source for foaming. and you wouldn't think that you would run out of water in certain areas, but it's certainly in small rural areas you very well may not have an effective water source. you can't take it out of the lake because it has to be filtered water or otherwise it shuts down your machines. you have to have carbon sources
for composting and things. so this really is a massive effort that requires coordination among a lot. senator baldwin: thank you. dr. schuchat, the university of wisconsin hosts a large team of researchers studying pathogens that endanger human, animal, and plant health. we have pioneers in developing research efforts that could potentially help us understand or treat avian influence of viruses. however, some of these efforts have been put on hold by a federal pause on gain of function research. discontinued research pause is delaying the potential benefits of studying these viruses, including research that could protect humans, animal and economic health. when does the c.d.c. plan to
issue final guidance on this research to be able to end the pause? ms. schuchat: i'll need to get back to you on the specifics. the public safety is really important and public support for research is very important. and we take very serious-l the need to make sure that the scientific experiments that c.d.c. or research partners are doing are done in the safest possible way. influenza virus research is critical to make sure that we have safe treatments and effective vaccines and get aheffed these viruses before -- get ahead of these viruses before we get to the problem we are seeing now with the avian outbreaks here. i know that across government with n.i.h., c.d.c., f.d.a. the question of the moratorium is important and we can get back with you with the specifics of timing. senator baldwin: i would
appreciate that. dr. clifford, i understand that state veterinarians are considering restrictions on the movement of birds and poultry separate from guidance by the usda. i know that i have heard from farmers in my state who have contracts to deliver birds across state lines. we all clearly share the common goal of containing and eradicating this viral outbreak, but our producers, as you have heard as you know are facing substantial economic strain. these unserts, of course, make things even more difficult to conduct business when it is safe to do so. i'm asking dr. clifford, what steps is the usda taking to ensure that quarantine and shipping practices are safe and effective while also
facilitating these contracts and ongoing commerce. mr. clifford: thank you senator. so within our approach we have a, what we call an infected zone and control zone. the control zone are around an infected flock. it goes out 10 kilometers. basically products that are negative in that area are tested regularly. so we -- nothing can move out of those zones unless we permit that product to move. there is regular testing requirements for those products within that to be able to be safely moved in and out of those zones. so that occurs ongoing. we issue actually thousands of permits out of those zones to allow that safe movement. we share that. we have weekly calls with the industry and states across the entire u.s. and we explain these things to them. they know how it's happening. some states have teaken
additional action because -- have taken additional action because of for example the live bird marketing systems we have in the u.s. some of those have caused some issues. we intervened on behalf of states such as wisconsin iowa, minnesota in that area to help fassel tate the movement of those birds into those states. -- to help facilitate the movement of those birds into those states. as you know the states do have oftentimes rights to go above and beyond our requirements. so we try to work through that with the industry. senator johnson: senator carper. senator carper: i appreciate you being here and your participation. i want to come back and revisit the issue of i'll call it crop insurance. we have had a crop insurance program in this country for a long time and it's a shared partnership between federal government, which helps on the subsidized the crop insurance.
we changed the last farm bill, we changed it up some so it would cover, as i'm sure mr. clifford remembers, it would cover fruits and vegetables if farmers want to participate in that. my colleague from dell war offered an amendment adopted included in the bill that called for maybe trying a demonstration program with respect to insurance for bowltry -- poultry growers. other live stofpblgt that was in the bill. i don't -- other livestock. that was in the bill. have we had time to get it up and running? is that something you're familiar with? mr. clifford: i'm aware of the discussions but not involved in the specifics of those. that's kind of outside of my range. senator carper: for the record, ask you to respond for the record. maybe some of your colleagues can give us an update.
contract growers and broilers on the delmarva peninsula, if there is an outbreak, the chickens are owned by the integrators. and the contractors, they don't get indemnified. as mr. schneider said, some real cost to bear. i want to go back to something you said to mr. schneider and i'll bounce it to mr. clifford. you mentioned -- you're very gracious in your comments about the support you have gotten from the federal government, ag, department of ag and others. we are encouraged to hear that. you indicated there's a lot of red tape and can be frustrating and time consuming. i thought i heard you say, mr. clifford there is an effort to identify one person, go-to person for mr. schneider or anybody else that's affected whether it's minnesota, iowa wisconsin, or delaware. is that something we are doing
now? where we have bun one designated person. you don't call a call sent earn get switched from person to person. do we have that in effect now? that sounds like a great idea. mr. clifford: it's in effect but not the way we want it to be finalized for the following spring. right now it's one person. because of our rotations of personnel in and out of those areas, because most of these people come from different parts of the u.s., and we have a three or four week rotation so they can go back home for a period of time before they are -- senator carper: it would be great -- mr. clifford: it's like a three or four week turn around. for the fall, what we are doing for the fall and spring migrations is we will assign a single person that will stay with that producer for the entire period. senator carper: if it isn't perfect, make it better. i think you have taken a good idea and made it better. i'd like to ask a question about lessons learned.
this would be for dr. gelb. is it dr. clifford or mr.? mr. clifford: dr. clifford. senator carper: i wanted to, can you take a minute, dr. gelb, dr. clifford, mr. schneider, ail call you dr. schneider, too. mr. schneider: i have been called worse. senator carper: if you could take a minute and share with us, one key lesson, one key lesson that we have learned that you have learned so far from this outbreak that can better prepare us for further infections. mr. schneider: i have not had direct experiences in this current outbreak. so i have -- mr. gelb: i have not had direct experiences in this outbreak. we have had people that paragraph it's pate in depopulation efforts. that happens to be one of our real strains. we help developed that
technology years ago. i get stories and reports from other individuals. i really feel that biosecurity is really a key issue. i think it's been repeated several times today. an area that -- biosecurity is not sexy. it's not something that is easily accomplished. it's a challenge, and you sometimes don't see results from it. but certainly we know it's not the entire answer, as mr. schneider indicated. you can do biosecurity almost everything right really. sometimes maybe it's an act of god. so you have the introduction of the virus here. i still think biosecurity is a really key weapon in this process. senator carper: thanks. dr. clifford. mr. clifford: senator, if i may expand on that for more than one i would like to hit a few. senator carper: quickly.
mr. clifford: first and foremost the questions that senator johnson, chairman, was asking earlier about the time frame of depopulation due to positive testing at our national veterinary services lab, we have already implemented plans quite a while ago to base the depopulation of those birds based on presumptive positives by the nonlaboratory where it was taken. we don't require confirmation anymore. that's one lesson learned. one action we have taken. in addition, one of the things we'll be looking at in the future is clinical signs where we already know we have virus in the area, not even waiting necessarily on presumptive positive. on the area of disposal, we need state, local plans in place that we know will work before they occur. biosecurity is based upon new biosecurity. air filtration systems. these air handling systems and
these facilities have to have some type of filtration to reduce the amount of dust and potential for virus particles to enter through the ventilation system itself. those are just some. there are others. senator carper: give us one good take away. one lesson learned you think we ought to share with the country. mr. schneider: i would suggest the increase of funning for agricultural research service to identify areas that those specific biosecurity protocols need to be implemented to help us prevent this from happening again would be a wonderful place to start. senator carper: my time's expired. thanks. senator johnson: i want to get into the insurance or the emergency funding. is there a program in place to indemnify mr. schneider as an
operator? mr. clifford: there is a program in place that pays right now for the owner of the birds. so if mr. schneider is a contract grower, what we have been doing is working with the companies to make sure that payments do go to the contract growers or contract racers. -- raisers. senator johnson: that's something you're trying to do working with the law that does not contemplate indemnifying the operator. mr. clifford: what we did in the low path a.i. situation quite a few years ago in virginia it's quite of our regulations on low path. it requires the contract deprowers to be paid. the problem -- growers to be paid. the problem is with this particular high path, that particular regulation is written into the a.i. rules for low path not for high path. so we pay the owner of the birds.
p senator johnson: mr. schneider, you have a problem there. we need to work with the ranking member to fiend out what we need to do to adoctors that -- need to do to address that. you made this agreement between the owner versus the operator. that's something that needs to be addressed. dr. clifford, you talked about personnel rotation. how many usd atcht offices do we have around the country? mr. clifford: veterinary services offices or usda offices? senator johnson: you can have qualified personnel to respond to this. i'm surprised we are rotating personnel versus just having -- mr. clifford: we don't have that many trained people to do this. you're talking about animal health technicians and veterinary medical officers. i have about 1,800 people that serve in veterinary services. i'm not talking about just any usda person. senator johnson: if you're talking about a point person to
manage a case, you really need someone who is skilled in management not necessarily in the hard science. mr. clifford: they need to understand the science as well. in this case. when they are working with them and helping them develop a flock plan and compliance agreement, they not only need to understand the red tape as you call it, but also the science. senator johnson: that could be an interesting discussion to have. if the whole purpose of this is to coordinate an effort with one point person that an owner or operator is dealing with, i think you could certainly have an interesting discussion whether or not that person is trained in all as opposed to trained in managing and coordinating the different expertise. let me move on. dr. schuchat. i want to talk about the virus itself and fonings vaccineations. how robust is the flu virus? how long can it survive if it
gets on a dust particle and loan on to other farms? days? weeks? months? ms. schuchat: the virus won't last that long, but the conditions are quite important. so the colder weather and the dryer weather permits -- it's a ripple. we are in a quiet period. senator johnson: the virus can be on a snowflake as well. so are we talking days? ms. schuchat: the issue with the disinfection is make sure that it's not -- you have reached everything and it's not coming back. senator johnson: in terms of the vaccines, we are concerned about trade. implications of that. professor gelb was talking about mutation of virus with vaccines, can you speak to that. ms. schuchat: influenza changes constantly that's why it's so difficult. it can mutate and it can also reassort. so swap parts of its genes with other influenza viruses. and two of the three h-35
strains we are dealing with, the avian strains in the u.s. are these reassortants where we had high pathogenic h-5 avian influenza fromure asia that swapped out part of its genes with a low pathogenic avian influenza here in the u.s. already. the vie -- virus is constantly changing which makes vaccine development difficult. the vaccines we have for humans as well as for animals are not as highly effective as some of the other vaccines. and the virus can mutate away from or escape from the vaccines. there's a lot of balance about the avian vaccines and the human vaccines. of course we do work to prepare vaccine viruses and stockpiled vaccines against the original h-5 strains from asia. those are really preparing for pandemic readiness rather than
what we are using every day. senator johnson: we are always expecting just a miracle to save us from these things. what you're talking about with the vaccine, those only be a certain percentage to again with. plus we have a real problem with vaccine production in this country, do we not? we have a hard time producing enough vaccines sometimes for human flu. would we have -- if we start trying to vaccinate 300,000 chickens or 300 million chickens, cupple hundred million turkeys, do we have the capacity for that? can we ramp it up quickly enough? ms. schuchat: let me answer about the human vaccines and let dr. clifford to respond about avian vaccines. the u.s. has invested an enormous amount in expanding our manufacturing base, and the investment in influenza vaccine production and distribution. we actually have had 80%
increase in the flu vaccines produced and distributed annually in the past decade. as well as a much stronger infrastructure for pandemic vaccine production for humans. but the animal vaccine production works differently. senator johnson: the human vaccine, we had a pretty robust vaccine production capability, correct? then it was reduced dramatically lawsuits, that tiche thing? it was not an attractive business to be in so drug manufacturers exited the vaccine business correct? so we have had almost government intervention to boost that production in case of pandemic or reaction to these outbreaks. ms. schuchat: that's right. there's been a lot of u.s. government investment in stimulating the vaccine industry, both for influensa vaccines and routine vaccines we have a very strong public-private partnership where vaccine companies are making good profits. senator johnson: i want to go back to the root cause why we
didn't have the capacity we needed vaccines. it was because it was very unattractive business. people were being sued. people exited the business,, correct? ms. schuchat: i think it was less the suits than the issue of the profitability. when you're producing drugs, people will take medicines for their whole life. and successful vaccines you need a couple doses perhaps forever to prevent diseases from occurring. flu vaccines you give every year right now. but the market wasn't that favorable. things have changed a bit and we are in much better shape for pandemic readiness. senator johnson: is the manufacturing capacity different for animals versus humans? mr. clifford: yes it is. our service for veterinary biolodgics works with the companies here. i'm not concerned about capacity. it's more economics with the companies knowing that we would use vaccine. senator johnson: it's the same production technique though,
correct? mr. clifford: by and large. there's some new techniques being used as well. senator johnson: can speed the production of development? there's more compasset available for animal vaccines because you just don't risk the liability problem? why do we have so much more capacity for animal vaccines versus human? mr. clifford: i can't say that from the standpoint of human side. we have a lot of companies that are both domestic and international that have -- if they don't have the capacity here, they have approved -- can have approved products they can move here. if they can't be produced here, it can be produced somewhere else and -- so the capacity is there to produce the vaccine. senator johnson: quick question for you,. mr. currie you are going to have a g.a.o. audit on this. how do you think the usda will fare in that audit? i've had -- i have a general
sense of this is going to be a good one or might have problems. mr. clifford: i think they'll find some good things and find some areas we need to improve on. i think you oftentimes find that kind of situation. some of those lessons learned, we are definitely taking those and working with the industry and states to move those lessons learned so we don't repeat them in the fall and spring. senator johnson: mr. currie, do you think you'll see some improvement? they already learned lessons? what's your general sense? mr. currie: i think -- we know for instance we should report on a potential response to an outbreak like in in 2007 and made a number of recommendations that touched on almost to a tee all these challenges that we are facing. i don't know if any of us expected to be this big and bad. usda addressed all those recommendations. they are being tested now. in any emergency, whether it's a natural disaster, outbreak like this there will be challenges and lessons learned
and things we didn't expect and after action reporting we have to study. senator johnson: there's been good reaction to prior reports. lessons learned. it's never perfect. always room for improvement. senator carper. senator carper: thank you so much. we talked about this a couple times already in the hearing. i want to nail it one more time. talking about how do we mitigate -- back up. when we have a farm that goes down in delmarva because of ambian influenza a lot of times countries around the world would just say, they are not going to take niff our chickens. we also have concerns when we hear from countries in part of the trade negotiations going on right now with the transpacific trade partnership is the use of vaccinations in livestock. or birds. and to what extent does that impair our ability to sell to a lot of different countries? some countries don't want to have animals imported into their countries that have been
vaccinated. how can we mitigate the impact of vaccine related export bans that are imposed on the u.s.? dr. clifford? mr. clifford: i think one of the ways to do that is to have the plans availablele to share with certain countries so that they can see those first hand. how we would use it. and they would have the knowledge we are not just going to rely on vaccine. there would be an end game so you're not continuing to use vaccine. because it's -- as already stated the virus mutates. these vaccines don't remain highly effective for long periods of time. so other countries, if you use a lot of vaccine, will see that as a weakness to control or earl eradicate the decease. they have to understand we are using it as a tool. if we can convince them to do that, that would be a first step. i may just expand on this --
senator carper: briefly. mr. clifford: to senator tester's questions earlier. senator carper: asked a lot of questions. mr. clifford: this is the same thifpblgt we would take no action to put our industry at risk. we care about our mission. and we care about american agriculture. we wouldn't do that. but the fact is there's a lot of concern out there about the use of vaccine in a country that's free of f.m.d. with vaccinations. it's the same thing with high path a.i. we can't go around the world and say one thing to one country because of our position and do something different to somebody else. senator carper: thanks. this is not our first radio. it's not my first rodeo. when it comes to avian enflue wednesdaya this is not the first this year. this one we see from time to
time a lot more than we want to. one of the things we try to focus on in this committee is not dealing with symptoms or problems, but how do we deal with root causes? all these people trying to get in our country from heartin america, how do we deal not just with the symptoms, but the root causes of their migration. talk about root causes here. is there any way to address this challenge with avian influenza by addressing nom just the symptoms but addressing root causes? or is that impossible? jack, if you lead off. . mr. gelb: i think if you consider the root cause, the induction from wild bird populations, it's a new normal for us. as dr. clifford mentioned earlier on, we have not seen this. this is a new situation. and what we need to do if possible is to institute the biosecurity at the farm level,
for example. it's not only commercial farms but back beyond a reasonable doubt farmers which are increasingly important in our country and numerous as well. on several fronts this is very important. senator carper: one of the things we have done in delmarva, we have found yerl outbreaks came from not wild birds but from live bird auctions in places like new york. they have been cleaned up. mr. gelb: usda has done a wonderful job. that metropolitan new york area was once very heavily involved with certain h-7 types of avian influenza viruses. senator carper: if you want to jump in, do. mr. currie: we are very aware of the new challenges. monitoring of the wild birds is the challenge. i know usda last week issued a couple new strategies to help
determine how these -- this should actually be done in wild birds and waterfowl. new element that will have to be addressed. senator carper: dr. schuchat. has your name been pronounced? ms. schuchat: once or twice. senator carper: what's the wildest? ms. schuchat: not really sure. i didn't prepare for that question. it i think to step back and generalize a little bit, we think of this is an emerging infection where global threats are local threats. where the human-animal interface is very important. with influenza we are always worried because the virus is constantly changing and we are worried about what's happening in the rest of the world. with avian influenza we are keen to know what's going on in the animal surveillance as well as human. senator carper: dr. clifford? very briefly.
mr. clifford: senator, i think it's important to make one critical point here. this virus came from virus that was found in 1997 in china. it's an h-a-n-1 outbreak in asia where there was concern about the human pan democrat eck. we put money around the world into that area. we didn't put enough and didn't do the job. if we would have eradicated h-5-n-1 from asia, this would not have happened today. senator carper: great point. doctor. mr. schneider: i like it. if i can learn one thing i think i am going to be rethinking my entire biosecurity plan on my farm. i'm going to be reallocating funds towards increasing the structural operational, and cultural protocols i have in place for my farm. ultimately it's my problem and my farm and i need to do something about it. i'm going to be training my
employees a little bert. going to be controlling traffic on and off my farm. and i'm even going to take steps to try to control dust. and i would love to include the use of a vaccine in my toolbox when i come to biosecurity efforts on my harm. -- farm. senator carper: great response. i'll just close with this thought. i'm an old navy guy. nautical terms, in navy we got to face challenges like all hands on deck. this is all hands on deck. and i'm pleased to see that the hands, hands and minds here, represented here teed, are focused bigtime on this. i think working collaboratively together. i commend you for that. i appreciate very much what you said scott, about taking responsibility yourself. that's what needs to be done. i like to say, home depot, i don't know if you have a home depot in minnesota, add campaign if you can do it, we can help. this applies, you can do it, but we can help.
we have a role and responsibility to play. it's going to come again. it's going to come again. may come again this fall. we have to learn from our mistakes and stuff that works, figure out what works. do more of that. what dovente do less. thank you very much. senator johnson: one thing we like to do is offer the witnesses one last comment. i have to first go to dr. clifford. how would we wipe out that virus inure asia? mr. clifford: we talk about one world, one health. in global health security. we've got to be able to address these issues and make sure they are done. we address the human pandemic concern, but we basically reduced the funding and support necessary to continue -- senator johnson: how would we have done it? when you have migratory bird. how would we have done it? mr. clifford: you have to eradicate from the polltry. it was in the poultry.
it was killing the wild birds, but what happened because of its allowance to continue, when it became an h-5-n-8 it adapted it self to wild waterfowl and wouldn't kill some of these ducks. that's the problem. we had to get rid of it in poultry so you would stop this exchange of virus back and forth. senator johnson: other countries doesn't have -- they don't destroy flocks? mr. clifford: depends upon the contry. in asia, parts of asia, people will actually sleep with the birds and may have pigs outside. it's a whole different world. if we don't help in those cases, many those kind of diseases that have fonings may come back to this contry. senator johnson: that's my point. you're saying we didn't spend money to eradicate it. i'm not sure we could. closing comments.
mr. clifford: we could have tried. senator johnson: i understand. start with you. mr. clifford: again. just thank you. i think we have learned lessons and we want this process to be faster. it's critical that we get in there, kill birds quickly, and get these -- producers back on their feet faster. that's something to be taken to heart. senator johnson: dr. shoe chart, the -- dr. schuchat, we don't have a real good track record ourselves. so there is a bad pronunciation, probably came from this committee. dr. schuchat. ms. schuchat: influenza has been around for a really long time and continue tobs a major challenge. i think the big picture here is continued investment in improved vaccines, including the so-called universal influenza vaccine is important to get ahead of these problems for the future. senator johnson: mr. currie.
mr. currie: i talked how important coordination and plans are. it's easy to talk about those things but it's very difficult to address a real life situation like this. however, this is somewhat unique in that we have had an outbreak, it seems to be slowing, but we expect and we are worried about the next outbreak. we can actually learn many lessons learned, coordination lessons learned now and figure out what our capabilities need to be in other parts of the country that may be impacted by this. we can foningsly learn from this quickly and be ready for what we think might be coming in the fall. senator johnson: mr. gelb. mr. gelb: i think we need to help and protect the mr. schniders of our country. these we have seen the number of people involved directly in agriculture fall for many many years. we have these largely efficient means of producing food and poultry. but i think really the
producers and the farmers, family farmers, this is a wake-up call for us, i think. because we have enjoyed the best quality food, safest food supply in the world. now we are importing some shell eggs here from other countries. what's wrong with that peck ture? and we sometimes get into problems when we have to import food, not to mention some other kinds of materials, drugs, etc. thank you. senator johnson: you took the words right out of my mouth. my own back grouped, my parents were raced on small dairy farms. tradition of the family farm is dwindling. we can't allow that to happen. we can't allow people, mr. schneider, remain exposed. in this hearing i have learned that he is exposed. i thought we had coverage. i thought he was just having a hard time obtaining that coverage. i'm afraid he's completely exposed. i think both senator carper and i will work together to see what we can do to help those in mr. schneider's position and not just mr. schneider but
everybody, now and in the future. i'll make real commitment of this committee. it's not in our jurisdiction, but this is certainly our ability to hold an oversight hearing, to expose that particular problem as i said before. the panelists, it's about getting people to admit we have a problem. this is a real problem that needs to be addressed. mr. schneider. mr. schneider: one of the things that might be able to help people like me is just in the indemnity payment formula. and one of those things is specific to eggland farmers. the indemnification could be based on the future value of the eggs produced from those hence. that's where the egg industry is different from the broilers and turkeys. over a period of weeks those animals are raised and sent to market. in the egg industry, those animals are in my facility for over a year. sometimes even two years. and as the value of those eggs that will be produced, that's where there's indemnity payment based on that future value. that would help me out an awful
lot. senator johnson: as we discussed, there's got to be something -- in my business if you have catastrophic loss, you destroy your flock. that's a catastrophic loss. we've got to do something there's got to be some indemnification, some insurance that will keep you in business. business interruption insurance. i'm shocked that we don't have that either as a government program or as -- in private insurance. that to me is a takeway from this hearing. i want to thank all the witnesses for your testimony. state again this committee really does have a great deal of sympathy for your loss, mr. schneider, we are dedicated to doing what we can to help you out of your predicament. this hearing record will remain open for 15 days until july 23 for the submission of statements and questions for the record. this hearing is adjourned. [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] it >> in a few minutes today's senate hearing on avian bird flu. you can watch it again shortly, it will be available at our website. c-span.org. >> this week on first ladies. influence and impassenger. we learn about la reesha garfield and mary arthur
mcelroy. la reesha was an educated woman and believer in her husband's rights. when her husband was assassinated, she returned to ohio and ensured his legacy by making their home into an early version of the presidential library. chester arthur, a widower, and his sister, fills the role of first lady. and establishes white house social etiquette used by future first ladies for decades. lucretia garfield and mary arthur mcelroy. this sunday night at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span's original series first ladies, influence and image. examining the women who filled the position of first lady from martha washington to michelle obama. sundays at 8:00 p.m. eastern. american history tv on c-span3. >> c-span gives you the best access to congress. live coverage of the u.s.
house, congressional hearings, and news conferences. bringing you events that shape public policy. and every morning, "washington journal" is live with elected officials, policymakers, and journalists, and your comments by phone, facebook, and twitter. c-span, created by america's cable companies and brought to you as a public service by your local cable or satellite provider. >> the u.s. house has been in a break before starting legislative work for the day. and just a few moments, live here on c-span. a busy day is expected ahead. members will be considering a number of bills, including ones on education and the environment. later on, votes on amendments to the interior and e.p.a. spending bill. more live house coverage as members return now on c-span.
the speaker: the house will be in order. prayer today will be offered by our guest chaplain reverend hall first southern baptist church dale city, oklahoma. >> holy god, we give you thanks today for every good gift and we know every good gift comes from you. we give you thanks to the united states and the freedoms that stand within her borders. we give you thanks today to the men and women of this congress and placed in positions of leadership in our nation. may you give them wisdom, which can only come from you to
legislate in such a way that the laws of this nation might conform to your will. inpart in each of us to seek all things pertaining to life and eternal life. may we love you with our heart, soul strength and mind and may we love our neighbors in ourselves. as we pray in the name of jesus amen. the speaker: pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1, the journal stands approved. for what purpose does the gentleman from south carolina rise. mr. wilson: pursuant to clause 1 rule 1 i demand a vote on agreeing to the speaker's approval of the journal. the speaker: the question is on agreeing to the speaker a's approval of the journal. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the journal stand approved. mr. wilson: i object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present. the speaker: pursuant to clause 8, rule 20, further proceedings
on this question will be postponed. pledge of allegiance will be led by the the gentleman from minnesota. 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: the gentleman from oklahoma, mr. russell is recognized for one minute. mr. russell: thank you mr. speaker. it's my honor and privilege today to have with us to provide the opening prayer, my pastor and good friend, shane hall from dale city, oklahoma. he grew up in brook indiana he actually grew up in burns flat, oklahoma. he's a graduate of oklahoma baptist university, with a secondary in education. he also got a masters of divin
ity. he has pastored a half dozen churches in oklahoma and louisiana louisiana and the pastor of my home church. he also serves on the executive committee of the entire southern baptist convention and he is a member of the baptist general convention of oklahoma board of directors. his wife misty and two daughters are wonderful people that if you ever in oklahoma i encourage you to attend services and get to know them and thank you for allowing us to make his introduction this morning. and mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair will entertain up to 15 further requests for one-minute speeches on each side of the aisle. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> ask unanimous consent to
address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. johnson: mr. speaker, today i rise to honor the life of tina a well known community leader in plano and dallas and we had the privilege of calling him and his late wife dear friends. tino was a special person in our hometown. he imgrated to california in 1952 and became a proud american citizen serving in the united states army at fort hood and found his way to north texas where he opened his first restaurant. he loved to serve people. not only with good mexican food, but giving back to the community that he loved. in fact, he was the founding trustee of colin county college
and he served for nearly 30 years. tino was soft-spoken, kind hearted and will be missed in plano and texas. america would be a better place with more folks like him. yield back. mr. cicilline: i rise today to honor the members of the order of sons of italy which is celebrating its centennial anniversary in newport, rhode island. the lodge has worked to promote and celebrate italian culture on aquid neck island. and over the years established itself as a rhode island institution by hosting cultural events. lodge 391 scholarship opens each
year for italian american seniors each year and prepare a writtenes a. i congratulate the president and the men and women of the sons of italy on this important milestone and i extend my best wishes on their centennial celebration on july 23. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from minnesota seek recognition? mr. paulsen: mr. speaker, over the past few years, we have seen small brewers in minnesota and around the country continue to meet the needs of the public in growing appreciation of craft benches. these brewers are burdened that make it difficult to grow their business and play a role in the local economy. i have introduced the craft beverage modernization act to modernize the tax code and streamline regulations for these small businesses.
these small brewries are a true example of the american dream. and they grow to become successful while at the same time creating jobs. we need to make sure we embrace the potential this industry has and that means modernizing our tax rules and tax code to ensure these small employers continue to grow. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. jackson lee: mr. speaker many of us have not spoken on the floor of the house on the horrific tragedy that occurred in mother emanuel baptist church, our respect for our assistant leader, jim clyburn and respect for the families
that have buried their dead over the last week. many of us joined the president in south carolina for the funeral of reverend pinckney. i ask this body reflecting on two amendments that were offered last night regarding the confederate flag that were voted on by voice vote in the interior bill, but i ask today the leadership to allow this house to look at three initiatives, legislative initiatives offered by members. based upon the walker case, sons of the confederate, i want my colleagues to know that justice thomas ruled that government speech did not warrant the utilization of the rebel flag. in the words of senator pinckney. this is warranted. he says my liberty depends on you being free too.
history must be a manual of how to avoid repeating the mistakes of the past. how to break the cycle. he knew that the path of grace involved an open mind but more importantly an open heart. we need to debate on the floor of the house the symbols of hate in this nation and need to do it now. i ask my colleagues to join us in the legislative initiatives we have for this to be placed on the floor of the house for all of us to zand and debate about what is positive in america. . the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? mr. thompson: to ask unanimous consent to produces. i introduced a bill with my colleague mr. jim langevin. family career and community leaders of america is a national career and technical
student organization that promotes personal growth, leadership development, and career preparation opportunities for opportunities for family and consumer science education. since the program was launched 70 years ago to this day, more than 10 million students have participated and gained knowledge -- gained the knowledge, skills, and credentials needed to secure careers in growing high demand field. i was pleased to welcome students from forest county, pennsylvania stayed. as co-chair of the bipartisan congressional career and technical education caucus, i ask my friend to get behind this bipartisan resolution to support the goals and ideals of family career and community leaders of america. now more than ever our young people need assurances that the skills they obtain will lead to good-paying, family sustaining jobs in career and technical education programming that make shows assurances. thank you, mr. speaker. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentleman has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition?
the gentleman is recognized for one meant. >> mr. speaker for far too long republicans in congress have kept our nation stuck in neutral while our highways, bridges, and transit systems crumble around us. they keep riding the clutch with these short-term patches that keep the highway trust fund solvent for another couple of months. you could say we are in a big race and the road ahead is long. we can't keep stopping for gas every five minutes, and we got to stop scrounging under the seats of the floor mats for enough change to buy a gallon here and gallon there. mr. doyle: america's been in the lead. but now we are just inching along. if we don't get back on track soon, we'll be left in the dust by our foreign competitors. in the next few months alone, more than 600,000 american jobs are at risk. mr. speaker, congressional republicans are in the driver's seat. so they need to start driving like pros. it's time for congress to do their job, pass a long-term
plan to pay for much needed investments in our roads, rails, and bridges. i say fill her up with high test. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from south carolina seek recognition? mr. wilson: to ask unanimous consent to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. wilson: mr. speaker, president obama's nuclear negotiations with iran pose significant threats to american families. already the president has conceded too much. an agreement that does not clearly prohibit the development of nuclear weapons threatens american families and our closest allies such as israel. now as the negotiation deadline has been further extended it is clear that president obama is willing to grant more concessions to this murderous regime. whose program of developing intercontinental ballistic missiles puts america as the target. i am grateful that congress passed the iran nuclear agreement review act giving
congress a voice in the final deal. i urge the president to change course with this oppressive regime that promotes death to america, death to israel. it is not too late to prevent a legacy of appeasement and avoid being remembered as a new neville chamberlain, establishing nuclear weapons across the middle east. in conclusion, god bless our troops. may the president by his actions never forget september 11 and the global war on terrorism. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from south carolina yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? without objection. the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. hinojosa: mr. speaker, i rise in strong opposition to h.r. 5, a misguided bill which denies america's children access to high quality education. today greater numbers of economically disadvantaged
children are entering public schools. for example, in my state of texas i have five million students enrolled in public schools in 2014 statewide, more than three million would be adversely impacted if we vote to pass h.r. 5. this republican bill abandons the federal government's historic commitment to educating disadvantaged populations. h.r. 5 block grants vital federal programs such as title 1 of the education code targeted for english language learners, migrant children neglected and delinquent youth, and native american education. the bill allows states and districts to siphon away these federal funds and use them for other purposes because of the proposed changes in the intent of the education programs' past many years ago, 50 years ago to be exact under the leadership of president johnson. h.r. 5 would provide inadequate funding and move backward on equity and accountability harming the education of our
nation's children. i respectfully urge members of congress on both sides of the aisle to vote no on final passage today. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentleman from texas has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from minnesota seek recognition? >> unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection so ordered. >> mr. speaker, i rise today to celebrate one of my own, as of today my son joe is officially a member of the united states navy. my wife jackie and i, are the proud parents of seven children. last month, joe, our fifth child, graduated high school and now off to serve his contry. today as joe leaves for basic he knows that hard days lie ahead. mr. emmer: he understands he will have to listen and learn, and when the time comes, lead. like millions of brave and selfless americans before him joe has taken an oath to serve his nation and protect the freedoms we hold dear. my wife and i are so proud of joe and we are humbled by his chosen path.
so to joe and his fellow recruits, we honor and thank you for your service and we wish you fair winds and safe seas. joe. we will pray for you and look forward to seeing your transformation from citizen to sailor. we love you. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from florida seek recognition? . the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, today we wear red to bring back our girls boko haram has heeded isis call for increased violence and a rapid egregious acts of violence. bombings and shootings have ripped through the country killing 300 people in the past
week. ms. wilson: their violence and disregard cannot go unchecked. when the nigerian president visits the white house to discuss the fight against boko haram with president obama, we must know that he is here in congress and that we are committed to giving the government of nigeria the support it needs to defeat boko haram. mr. speaker, i urge my colleagues to join me in co-sponsoring house resolution 147 as amended to help the nigerian government bring back our girls and defeat boko haram for good. mr. speaker, don't forget to tweet tweet, tweet bring back our girls hash tag. bring back our girls, tweet, tweet, tweet. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from nebraska seek
recognition? >> request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. >> i rise today to express concern about continued acquisition of private lands by the federal government. the federal government currently owns about 30% of the land in our country but unable to properly maintain this land as evidenced by the park services $11.5 billion backlog of projects. they spend taxpayer dollars and resources on more land. mr. smith: many of my constituents are facing a push. june 30, "new york times" entitled let's fix our parks, not add more, further illustrates the scope of this problem criticizing the administration's decision to add seven new parks to the system. i urge my colleagues to oppose this and focus the attention on properly maintaining existing federal lands to ensure access for generations to come.
i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from arizona seek recognition? >> ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, i rise today to highlight an issue that deserves immediate attention. failure to bring the re-authorization of the exim bank to the floor for a vote. it plays a critical role in our economy opening international markets by facilitating the sale of goods and services overseas. the bank evens the playing field for american companies and allowing them to compete based on the quality of their product. allowing the banks authorization to expire will have real world consequences. if we don't act, american businesses that employ workers
will struggle to survive. there is no question that there are enough votes in this house, both the house and the senate to pass the exim bank re-authorization on a bipartisan basis. mr. speaker, for the sake of the american businesses and workers the republican leadership needs to stop playing to their out of touch base and start acting in the best interests of the american people by re-authorizing the exim bank immediately. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from louisiana seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house and revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. >> i rise to highlight the vital role that fort poke houses the primary joint readiness training center. it is also home to the third batallion tenth mountain
division, the lone brigade combat team, lethal and flexible combat unit. this team was recognized as a superior brigade combat team awarding the unit citation for its efforts in operation iraqi freedom. any cuts to this unit would deal a blow to the post and surrounding communities and louisiana as a whole. mr. boustany: the local community and state have invested money and donated land demonstrating their commitment to this post and as the army announces its troop realignment louisiana stands together to support the unit. the community and the military excellence they represent. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan seek recognition? >> seek unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. kildee: on july 31, the
highway transit and trust fund will expire. so what is the expiration of the trust fund mean to america? to american families? it means the potential loss of over 600,000 jobs. it means the cancellation of major infrastructure projects. in fact i heard this morning that five states have already canceled or delayed major projects because of congress' lack of ability to do its work. my home state of michigan, we know more than any place that if we invest in our roads, bridges and rails, we grow our economy. other nations, instead of planning months ahead are planning years ahead and building infrastructure. china for example, spending 10 times what we are as a percentage of their g.d.p. on infrastructure. back in may, instead of thinking about the decades to come and hundreds of thousands of jobs, this congress passed a two-month extension. a self-imposed man-made crisis
governing crisis to crisis on every big issue that we deal with. we can't let this happen. this congress needs to do its job. we need to come together in a bipartisan way. we can do it and pass an extension of the highway trust fund that invests in america, puts american workers back to work rebuilding this country. if we don't do this, we cannot expect our economy to grow. congress has to act. the speaker pro tempore: time of the gentleman has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia seek recognition? >> request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. mr. collins: ninth district of georgia is something we like and that is barbecue and our office knows this will and my intern from georgia, casey because we the latest pick of the nation's best barbecue and joe's barbecue was named number one in the
country. it is located 90 miles north of atlanta and founded three years ago by a former mortgage salesman. he moved to blue ridge 10 years ago and ended up doing barbecue. he calls it engineer's luck. it is turning into a legacy. customers travel from hundreds of miles to seek the secret recipe and been named number one as proof. we have many coming to northeast georgia to experience what we experience and always knew, i want to invite everyone to joe's barbecue in blue ridge. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentlelady from michigan seek recognition? >> address the house for one minute. mrs. dingell: i rise to bring to the attention of my colleagues a humanitarian crisis in yemen. my district is home to many who
are deeply concerned and many families have been in my office in total desperation in tears. this week, 45 civilians were killed after an air strike hit a marketplace. real concern is the outbreak of the fever. 3,000 cases of fever in yemen right now and other groups are estimating it's twice that. my constituents have family members who are suffering and no access to medications, doctors hospitals or even clean water. we must show u.s. leadership to help contain this outbreak. today i sent a letter to secretary kerry asking about plans the state department is undertaking to combat this problem. i hope my colleagues will join me in a bipartisan manner to support real concrete action that is needed to help the people of yemen, who are sick, desperate and in critical need of assistance and leadership.
thank you, mr. speaker. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentlelady has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from new hampshire seek recognition? recognized for one minute. mr. guinta: i rise to honor a selfless granite stater and rewarded the portsmouth rotary club's humanitarian award. don moore found sea coast pathways providing those with mental illness finding a place to live and a job, to develop talents and interests to stay engaged in our community. for far too long, the topic of mental health has been regarded as taboo and carries a stigma. don moore is changing this negative perception and bringing about positive change for our communities. the successes of the clubhouse model used by seacoast pathways
are board from granite pathways. i had the privilege of visiting both, meeting with the staffs and clubhouse members. the commitment to creating a goal of work education and stable housing are absolutely commendable. and it's because of the selfless and dedicated folks like don that our state is a shining example of best practices in this area. on behalf of the entire granite state congratulations to don on receiving a well deserved honor and working tirelessly. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentleman has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from connecticut seek recognition? the gentleman is recognized. >> mr. speaker, four days ago on july 4, a young man was murdered was -- on a crowded subway. kevin joseph sutherland.
he was my campaign volunteer, intern and friend. maybe that's unremarkable. violence seems to be a part of who we are and all too present with us. i want to tell this house, kevin was in washington because he believed the best of us, each one of us. he believed that we could come together. he believed that we could set aside our petty prejudices. he believed that we could bring our voices together in this chamber and make a better world. i think there's a chance that 20 years from now kevin might have served in this chamber. now that's not going to happen. kevin's spirit of openness, of optimism of possibility that spirit must live on in this chamber and in our hearts. thank you, kevin. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the
gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from arkansas seek recognition? >> permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> i rise today to pay tribute to pay tribute to between william andly long and private clinton easy wala. on june 1, 2009 these soldiers were the target of a terrorist attack at a military recruiting station in my hometown of little rock, ar can saw which andy long did not survive. last wednesday after a wait of six years these two soldiers were finally awarded the purple heart medals they deserved. i was privileged to be present as easy and the family of andy long received the recognition they deserved for their sacrifice to our nation.
mr. hill: andy's father put it best at the ceremony when he stated this was never just about purple hearts. it was accurately about identifying what really happened in little rock and at fort hood. these acts were not simply a drive-by shooting or workplace attacks, but attacks on our service members on our homeland. i'm appreciative of the work of our entire congressional delegation, both past and present whose efforts over the past six years ensured the sacrifice of these young men has been fully recognized and honored. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentleman has expired. for what purpose does the gentlelady from new hampshire seek recognition? . the gentlewoman virginia tech. >> today i rise to honor one of new hampshire's best and brightest educators upon her retirement. chris teen rath has served as
superintendent of the concord school district for 15 years. helping to mane tain the high standards of public education in concord, new hampshire. i'm a proud product of concord's public schools so they hold a special place in my heart. chris started her teaching career right here in washington d.c., in the 1960's as a member of president johnson's teacher corps designed to help educate low-income students in cities across this country. miss cufter: that's where she -- ms. kuster: that's where she met her husband. after they moved to new hampshire, she taught in potstown, worked in concord's second start alternative education program, and became the principal of recommendlet middle school in concord. chris has spent decades working to provide excellent education and support to students of all ages across the granite state. our young people are our nation's greatest resource, and it's absolutely essential that
they have the tools they need to follow their dreams and meet the challenges of the 21st century. chris sets an extraordinary example for young educators who hope to change the lives of their students you through commitment and create test. i applaud her empressive service to the students, the city of concord, and the granite state. with that i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentlewoman has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. >> thank you, mr. speaker. last week, just last week an american woman was shot an killed by an illegal emgrant while wuker walking through a tourist frenly air ofa san francisco with her father mr. lamalfa: she was killed for moo reason. by an illegal immigrant convicted of seven felonies deported five times, but released by san francisco police department again over
the objections of federal immigration authorities. this is sadly not the first time this happened. several years ago a father and his two sons were killed by an illegal emgrant felon who again, san francisco refused to detain for federal immigration authorities. the evidence is clear, sanctuary city laws make our cities less safe and endanger americans. despite liberal claims contrary, this refusal means dangerous criminals with no regard for our laws are walking the streets. in california alone, over 10,000 immigration detainer requests were declined 10,000 known criminals were released in violation of federal law. it's time for the house to act to ensure the federal government does not aid cities who refuse to enforce our nation's laws that. would be comprehensive reform we can all understand. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentleman has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore:
without objection, the gentleman is recognized. mr. tonko: thank you, mr. speaker. even though many in congress still refuse to admit climate change is a very real problem, the administration has been leading action on what has become one of the most important issues of our generation. this week the white house announced a new initiative to increase access to solar energy. especially in low and moderate income communities. this is a critical step to reducing our carbon footprint and showing the world that we are indeed, ready to lead by example when it comes to clean energy in innovation. the initiative expands training and education for jobs in the solar industry and is a partnership with the private sector to increase diversity in a new green collar work force. access to clean, reliable energy results in good-paying jobs, cleaner air, and an opportunity for our innovators and entrepreneurs to grow our economy. as a member of the safe climate caucus and co-chair of the
sustainable energy and environment coalition, i applaud and support the administration's announcement this week and continue to press for broader climate action in this congress. with that, mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentleman has expired. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from arizona seek recognition? without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. ms. mcsally cloverpb -- ms. mcsally: i rise today to honor the life of dr. rafael stegrin a world renowned scientist and university of arizona professor who died tragically a few weeks ago. he was passionate about the world's oceans and applying the lesson of our natural world to solve modern challenges. he earned widespread recognition for theorize rizing that governments can learn national defense techniques by studying how animals adapt to threats they face in the wild. during his lifetime, he authored three books and nearly four dozens scholarly articles
and book chapters. at the time of his death he was leading a u of a project called biosphere two that required creating a functional model of the gulf of california in the so norian dezer. i was fortunate to hear him earlier this year about his work. i'm also currently reading his insightful book on the subject. he will be missed by so many around the world but his contaje yoss spirit and grond braking contribute shns over many years will have lasting impacts. rest in peace, i yield back. soap the gentlewoman yield back the balance of her team. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> knack to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: -- unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. mcnerney: mr. speaker, during a severe crisis such as the one now in california we must focus on solutions that create water and maintain a clean water supply. that's why i'm stressing how
crucial the clean water and safe drinking water state revolving funds are. clean and safe water is essential for our homes farms, and businesses. these funds help finance projects that treat domestic sewage, capture storm water runoff, and deliver drinking water to homes and businesses. the programs are the only low cost loans available for many small and medium-sized communities to finance clean water infrastructure. every dollar that we invest in water infrastructure comes back to our economy six times over. cutting the s.f.r. programs will have a crippling effect on our communities' abilities to meet water needs. republicans say they support drought relief, but in reality they cut desperately needed funds for both these programs, a 23% cut in the house interior and e.p.a. appropriation bill being debated today.
congress must provide necessary funding to maintain our nation's aging water infrastructure. our communities depend upon it. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentleman has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized. mr. takano: mr. speaker, i rise today to oppose h.r. 5, also known as the student success act. the federal government has played a key role in funding our education for 40 years. 40 years, mr. speaker. we know how effective title 1 is when it is properly funded. we know low-income and the low-income children and english language learners are negatively impacted when education funding is block granted or made portable. h.r. 5 does all these things. it locks in cuts to title 1 funding. block grants many of the funding streams dedicated to specific at-risk population.
and it allows these fnds to be diverted aweigh from the -- funds to be diverted away from the districts and schools that need them most. it is meant to promote opportunity mr. speaker. not taken away. i urge my colleagues to oppose h.r. 5. while ranking member scott's substitute amendment is an improvement over the current law and i will support it, i still have serious concerns about our nation's emphasis on standardized testing. we cannot continue to use standardized test scores to punish teachers and schools. thank you. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentleman has expired. for what purpose does the gentlelady from california seek recognition? the gentlelady is recognized for one minute. mrs. capps: i rise today in strong opposition to h.r. 5, the so-called student success act. there should be no question that education in this country
is a right not a privilege. every student deserves the opportunity to succeed and that opportunity begins with equal access to high quality education. but this bill severely undercuts our public schools. it slashes funding and takesway critical resource from students with the greatest need. it eliminates key protections for students with disabilities. it guts support for vital after school programs. and on the central coast of california where i'm from, our high school graduation rates have continuously improved over the past five years. exceeding statewide averages. we must build upon these successes not turn the clock backwards by dismantling equity and accountability standards. we must instead continue to move forward, deliver the promise of a great education, and the opportunity for a bright future. sadly this bill only takes away that promise. i urge my colleagues to vote no on h.r. 5 and yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the
time of the gentlelady has expired. for what purpose does the the gentlewoman from florida seek recognition? the gentlelady is recognized. >> mr. speaker, today i rise to honor the late bernice flozell who passedway at the age of 98 last week. she was a civil rights leader in tallahassee who participated in the bus boycott of 1956. ms. graham: she was a devout christian who with her husband founded cavalry baptist church in 1958. later she became the church's pastor, one of the first women to do so in tallahassee. she was a fixture at town hall meetings and charity drives. and she was always there to help those in need. we lost a true north florida hero but i'm so thankful that we had her for so long. may god bless pastor bernice
flozell and may he bless each of us with the strength and dedication to serve our communities as well as she did. thank you mr. speaker. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back the balance of her time. one minutes have now expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from washington seek recognition? >> mr. speaker by direction of the committee on rules i call up house resolution 347 and ask for its immediate consideration. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the resolution. the clerk: house calendar number 46. house resolution 347. resolved, that during further consideration of the bill h.r. 5 to support state and local accountability for public education, protect state and local authority, inform parents of the perform avens their children's schools, and for other purposes, pursuant to house resolution 125, it shall
be in order to consider the further amendments printed in part a of the report of the committee on rules accompanying this resolution. as though they were the last further amendments presented in part b of house report 114-29. section 2, at any time after the adoption of this resolution, the speaker may pursuant to clause 2-b of rule 18 declare the house resolved into the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for consideration of the bill h.r. 2647. to expedite under the national environmental policy act an improved forest management activities and units of the national forest system derived from the public domain on public lands under the jurisdiction of the bureau of land management, and on tribal lands to return resellens to overgrown, fire prone forested land and for other purposes. the first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. all points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. general debate shall be confined to the bill and amendments specified in this
section and shall not exceed one hour equally divided among and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on arkansas and the -- agriculture and the committee and ranking member of the committee on natural resources. after general debate, the bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. in lieu of the amendments in the nature of a substitute recommended by the committees on agriculture and natural resources now printed in the bill, it shall be in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the five-minute rule an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of rules committee print 114-21 modified by the amendment printed in part b of the report of the committee on rules accompanying this resolution. that amendment in the nature much a substitute shall be considered as read. all points of order against that amendment in the nature of a substitute are waived. no amendment to that amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be in order except those printed in part c of the report of the committee on rules. each such amendment may be
offered only in the order printed in the report, may be offered only by a member designated in the report. shall be considered as read. shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question in the house or in the committee of the whole. . at the conclusion of consideration of the bill for amendment the committee shall rise and report the bill to the house with such amendments as may have been adopted. any member may demand a separate vote adopted in the committee of the whole to the bill or to the amendment in the nature of a substitute made in order as original text. the previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage except one motion to recommit with or without instruction. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from washington is
recognized for one hour. mr. newhouse: thank you mr. speaker. during consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only. i would now yield the 30 minutes to the gentleman from colorado my good friend, mr. polis, pending which i yield myself such time as i may consume. mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. so ordered and the gentleman from washington is now recognized for such time as he may consume. mr. newhouse: mr. speaker, on tuesday the rules committee met and reported a house rule, house resolution 347, providing for consideration of two important pieces of legislation for which i'm honored to be able to bring forward for consideration by this legislative body. h.r. 2647 the resilient federal forest act of 2015 and h.r. 5, the student success act.
the rule provides for consideration of h.r. 2647 under a structured rule with four amendments made in order, majority of which were offered by our democratic colleagues, members of the house. the rule also provides for further consideration of h.r. 5 under a structured rule with four additional amendments that were made in order. mr. speaker, this rule provides for consideration of h.r. 2647. the resilient federal forest act of 2015, a bill that is critically important to my district in central washington state, which is unfortunately once again facing another devastating wildfire season. this bipartisan comprehensive legislation is aimed at expediting and improving forest management activities in federal forests and builds upon many legislative concepts introduced in this and in previous congresses to address disastrous consequences of catastropheic
wildfire, insect and disease infestations and other threats to our nation's forests. h.r. 2647 would return resilience to the overgrown fire-prone forests that encompass a great deal of land in the western united states. it would dramatically improve the health and resiliency and range lands by simplifying the environmental requirements, curtailing project planning times and reducing the costs of imementplementing forest management projects all while still ensuring robust protection of the environment. mr. speaker, just last year in my district in central washington we endured the carlton complex wildfire. the largest in our state's history which was responsible to the destruction of over 300 homes and businesses. this devastating catastropheic
wildfire crippled my district and many of my constituents are still trying to recover. yet it seems as soon as we start to move past one major wildfire another is immediately on our doorstep, literally. almost 10 days ago, new fires broke out in washington state and in cities like wenachee and grant and adams and douglas, spreading and some requiring washington state fire mobilization resources to keep them from escalating. as the west continues to face drought conditions the threat of wildfire will only continue to worsen. in order to prevent and address these fires, we need to reform the way we prepare for and respond to and fund wildfire response and mitigation efforts. we cannot continue to limp from one devastating fire season to the next living -- leaving no time for reforestation and
rehabilitation and overall forest management. this bill provides new methods of funding which will tackle the problem of fire borrowing and includes tools the forest service can implement immediately to treat thousands of acres of forest land at a lower cost. earlier this year, the house natural resources committee subcommittee of federal lands held a hearing on this bill. one of the witnesses testifying was u.s. forest chief tom tidwell. he remarked that the forest service is encouraged by many of the goals outlined within the bill and welcomes legislation that incentivizes collaboration and expands the tool set we can use to complete critical work on our nation's forests without overriding environmental laws. i believe these comments reflect the bipartisan nature in which this legislation was drafted and
highlight the necessity of reforms we are considering here today. mr. speaker, it should be noted that because of the reforms and streamlined authorities in this bill, there will be an increase in acres of treated land, all at no additional costs to taxpayers. this legislation is essential and desperately needed to change the current path of forest management on public lands, which is outdated unsustainable and dangerous. this rule also provides for the further consideration of h.r. 5 the student success act, an education reform bill that reduces the federal government's footprint and restores local control over education by eliminating wasteful and programs and replacing them with guidelines that maintain high performance expectations and appropriate levels of funding. this legislation provides local governments with the flexibility
necessary to develop appropriate strategies with which to serve their students, parents and communities. the elementary and secondary education act known as no child left behind has been due for re-authorization since 2007. because it has not been re-authorized, the administration has been free to circumvent congress and impose its own vision of education reform on the country, resulting in unprecedented intervention in local education issues. the student success act addresses this overreach by streamlining and eliminating more than 70 secondary and elementary programs that be deemed ineffective and promotes focused, efficient level in the education system. h.r. 5 will eliminate the current one size fits all federal accountability requirement and replace it with state-determined accountability systems designed to maintain
high expectation for our nation's schools. additionally the bill supports and encourages parental engagement in their children's education by helping parents to enroll their children in charter schools and allowing title 1 funds to follow low-income children to the school of their parents' choice. mr. speaker, a well educated work force is imperative to the health and vitality of both our nation's children and our economy. the students success act will benefit students parents teachers and school administrators by returning responsibility for student achievement to the states and local communities while maintaining high standards and expectations for our nation's students, teachers and schools. mr. speaker, this is a good, straightforward rule allowing for consideration of two critical pieces of legislation that will help protect our rural communities, provided much
needed reforms to our education system and ensure that we are prepared to respond to devastating and catastropheic wildfires that have plagued many areas of our country. i support the rule's adoption and i urge my colleagues to support both the rule and the underlying bills. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from washington reserves. for what purpose does the gentleman from colorado seek recognition? mr. polis: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. polis: i thank the gentleman from washington for yielding me the customary 0 minutes. i met one of the superintendents from my district superintendent of boulder valley schools and bruce told me as so many have, that the outdated policies stifle innovation and burden teachers and principals with overtesting. i remember these concerns because i served on our state board of education in colorado from 2000 to 2006 when we were
implementing no child left behind and as we are now frustrated, we were then frustrated with the lack of flexibility, the fact that solutions were coming out of washington, rather than honoring our local accountability system and how to make things work locally. we knew we wouldn't have 100% proficiency in all subgroups within a decade. we knew we needed reasonable goals to look at student achievement growth rather than the one-year picture. since that time, there has been additional discretion given through a policy of waivers, including my home state of colorado. we can agree that it is past time to re-authorize and replace no child left behind with a federal education policy that makes sense. unfortunately the bill before us today is not that policy that makes sense. one need go no further than looking at the beginning of the bill on page seven, just to see
some of the tea party paranoia that underpins a lot of this bill. it starts out on page seven as a finding of congress saying the secretary of education has created a system of waivers and grants that influence incentivize and coerce state educational agencies into implementing common national curriculum, programs of instruction and assessments for elementary and secondary education. just patently false. first of all, i believe that this is a reference incorrect of course, to the common core standards. standards are different than curriculum. standards are differently than programs of instruction, which stem from curriculum and standards are different from assessments. common core was an effort of the states to create college-ready standards. what the federal government and secretary duncan have attempted to do is states need to have college and career-ready
standards. can't say that kids are passing the test because it's an insufficient tests and whether the states do it through common core or other types of standards, they are welcomed to do it. none of that, and the -- none of that has to do with curriculum or program of instruction. those are entirely developed at the local level. standards and the grade-level expectations are one thing. curriculum is another. this bill starts with a false premise. it starts with a premise that somehow washington is trying to run local school districts. that has never been the case nor should it be the case. and if that is the beginning of the essence of our cooperation, i think we can work together on a bill that empowers teachers, local school districts and states with an accountability system that makes sense and the resources they need to meet the
learning needs of all students. more than a decade has passed since congress has authorized no child left behind. while there are some good intentions in this bill and some good language which is reflected in our democratic substitute, it is far outweighed by the unintended consequences of the harmful language that's in this bill. let me give you a refresher, in early february chairman kline introduced this bill and without input from democrats and drafted with zero committee hearings. the bill immediately went to markup and passed along partisan lines. the bill resembled the bill last session that passed this congress with zero democratic votes. this bill is actually worse for a number of reasons i'll get into than the bill that attracted zero democratic support last session. this bill was brought before the house in february. it was then pulled.
look everybody can agree that this is a bad bill. teachers say it is a bad bill. principals say it's a bad bill. the civil rights community say it's a bad bill. disability advocates, the business community and the chamber do not support this group. the only group that we could find are superintendents. i'm sure they will find a few more. we will have a number of groups that oppose this bill for a number of reasons. and those reasons are correct. if it looks bad, if it looks like a duck and walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it is a duck. it is hard to bring them around anything and to bring them around saying this bill will result in less educational opportunities for american kids really is a crowning achievement. we need a bill that prepares the next generation of our work force. we need re-authorization that
helps improve american competitiveness in the global economy. we need a bill that expects the best of teachers and gives them the respect they deserve. we need a bill that cares for students with special needs and gives them the support they need. we need a bill that allows innovation in our schools and lesbian, gays and transgender students from discrimination and bullying. both times that i offered an amendment to include the student nondiscrimination act, it was not allowed in the rules committee. and we need a bill that ensures that every child in america has access to a world-class education regardless of their zip code, their race their background, socioeconomic class or sexual orientation. the democratic substitute that mr. scott has offered and will be debated on, is a strong step forward areflects many of these priorities. it would have been wise for chairman kline and the sponsors of the bill to take a closer
look at mr. scott's democratic substitute and to consider many of those provisions in the underlying bill. now, i do want to point out a few of the good provisions in the bill, all of which are reflected in the democratic substitute and reflected in some of the language being debated in the senate as well. . i know how public charter schools can achieve the highest level of success. the new america school serves over 2,000 students in over 40 countries. i was honored to speak at its colorado graduation and it was moving to hear some of the tales of some of the immigrant students in these schools. charter school title 5 programs and both the democratic substitute nearly identical language that ups the bar on charter schools, makes sure that the districts and states have best policies surrounding charter schools and making sure
that successful charter school models can replicate and ickspand more students. i'm also pleased that two of my amendments have already passed the house in the previous debate in february. one of my amendments encourages collaboration of charter schools and public schools and another amendment allowed funds to be used for open educational resources to help save districts and students money on textbooks and other programs. these resources that are open source which are license but free to use can reduce the burden of overtesting and can help reduce costs in education. now, there's not a lot more to say with regard to the positive provisions in this bill but i want to talk about one of the biggest shortcomings and namely getting accountability right. we can all agree that no child left behind did not get accountability right. but the answer is to move forward and improve upon and make accountability work, not to take a step backward which is what this bill does by having a misguided set of principles of finding performance targets and
accountability. in fact, if this bill were to become law states would not be required to set performance targets based on student growth, proficiency or graduation rates. the bill doesn't define low-performing schools, nor does it establish any parameters for intervention when we know a school isn't working. one of the most compelling things that we can do here in washington is equip local superintendents are with the toolbox they need to help turn around persistently failing schools, and this bill fails to do that. mr. speaker, we should provide schools with more flexibility in the design school improvement programs that no child left behind does. we should not allow dropout factories continue to exist, elementary schools where we know the kids falling further and further behind every year. no kid should be trapped in a failing school with no recourse. we need to fix accountability, not step away from it, and this bill constitutes the federal government throwing up its arms
and making themselves look good while leaving more students behind. this problem is compounded by another amendment that was not even previously discussed that has now been allowed under this bill salmon amendment number 129 which is opposed from civil rights groups from naacp to la raza to lieu lack. the salmon amendment assumes that disadvantaged students are not capable of high achievement, perpetuating low expectations that are projected on students of color, poor students, immigrant students students with disabilities and others. this amendment effectively gives in to those political pressures which we all feel that work disadvantaged students. that work against them at the district level because often their parents are not enfranchised members of the student, work against them at the state level because they're
up against the special interests and, yes, work against them here even in washington. this body needs to stand up for disadvantaged communities. needs to stand up for african-americans, latinos, immigrant communities, those students with disabilities and ensure that any defrishts in the quality of instruction for -- deficiency and the quality of instruction is not swept under the rug as the salmon amendment would do. and i strongly encourage my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to reject the salmon amendment. while no left behind certainly had its flaws, it did move us forward in continuing to serve low-income, minority students, english language learners and students with disabilities. h.r. 5 is a step backwards. it excludes students with disabilities from school accountability systems. the bill eliminates the 1% cap on alternate assessments are based on alternative achievement standards. again, there's a real-world problem to be solve. there are some kids with
learning problems so severe they can't be given a test for accountability purposes. and that 1% number isn't arbitrary -- is an arbitrary number. you should argue it could be half a percent or 1.5%. i would be fully open, as many of my colleagues were, to figure out what that number is. the answer is not to eliminate that answer and a state that might serve 12% of a population with students with disabilities to say none of those students will be tested. none of those students with individual education plans, none of those students who might be dyslexic will be looked at in terms of how they're learning. you know what my father was dyslexic and it took him until fifth grade to learn how to read. under the provisions of this bill he might not learn how to read because he and millions of other americans might be swept under the rug with the elimination of the cap. this bill also fails to invest in our nation's teachers. in february, i introduced the great teaching and leading for
great schools act which would advance a new definition of professional development based on research and best practices. professional development doesn't have to simply be hiring someone to lecture teachers for a few hours. in fact, there's proven data-proven ways that can advance teachers. feedback from teachers and principals making sure our professional development opportunities work. unfortunately h.r. 5 eliminates any requirement that ensures quality professional development for teachers. now, let me talk about one of the most concerning provisions in this bill to democrats, including myself, and it's an innocuous name. it's called title 1 portability. sounds like a good concept. it says the federal aid for students of poverty would follow the student. now, that sounds good. again, just as that finding somehow the federal government should never do these programs of destruction and national
curriculum sounds good. it's void of the facts. let me tell you what this provision would do. what this provision would do is shift millions of dollars from schools that serve our most at-risk kids, to schools that serve wealthier children. the center for american progress recently released a report that broke down exactly what the language would mean for high-need schools in each state. in colorado alone, schools that serve students of poverty would lose over $8 million of funding. so again, let's talk about how this works. there's a threshold in each school district for schools that receive title 1 free and reduced lunch services. they're focused on the schools that serve the largest pockets of poverty. in boulder valley school district whose superintendent was in to meet with me today, they offer title 1 services in schools that have about 40% or more free and reduced lunch kids. those focus on the schools that have the highest need.
and what is overall a fairly prosperous school district. if this provision were passed, resources would be diverted out of those schools that are in our neediest communities to the schools that are in our wealthiest communities. as our ranking member has said and probably will say again what problem is it you're trying to solve by shifting resources from poor schools to wealthy schools? well, again, it's a noble concept and their way to hold harmless or support at-risk schools there might be some basis of discussion by myself and some members on our side of the aisle. but to shift hundreds of millions of dollars from schools that serve kids and communities of poverty to wealthier schools, under any possible account rehabilitate metric i guarantee you will only increase the already persistent learning gap that exists between communities of
poverty and prosperous communities and is exactly the wrong way to go with regard to how we target our federal resources to make the biggest difference of the lives of americans who deserve access to quality public education. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from colorado reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from washington is recognized. mr. newhouse: thank you, mr. speaker. i appreciate my colleague on the other side of the aisle's enthusiasm on this issue. this is an important topic, something we've been discussing and debating for many, many years and will continue to because all of us want to do right by the children in our school districts. they are our future. we have equal amount of enthusiasm on our side of the aisle. at this time i'm very pleased to yield two minutes to the good gentleman from louisiana our majority whip, mr. scalise. the speaker pro tempore: the majority whip, mr. scalise, is recognized for two minutes. mr. scalise: thank you mr. speaker. i thank the gentleman for yielding. i rise in support not only of the rule but of the underlying legislation with the reforms that are included not only in
the bill but in the amendments that are coming forward in this rule. and i first want to commend chairman kline and his staff for working over the last few months with many members of our conference that had some real issues they wanted to see addressed in the bill and i want to talk about a few of those. specifically the salmon amendment that this rule makes in order that brings forward the ability for parents to opt out of testing in a way that doesn't impact the local school system. this comes out of question of whether or not you trust parents to make the right decisions for their children. in making real reforms that give parents more control, getting washington out of those decisions and allowing local innovation to move forward and allowing parents to make those decisions about what's best for their children. so the salmon amendment does that. i strongly support it. i know chairman kline supports it as well. i want to also point out the rokita amendment. this was an amendment that chairman kline worked very closely with a number of our members on to bring forward to
reduce the time frame of the authorization. instead of a six-year authorization it would be a four-year authorization. give an opportunity to let the next administration put their own prints on what they want to see in terms of education reform while allowing these other reforms to move forward. and that's an amendment that chairman kline supports, as i do and hopefully gets added to the bill. the third amendment i want to talk about is the zeldin amendment. this is an amendment that gets the federal government out of common core, not only financially but also taking the ability of the secretary of the department to use things like common core as a bludgeon when they're determining whether or not to approve waivers. so i think it's very important to get the federal government out of those decisions of common core. and that's what the zeldin amendment does. finally the walker amendment allowing a vote on a-plus is something that i support and i'm glad that that's in the rule as well. so many good reforms. not only with the amendments but with the underlying bill to give parents more control and get the federal government out of those decisions, really good
legislation, advances conservative causes in letting innovation happen at the local level. so with that i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from louisiana yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from colorado is recognized. mr. polis: thank you, mr. speaker. i'd like to yield two minutes to the gentlewoman from florida, the ranking member of the education and work force subcommittee on work force protections, ms. wilson. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from florida is recognized for two minutes. ms. wilson: mr. speaker as a former teacher, elementary school principal, and school board member i know firsthand that no child left behind is in need of serious improvement improvements must take substantial steps towards fulfilling the promises made by esea. those simple yet powerful promises that are at the heart of this civil rights law
promises made to all american children. h.r. 5 ignores these promises and endangers the educational gains made in the 50 years since esea was passed. h.r. 5 threatens to thrust us back to a time when the right to quality education was merely an intangible promise for disadvantaged children. it ignores the promises of the heart of this civil rights law. we must take substantial steps towards fulfilling the promises made by esea. h.r. 5 ignores the promise to value every child by allowing states and school districts to redirect funds away from the schools and the children most in need. they call it portability. h.r. 5 ignores the promise that every child counts by using vague and undefined accountability measures and failing to provide federal guardrails for student achievement.
h.r. 5 ignores the promise that every child deserves a quality education by failing to address our dependence on deeply problematic standardized tests. we need to move towards a more balanced assessment that measures diverse kinds of success in teaching and learning. mr. speaker, i spent decades working to understand how children learn, and i can tell you this -- this bill fails to meet the very promises that are essential for educating our children and are at the heart of esea. i strongly urge all of my colleagues to vote against this bill of unfulfilled promises. thank you and i yield back. . the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from washington seek recognition? mr. newhouse: i yield three minutes to someone that really embodies something that i have
seen in this congress since becoming a member. we have people on both sides of the aisle that dedicate their lives in different fields. the gentlelady from north carolina, congresswoman foxx, a colleague and member of the rules committee has dedicated her life to education and i yield three minutes to her. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from north carolina is recognized. ms. foxx: i thank my colleague from washington for yielding and his kind comments. mr. speaker today's debate on education the students success act is a crucial one for our future. over the last five decades the federal government's role has increased dramatically. the department of education currently runs 80 k-12 programs, many of which are duplicative or ineffective. i saw how the vast reporting requirements for these federal programs tie the hands of state and local school education leaders. my colleagues on the house education and work force
committee and i have been working on the students success act to make commonsense changes to update federal law addressing the concerns raised following no child left behind. our legislation is centered on four principles, reducing the federal footprint in education, empowering parents supporting effective teachers and restoring local control. h.r. 5, the students success act will streamline the department of education's bureaucracy by eliminating 65 duplicative and ineffective federal education programs cutting through the bureaucratic red tape that is stifling innovation in the classrooms, and use federal education funds as they believe will meet the unique needs of their student. additionally this legislation will take steps to limit the secretary's authority by prohibiting him or her from coercing states into adopting academic standards like the
common core. if we would like to reduce the federal government's role in education, we must act. in the absence of congressional action president obama and his education department have taken unprecedented steps to regulate education. beginning in 2011 the obama administration began offering states temporary waivers from no child left behind's onerous burden in exchange for granting the secretary of education complete discretion to four states -- to coerce states to enacting the president's education reforms. the students success act provides an important opportunity to stop president obama's overreach into state and local education debates through his waiver scheme. our children deserve better. it's time to acknowledge more federal intrusion cannot address the challengeses facing schools. that is the promise of the students success act. a reduced federal role focused
on restoring authority and control to parents, teachers states and communities on how our children are educated. i urge my colleagues to support the rule and the underlying bill. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the the gentlewoman from north carolina yields back. the gentleman from colorado is recognized. mr. polis: i yield one minute to the gentleman from wisconsin. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. pocan: on the 50th anniversary of the elementary and secondary education act, now more than ever we must ensure that every kid has access to a great school. it shouldn't matter who your parentsr what zip code you live in or how many zeros are at the end of your bank account, h.r. 5 breaks the promise made 50 years ago to help all kids get a good public education and recognizes the challenges faced by kids living in poverty. republicans will have the opportunity to make their bad
bill even worse by allowing an amendment to come to the floor today which turns esea into a block grant and using resource meaning states can redirect federal funds towards taxpayer-funded vouchers for religious schools. that has been a failed experiment in wisconsin and hurts kids everywhere. i urge a no vote on h.r. 5, a bad bill that could get even likely worse today. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from washington is recognized. mr. newhouse: i would like to yield two minutes to a fellow freshman, the gentleman from georgia for two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. alal mr. speaker, the -- who knows best how to educate our children. i rise to speak about the
students success act. this is legislation that i believe goes a long way of getting the federal government out of the way of our schools and teachers and putting education back in the right hands by restoring control. as a member of the education and work force committee, i spent several hours marking up this legislation. i also visited several schools in my district and spoke with parents, teachers and administrators about the challenges they are facing. what i heard across the board is that top-down regulations from washington are burdening our teachers with endless compliance requirements. our teachers need to focus on the individual needs of their student and classes. instead, our current system is forcing them to spend time filling out paperwork and meeting this one size fits all requirement. that's exactly why h.r. 5 is
important legislation that i urge my colleagues to support today. this bill replaces the current accountability system that says washington knows what's best for our students and replaces it with a system that gives states and school districts responsibility for measuring the success of their schools. through bottom-up reforms, it restores local control and gives our educators more freedom to innovate. i personally seen in my district how students and communities benefit from local innovation in schools. we have one such example in my district that does not get one dollar of federal funding and takes children who are discarded by the public school system and makes successful students from this group. i'm very proud of what this school has accomplished. h.r. 5 and parent's parents with more information to hold schools accountable for effective
teaching and expands opportunities to send their children to a school that best meet their needs. it also gets rid of almost 70 unnecessary federal programs, in-- and instead creates a block grant that provides money to the states. would the gentleman yield 30 seconds? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for additional 30 seconds. >> under h.r. 5 states are protected from being coerced into adopting common core by the department of education. and have the right to opt out of any program under the law. mr. speaker, all these are significant and needed steps to put the responsibility of education back where it be longs. and that is with states, local school districts parents and educators who know what is best. i urge my colleagues to support h.r. 5 and yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentleman has expired. the gentleman from colorado is recognized.
mr. polis: i yield four minutes to the gentleman from virginia distinguished ranking member of the committee on education and work force mr. scott. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for four minutes. mr. scott: i thank the gentleman for yielding. mr. speaker more than 60 years ago, the supreme court in brown v. board of education talkt about the value of education when it said in these days it is doubtful that any child may reasonably be expected to succeed in life if denied the opportunity of education, such an opportunity where the state has undertaken to provide it is a right which must be made available to all on equal terms. the fact is that equal educational opportunities were not and still are not always available in low-income areas basically for two reasons. first we fund education through the real estate tax virtually guaranteeing that wealthy areas will have more resources than the give and take in politics and low-income areas will get
the shortened of the stick. in 1965 we enacted the elementary and secondary education act recognizing the disparities and funding, i quote, the special educational needs of children of low-income families and the impact that concentrations of low-income families have on the ability of local agencies to support adequate educational programs. while the public education would remain fundamentally a local issue, the government recognized that without federal oversight and support, districts would not address the inequities. in the last re-authorization better known as no child left behind, in addition to the money, congress required states to identify and address achievement gaps. and because of that work, the education of our children has been much improved. high school dropout rates are at historic lows. the long-term scores on the national tests have gone up and
the achievement gaps has actually been closing. but the gap between rich and poor has actually been going up. mr. chairman, with that background, the house has put forth its version of the re-authorization of esea and it violates the original purpose of the esea first by reducing the funding and changing the formula to take money from low-income areas and give it to wealthy areas. los angeles with 70% poverty would lose about a quarter of its funding. beverly hills with virtually no poverty, would pick up 30% in additional funding under that new formula. this rule enables amendments that if adopted the bill will significantly reduce the ability of states to determine academic achievement gaps. we address that in the bill by auditing the number of tests and
making sure they are as few as possible and used for the purpose which they are validated. but the bill significantly scales back the ability of states to identify achievement gaps and then scales back their requirement to do anything about it. these are the major flaws in h.r. 5. less funding, less ability to determine the achievement gaps and then no requirement to do anything about it. there are other problems with the bill. for example, block granting programs that will end up underfunding after-school programs, stem, arts education and others. these vital programs will do worse. mr. speaker, for those reasons, we should both defeat the rule and if the rule passes, we should defeat the bill. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from washington is recognized. mr. newhouse: at this time i'm
pleased to yield to another freshman colleague two minutes to the gentlelady from new york congresswoman stefanik. ms stefanik: i rise in support of the rule and the underlying bill. we have a chance to put our education system back on track helping students all across this country. over the past six months, i have traveled in my district to listen to the concerns of teachers administrators, parents and students. one of the most common themes i hear is there is too much confusion coming from washington and those who know what's best are educators and parents, are not getting a say in our children's future. local school districts understand the unique needs of their students far better than any bureaucrat in washington ever will. from no child left behind, race to the top and waivers the department of education has sent so many mixed signals that it is impossible for teachers and
administrators to focus on what is needed most, flexibility to help students learn and succeed. this is why i'm a strong supporter of h.r. 5. i commend chairman john kline and subcommittee chairman rokita to ensure that students and schools are put first. accountability will now be placed where it should have been all along with states and local school districts. labeling half of all schools in the united states as failing has caused the department of education to become far too overreaching in defining accountability as they continue to shift the metric on what is considered satisfactory. h.r. 5 empowers parents and students by giving them access to information about local schools in order to hold them accountable. in addition, this bill eliminates 65 duplicative and underperforming programs and consolidates the money into a new grant program for local school districts. this money can be spent by
districts to meet their unique needs. funding for title 1 remains robust in the bill and students and parents retain the ability to make the best educational decisions for them by providing access to charter schools and particularly important for my constituents in new york is language in h.r. 5 that prevents the secretary of education from forcing states to implement common core. i urge all members to vote aye on the rule and support the underlying bill. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. the gentleman from colorado is recognized. mr. polis: i yield 1 1/2 minutes to the the gentlewoman from california, a member of the committee on education and the work force mrs. davis. . mrs. davis: this bill continues to embrace the idea that less federal oversight over federal dollars is what we need to
transform k-12 education. the opposition seems to believe that removing federal standards would help local leaders make tough decisions. that's absolutely wrong. it actually makes it harder. for nine years i served on the school board in a large urban school district, and i remember agonizing over the decision to move money from one tiny school to another. in the end it was the law, and safeguards around title 1 that helped direct us to make sure the money went to the students that required the greatest assistance. this changes that. mr. speaker, what we need is a federal law that gives guidance to local school board members that must deal with thousands of competing interests every single day and which enables local leaders ultimately make the right decision. mr. speaker, today represents a missed opportunity. we need a 21st century
education system that makes investment in all our nation's children. that and only that will help our nation compete in the global economy. today's re-authorization of the esea not only misses the mark but actually moves us in the wrong direction. i urge a no vote on the rule, a no vote on final passage and also on the salmon amendment. thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields. the gentleman from washington is recognized. mr. newhouse: mr. speaker very pleased at this time to yield three minutes to the chairman of the subcommittee on early childhood education and elementary and secondary education, the gentleman from indiana congressman rokita. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from indiana is recognized for two minutes. mr. rokita: i thank the speaker. i thank the leadership of the gentleman from washington and the members of the rules committee for bringing this rule to the floor. i think it's a good rule. i urge a yes vote on it and the underlying bill, which i'm
hopeful and pleased we're going to get to today. in response to some of the last speakers, first of all, let me associate my remarks with the gentlelady from new york. she's right on. this is exactly the kind of policy and law we need in this country at this particular time because it puts the trust and the personal responsibility back in the hands of the people where it belongs and that's our parents, our teachers, our school principals and superintendents. how arrogant for anyone to think that we here in washington no better how to raise our children than those children's parents working hand in hand side by side with that child's teacher and school leaders. this bill is needed. it is right on point. it is needed for the 21st century and i want to address some of the misinformation that
might be out there. first of all, i want to be very clear mr. speaker, that the civil rights protections -- which i agree with my friend, the ranking member in the education and work force committee, very, very important, critical. that's all kept here. that language remains because it's essential. secondly, we mandate disaggregated data so that we can see from a wholeistic collective standpoint -- holistic collective standpoint how our children, no matter their background, how they're doing. it's kept there. title 1 is there. there is more portability, but we think that's a good thing because choice in this subject is a good thing. finally mr. speaker i'd say this isn't about money. spending, federal spending in education has gone up 300%
since the federal government got involved in this business, and test results are flat. it's not about money. it's about leadership and the best way to empower leaders is to give them the tools they need so they can help our children grow and compete in the 21st century world and win and that's exactly what the student success act does. it trusts teachers and parents over washington bureaucrats. so with that, mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of my time and i ask for full support from this house for the rule and for the underlying legislation. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from indiana yields back. the gentleman from colorado is recognized. mr. polis: mr. speaker, i'd like to yield 1 1/2 minutes to the gentleman from arizona, mr. gallego. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from arizona is recognized for 1 1/2 minutes. mr. gallego: thank you mr. speaker. i rise today in opposition to the rule which would allow for consideration of h.r. 5, a
harmful bill that abandons our commitment to ensuring all children in my home state of arizona and across the country are afforded quality education that prepares them for success . we can all agree that every child needs a fair shot. but the reality is millions of kids faces additional barriers that needs targeted resources. unfortunately this bill turns us back on these kids by blocking grant -- by block granting all funding for english language learners. my good students and at-risk students and lets the funding be spent elsewhere. it limits requirements that schools improve the education of english language learners each year. by removing quality of latinos and english language learners, this bill ignores the real needs of kids and families across our communities. mr. speaker, a latino child in phoenix deserves every resource he or she needs to succeed. that's why i strongly support the democratic substitute
amendment to h.r. 5 offered by my colleague, congressman scott. this alternative recognizes the needs of latino students and ensures proper oversight that we know is necessary. i urge all my colleagues to oppose h.r. 5 and its dangerous provisions for latino students, and i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. the gentleman from washington is recognized. mr. newhouse: mr. speaker, i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from washington reserves. the gentleman from colorado is recognized. mr. polis: thank you, mr. speaker. i'd like to yield two minutes to the gentleman from texas mr. doggett. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized -- gets two minutes. mr. doggett: when he first signed into law the elementary and secondary education act president lyndon b. johnson greatly advanced both education and civil rights. now here 50 years later the need for federal support for our schools remains very real. but republicans celebrate the
anniversary by repealing title 1 of this act. in february republicans began consideration of this bill and then suspended it because so many of their members did not think it was extreme enough in cutting aid to our schools. since then the senate has come together in a bipartisan, though lacking approach, but a better approach that recognizes the need for civil rights and public education. and just as it did previously on immigration reform, the house has rejected that bipartisan approach and has jumped off the right end with a more extreme anti-education attitude. in a few weeks there are bright faced young schoolchildren who will put on their backpacks and head off to school. as their number increases, this bill actually cuts the
purchasing power available to our schools to meet those growing needs. and most importantly, republicans would encourage the states to divert aid from the schools with the greatest need and to actually use federal dollars to replace what the states are already spending on education. not only does the bill shortchange our schools and our students, it also eliminates dedicated funding for important programs like stem, science technology and engineering and math education. it is silent on support for our youngest americans as schools across the country recognize the brain research and the need to have pre-k through 12 education. we need not only availability but funding. this bill should be rejected. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. the gentleman from washington is recognized. mr. newhouse: thank you mr. speaker. at this time i'd like to yield two minutes to the good
gentleman from california, representative lamalfa. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. lamalfa: thank you mr. speaker. passage of this measure will restore forest management to our forest after decades of federal neglect. my district has seven national forests which suffered from increasingly devastating forest fires caused by overgrown mismanaged forest, has been economically hobbled by forest management. last year in one of my counties, just three forest fires burned 200 acres. our environment has been neglected. this bill increases flexibility cutting red tape and actively managing forests before fires occurs, not afterwards. forest management can occur when it's actually needed to
address sdwuss conditions not -- dangerous conditions, not after roadblocks. salvage and rehabilitation hastens forest recovery prevents fuel buildup that can contribute to the next fire. expanding forest involvement and management will improve the data available for planning and respect local priorities. in light of forest service surveys find that over 12 million sierra nevada trees have died in the last year, we cannot afford to wait another year. mr. speaker, it's imperative that we can act today before a forest are past beyond the point where they can be restored to good forest health. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california yields. the gentleman from colorado is recognized. mr. polis: i'd like to inquire how much time remains on both sides. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from colorado has 2 1/2 minutes. the gentleman from washington has eight minutes. mr. polis: i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the
gentleman from colorado reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from washington is recognized. the gentleman from washington is recognized. mr. newhouse: i'd like to just reserve my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from washington reserves his time. mr. polis: i'd like to inquire from the gentleman if he's prepared to close. mr. newhouse: yes sir. mr. polis: what? mr. newhouse: yes, i am. mr. polis: ok. then i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from colorado. mr. polis: mr. speaker, instead of engaging on partisan fights that is in essence is about our future of our nation and future generations, we should find common ground. education is a civil right.
all students deserve the opportunity of a world-class, high-quality education. this very week the senate is discussing their own version of esea re-authorization. now, while nothing's perfect, their bill reflects the bipartisan spirit that would improve this bill if it was allowed in this body. members of the tricaucus and minutes of the new democratic coalition sent letters with a number of suggestions for their bill but at least there's a bipartisan attempt to help prepare our nation's kids for our future. esea is one of the most significant pieces of legislation this body will consider. it's a bill about our future. members of this body are eager to improve this bill and pass a re-authorized version to finally replace no child left behind. no child needs to attend a failing school and zip code and race should never determine the quality of an education that a child receives. i think that is something hopefully we can agree on as a core principle. unfortunately, the bill before
us retreats from our promise to our nation's students. h.r. 5 would bring us back to a time with no accountability standards, where students with disabilities are swept under the rug. it would divert money from the schools and kids that need it the most. and with the salmon amendment it would sweep minority students, students with disabilities, new immigrant students and low-income students under the rug, as they were in the past and now they have emerged we must ensure they meet all the learning needs for all students. mr. speaker, we're shortchanging our nation's kids by not being thoughtful and deliberate with this issue. it's rare a bill would unite the business community teachers, school boards and many others in opposition, but h.r. 5 does this. the bill's sponsors had 133 days to give students and our country a bill that they deserve. it's a shame they didn't take better advantage of that opportunity. i encourage my colleagues to vote no on the rule, no on the bill no on the salmon
amendment and yes on the democratic substitute, which was thoughtfully put together to ensure that america's next generation is prepared to carry on our legacy of global leadership and to put food on their tables as aspiring members of our great country. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from colorado yields. the gentleman from washington is recognized. mr. newhouse: thank you, mr. speaker. . mr. newhouse: number of colleagues from both sides of the aisle speaking today. these are important issues that we are considering important to the economic well-being of our country and the health of our forest lands and the safety of our rural communities. reforming our education system and the way we combat wildfires and manage our forests is of the highest priority. and i urge my colleagues to support this rule as well as both of the underlying bills. this rule does provide for consideration of h.r. 2647, the
resilient forests federal forest act of 2015, a bipartisan, comprehensive bill aimed at expediting and improving forest management activities in federal forests. this critical piece of legislation would address the disastrous consequences of catastropheic wildfires and return resilience to our overgrown fire-proned forests by dramatically improving the health of our federal forests and range lands. my district as well as many areas around the country continue to face the threat of catastrophic wildfire, which is made worse by the continuing drought conditions and the poor management and maintenance of forests on our federal land. we must prevent and address these fires which this bill does, by reforming the way we prepare and respond to and fund wildfire response and mitigation efforts. mr. speaker, we cannot continue on this current path where we
limp from one devastating fire to the next, unable to break the cycle of destructive fire seasons due to ineffective funding mechanisms insirblet forest maintenance and review processes. these bill tackles the process and problem of fire borrowing. simplifying environmental process requirements and reducing project planning times and lowering the costs of implementing forest management projects while ensuring environmental protections. because of the reforms and streamlined authorities in this bill there will be an increase of treated land which will come to no additional costs to our taxpayers. this legislation is essential and desperately needed to change the outdated unsustainable and ultimately dangerous system of
forest management on federal lands. this rule also provides for further consideration of h.r. 5 the students success act. a reform of our nation's education system, which reduces the federal government's footprint in state and local issues and restores control over education back to those on the ground who are best qualified to make the decisions affecting their students parents, teachers and communities. mr. speaker, a well educated workforce is imperative to the health and vitality of both our nation's children and our economy. the students success act empowers parents, local communities and state governments to lead the way in fixing america's broken educational system. h.r. 5 will benefit students parents, teachers and school administrators by returning responsibility for student achievement to the states and local communities while
maintaining high standards and expectation for our nation's students, teachers and schools. this is a good, straight-forward rule allowing for consideration of two critical pieces of legislation that will help protect our rural communities, provide much needed reforms to our education system and ensure that we are prepared to respond to the devastating and catastrophic wildfires that have plagued many areas of our country. i support the rule's adoption and i urge my colleagues' adoption to support the rule and the underlying bills. with that, i yield back the balance of my time and move the previous question on the resolution. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the previous question is ordered. the question is on the adoption of the resolution. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the resolution is agreed to. and without objection, the
motion to reconsider is laid on the table. mr. polis: i request the yeas and nays. the chair: the yeas and nays are requested. those favoring a vote by the yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered members will record their votes by electronic device. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]
defending our title. back-to-back victories as the congressional women softball champions, i want to thank my teammates on both sides of the aisle. they've became my sisters and friends throughout the season. it's always so amazing to think about what we do over three months with the incredibly busy schedules that so many of us have, coming after practice at 7:00 in the morning two or three times a week. we did not have a smaller turnout for practice. and our hard work paid off. this is a game that i know many of you know is near and dear to my heart. . is the speaker pro tempore: the house will come to order. ms. wasserman schultz: thank you, mr. speaker. i know many of you know this. it bears repeating because of the reason we play this game.
i was diagnosed with breast cancer 7 1/2 years ago. today i'm cancer free. thank you. at 41 years old. it is really timely for us to be able to focus some attention on breast cancer in young women given the recommendations and the discussions that we are having around making sure that we pay attention and help young women focus on their breast health. that's what this game is all about. we are so proud to tell you that since we started this game seven years ago, we raised about $700,000 for the young survival coalition. $200,000 of that was this game. and without the leadership and dedication of our board of directors and organizing committee this game and the money we raise would not have been possible. i want to specifically thank our board president, kate lacy, and all the members of the board natalie torrey, and christian, and also a huge thank you to the members of the
organizing committee, jill shawn, gary, kay la, katherine katherine hamm, erica, jim, and dana special shutout to eddie perlmutter who was one of our assistant coaches, and to our cheerleaders. come on. come on, eddie. and with that, mr. speaker, i'd like to yield my time to the gentlelady from alabama who for the second time this month, second time in the last couple weeks is actually standing next to me. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from alabama is recognized. >> i thank the gentlelady. mr. speaker, i would like to associate myself with the gentlelady from florida's remarks. also mr. speaker, would like to thank all of our colleagues here in this chamber today. mrs. roby: that have not only come out and support it but also supported the young survivors coalition as well. the speaker pro tempore: will the gentlelady yield. the house will come to order.
the gentlelady shall continue. mrs. roby: i would like to thank the survivors, each member of this team play either in memory of or on behalf of someone that is currently struggling with cancer. so i would just say, mine rhonda, who came from alabama and attended the game along with so many others that we support these individuals. this is a really incredible thing that the members of congress do. mr. speaker to the bad news babes, i would just say we are on it for next year, too. keep your guard up. and i'd like to also recognize the gentlelady from florida who is -- who is the m.v.p. ms. castor. she played an incredible game.
and again thank you. and most improved the gentlelady from arizona, ms. sinema. with that, mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yield back. the chair lays before the house an enrolled bill. the clerk: h.r. 91, an act to amend title 38 the united states code to direct the secretary of veterans affairs to issue upon request veteran identification cards to certain veterans. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to house resolution 333 and rule 18, the chair declares the house in the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for the further consideration of h.r. 2822. will the gentleman from georgia, mr. collins, kindly take the chair.
the chair: the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for further consideration of h.r. 2822rks the clerk will report by title. the clerk: bill making appropriations for the department of the interior environment, and related agencies for the fiscal year ending september 30, 2016, and for other purposes. the chair: when the committee of the whole house rose earlier today, an amendment offered by the gentleman from pennsylvania had been disposed off and the bill red to page 132, line 24. proceedings will now resume on those amendments on which further proceedings were postponed in the following order. amendment by mr. garamendi california. amendment by mrs. capps of california. amendment by mr. sablan, northern mariana. amendment by ms. castor of florida. first amendment by mr. grijalva of arizona. first amendment by ms. tsongas of massachusetts. amendment by ms. edwards of maryland. amendment number 13 by mrs. lawrence from michigan. second amendment by mr. polis
of colorado. sec amendment by ms. tsongas of massachusetts. third amendment by mr. polis of amendment in disagreement of a substitute. amendment number 6 by. am by mr. hardy of nevada. the chair will reduce to two minutes the time for any electronic vote. the unfinished business is the request for recorded so the on which further proceedings were postponed and the noes prevailed. the cleric will redesignated the amendment. amendment offered by mr. guerra menda of california -- garamendi of california. the chair: a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is recorded. members will record their votes by electronic device. members this is a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]
the chair: on this vote the yeas are 181. the nays are 244. the amendment is not adopted. the unfinished business is the request for a recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from california, mrs. capps, on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by
mrs. capps of california. the chair: a recorded vote having been requested, those in support of the request for a recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having arisen a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]
the chair: on this vote the yeas are 184. the nays are 243. the amendment is not adopted. the unfinished business is the request for a record vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from the northern mariana islands, mr. sablan, on which the noes prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: an amendment offered by the northern mariana islands . the chair: the -- those in support of the request for a recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]
the chair: on this vote the yeas are 183. the nays are 245. the amendment is not adopted. the unfinished business is the request for a recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from florida, ms. castor, on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: an amendment offered by ms. castor of amendment. the chair: those in support of the request for a recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]
the chair: on this vote the yeas are 188. the nays are 239. the amendment is not adopted. the unfinished business is the request for a recorded vote on the first amendment offered by the gentleman from arizona mr. grijalva, on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. grijalva of arizona. the chair: a request for a
recorded vote has been requested. those in support of the request for a recorded vote will rise and be counted, a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. this is a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]
the unfinished business is the request for a recorded vote on the first amendment offered by the gentlewoman from massachusetts, ms. tsongas, on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: an amendment offered by ms. tsongas of massachusetts. the chair: a recorded vote having been requested those in support of the request for a recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]
the chair: on this vote the yeas are 191. the nays are 238. the amendment is not adopted. the request for unfinished business is request for recorded vote on the second amendment offered by the gentleman from mr. grijalva. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: am -- amendment offer by mr. grijalva of kaz arizona. the chair: those in support of a request for recorded vote will rise and remain standing. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]
the chair: on this vote the yeas are 178. the nays are 251. the amendment is not adopted. the unfinished business is the request for recorded vote on the first amendment offered by the gentleman from colorado, mr. polis, on which further proceedings were postponed and the noes prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. polis of colorado. the chair: recorded vote having been requested, those in
support of the request for recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]
the chair: on this vote the yeas are 186. the nays are 243. the amendment is not adopted much the unfinished business is the request for recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from maryland, miss edward, on which further proceedings were postponed and the noes prevailed by vose vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by ms. edwards of maryland. the chair: recorded vote having been requested. those in support of the request for recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having arisen, recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]
the chair: on this vote the yeas are 180. the nays are 249. the amendment is not adopted. the unfinished business is the request for recorded vote on amendment number 13 printed in the congressional record offered by the gentlewoman from michigan, mrs. lawrence, where proceedings were postponed and the noes prevailed by vose vote. the clerk are redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 13, printed in the congressional record offered by mrs. lawrence of michigan. the chair: those in support of a requested for voted vote will rise and be counted. members will record their votes by electronic device, this is a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the
the recorded vote. a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]
the chair: on this vote, the yeas are 192, the nays are 237, the amendment is not adopted. the unfinished business is request for a recorded vote on the second amendment, on which further proceedings were postponed and the noes prevailed. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by ms. strong asof massachusetts. the chair: a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]
the chair: on this vote, the yeas are 186 and the nays are 243. the amendment is not adopted. request for a recorded vote by the gentleman from arizona and further proceedings were postponed. the clerk will redesignate. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. grijalva of arizona. the chair: those in support of the request for a recorded vote will rise. a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]
the chair: the yeas are 182 and the nays are 244. the amendment is not adopted. the unfin bished is request for a recorded vote on which further proceedings were postponed. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. beyer of virginia. the chair: those in support of the request for the recorded vote will rise. a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]
the chair: the yeas are 189 the nays are 237. the amendment is not adopted. the unfinished business is request for a recorded vote on the amendment offered by mrs. blackburn and the noes prevailed by voice vote. the clerk: amendment number 6 printed in the congressional record offered by mrs. blackburn of tennessee. the chair: those in support of the request for a recorded vote will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]
the chair: on this vote, the yeas are 168, the nays are 258, the amendment is not adopted. the up finished business is the request for a recorded vote on the amendment offer bhid the gentleman from new mexico, mr. pearce, on which the ayes prevailed by voice vote. clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. pearce of new mexico. the chair: a recorded vote has been requested. those in support of the request for a recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having risen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]
the chair: a recorded vote has been requested. those in support of the request for a recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient numbering are vizen a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]
the chair: on this vote the yeas are 222 the nays are 206. the amendment is agreed to. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> mr. chairman, i move that the committee do now rise. mr. calvert: i move that the committee do now rise. the chair: the question is on the motion that the committee rise. those in favor say aye poveplspose. the ayes have it. the committee rises. the speaker pro tempore: mr. chairman. the chair: madam chairman, the
committee of the whole house on the state of the union having had under consideration h.r. 2822 directs me to report it has come to no resolution thereon. the speaker pro tempore: the chair of the committee of the whole house on the state of the union reports that the committee has had under consideration h.r. 2822 and has come to no resolution thereon. the chair will receive a message. the messenger: madam chair a message from the senate. the secretary: madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: madam secretary. the secretary: i have been directed by the senate to inform the house that the senate has passed s. 286, titled the department of interior tribal self-governance act of 2015 in which the concurrence of the house is requested. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 8 of rule 240erk chair will postpone further proceedings today on motions to suspend the rules on which a recorded vote of the yeas and nays are ordered or on which the vote incurs objection
under clause 6 of rule 20. record votes on postponed questions will be taken later. the house will come to order. please take conversations off the floor. the house will come to order. for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey seek recognition? >> madam speaker, i move that the house suspend the rules and pass house resolution 337 as amended. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: house resolution 337, resolution calling for a substantive dialogue without preconditions in order to
addressity bet tan grievances and secure a negotiate aid greement for thity bet tan people. -- for the tibetan people. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from new jersey, mr. smith, and the gentleman from new york, mr. engel, will each control 20 minutes. mr. smith: i ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days to submit statement -- statements or extraneous materials for the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. smith: i yield myself such time as i may consume. i rise in strong support of house resolution 337, calling for substantive dialogue without preconditions to help secure a negotiated agreement for the tibetan people. i want to thank the gentleman from new york, a friend ap colleague, eliot engel for his help in this bipartisan resolution this week when so many voices around the world are joined in wishing his holiness the dalai lama a happy 809
birthday it is a fitting time to recommit ourselves to congress' support for the fundamental rights of the people in tibet because the situation in tibet has never been more bleak. those rights include the fundamental right of freedom of religion. the recent statement of human rights report offers a withering criticism of the chinese government's oversight of tibet. it said, quote, the government engaged in severe repression of tibet's religious cultural and religious heritage by among other means striketly curtailing the civil rights of china's tibetan population including the rights of freedom, association, and movement. unfortunately, the regime's interference extends even to the most elemental aspect of tibetan buddhist practice this year marks the 20th anniversary of the disappearance of the punchin
llama who was detained by the government as a young child. a top communist official dealing with ethnic and religious affairs has claimed, and i quote, decision making power over the reincarnation of the dalai lama and over the survival of his lineage resides with the central government of china. close quote. sadly we know that tibetans have used self-imlations as a protest -- self-immolations as a protest against the chinese government. there have been 134 self-immolations since 2009. the numbers are decreasing because of heavy security and punishments that target family members and entire villages. it is difficult to fathom the despair and the desperation felt by tibetans who take this last act of defiance. the ho tissue the chinese
government has blamed the dalai lama and, quote, foreign forces, for self-immolation, instead of looking at how their own despicable policies created such deep grievances. madam speaker, the tibetan people want to be free to practice their unique faith and live by the dictates of their faith. this freedom is denied to them. the chinese government expanded its efforts last year to transform tibetan buddhism into a state managed institution. they sought to undermine the devotions of the tibetan people of the da loo -- to the dalai lama and control the process of selecting buddhist leader. the chinese government wants a tibetan buddhism that is attractive to tourism and allows the communist party to manage its affairs. the u.n. special representative on religion said the efforts of china to control tibetan leaders he said the chinese government is destroying the
autonomy of religious communities it is creating schisms and pinning -- pitting people against each other in order to exercise control. this is exactly what the chinese government has done to other religious groups, including catholic protestants muslims and the fa lo gong. when the faithful don't fall in line, they are jailed. the executive commission on china, on which i serve as chairman, has a prisoner database that contains records of 617 tibetan political and religious prisoners. 44% of those detail -- detains are monks nones and religious -- nuns, and religious teachers. unfortunately, our ability to get accurate information in realtime about this situation in tibet is complicated by restrictions on access to tibetan areas by united states officials. journalists and this has
frustrated to provide services to american citizens. in october of 2013, the chinese government delayed access for 48 hours involving a bus incident -- accident that resulted in the death of three u.s. citizens and injuries to others. as the chinese government pushes for new consulates in the united states, our government must insist on an official presence which is called for in section 618 of the tibet an policy act which became law in 2002. the dalai lama is recognized for peaceful nonviolent resolution. and congressional gold medal winner in 2007, he has made clear his willingness to engage in dialogue with chinese
counterparts at any time, at any place and without any preconditions. unfortunately, this commitment to peaceful dialogue is not reciprocal and chinese officials have not met directly with his representatives in over five years. this is the longest break since the dialogue or so-called dialogue started in 2002. chinese government white paper on tibet published this april states that china will, quote only talk with private representatives of the dalai lama to discuss the future of the dalai lama and gain forgiveness of the central government and the chinese people. that is outrageous. instead of asking for his forgiveness the decades of brutal oppression, they demand he ask the government of china for forgiveness. this is unfortunate. if china's goal is to build a
harmonious society in tibet, it cannot be done without the dalai lama. he is the spiritual leader. miss views are wildly -- widely shared throughout the community. in light of this, the resolution before us calls for a fuller implementation of existing law in support of direct dialogue between the chinese officials and the dalai lama. calls for official u.s. presence in lasa and ensure religious rights and freedom issues are consistently raised in the u.s. -china strategic dialogue and other high-level meetings and has many other provisions. i would like to reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey reserves. the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. engel: i rise in strong support of h.res. 337.
at this point, i yield one minute to the greatest champions of tibet's struggle for freedom mrs. pelosi. ms. pelosi: i thank the gentleman for yielding and commend him for being a champion on human rights throughout the world. i'm pleased to associate myself with the remarks of chairman smith and thank him for his courageous, long-term dedication to human rights throughout the world and the recognition that what is happening in tibet is a challenge to the conscience of our country and to the world. and i thank him for enumerating some of the concerns that we have. and i know that our distinguished ranking member will talk about some of those contained in the resolution. i thank them both for their leadership. i rise today in support of that resolution in celebration of the 80th bifert day of the dal dalai
lama. he is uplifting to tibetance and people throughout the world. he is the figure presence on the international stage. as a compassionate religious leader and astute diplomat and believer in the power of nonviolence the dalai lama has earned the respect from people of many nations, many backgrounds. american presidents and the american people have been inspired by his holyness who describes himself as a simple monk. american presidents beginning with franklin roosevelt who set the dalai lama a watch on his birthday with the faces of the moon. how precious it was of president roosevelt, because not only being a religious figure but
related so positively to science and its mysteries. to tibet an bude history he is a living buddha. he is a spiritual leader of the tibet an people, to millions, he is a source of wisdom and compassion to young people his holyness is a positive example of how to make the world a better place. the chinese government has refused to meet with him afraid to meet with him. they consider him a threat, and that's so unnecessary. they accuse him of being for independence when he has said for decades that he is for autonomy for tibet. the government has brutally threatened them. and the campaign against the dalai lama continues, which
challenges us all to speak out. again, the situation in tibet is a challenge to the conscience of the world. the freedom-loving people do not speak out against oppression in tibet, then we have lost all moral authority because our -- it's a big country and we have big commercial interests like china, deters us from using our voices in support of human rights how then can we turn to smaller less economically less significant countries and say for you, the standard is different. the u.s. congress should stand with the dalai lama to ensure that tibet an children are free to learn their language, practice their faith and honor their culture as they live in peace. one of the most remarkable achievements of the leader is his profound and unbreakable
connection with the people of tibet. perhaps -- he has won the nobel peace prize and recipient whom we honored with the congressional gold medal in 2007 and at that time, it was an honor for us that president and mrs. bush attended that gold medal ceremony. 80th birthday is a significant milestone in any culture, none more so than in tibet. this is a moment to celebrate and on his birthday july 6 tibetance were not allowed to utter the dalai lama's name. they have self-immolation. the people of tibet per see veer. they per see veer in peace and
this should be an inspiration to the world. during his long life the dalai lama has shown that harmony between people is based on freedom of expression and encourages to speak the truth and treat others with mutual respect and dignity. i just recall one incident when i was visiting him in india and he had lamas come over to visit with us the bipartisan congressional delegation who were visiting him there. and after the people got up and talked about the oppression and campaign against the tibetance that was happening at that time when i got up to speak following that, i said that we in congress must act, we must act in terms of legislation to support the people of tibet. and i said so in a very forceful way, because it was so sad to
hear the stories of what was happening in tibet. and i was so strong in my reaction to it. and he followed me in the program and he said i pray that with nancy of her negative attitudes. but any way, there is no better way to honor the dalai lama on his 80th birthday standing with him and the people vowing to keep his cause alive. we must rededicate ourselves to the cause of peace in the world and peace in our lives. with that, madam speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york reserves. the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. smith: i reserve. mr. engel: i rise in strong support of h.res. 337 and i yield myself such time as i may consume.
the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. engel: i'm proud to have offered this resolution that calls for the chinese government to sit down with the leaders without preconditions and listen to their grievances and work toward an agreement that guarantees the rights and security of the tibet and people. as the leader pointed out, the 80th birthday, the 14th dalai lama. i had the privilege to meet him. such a gentle spirit driven from within. person of such human kindness whose life has been marked with strife. when you meet him, no matter your faith or background, you cannot help but feel the bond and drawn into his cause and the cause of the tibet an people. many in congress have gotten behind this effort. let me thank leader pelosi. there has been no greater champion in congress for tibet
ans' struggle for freedom and the challenges they face in preserving their culture language and religion. i'm honored she is co-sponsoring this religion. let me thank matt salmon and representative jim mcgovern and representative pitts for supporting this measure. and i thank my friend, mr. smith of new jersey as well. 1951, the republic of the people of tibet lived under the shadow of the peoples republic of china. no say in deciding tibet's future. the dalai lama has described the cultural genocide forced immolation. today, as human rights conditions for the tibet an people deteriorate and continue to deteriorate as mormon asterys
come under control, desperation grows. more than 140 tibetcht ans have burned themselves alive in protest. yet the chinese authorities have not changed course. despite talk of respect and harmony, it tells a different story. today, we look to the examples set by the dalai lama and call tore meaningful change of the tibet an people. his life has been a peaceful journey for a better life for his people. we call on the chinese government to negotiate without preconditions. he has shown democratic institutions can thrive along side spiritual leadership. it's in that spirit we urge the chinese government not to involve itself in the spiritual suction process. he has championed freedom of expression and freedom of con
shens. it's in this spirit that this resolution calls on china to allow unrestricted access to officials journalists and other american citizens and let's not forget the united states has an obligation to hold up these freedoms as well. that's why this measure calls on our own government to press the issues of human rights, political rights and religious rights at the highest level of the chinese government and to call for the immediate release of tibet an political prisoners. throughout his life, he has worked for peaceful path forward for the tibet an people. we are debateful for his example and his wisdom and with this resolution we urge china's leaders to do the right thing for tibet. i support this resolution and i urge my colleagues to do the same. and i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york reserves.
the gentleman from new jersey reserves. the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. engel: it's my pleasure to yield four minutes to the co-chair of the tom lantoost human rights commission, long time supporter of the dalai lama and tibet, the gentleman from massachusetts mr. mcgovern. . mr. mcgovern intk thank you. i want to thank the gentleman for yielding me time and for his work on this issue and so many other issues. i want to thank subcommittee chairman salmon congressman joe pitts as well as my colleague from new jersey, mr. smith for working in such a bipartisan way to bring this resolution to the house floor during this week when we're all celebrating the 80th birthday of his holiness the dalai lama. i want to especially thank democratic leader pelosi for her many years of support of the tibetan people.
she's a true hero in the rights for their -- in the struggle for their rights. we are all here to support the rights of tibetans, including the right to worship as they choose. but we may be running out of time to guarantee those rights. as we celebrate the 80th birthday of the 14th dalai lama the chinese government has recently asserted its right to approve his successor. the very continuation of the ancient line of tibetan spiritual leadership is in question. next tuesday, july 14, the tom lantos human rights commission will hold a hearing with the aim of identifying new creative ideas to advance the basic human rights of tibetans and ensure tibetan autonomy. i share the concerns of my colleagues that the situation in tibet is dire. since 2009, more than 130
tibetans inside china has taken the unimaginable step of celting themselves on fire. at least 112 are believed to have died. some chose self-immolation to protest chinese government policies. others to call for the return of the dalai lama. in response, chinese thoshts have intensified official reprisals. surely the people of tibet must wonder whether anyone is hear -- is hearing their desperate cries with this resolution we are i atempting to send a message to tibet that yes, we hear you, you are not alone. regretly the human rights abuses in tibet are neither new or unknown. on the contrary, tibet is a sensitive issue in u.s.-china relations. u.s. policy is supposed to be governed by the tibetan policy act. chinese intransigence has closed
down dialogue since 2010. china also severely restricts access to tibet and tibetan regions, especial he for u.s. journalists, officials and citizens, even though, i might add, chinese citizens and officials enunrestricted access here in the united states. in april, the chinese government issued a new white paper on tibet with its own unbelievable version of history and an unprecedented demand that the dalai lama publicly state that tibet has been an integral part of china since antiquity as a precondition for improving relations with china. madam speaker, we need to be doing something different. we need to have the guts to take some action. everyone in the world says how much they admire the dalai lama. every head of state, every international organization all declare how much they care about tibet and warry about tibetan human rights abuses. but things have only gotten worse. we must all come together now to
change the status quo, to change the game the chinese goth has been playing for so many decades. the situation is urgent. it can wait no longer. and shame on all of us if we stand by with empty words and continue to watch the people of tibet suffer, and their culture, religion, and way of life be exterminated day by day, year by year until nothing is left. i thank my colleagues for bringing this urgent matter to the attention of congress and i urge my colleagues to support h.res. 337 and i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. smith: i yield such time as he may consume to the distinguished chairman from california, dana rohrabacher. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. rohrabacher: what happens when the united states remains silent? what happens is repression and torture and the expansion of dictatorship and in the end, it
makes the united states vulnerable. we have sat back and permitted the chinese to have whatever course they want to suppress the people of tibet for over three decades now. and has it made tibet any better, the people any freer that we haven't put any demands on the communist party in beijing? has it made war less likely between the united states? because we've given them such elbow room that the chinese dictators in by jang -- beijing have decided to move on and treat their people a little bit bet her no. what's happened is there's been a growing presentation and growing chance of an altercation, an international altercation between china and its neighbors, and yes, the united states. it's time we stand up for the people of the world who are fighting, struggling for their freedom, knowing that's what will make us secure and nowhere is that more clear than in tibet.
the people of tibet are not chinese people who are just reunited by the communist chinese with the moreland in china. it's been a distinct culture for centuries. it wasn't until long after the communist chinese have taken over the rest of china that they invaded tibet and sub gated its people. the dalai lama is the spiritual leader but also a sim bholic -- and sub jew gated its people. -- and subjugated its people. the dalai lama is a spiritual leader but also a symbolic people. we need to make sure we are on the side of the dalai lama and the people of tibet and in no way would our -- could our actions be interpreted or our silence be interpreted as acquiescence to what the people of tibet have been experiencing the last three or four decades. i rise in support of h.res. 337 and thank my colleagues for the
leadership that they are providing on this issue. let's make sure america stands tall stands strong and stands with the people of tibet and other people seeking their freedom. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. engel: i yield myself such time as i may consume to close. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. engel: i urge my colleagues to support h.res. 337. i think everyone who spoke made excellent points and we're all of one mind, this is the right thing to do. we should support this resolution to honor the deep humility, respect and peace that that de-- that the dalai lama represents to us and people around the world. we should do it to underscore our friendship with tibetan people and all people who are oppressed and divided -- oppressed and deprived of their basic rights. we should support this resolution on behalf of the chinese people themselves the growing number of people inside
china who understand that china itself would be more prosperous and more successful when their government chooses to be genuinely open and respectful of all peoples and cultures. i urge my colleagues to support h.res. 337 and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. smith: i want to again thank my good friend and colleague elliot for his excellent resolution. it is a bipartisan resolution. and i want to also thank leader pelosi for her eloquence on the floor today and for her love and respect that she has conveyed for decades to the dalai lama and the people of tibet. this is a bipartisan resolution. it show, i think, that we are absolutely united and i think that's an important message to send at this critical juncture. i also want to point out to my colleague, china really is a place where much is never as it
seems to be. people take trip there is, go on tours there even members of congress who travel there, come away with a village viewpoint of what is happening especially when torture and other degrading and cruelty is routinely visited upon people the chinese government deems to be of lesser values. we see it with the underground christians and we see it in tibet where there has been a systematic effort to eradicate the culture of tibet. it is genocide. they used force abortion to kill the children of tibetan mothers. years ago i healed a -- i held a hearing in the mid 1990's, it was on torture in the people's republic of china. let's not forget, chinese law prohibits torture. it's all nice on paper, but
doesn't mean anything. they signed the convention against torture, the u.n. convention. they love to ballyhoo that, when their people travel here to the united states. let's not forget as well that china took out a reservation to the u.n. convention on torture, article 20, that exempts it from accepting any investigation about abuses. so the only one who will investigate china is the chinese government itself. they will not allow the international committee of the red cross they will not allow u.n. representatives and other bilateral or i should say multilateral organizations to come in and investigate allegations of torture. back in the early 1990's, again, i hold this hearing, one of many, i've held 53 hearings on human rights abuses in china over the years. be this one had six people, all of whom have been tortured with impunity by the chinese government. a buddhist monk came to the rayburn building, tried to go
through the security there, and was stopped. he was stopped because he brought with him some of the implements of torture that are used routinely by the chinese government. cattle prods and other hideous instruments that are put under the arms and elsewhere to cause horrific damage and pain to the victim. and he described in detail at the hearing why he -- what he personally went through. regrettably that continues to this day. state department's report on human rights recently released reminds us that electric shocks exposure to cold and severe beatings, as well as physical labor, extreme physical labor is routinely used against tibetans and tibetan buddhists in particular just like they were against -- just like they were years ago. it has not changed. it has actually gotten worse. and again this resolution brings
the light and scrutiny that is so necessary to these hideous practices. again i urge my colleagues to support it and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the question is, will the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 337 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 resolution is agreed to, and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. for what purpose does the gentleman in new jersey seek recognition? mr. smith: i move that the house suspend the rules and pass house resolution 310. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the resolution. the clerk: house resolution 310 resolution expressing the sense of the house of representatives regarding srebrenica.
mr. smith: i is ask that all members have five legislative tais to submit extraneous materials on this. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. smith: this week, the world pauses to reflect on the srebrenica genocide, wanton mass murder committed beginning july 11, 20 years ago. this week we pause to honor those brave bosniacs who suffered and died. we again extend our deepest condolences and respect to the mothers and surviving family members who have endured unspeakable sorrow and loss that time will never abate.
this week, the international community must he commit itself to justice, once and for all, for those who perpetrated these heinous crimes. today, the two accused are incarcerated awaiting their trial for multiple counts of genocide, and violations of laws and customs of war. 20 years ago madam speaker, an estimated 8000 people were systematically slaughtered by bosnian soldiers in the united nations designated safe haven area of srebrenica. they killed women and children but especially sought out and murdered adult males in that area. these brutal killings were not committed in battle. they were committed against
people who were unarmed and helpless. and who had been repeatedly assured by the dutch peace keepers that they would not be harmed if they surrendered. the evidence is overwhelming that the executions were committed with the specific intention of destroying the bosnian muslim population of that area. this intention is an essential element in the crime of genocide. the u.n. piece keeping sporses -- forces in the area were charged with enforcing security council resolution 836 which had placed -- which had pledged to defend the safe areas with, quote, all necessary means, including the use of force. but when the when the moment of truth came, the u.n. forces offered only token resistance to the serb offensive. their military and political commanders had redefined their primary mission not as the protection of the people of
srebrenica but as the safety of u.n. forces themselves. when bosnia's commander threatened violence against the blue helmeted u.n. soldiers here's the way one of the soldiers described the reaction . and quote him. everybody got a fright. you could easily get killed in such an operation. as far as i knew, we had not been sent to srebrenica to defend the enclave but rather as some kind of spruced-up observers. closed quote. so that is what the peace keepers became. observers to genocide. soon they became something more than observers. enablers. on july 13, the dutch blue helmet battalion honded bosnian muslims who had sought safety within the u.n. compound over the serbs, they watched as men were separated from the women and children a process which is already well known in bosnia, was at the time, as a sign that the men were in
imminent danger of being executed. these men were never heard from again. at one congressional hearing i chaired in march of 1998, i had six of them, hassan, a translator, indigenous translator working for the u.n. peace keepers in srebrenica, testified, he was there in the room. he lost his family in the genocide. he was there when the commanders of the dutch peace keepers talked about the terms. here's what he told my panel. and i quote. in part. on july 12 the day before the fall of srebrenica, the bosnian serb army commander requested a meeting with the dutch commander lieutenant colonel and local representatives of srebrenica in a nearby town outside the enclave. during the meeting he assured the dutch and local delegation that no harm would come to the refugees.
upon returning to the camp three local representatives were ordered but the dutch deputy commander to prepare lists of all males, all the men and boys between the ages of 16 and 65. among the refugees inside and outside the camp. . the list of the meals were about 6000 -- males were about 6,000 and were completed the same day. on july 13, the dutch ordered 6,000 refugees out of the camp. the serbs were waiting, literally waiting at the gate, separating all the males from the women and the children. mange franken stated, he's again the u.n. dutch peacekeeper, this is again a quote from the translator, that all the males whose names were on the list would be safe. you're going to be safe. i watched, he went on to say, as my parents and brother were handed over to the serbs at the
gate. none of them have been seen since. he went on to say, i want to explain here that the people hope that the dutch were going to protect them. the u.n. peacekeeping troops and all other members of the other organizations who were present in srebrenica as well. but the dutch soldiers and officers gave no option to the refugees but to leave. so the refugees inside were told to leave without any other choice. my family was told on the evening of july 13 that they should leave. about 6:00 p.m. there were no more refugees in the camp. he then went on to say, i don't know if this is the topic of the meeting or hearing but the same night the dutch soldiers had a party inside the camp because they received two or three trucks full of beer and cigarettes. they played music while i was sitting not knowing what it what -- what had happened to my family. as he went on to say later, they had all been slaughtered. july, 2007, madam speaker i visited srebrenica, where
together with my good friends, spoke at a solemn memorial service and witnessed the internment of hundreds of wooden coffins, of newly discovered victims of the genocide. it was deeply moving. 12 years then after the genocide, now it's 20, families were still grieving loved ones whose bodies were being identified often miles from the killing sites as serb forces trying to hide the evidence of their crimes moved the bodies of their victims. 10 years ago, for the record, in 2005, the house of representatives overwhelmingly passed h.res. 199 which i authored, which clearly and unambiguously condemned the srebrenica massacre for what it was, a genocide. that resolution was a landmark in the recognition on srebrenica as a genocide. two years later the verdict of
the international court of justice found the same. in confirming the ruling of the international criminal tribunal for the former yugoslavia. today the international community is nearly unanimous when it proclaims that srebrenica was a genocide. the resolution today, of course, supports that as well. astonishingly madam speaker there are some genocide deniers. that is why this resolution condemns statements that deny that the massacre at srebrenica constituted genocide. just last weekend the president of a country asserted that srebrenica's genocide is a lie. mr. speaker, just as it's doing in ukraine russia is utilizing misinformation and historical revisionism in an attempt to destabilize bosnia and the balkan region. today russia vetoed a british-u.n. security council resolution that reaffirms that
srebrenica was a genocide. russia yass what enen-- -- russia has encouraged genocide denial. mr. speaker, this resolution also encourages the administration to fulfill other often neglected responsibilities. in particular it urges the atrocities prevention board to study the lessons of srebrenica and issue informed guidance on how to prevent similar incidents from occurring in the future. as you may know, the atrocities prevention board is a u.s. interagency committee established by the administration in 2012 to flag potential atrocities. however, since its creation, the board has been marked by inaction and a complete lack of transparency. this is unacceptable, especially as conflicts with the -- with disturbing parallels to bosnia before the
genocide continue to fester in syria, the central african republic, burma and in burundi. africa in particular would stand to benefit from a more active board. the conflict in bureau undery is -- bureau undery is -- burundi is currently at a tipping point. despite the need, there have been many promising developments in the balkan region and this needs to be underscored. in particular, i would note that serbia today is not the serbia of the past era. that era was marked by nationalist aggression against neighboring countries and peoples as well as considerable repression at home. one of those who testified at one of my hearings on serbia, a great young leader was murdered on the second day after our bombing began by serbian people and the person who did that is -- persons has been held to account. so what has happened there,
thankfully there is significant changes in serbia. i want to thank my colleagues. i do hope we'll have a strong show of support for this resolution and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: jamplet the gentleman from new york is recognized. -- the gentleman from new york -- the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from -- the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. engel: i yield myself such time as i may consume. i am the lead sponsor of this resolution and i remember 20 years ago being in this chamber when that massacre happened. it's hard to believe that it's 20 years and it certainly was a genocide. 20 years since the srebrenica genocide. during the bosnian war, the united nations declared the area around this small town a safe zone. on the eve of the massacre, tens of thousands of displaced boss knack civilians had gathered under the protection of the u.n. in what they thought was a safe zone. they all rushed to that place only to be slaughtered a little
while later. 400 u.n. peacekeepers could put up scarce resistance to the army of republic whose leaders were bent on wiping out the boss nean population. over the next few days, men and boys were lined up and mowed down by machine guns. children were murdered in front of their mothers, women and girls were rail raped and beaten as onlike -- as onlookers stood powerless to intervene. i remember that happened in our lifetime. hard to believe. when the killing had ended more than 8,000 bosnian, mostly men and boys, had lost their lives in one of the bloodiest episodes on european soil since world war ii. this resolution tells their tragic story. it praises the efforts to hold the guilty accountable. it demands that those efforts continue. it underscores solidarity with the victims and calls for a reconciliation that will one day civilize hatred and violence of the past replaced
by true friendship and community this resolution tells the truth about what happened. because telling the truth, however painful, is a starting point for healing to begin. we remember the genocide to honor the victims and to remind ourselves of the cost of indifference, of what can happen when we say, well that's somebody else's problem. as this region of europe heals, and i've just come back from the balkans, and charts a course toward a brighter future, i hope the lessons of this tragedy will be a guide for the united states and for countries around the world fighting against tyranny and oppression. now, today there was a disgrace that happened at the united nations. unfortunately there are many disgraces that happen at the united nations. now, two international courts have called the slaughter of bosnian serbs of some 8,000 muslim men and boys when had sought refuge at whats with supposed to be a u.n. -- at what was supposed to be a u.n.-protected site general sight. what happened -- genocide.
what happened today at the u.n.? russia vetoed a resolution calling srebrenica a genocide. past the security council. russia vetoed it. you'd think that a veto would be used for something of substance, not a resolution. this resolution has substance but you would not think that russia or any country would veto it. let me see what this defeated resolution stated. it stated that acceptance of, and i quote.
the u.n. is not recognizing a decision by its own branch, the international court of justice, which has declared the tragedy a genocide. the world has lost an especially -- others will have to face the truth sooner or later. our ambassador, who is a 24-year-old journalist in bosnia at the time of the srebrenica massacre, told the council that, quote, for all the brutality of a horrific war this was a singular horror, it was genocide, a fact now proven again and again by international tribunals.
today's vote mattered. it mattered hugely to the families of the victims of the srebrenica genocide. russia's veto is heartbreaking for those families and it is a further stain on this council's record. i read that into the record because i think it's important to notice the actions of russia. we see their actions in ukraine, we see their actions at the u.n. and we see the actions of the u.n. itself and it really is a shame. so again, we remember this genocide to honor its victims. it's not somebody else's problem. it's all of our problems. and in order to prevent it from happening in the future, we have to accurately recall what happened in the past. so i urge my colleagues to support this resolution and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. smith: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield my as much time as he may consume to -- i yield as much time as he may consume, mr. royce.
mr. royce: thank you, mr. speaker. i appreciate mr. smith from new jersey for bringing this bill up and keeping this atrocity and the lessons that it means for us today in front of this body and as always i appreciate mr. engel's cooperation in seeing this resolution move to the floor. i appreciate the powerful stories that were shared by mr. engel and about mr. smith today in terms of what happened on that day 20 years ago this month. . as they transformed what was supposed to be a u.n. safe haven of refugees in what became an extermination camp and on that july day, 8,000 men and boys were massacred as they shared with you serb forces compiled detailed lists of those targeted for killing. they separated families. they drove those young muslim men to various fields where
they were san marinoially executed. they ruled that this act was an act of genocide and rightly so. we do not know the names of many of these victims as these killers took extensive measures to cover their crimes, and as a result, families have never found their missing relatives and experts continue to uncover and identify remains at the scenes of those mass killings. former united nations secretary general kofi annan said this tragedy will haunt the united nations forever. although it occurred 20 years ago, this massacre continues to hinder progress towards peace in this troubled region. for a while, serbia's president has apologized for crimes committed. he and other serbian officials still refuse to talk about the extent of the brutality and today's resolution encourages
serbian officials to acknowledge the genocide that occurred which would institute a major step forward in restoring relations with its neighbor. this resolution also reaffirms u.s. policy to oppose mass atrocities in the strongest terms whenever and wherever they occur. but of course, the srebrenica genocide along with others in rwanda and cambodia and darfur are stark reminders that simply saying never again will never be enough. action is needed, it's demanded as around the world violent eruns once more into genocidal campaigns and i will name some right now. ongoing abeeses against the muslim population in burma have caused human rights advocates to sound the alarm over a grave risk of additional mass atrocities and even genocide. unable to claim citizenship in
burma or elsewhere and under constant threat of violence, many have called the muzz -- those muslims the most persecuted in the world. leading thousands upon thousands to flee their homes in overloaded boats, and that's why i helped lead the effort last congress to pass house resolution 418 calling for an end to the persecution of the rohenga people. in shry lanka anti--- in sri lanka, anti-muslim protests came about. under the government, extremist forces destroyed mosques and muslim businesses displacing thousands. under the government, however, we have an opportunity to press for positive change and incluesivity in the newly elected there in sri lanka.
extremist groups are similarly targeting minority communities in syria, the central african republic and so while we absolutely must remember pass atrocities, we are charged with doing all we can to stop today's violence. i don't want future congresses having to memorialize atrocities from our era now. again, i thank the gentleman from new jersey, mr. critz smith, for introducing this -- mr. chis smith for introducing this timely resolution. i thank mr. engel. i ask my colleagues to join me in supporting this. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. engel: mr. speaker, in closing, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. engel: mr. speaker, i commend my friend from new jersey, mr. smith, for his leadership on this important resolution. and i'm gratified that we held this timely debate ahead of the sound commemorations that will
take place in srebrenica and around the world this weekend. i thank our chairman for his leadership, chairman royce, as usual, and he chose that we work, again, together on the foreign affairs committee in a very bipartisan manner. this transcends everything. this is genocide, and these resolutions are very, very important. now, let's think about this. the chairman said something that really josled my mind. -- jostled my mind. i pointed out where a u.n. resolution was vetoed today by russia. these men who were massacred in the genocide went to what they were told was a united nations safe haven. so for this to happen under the auspices of the united nations and then for russia to veto the united nations resolution
commemorating solemn 20 years is just an absolute disgrace and irony, and it's one of the reasons that the united nations has trouble because of the hypocrisy once again that we see in that body. by passing this resolution, we put the house solidly on record honoring the thousands of innocent people killed in srebrenica and all those who suffered during the bosnian war, and we stand alongside those who risked and continue to risk life and limb to defend the human rights of all people. i urge my colleagues to support this resolution unanimously, 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 new jersey is recognized. mr. smith: thank you very much mr. speaker. i just want to finally say a very special thanks to majority leader kevin mccarthy for arranging for this bill to come to the floor and of course to the speaker, to ed royce, our distinguished chairman and
ranking member for their strong support co-sponsorship of this resolution. it is bipartisan. i think we are sending a clear message to the world again that this srebrenica was a genocide. we must hold those to account who committed these atrocities. at least two of the major perpetrators hopefully will soon get justice. one at the end of this year and the other by 2017, the wheels of justice do turn slowly but they are jailed right now. but above all i think we need to pray for the victims we need to pray for the loved ones who continue to suffer unspeakable agony and i do hope the american people, all of us in the house and in this town will keep, especially as this remembrance comes around beginning on july 11, to keep these people who have suffered so much in our prayers. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the
question is will the house suspend the rules and agree to house resolution 310. 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 resolution is agreed to and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. for what purpose does the gentleman from minnesota seek recognition? mr. kline: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on h.r. 5. the speaker pro tempore: without objection.
pursuant to the house resolution 125 and rule 18, the chair declares the house in the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for the further consideration of h.r. 5. will the gentleman from kansas, mr. yoder kindly take the chair. the chair: the house is in the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for the further consideration of h.r. 5, which the clerk will report by title. the clerk: a bill to support state and local accountability for public education, protect state and local authority, inform parents of the performance of their children's schools, and for other purposes. the chair: when the committee of the whole rose on friday, february 27, 2015, a request for a recorded vote on amendment number 44 printed in part b of house report 114-29
offered by the gentleman from virginia mr. scott, had been postponed. pursuant to house resolution 347, it shall be in order to consider the further amendments printed in part a in house report 114-192 as such amendments had been printed in part b of house report 114-29. each such amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the report, by a member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject to an amendment and shall not be subject to demand for division of the question. it is now in order to consider amendment number 45 printed in part a of house report 114-192. for what purpose does the gentleman from indiana seek recognition? mr. rokita: i have an amendment at the desk. the clerk: amendment number 45 printed in part a of house report 114-192 offered by mr. rokita of indiana.
the chair: pursuant to house resolution 347, the gentleman from indiana mr. rokita, and a member opposed, each will control five minutes. the chair now recognizes the gentleman from indiana. mr. rokita: i thank the chair. my amendment is simple. it shortens authorization of the act from six years to four years. very thankful for the leadership of the gentleman from wisconsin, mr. grothman for his work in leading this effort. it is the role of congress to conduct oversight of federal programs and regularly revisit the results of taxpayer investments. we began a process to replace no child left behind four years ago and our goal from the beginning has always been to roll back the federal government's authority over k-12 schools and return to state and local education leaders the responsibility and opportunity to deliver a quality education to their students. now, the student success act is a conservative proposal that
will reduce the federal role, restore local control and empowering individuals. reducing the authorization to four years will give the congress and the next administration a chance to ensure that these bold reforms are actually working as intended. so i encourage my colleagues to support this commonsense amendment to the underlying bill, and i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from colorado seek recognition? pol pohl i claim time in opposition -- mr. polis: i claim time in opposition. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. polis: thank you, mr. speaker. i had the opportunity to serve on our state board of education in colorado from 2001 to 2007. this was during the implementation phase of no chifled left behind. -- child left behind. now, we knew the flaws but it took several years just to get up to the point where we had the tests, we had the standards and we complied with it. education is a major public enterprise.
in fact it's the largest enterprise at the state and local level. one of the frustrations i heard a lot of the last few years, and it's really amplified the truss foreign relation about testing -- frustration about testing is the ball has been moving. in my state of colorado, we move from one test, to a temporary test and then finally a third test all in a period of four years. what we need to do -- and this is something that we will hear from education stakeholders as varied as teachers and school boards and principals is stop moving the ball. we know it's not going to be perfect. let's give it a little bit of time to work. now, this bill is far from perfect which is why i oppose the underlying bill. but whatever set of rules you put in place i feel it's important to alowell the rulemaking -- allow the rulemaking, the state laws to catch up which takes a period of time, a period of years. i believe the longer re-authorization through 2021 rather than reducing it to four years is absolutely in the interest of ensuring that whatever law we come up with
can be implemented more effectively at the state and local level. not only is it frustrating for districts and teachers to chase a constantly moving ball it detracts from their most important effort which is to educate the next generation of americans. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from colorado reserves. the gentleman from indiana is recognized. mr. rokita: i thank the chair. i now want to recognize one minute the chairman of the full education and work force committee, a leader in this area, has been working on these issues a lot more than the four years, the gentleman from minnesota, the chairman kline. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. kline: i want to take a few seconds to say i understand. i support the amendment and urge my colleagues to vote for it. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from colorado is recognized. mr. polis: thank you. i yield to the ranking member, mr. scott of virginia. for as much time as he may consume. the chair: the gentleman from virginia is recognized. .
mr. scott: thank you, mr. chairman. i rise in support of the amendment. as the gentleman from colorado has indicated, if you have a good bill, you should have as long an authorization as possible. better planning and other things he mentioned. but this is a bad bill. the funding formula takes from the poor and gives to the rich, eliminates the responsibility to actually do something about the achievement gaps. i believe the quicker we can get back to it the better. so if you want to shorten authorization so that the pain inflicted on this bill is shorter, i'm for it. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from colorado is -- i'm sorry, from indiana, is recognized. >> i thank the chair and the gentleman for supporting the amendment. the republicans he's supporting are completely wrong. we've increased federal spending as the gentleman knows on education over 300% since the federal government's been involved. mr. rokita: guess what mr. chairman? the results have been flatlined. this bill does anything but take from the poor and give to the rich. it ensures that civil rights are protected and that children
whatever socioeconomic background aren't left behind. but they have the opportunity to succeed in the 21st century and win. with that i'd inquire as to how much time we have remaining. the chair: the gentleman from indiana has 3 1/4 minutes remaining. mr. rokita: i thank the chair. for the remaining time i yield to the gentleman from wisconsin , a the gentleman who is new -- new to this congress but who is already making his mark. mr. grothman. the chair: the gentleman from wisconsin is recognized for 3 1/4 minutes. mr. grothman: one of the many reasons that this is a good bill is that it recognizes that the federal government is taking too much control over education in this country. one of the reasons the federal government should not get involved in many, many things is they're not very nimble. when they make a mistake, rather than turning something around, you know, if a school board makes a mistake, they may come back in the meeting two weeks later and undo the mistake they made.
when the federal government makes a mistake, it can take 15 or 20 years, if ever, to admit they made a mistake. now, when the original no child left behind bill passed, i used to meet with school superintendents a couple times a month. they knew within months that that bill was horribly flawed. chairman kline has worked very hard on this bill. it's a very good bill. but it's still a very big complicated bill. and i am sure within months, years, a couple of years, local superintendents will report changes they want to have made. the idea -- i think it's a very good amendment because even though it doesn't assure us that we're going to revisit this in four years, any more than the original no child left behind, i think it reminds congress that at least in a four-year period, you ought to be looking at it, see what your local superintendents think, see what your local school
teachers think and see if it can be improved. and of course it's going to be able to be improved in four years. so that's the reason for the amendment. if you told anybody back home we're passing a law and we don't anticipate looking -- even looking at it again for four years, they would -- i think they'd think that's highly unusual and that defines one of the reasons why we shouldn't get the federal government involved in a wide variety of things. i yield the remainder of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from colorado is recognized to close. mr. polis: thank you, mr. speaker. of course you can look at a bill during its period of initial authorization. there are routinely clean-up bills that move through this body. i wish, i wish that no child left behind had a clean-up bill in 2002. or in 2003. or in 2004. all during its initial period of authorization where president bush closed the door on even the changes that i think that we could have had broad consensus that we needed to pass. but of course whatever comes
out of this esea process, if we can agree on cleanup things and unintended consequences, two years, three years out, let's do them. the answer is not to move the ball. it leads to the spinning of the wheels for a period of years and rather than working on educating kids, people are working on complying with ever-changing mate ricks -- matrix of federal, state and local law. a lot happens after we pass a law in this body. goss federal making. goes to states who might -- goes to federal rulemaking. goes to states. goes to superintendents. takes a lot of time. might take two years, three years before it finally reaches those policy implementation levels on the ground at a local level. and guess what? if this amendment becomes law and the authorization period is only four years, they might finally, finally start complying with this law only to find that there's a future congress, a future president
that moves the ball once again and starts the whole cycle of spinning wheels all over again. we need to make sure that we -- whatever we do in this body, that we give time for a thoughtful implementation of it at the state and local level that doesn't detract from the core mission that the men and women who teach in our classrooms, the men and women who volunteer on school boards commit their lives to in terms of educating kids. so we need to move forward with a longer re-authorization. if there are cleanup mats that are we can agree on during that authorization -- matters that we can agree on during that authorization period, with you should by no means recollude them from the discussion until the end of this authorization. that was one of the problems with no child left behind. that this body never had follow-up discussions. i urge my colleagues to vote no and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from indiana. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed to.
it is now in order to consider amendment number 46 printed in part a of house report 114-192. for what purpose does the gentleman from north carolina seek recognition? >> i would like to offer an amendment. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 46 printed in part a of house report 114-192 offered by mr. walker of north carolina. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 347 the gentleman from north carolina, mr. walker, and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from north carolina. scott walker thank you, mr. chairman -- mr. walker: thank you mr. chairman. when most of us come to washington, one of the promises or things we try and do best is to return as much power or should i say decision making back to the states and back to the people.
this allows states to opt out of 80 different federal programs, returning that opportunity. some may say that not child left behind, that it allows the opt-out and it does, but whatever -- what it doesn't do, it doesn't allow the states to opt out of the mandates and still keep the federal funding. that's why we believe this is a crucial amendment. with that i would like to yield some time to my distinguished friend from florida, representative desantis. the chair: the gentleman from florida is recognized for as much time as he may consume. mr. desantis: thank you to my friend from north carolina. i'm happy to co-sponsor this amendment. i think this amendment -- i think of it in terms of common core. because we've had a lot of controversy over common core, a lot of parents are upset about it. and they say, look, this is a federal government getting involved in education. people support common core said, wait a minute, the federal government never mandated common core. that never happened. that's true. but what did happen was the federal government had a huge
amount of money under president obama's race to the top, and they said, hey states, this is during the recession, states need the money, here's some money, but you got to do what we want to do. so they continued that funding and really coerced a lot of states into adopting something like common core. and so i think what the a-plus does is it says, ok, federal government's gotten involved in k-12 education, i don't think it's been very successful from the very beginning, but if you're going to be providing money, at least give the state the ability to take that money and use it as they see fit to try to innovate and to try to do things that will improve the academic performance of their kids. but don't condition the funding on following specific formulas that washington knows best. so i think this really empowers states. i think this is something that will empower local communities and i think ultimately will be better off as a matter of k-12 education. so i thank my friend from north carolina for offering it and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields
back the balance of his time. the gentleman from north carolina. the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from virginia for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek reck fligs? mr. scott: i rise to claim type -- time in opposition. mr. speaker, i rise in opposition to the amendment. the amendment would literally let states just take the money and run with no assurance that the billions of federal dollars actually benefit the populations of students that esea was intended to serve. low-income minorities, students who do not speak english, students with disabilities. the original purpose of esea was to address the special educational needs of children of low income families and the impact that concentrations of low-income families have on the ability of local educational agencies to support adequate educational programs. subsequently we added a requirement that you identify and address achievement gams -- gaps. that's the purpose of the law. if you just opt out, take it as a block grant, you don't have to address the problems that
the money is designed to cure. the underlying bill violates the original purpose of the original esea and this amendment just makes it worse. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from north carolina is recognized. the gentleman from north carolina has 2 3/4 minutes remaining. mr. walker: thank you. who better to address these problems than states and local school boards? let's talk specifically about what the a-plus act does. it restores education decision making to state and local leaders who are better positioned to make informed decisions about the needs of their local school communities. it allows states to consolidate funding for any and all programs that are authorized under the esea and it also reduces bureaucracy and increases transparency of student outcomes by redirecting accountability to parents and
taxpayers, not washington. fundamentally i believe that government is more accountable almost always the more local and it becomes more effective. thank you, mr. chairman, i yield back the balance. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from virginia is recognized. mr. scott: mr. chairman, i yield the gentleman from colorado, mr. polis two minutes. the chair: the gentleman from colorado is recognized for two minutes. mr. polis: thank you mr. speaker. there is a great potential for cooperation between democrats and republicans as there has historically been with regard to education. and that lies in of course, enhancing flexibility, in freeing teachers and principals and districts from some of the bureaucratic constraints that they have that distract from their ability to maximize education. but along with that increased flexibility needs to come accountability. otherwise we wind up with the worst of both worlds. and just like no child left behind erred too far in the
direction of not enough flexibility, so too we must be caroline not -- careful not to err in the direction of too much flexibility without accountability. it's important to make sure that as we increase the ways and the manner that states and districts have to free up local innovation at the classroom level at the school level, at the district level, we need to make sure and reiterate what our goals are here. how do we make sure that all students are learning? how do we make sure that schools are serving students with disabilities under idea? how do we make sure that districts and states are committed to closing the achievement gap between students of color and white students, even in local jurisdictions that might not have that political will intrinsically? that is the federal promise. that is the promise and the reason behind esea and our efforts to improve education across these united states. to turn it over to the states effectively makes the referee a
player on the field. we need to have an objective look. the same people who are concerned with the -- with deciding how exactly money are spent, cannot objectively weigh whether it's working or not. that's just human nature. we need to make sure that if states have additional flexibility and grants, something that i think we could certainly work together on, if they have that flexibility, we need to make sure there's an objective standard under which what they're doing with that flexibility is determined to work or not to work. and if doesn't work, we need to encourage those states to move in a different direction. if it does work, we can increase our efforts to support them. so again there's a general premise here that can be worked on but the underlying amendment would be extremely detrimental to public education. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from virginia is recognized. mr. scott: mr. chairman, how much time do we have? the chair: the gentleman from virginia has two minutes remaining. mr. scott: i reserve the balance of my time.
the chair: the gentleman from north carolina yielded back the balance of his -- yielded back the balance of his time. did the gentleman intend to reserve? does the gentleman ask for unanimous consent to reclaim his two minutes' of time? does the gentleman ask for unanimous consent? mr. walker: yes. the chair: without objection ok. the gentleman from north carolina. mr. polis: parliamentary inquiry. to be clear, the gentleman was not yielded time from the gentleman from virginia. the gentleman was granted his own time which he'd yielded back to the chair. the chair: correct. the gentleman from colorado is are correct. the gentleman from north carolina is recognized. mr. walker: thank you. time remaining? the chair: two minutes for the gentleman from north carolina, two minutes to the gentleman from virginia. mr. walker: thank you, mr. speaker. a lot of us are talking, with due respect to my friends from colorado, i hear the point, but i would say a lot of that is -- we're hearing we, we this, we the federal, we this. it should be we the people at the state level, we the people at the local level. it is important that we get some of the power that we like to monger up here among us in
the house, to return it back to the state, to return it back to the individual school boards, who best know, and these parents and school boards, to make these decision. we talk with about accountability. how's that been working for us the last 40 years? we need to get the accountability back to where it goes, from where it should be from the very beginning and that is to the state level and to the local people, to the parents and the school boards. with that i yield back mr. speaker. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. . the gentleman from virginia is recognized to close. mr. scott: thank you, mr. chairman. mr. chairman, the esea passed in 1965 because states and localities were not equitablely funding the schools. -- equitably funding the schools. funds were to be spent in areas of concentration of low-income families. if we -- if this amendment passes, we can reasonably assume that they'll go back to the way they were doing it.
this makes a bad bill even worse, so i would hope that we would defeat the amendment, keep the requirement that the states in using the money address fiscal inequalities and achievement gaps. with this amendment, there are no requirements that they do anything and we can reasonably assume they'll go back doing the things they were doing to begin with before esea passed. mr. chairman i would hope we would defeat this amendment and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. all time having expired, the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from north carolina. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed to. mr. scott: mr. chairman. the chair: the gentleman from virginia. mr. scott: on that i ask for a recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from north carolina will be postponed.
it is now in order to consider amendment number 47 printed in part a of house report 114-192. for what purpose does the gentleman from arizona seek recognition? mr. salmon: mr. speaker i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 47 printed in part a of house report 114-192 offered by mr. salmon of arizona. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 347, the gentleman from arizona, mr. salmon, and a member opposed, each will control five minutes. the chair now recognizes the gentleman from arizona. mr. salmon: thank you, mr. speaker. i want to first thank chairman kline and representative rokita of the house committee on education and the work force for working with me on this important amendment to ensure that parents have more authority and power over their children's education. my amendment is very very simple. it would allow any parent to opt their child out of high-stakes testing and protect schools from being punished by
the federal department of education if parents opted to take their children out of these tests. since 2001 and the re-authorization of the elementary and secondary education act, called no child left behind, the federal government has placed increasingly importance on academic assessments in k-12 education. assessments are important and even necessary to understand the measure a child's academic progress however academic assessments have become an overutilized metric to evaluate everything from the quality of a teacher to the strength of a particular program. because of this frenzied obsession with high-stakes testing, more and more time is being usurped from actual classroom learning. it was reported that testing for a student in the 11th grade could take up to 27 days, a total of 15% of the entire school year. and a lot of the teachers complain about having to teach
to the test. in fact i think that's why the n.e.a. has come out in support of this amendment. parents are becoming increasingly fed up with such constant and onerous testing requirements as well as the teachers. and while some states currently allow parents to opt students out of testing, the obligation on schools of a 95% participation rate in-school assessments. if schools don't meet these requirements, they risk enforcement measures from the department of education, which at worst, could include losing access to federal funding. these factors create a strange environment of conflicting interests for students, parents and schools. my amendment would ease the schools' fears of penalties by directing that opted out students not be counted among the 95% participation requirement. while giving students due power
over their child's education. and i urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this important amendment which returns the power back where it should be, back to the students. and i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from arizona reserves. for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? mr. scott: mr. chairman, i claim time in opposition. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. scott: thank you, mr. chairman. mr. chairman it's one thing to keep a light on the -- what the underlying bill does, it keeps a light on problems like achievement gaps. what this bill does is kind of sweeps everything under the rug. before participation threshold of 95%, only one state actually assessed 95% of students with disabilities and it was not unusual for low-achieving students to suddenly have field trips on testing day. if you are not measuring the achievement gap, you can't deal with the achievement gap. we need to make sure that enough students are tested 95%, so that we can actually
identify the achievement gaps and do something about it. as parents do have the right to opt out, but you still have -- when the dust settles, you have to at least 95% have had to take the test. we are having situations now if you eliminate that requirement, school systems can encourage people not to show up on testing day. they can have field trips on testing day and manipulate the data so that only half the students are taking the test, you make sure it's the good students that are taking the test. the scores all of a sudden went up. the requirement that 95% get tested means you have meaningful data you can find out what the problem is and then you can deal with it. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from virginia reserves. the gentleman from arizona is recognized. mr. salmon: i'd like to yield a minute to the chairman of the full committee, mr. kline. the chair: the gentleman from minnesota is recognized. mr. kline: thank you, mr. chairman. i thank the gentleman for offering this amendment. he's expressing a concern here of parents, not school teachers
and principals who want to put together field trips. there's a great deal of anxiety on the part of some parents. this is giving them some power, so i support the gentleman's amendment and encourage my colleagues to support it and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from virginia is recognized. mr. scott: mr. chairman, i yield two minutes to the gentleman from arizona, mr. grijalva. the chair: the gentleman from arizona, mr. grijalva, is recognized. mr. grijalva: i want to thank the ranking member. mr. chairman, i rise in opposition to the underlying legislation and to the salmon amendment. once again, we're considering legislation that does nothing to improve equity in our public education system. by assuring and ensuring that resources are focused on student populations that have been historically marginalized, primarily children of color, english language learners, children with disabilities and poor kids. and the lessons from no child left behind are plentiful, some good, that need improvement and some that need to be eliminated from re-authorization. but this amendment along with
the underlying legislation, continues to dismantle and remove the significant mission of esea that was the original reason to deal with the issue of poverty in this country marginalized communities and kids that weren't achieving. mr. speaker, i ask my colleagues to oppose h.r. 5 and this amendment. the current bill fails to provide all of our communities with equity education. portability eliminates mant assistance of efforts, blocks grants doesn't address charter school accountability and eliminates provisions. eliminates provisions to protect english learners in this country. and now with this amendment, we eliminate the nation's responsibility to be accountable and to ensure all children get education. i'm astounded by the historical amnesia that goes on when we have these discussions. esea was for a purpose. to improve and to create equity
and opportunity for children that didn't have it. we have not reached the stage in this country where we can say the states can take care of this. we could go back to those vestiges, as the ranking member said, in which there was no equality, there was no opportunity and tell the states you can do what you want with this federal money and if some -- and by discretion if you don't educate all your children, that's ok. and if by discretion we can't hold anybody accountable for the lack of education, that's ok. that's the vestige we're going back to, and i urge a no vote. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from arizona, mr. salmon, is recognized. mr. salmon: thank you, mr. speaker. i take serious umbrage with the arrogance that pervades this city. i joke from my constituents, i'm here to help you, and that always draws a loud amount of
laughter because everybody knows that's not the way things really are. if we can't trust our parents who have the biggest interest in whether their child succeeds in education, if we can't trust the teachers, if we can't trust the local school boards who has to run for election, then we must fold up and go home. i have confidence in my parents and school board people than i have here. we need to put the power back in the hands of parents and teachers. the chair: the gentleman from virginia is recognized. mr. scott: how much time do i have? the chair: the gentleman has one minute remaining. mr. scott: i yield to the gentleman from colorado. mr. polis: one parent says that students with special needs need to take test. the test gave us the data to
see where my son needed additional support. i rise in opposition to mr. salmon's amendment. before no child left behind was passed school would systemically exclude students from tests to sweep deficiencies and discrimination under the rug. this amendment, which would allow students to opt out of tests and allow those students to be omitted from the testing threshold would make it easier to exclude historically marginalized students from accountability systems. there would be almost no way of knowing which students truly opted out, which were pushed out and which students stayed at home at their school's suggestion or optional field trip. in my own state of colorado a similar provision was brought up in the state legislature and over 400 business and community leaders strongly publicly opposed the bill and succeeded in defeating it. in order to close achievement gaps, we need data on every student, regardless of race, background or disability. this kind of policy allows the very data we need the most on
the most unique kids to be swept under that rug. for that reason i strongly urge a no vote on this amendment, and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from virginia is recognized to close. mr. scott: thank you, mr. chairman. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for 30 seconds. mr. scott: mr. chairman if this amendment passes, school systems will be having an incentive to achieve achievement gaps by manipulating the data. this is wrong. this amendment ought to be defeated. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from arizona. those in favor will say aye. those opposed no. in the opinion of the chair the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed to. mr. salmon: i ask for a recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from arizona will be postponed. it is now in order to consider
amendment number 48 printed in part a of house report 114-192. for what purpose does the gentleman from colorado seek recognition? mr. polis: i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 48 printed in part a of house report 114-192 offered by mr. polis of colorado. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 347, the gentleman from colorado, mr. polis, and a member opposed, each will control five minutes. the chair now recognizes the gentleman from colorado. mr. polis: mr. chairman no child left behind's metrics are outdated and rigid. with that we agree. h.r. 5 in its current form abandons provisions that are crucial in ensuring equal education opportunities for all of our nation's students. my amendment advances a more comprehensive and effective vision of accountability at the school district and state level. this new language expects states to set college and career-ready standards rather them dumb down their standards, inflate their results. it also requires states to set performance growth in
gradeuation rate targets and ensures it improves every year including students with disabilities. one of the major deficiencies in h.r. 5, one of the reasons that all the advocacy groups for students with learning disabilities oppose the bill, it removes the accountability we have for students with disabilities to ensure they continue to learn. there is currently a 1% cap or students with the most severe disabilities who are not tested. this bill, h.r. 5 would eliminated 1% cap on alternative assessments based on alternative achievement standards and remove it altogether, allowing ultimately schools and states to decide not to have any accountability for those students who need programs that meet their learning needs the most. the democratic substitute amendment upholds our nation's civil rights and equity responsibility to ensure that all students receive a high-quality education. . it makes sure that
accountability is a meaningful word and takes meaningful steps toward getting accountability right, rather than allowing discrimination and bad choices to continue to result in an increasing achievement gap across our country. this amendment is also reflected in the democratic substitute and would make sure that we have an accountability system that prepares our studenters in jobs and the work force of the 1st century and to move on to higher education. absent including this language or the democratic substitute in the final passage of the bill, the bill in its current form would be a step backwards a step to lower standards a step to reduce accountability, and a step to allow deficiencies to be swept urn the rug as they once were. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves -- the chair: the gentleman reserves. for what purpose does the gentleman rise?
>> i rise to claim time in opposition to the gentleman's amendment. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. kline: i would like to yield two minutes to the gentleman from new york. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. >> i rise in opposition to this amendment. my daughter just completed third grade and we need to create higher standards for them and their generation. we need to set up our state of the unions to succeed, not fail. we need to stop overtesting in our schools this would be a -- this amendment would be a giant leap backwards for education reform. rather than reforming the policies of no child left behind this embraces the most problematic portions, continuing to obsess over federally mandated performance standards and using that to measure teacher performance. mr. zeldin: what's most bad is
that they lower standards because the proposal doesn't stand on its own her roits. our schools need greater flexibility and local control. this amendment would do the exact opposite which is why i strongly oppose its passage and encourage all my colleagues to do the same. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the gentleman from colorado is recognize. mr. polis: i yield one minute to the gentleman from virginia, the ranking member on the -- member on the committee. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. scott: until amendment addresses achievement gaps. unfortunately the one size fits all approach has neglected the achievement gaps. the gentleman's amendment
reinstates the requirement that something be done but directs the states to develop their own locally tailored response to achievement gaps. this approach is much more likely to be effective and will be part of the democratic substitute that will be voted on shortly. mr. chairman, before we leave the bill i'd like to thank many of the members of our staff that have worked on this bill since january. they've spent days an nights and weekends working on the bill and i'd like to acknowledge them in their work today. denise ford, jackie christian haynes, ashley holyfield, erica tim kiera brian kennedy, all worked very hard on this bill and deserve significant recognition. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from minnesota is recognized. mr. kline: thank you, mr. chairman. i'd like to yield one minute to the gentleman from utah.
the chair: the gentlelady is recognized for one minute. ms. love: i rise in opposition to this amendment as a mayor and the mother of three children. this amendment puts a bigger -- a larger footprint in the hands of the federal government and gives more power to the federal government instead of our local agencies. i believe that the best people to teach our students are the people at the local level. i trust teachers and parents to make decisions for students. now i made a promise that i was going to do everything i can to put the decision making back into the hands of the people not into the hands of the federal government. i believe that this amendment actually puts it into the hands of the federal government and gives us a big step backwards. i believe that we as people, when we're given more options we can make better decisions. and when we make better decisions we can do that at a local level, not at a federal level. so i ask that we vote against
this amendment and i stand in opposition to this amendment and i yield back. the chair: the gentlelady yields back. the gentleman from colorado. the gentleman from colorado has one and three quarters minutes remaining the gentleman from minnesota has two and three quarters minutes remaining. mr. polis: the gentleman from utah -- the gentlewoman from utah talked about the local level. on that we agree. this is accountability metrics, when we look at decisions -- we look at whether decisions made locally work or don't work. we want to allow the flexibility to get things right but not the flexibility to continue to ignore persistent gaps in our education system that continue to poorly serve too many low income students and minority students. given that my amendment is included in its entirety on the democratic substitute upon which we will be voting i would now like to withdraw my amendment. the chair: the amendment is withdrawn.
pursuant to clause 6 of rule 1, pr seedings will now resume on those amendments printed in part b of house report 114-29, and part a of house report 114-192 on which further proceedings were post-postseasonned in the following order. amendments printed in part b of house report 139. number 30 by mr. zeldin of new york number 31 by many lurd -- by mr. hurd of texas, number 32 by mr. grayson of florida, number 33 by mrs. wilson of florida, number 35 by mr. carson of indiana, number 39 by ms. brownlee of california, number 40 by mr. loebsack of yale, number 41 by mr. polis of colorado, number 43 by mr. thompson of mississippi. amendments printed in part a of house report 114-192, amendment
number 46, by mr. walker of north carolina. amendment 47 by mr. salmon of arizona. and amendment number 44 printed in part b of house report 114-29 by mr. scott of virginia. the chair will reduce to two minutes the minimum time for any electronic vote after the first vote in the series. the unfinished business is the request for a recorded vote on amendment number 30 printed in part b of house report 114-129 by the gentleman from new york mr. zell din, on which further proceed -- mr. zeldin on which further proceedings were postponed. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 30 printed in part b of house report 113-29 -- 114-29. the chair: a recorded vote has been requested. those in support of the request for a recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having risen
a recorded vote is ordered. 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 representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]