Rob Andrews

Mr. ANDREWS

Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the graduating students of the Garden State Pathways Program at Camden County College. For the past two years, these remarkable students have acquired valuable expertise in career skills while experiencing a college campus atmosphere. The students graduating May 18, 2013 from the program are Ashley Cousins, Kevin Joseph Hillegas, Wesley Jay Johns, Austin Jarrett Parrish, Ashley M. Smollock, and Lucas Alexander Tavlas. None of this, of course, would have been possible without the invaluable dedication of their teachers and mentors. The staff of the Garden State Pathways is headed by Ms. Bernadette Gismonde, who is the program coordinator. Her staff includes Ms. Bernadette Stettler, Administrative Assistant; Ms. Danielle Brittin, Job Coach; Ms. Hazel Thompson, Lead Mentor; and Ms. Joyce Howie, Assistant Mentor. Mr. Speaker, I wish to congratulate these young men and women on the hard work they've put in and they have already accomplished. These students have bright futures ahead of them, and I wish them the best in all coming endeavors.

Mr. ANDREWS

Mr. ANDREWS. The House deserves a vigorous debate on any question. It also deserves the factual record. The President, the Vice President, and the employees of the executive branch are subject to the law in the following way: because they receive coverage through their employer, their employer is subject to the rules of the law. The second thing I want to make very, very clear: no Member of the House of Representatives is exempt from this law in any way, shape, or form. None. As far as the committee staffs are concerned, the committee staffs that you refer to are members of the Federal Employee Health Benefits Program. Nothing in the law changes that. Just as any other person in America who is insured by their employer, they have to live by these same kinds of rules. This just isn't true.

Mr. ANDREWS. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.

Mr. ANDREWS. No, they're not. Reclaiming my time, this is just not correct. There is no one exempt from this coverage. Does the gentleman agree that he is not exempt from this coverage? Are you exempt?

Mr. ANDREWS. I would yield to the gentleman. Are you exempt from this law, sir?

Mr. ANDREWS. Reclaiming my time. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time.

Mr. ANDREWS. The committee staffs who were involved in writing the bill are Federal employees subject to the Federal Employees Health Benefits Act. There have been many distortions about this law; this is just one of them. I want to point out that one of the earlier speakers said that there's a GAO study that says this increases the deficit by some imaginary number. The scorekeeper around here for deficits is the Congressional Budget Office. They say it reduces the deficit by $100 billion.

Mr. ANDREWS

Mr. ANDREWS. I thank my friend for yielding. It is right and good that people should passionately pursue their points of view in democratic debate. But it's also our obligation to work from the same set of facts. I have sat here and listened to my friends for the better part of an hour, and I do think it's important that we reflect a correct record on a lot of things, first of all, about the deficit. We have a neutral referee here on questions about spending and taxes called the Congressional Budget Office, and several Members on the other side have approvingly quoted what the CBO says on different things. Here is what the CBO says about this law: Repealing this law will add at least $100 billion to the deficit. Now, our friends disagree with that, but the referee that they hired, that we live by, says repeal of the law adds $100 billion to the deficit. We hear that health insurance premiums have gone up by an average of $3,000 per year. I don't know the source of that claim. Someone should share that with us. But I do know this: the cost-control strategies in the new law which involve the establishment of a competitive insurance market so the insurance companies don't have huge market control hasn't taken effect yet and doesn't take effect until January 1 of 2014. This is characterized as government control of health care. Here's what the law actually says: it says a person without health insurance can get a subsidy to choose among private insurance plans, like Blue Cross and Blue Shield, like Kaiser Permanente, and make their choice. There is nothing in this law--and I would challenge any of my friends on the other side, Mr. Speaker, to show us one word that says that the doctor-patient relationship is in any way impeded or impaired by this law. They can't find those words because they're not there. The bill is referred to as a job-killing health care law, right out of the polling and focus groups of the Republican Party. Here's the facts: in the months before the law was signed, the country was bleeding jobs; 750,000 jobs lost in the month of January of 2009 when the President was inaugurated. Since the law was signed, the private sector has added 3.5 million jobs. Now, you can argue, well, it would have been four and a half or five. Have that argument if you want. But since the law was signed, the number of jobs in the private sector has gone up by a lot, not down. That's what the private sector has done. One of the gentlewomen referred to CBO saying 800,000 jobs are being lost. Apparently CBO is okay in that fact. Here's what that report really says: it says that a lot of people who are older--in their late fifties and early sixties--who are working because they feel they have to work for health insurance are likely to take early retirement. That's where the 800,000 job difference comes from. That's what the report says if you read it. We've heard ObamaCare is a tax. That is true. ObamaCare is a tax on two kinds of people--people with investment income in excess of about a quarter-million dollars and people who can afford health insurance, choose not to buy it, and choose to have our neighbors and our constituents who do buy health insurance pay their bills when they go to the emergency room. That is true. We've heard we have to protect the Constitution. Well, we are protecting the Constitution. With all due respect, your side litigated this and lost. The Supreme Court of the United States heard the claim this is unconstitutional and said you were wrong. Finally, we hear about the assault on the 40-hour workweek. Massachusetts, under a Governor named Romney, did something very similar to this law--imposed an employer mandate. Here's what happened in Massachusetts: while the rest of the country was shedding 3.6 percent of its full-time jobs, Massachusetts lost 2.8 percent of its full-time jobs.

Mr. ANDREWS. I thank my friend. Massachusetts added nine-tenths of 1 percent of part-time jobs to the workforce. The country was 0.8. So if this bill is going to force all of these employers to drop their hours from full time to part time, why didn't it happen in Massachusetts? This has been a fact-free debate up until this time. The country deserves better. The House deserves better. We should oppose this absent-minded repeal.

Mr. ANDREWS. Madam Speaker, on the east coast it's almost the end of the workday. And we know that somewhere a mom who stood on her feet all day in a retail store, or broken her back all day in a nursing home, will come home, and she will see that her son or her daughter isn't feeling very well, is too sick to eat dinner, can't seem to sleep through the night. Most of us in this country have the privilege of taking that child to the pediatrician or to the emergency room right away. Right away. But for over 40 million people in this country, they don't have that privilege. She'll hesitate because she'll think, maybe my daughter will get better by the morning, because a trip to the emergency room for that family might also mean a trip to the bankruptcy court. We are here today to honor her work, not disrespect it. Almost every day here the Wall Street bankers, the oil barons, the big shots get their way. Her day is coming on January 1, 2014, because for the first time in this country's history, we'll do more than talk about the fact that we honor her. We will honor her work and honor her family with affordable health insurance. That day is coming. This charade won't stop it. No amount of misrepresentation will cease it. That day is coming. Her work will be honored. The Affordable Care Act will be implemented.

Mr. ANDREWS. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. ANDREWS

Mr. ANDREWS. So it's Friday afternoon at the nursing home, and Debbie and Donna are approached by the boss. The boss says, I have 5 hours of overtime this weekend. You can either have cash or comp time. Debbie says, I'll take the cash. I need the money. Donna says, I'll take the comp time. Donna gets the overtime. The next Friday rolls around--the same boss, the same request. Debbie says, I'll take the cash. I'll take the overtime. Donna says, No. I'll take the comp time. Donna gets the overtime. It doesn't take very long for people to figure out what the right answer is when you're asked for overtime. You might say, Well, Donna is going to be okay because she gets all this comp time. Donna comes back and says, Next Friday is the pageant at my daughter's school for second grade. I want to take the morning off so I can go to my daughter's pageant. The boss says, No, that's not convenient for me. No. Now, I suppose in some theoretical universe Donna could hire a lawyer, sue her boss, and try to get to see her daughter's second grade pageant--not in the world that she lives in and the world we live in. The boss decides when she uses the comp time. The end of the year comes, and she hasn't used it yet. The boss writes a check to Donna without interest. Donna has made an interest- free loan to her employer. If the employer goes bankrupt in that year, Donna is out of the money altogether. This is not about flexibility. It's about the conversion of someone's wages and assets. This is an assault on the 40-hour workweek. It is not worthy of this institution. It's wrong for our country. We should vote ``no.''

Mr. ANDREWS

Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. ANDREWS

Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Speaker, we're here this morning because Americans are understandably upset at sitting and waiting at airport gates. But there are other Americans who are sitting and waiting. There are moms sitting and waiting at home to enroll their children in Head Start; after this bill, they'll still be waiting. There are pilots in our Air Force and Navy sitting and waiting to fly their training missions. One-third of our planes are grounded. After this bill, they'll still be sitting and they'll still be waiting. There are senior citizens who need to go to chemotherapy at outpatient clinics around this country, but because of the cutbacks of sequestration, their doctors aren't seeing them. After this bill, they'll still be sitting; they'll still be waiting. This Congress has done too much sitting and too much waiting when it comes to sequestration. The Senate has passed a budget that ends sequestration. There's an opportunity to sit at a conference, negotiate and pass that budget. Instead of sitting and waiting, let's start working and negotiating and pass the Senate budget.

Mr. ANDREWS

Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the efforts of the sixth grade class of Laurel Springs School. These students took it upon themselves to honor the centennial of their hometown by writing and performing in a historical play last week. The sixth graders involved with putting on the play to honor the history of their town are Olivia Baldino, Kejsi Bocaj, William Brandley, Elizabeth Brown, Joelle Burns, Craig Caruso, Alijah Caul, Hannah Crane, Gabrielle Daniels, Joseph DeBlasio, Madison Dempsey, Leya Erdman, John Fox, Samantha Gross, Zachary Knight, Briana Lucha, Rachel Mai, Jarred Matchett, Joshua Matchett, Hannah McLaughlin, Stephen McLaughlin, Matthew Michielli, Riley Molway, Minas Nicoludis, Anthony Nocito, Briana Novoa, Cain Pipitone, Dominic Rattell, Melanie Schmidt, Alexandra Simber, Gian Sinfuego, Taylor Swan, Christopher Thatcher, Daniel Trantas, Sophia Troilo, and William Waer. The director is Mrs. Lucinda Garvey and the scenes were all hand-painted by Mrs. Kristen Laurenzi and Mrs. Pam Laurenzi. The students from the class also interviewed Mr. Rich Zimmerman, a longtime resident of Laurel Springs. After gathering information about the town, they wrote their play based on Mr. Zimmerman's knowledge. These exceptional students were very excited to celebrate Laurel Spring's history and to sing happy birthday to the town after the play. The class' efforts to commemorate their town exemplify a strong dedication to learning and an outstanding commitment to their community. I urge them to continue to practice civic engagement and academic curiosity as they grow older.

Mr. ANDREWS

Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Mr. Stephen Strassler, a business owner in New Jersey. His firm, Reviva Labs has been a successful job creator in New Jersey's first district for 40 years. Reviva Labs has been giving back to the South Jersey community for 40 years by providing health and skin care to men and women from around the world. As part of his commitment to community service, Mr. Strassler has generously donated skin care protection aids to a variety of organizations, including the U.S. military. Mr. Strassler sent Vitamin E sticks to Iraq, so our brave men and women could protect their eyes and lips in the harsh environment. Mr. Speaker, the commitment to community service of Mr. Stephen Strassler should not go unrecognized. I join all of South Jersey in expressing our profound gratitude and thanks for Mr. Strassler as he prepares to celebrate the 40th anniversary of his outstanding firm, Reviva Labs.

Mr. ANDREWS

Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to celebrate the accomplishments of Mr. Tom MacAdams. Throughout his life, Mr. MacAdams has been active in his community, founding a number of organizations in Brooklawn, New Jersey. Mr. MacAdams and his wife Marie have been married for 34 years and they have three children together, Shane, Colin, and Erin. Sadly, Mr. MacAdams has Frontotemporal Dementia, a neurodegenerative speech disorder, and was recently diagnosed with Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis. Mr. MacAdams is a paragon of community service and a true leader in his community. To combat drug use, he created the Brooklawn Drug Alliance Committee. Mr. MacAdams also served on the Brooklawn council for 18 years, 16 of them as Municipal Chair. Along with his wife, Mr. MacAdams organized the Brooklawn Christmas Spirit, a group dedicated to providing food toys, and gift cards for families in need. An avid sports fan, Mr. MacAdams created a number of leagues in his hometown. He founded the Lady Bugs Basketball League, a girl's league which played in his family's backyard for 7 years. Mr. MacAdams also established and coached the Brooklawn Bees basketball team, and founded and organized the Brooklawn Wiffleball Tournament. Tom MacAdams is a role model for Brooklawn and all of South Jersey. I rise to honor Mr. MacAdams for his outstanding commitment to his community, and all the work he has done to improve Brooklawn, New Jersey. I wish him and his family the best.

Mr. ANDREWS

Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the One-hundredth Anniversary of the founding of the Borough of Laurel Springs. On April 2, 1913, the people of Laurel Springs broke with Clementon Township to form their own community. In the past century, Laurel Springs has been a peaceful place to call home for many, and a relaxing destination for people from near and far. Its idyllic South Jersey location has been appreciated for centuries. Poet Walt Whitman spent much of his time between 1876 and 1884 in a summer house in what later became the Borough of Laurel Springs. It was there that he wrote portions of his renowned collection Leaves of Grass. Of Laurel Lake, Whitman simply wrote that it was ``the prettiest lake in either America or Europe.'' Whitman's praise revealed this well-kept secret to the world, attracting residents and visitors and helping the community grow and thrive. Mr. Speaker, this beautiful community has served as a home to generations of New Jerseyans and a home away from home for tourists from around the world. On the centennial of the creation of the borough, the citizens, mayor, and council of Laurel Springs should be congratulated for reaching this milestone. I join all of South Jersey in wishing the people of Laurel Springs another hundred years of happiness and prosperity for their community.

Mr. ANDREWS

Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to myself. (Mr. ANDREWS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Speaker, this is a Friday across our country, and there are millions of Americans who are going to work under circumstances that exist because of the union movement and collective bargaining in the history of this country. If they work the 41st hour, they'll get time-and-a-half for working overtime. Many find themselves protected by good health benefits and good pension benefits that will guarantee their family a good situation while they're working and a safe and secure retirement. The whole concept of the weekend--that for many American workers will begin this afternoon--exists because of the hard-fought gains of collective bargaining. We wouldn't have a strong America without a strong middle class, and we would not have a strong middle class without collective bargaining. This bill strikes at the heart of collective bargaining by paralyzing the agency that enforces the ground rules of collective bargaining, the National Labor Relations Board. This is really part 2 of a strategy by the Republican majority in the House and the Republican minority in the other body to paralyze the rights of Americans to organize and bargain collectively. Act 1 has occurred since President Obama took office. He has made nominations to the National Labor Relations Board, and not one of those nominees has ever received a vote on the floor of the other body. Understand this: the minority in the other body has not voted against these nominees; they just refuse to put the nominees up for a vote. Today, there are five nominations pending before the other body. If the Senate were to act on those nominations and reject them, the President would presumably make other nominees until he could find people who could clear the process. If the other body were to confirm those nominees, we would not be here having this discussion today because the Board would be functioning. But a functioning Board is clearly not the objective of the other side here. So then act 2 comes along, and this is act 2. This bill says that the National Labor Relations Board can do effectively nothing. My friend, the chairman, referenced the story of a woman who is seeking back pay because of alleged violations of her rights by her union, and she's unable to proceed with the collection of that remedy because the minority in the other body has refused to confirm or refused to even consider any nominees of the National Labor Relations Board; and should this legislation go through here today, we are guaranteeing that nothing will happen because the Board cannot go to court to enforce one of its orders if the Board cannot act. Under this proposed statute, the Board could not act. We are here today because a recalcitrant minority in the other body has steadfastly refused to even take a vote on the President's nominees to the National Labor Relations Board. This bill compounds that travesty. This bill creates chaos. It says that decisions of the Board cannot be taken to court to be enforced, which means as a practical matter those decisions will never be enforced. It says that 11 regional directors of the National Labor Relations Board now have their appointments in jeopardy since their appointments were made since January of 2012 when this bill--it says anything following that is invalid. Employers and employees and unions go to the regional offices of the NLRB to resolve disputes, to prevent strikes, to achieve justice; but this bill paralyzes that effort. There are some who believe that an America in which the bosses make all the decisions and the rest of us stand up, salute and say, yes, sir, is how the country should function. We do not believe that. We believe in a country where workers can freely organize, speak for themselves, sit at the bargaining table, and stand up for their rights. The agency entrusted by law to enforce those rights is being paralyzed by this bill, collective bargaining is being paralyzed by this bill, and we should oppose it. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ANDREWS. I yield myself 15 seconds. Mr. Speaker, President George W. Bush used the same legal authority to make appointments to the National Labor Relations Board that President Obama used here. There was not a word of challenge from the other side ever in that process. At this time, I am pleased to yield 5 minutes to the leading champion of workers' rights in the House of Representatives, the senior Democrat on the House Education and the Workforce Committee, the gentleman from California (Mr. Miller).

Mr. ANDREWS. I yield myself 15 seconds. Mr. Speaker, what President George W. Bush did 171 times--the legal authority he relied on 171 times--is the legal authority relied on by President Obama, which is the subject of this discussion this morning. I am now pleased to yield 2 minutes to someone who understands the value of collective bargaining to America's middle class, the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Courtney).

Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 15 seconds. Mr. Speaker, every Member of this House, I'm certain, wants to follow the Constitution. On our side, we think that the Constitution means the same thing whether George W. Bush is President or Barack Obama is President, and that Constitution vests the President with recess power appointments which were never challenged by the other side in the Bush administration. At this time, I'm pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Bishop), a long-time fighter on this committee for the rights of the middle class.

Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 15 seconds. With all due respect to the last speaker, this bill doesn't push the pause button. It pushes the erase button. It erases the rights of American workers to bargain collectively and organize. At this time I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to my friend and neighbor from New Jersey (Mr. Holt), a member of the committee, and someone who understands that there's a direct connection between economic growth and collective bargaining.

Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 15 seconds. President Obama is relying on the same constitutional provision that President Reagan relied on when he appointed Alan Greenspan as head of the Federal Reserve, the same constitutional provision he relied upon when he appointed Ambassador Jeane Kirkpatrick. At this time, Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Oregon (Ms. Bonamici), someone who stood up against the assault on collective bargaining and the middle class.