Xavier Becerra

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to celebrate the legacy of a great American, Ambassador Raymond Telles, a true pioneer in international and civic leadership. Ambassador Telles passed away on March 8, 2013 at the age of 97 in the company of those who loved him. He is survived by his daughters, Dr. Cynthia Telles and Dr. Patricia Telles-Irvin and their families. His life was the very definition of a trailblazer. Ambassador Telles was America's first ambassador of Latino descent, the first Latino to be mayor of a major American city and a decorated U.S. Air Force Colonel. Born September 5, 1915 in El Paso, Texas, Ambassador Telles began his career at the Department of Justice before being drafted into the United States Army Air Force where he admirably served as the Chief of the Lend-Lease Program for South and Central America. In honor of his distinguished work, he was awarded the Mexican Legion of Merit, the Order of the Southern Cross from Brazil, Columbian wings, and the Peruvian Flying Cross. Later Ambassador Telles served as a military aide for President Harry S. Truman and General Dwight D. Eisenhower during World War II. After being recalled as the Executive Officer of the 67th Tactical and Reconnaissance Group during the Korean War, Raymond Telles was elected Mayor of El Paso, Texas in November 1957. While in office, he encouraged fire and police departments around the city to diversify their workforce. Following a close first election, he went on to win a second term unopposed. After his tenure as mayor, President John F. Kennedy appointed him as U.S. Ambassador to Costa Rica. In 1967, President Richard Nixon called on Ambassador Telles to serve as Chairman of the U.S.-Mexican Border Commission. He would later be appointed as Commissioner of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission where he served in the administrations of Presidents Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford. Although Ambassador Telles will be known in many political circles as a tireless public servant, he will eternally be remembered by those closest to him as a caring father, loving husband, and mentor who paved the way for others to succeed long after his passing. As someone who advised so many young emerging leaders, he can rest comfortably knowing that the light of his legacy will shine for several generations to come. Mr. Speaker, we are truly fortunate to live in a country which gives every one of us an opportunity to make our dreams come true. A few remarkable Americans achieve a level of service to country that opens the door not just to their dreams but to ours as well. Many of us, therefore, have a profound desire and abiding obligation to look up to the sky to say to Ambassador Raymond Telles, ``Thank you!'' Surely, he is smiling upon us now as he surveys the countless dreams he brought to life. May Ambassador Telles rest in peace and may his family celebrate the life and memory of a dear family man and American patriot.

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce the Smithsonian American Latino Museum Act, a bill that supports the creation of the Smithsonian American Latino Museum and whose genesis began 20 years ago. I first introduced this bill, with my colleague Rep. Ileana Ros- Lehtinen, in the 112th Congress. While the wonderful museums and monuments on the National Mall provide a sense of America's history and treasures, many have felt that more must be done to ensure that the contributions of all Americans, including those of Latino descent, are better represented. The 2010 Census revealed that there are over 50 million Latinos in the U.S. plus an additional 3.7 million citizens of Puerto Rico. Even with the large and growing Latino population in the our country there is still no real significant, permanent representation of Latinos in our nation's capital. The Latino community first moved to address this issue in 1993. But, it was not until 2008 that the Commission to Establish the National Museum of the American Latino Act was passed by the House and Senate and signed into law. A panel of 23 bipartisan commissioners was appointed by President George W. Bush, President Barack Obama, House leaders Nancy Pelosi and John Boehner, and Senate leaders Harry Reid and Mitch McConnell. That Commission dedicated itself to creating a comprehensive report and a singular vision--one that would reflect the hopes, opinions, cultural values, recommendations and insights of Americans of diverse origins and geographic regions of the U.S. In 2011, that Commission presented its report, Illuminating the American Story for All, early and under budget, to the President of the United States. Since that time, the notion of a Smithsonian American Latino Museum has continued to gain support from a diversity of people and places. Despite that long-standing support and almost 20 years later, we are still not there yet, but we are getting closer. To move forward in our effort, the House and Senate must pass the Smithsonian American Latino Act. Our bill would do 3 things: Designate the now-vacant Arts and Industries Building (AIB) within the Smithsonian Institution as the location of the museum, including an annex that would be constructed underground and adjacent to the AIB. The bill requires that the planning, design and construction of the museum be harmonious with open space and visual sightlines of the National Mall. Provide the Board of Regents 18 months to conduct a study to determine the best way to plan, design, fund and construct the Museum of the American Latino, taking into account the Commission's report. Authorize private fundraising to begin for the planning, designing and construction of the museum. Upon the bill being passed by both chambers and signed into law by the President, the Smithsonian American Latino Museum would be on its way to becoming the 20th museum within the Smithsonian Institution, forming part of the world's largest museum and research complex. Many may ask: at this moment in time how can we afford to create a new museum? The better question is how can we not? These are challenging times. And in these times, the arts, culture and humanities have a distinct role to play in helping unite us during episodes of adversity and prepare us to share in the prosperity to come. Cultural and historical institutions play a critical role in investigating, educating, sharing, celebrating, preserving, and convening the American people--as we are doing today--to show that we are in this together. Mr. Speaker, the Smithsonian Institution was created for the purpose of helping increase and diffuse knowledge. It is in that same spirit that we seek to advance the Smithsonian American Latino Museum effort. Just like the National Museum of American History, the National Museum of the American Indian, The National Museum of African American History and Culture, the National Air and Space Museum, and others, the future Smithsonian American Latino Museum will help display America in its full bloom.

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. I thank the leader for yielding. My friends, every single day in America, three women die at the hands of domestic violence. Yet this Congress allowed the Violence Against Women Act to expire more than 500 days ago, every one of those 500 days three women dying at the hands of domestic violence. There's been a balanced bipartisan solution passed in the Senate by a vote of 68-31 that has been sitting on the table for almost a year to reenact the Violence Against Women Act. The failure or reluctance of this House to do its work for the American people seems to have now become business as usual. This should not be the new normal. The 113th Congress has now been in session for 56 days in 2013, and it is only now that a debate on an up or down vote on the bipartisan Senate bill will have an opportunity to be had. Every woman in America deserves a clean bill to come before them to reenact the Violence Against Women Act, and those three women in America who today desperately seek to beat the odds and live to see another day deserve a vote. We must defeat the Republican substitute amendment and pass the Senate bipartisan bill.

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. Madam Speaker, by direction of the Democratic Caucus, I offer a privileged resolution and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Democratic Caucus, I offer a privileged resolution and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. If you buy a house, you pay your mortgage--well, at least under this bill, for 3 or 4 months. If you want your kids to go to college, you take out student loans, and you'll tell the bank, well, you'll pay for 3 or 4 months, and then we can talk again. If you want to buy a car, you go in and tell the dealer, Love that beautiful new car. You take out a loan. You pay for 3 or 4 months, and then you tell the dealer, Let's talk in about 3 or 4 months about what we do with the rest of the debt. This simply creates more uncertainty, another fiscal cliff and yet another economic case of sabotage against the American public. The party that voted for tax cuts for the wealthy, two wars, and a massive new prescription drug benefit program and that put all of the costs of that on a credit card doesn't believe it's important now to honor those obligations of paying those bills and maintaining the full faith and credit of the United States of America. Now, with this new Congress, we have a chance for a fresh start--an opportunity to find common ground, not more conflict. Instead, our Republican colleagues are threatening three strikes against the middle class, against small businesses and the U.S. economy--the U.S. default, a government shutdown, and sequestration. Let's start talking about what really matters to Americans, the biggest deficit we face--a jobs deficit. Let's get to work putting Americans back to work. Let's be problem solvers, not problem makers. It's time to get America moving again.

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. Madam Speaker, by direction of the Democratic Caucus, I offer a privileged resolution and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Democratic Caucus, I offer a privileged resolution and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. I thank the gentlelady for yielding. If you're in the middle class, shouldn't it feel like you're in the middle of America? Yet the politics of extremism is pushing the middle class to the very edge--the very edge. Our House Republican colleagues continue to ignore the calls from the American people to extend middle class tax cuts now. That politics of extremism is threatening to raise taxes on the middle class by the amount of about $2,200 starting January 1. Republicans should, once and for all, join with Democrats and the American public to bring the bipartisan, Senate-passed middle class tax cut bill to a vote on the House floor. Passage of the bipartisan middle class tax cut bill ensures that 98 percent of Americans and 97 percent of small businesses don't see a single tax increase next year. Democrats and two-thirds of the American people agree with a growing number of Republicans who are telling their Republican colleagues, Take the 98 percent deal; take the 98 percent deal. My friends, this is not the time to put a foot on the brake of our economic recovery that we're beginning to experience. It's time to get our work done. Remember, colleagues, where we were 4 years ago. Four years ago, November 2008, our country was hemorrhaging 800,000 American jobs. This November, we got the news, 146,000 new jobs. It's time to continue that progress. Let's stop abiding by these pledges to special interests and start abiding by our pledge to the United States of America and to the people who elected us to serve the interest of all Americans, not those of special interests. Let's pass this middle class tax cut bill now.

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained and missed rollcall vote 604. If present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall vote 604.

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, when the Wall Street banking crisis of 2008 hit, causing the worst recession since the Great Depression, it was the middle class that took it on the chin. More than 8 million Americans lost their job through no fault of their own. And as millions of Americans were losing their jobs and their homes, the big banks received bailouts and CEOs continued to receive million-dollar payouts. While too many middle class Americans are still out looking for work, this Congress is voting again to give over $160,000 a year in tax breaks to the richest 2 percent of Americans while the average American will be lucky to get about one-100th or maybe two-100ths of that. Can anyone in this Chamber blame the middle class for thinking the system is rigged against them? Mr. Speaker, we all admire financial success, but when we give away trillions in tax cuts that we cannot afford to those who need them the least, it's the middle class who has to make up the difference. To pay for these tax cuts, our Republican colleagues have voted to end Medicare and would force seniors to pay $6,400 more for their own care. On top of that, Republicans propose changing Social Security, slashing its budget by over $800 million. It's an ideological agenda that chooses millionaires over the middle class. Regular folks pay more so that folks like Donald Trump and Mitt Romney can get yet another tax break. Einstein is credited with saying that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. Eleven years after the Bush tax breaks became law and drove us deeper into deficits, let's not repeat these mistakes. Rather than having these debates about whether the richest 2 percent of Americans deserve extra breaks, we should stand with the middle class. Mr. Speaker, this should be an all-hands-on-deck moment. America works best when the middle class in America is working. Let's start talking about how we can get all Americans back to work and strengthen our economy. I urge my colleagues to reject this bill and support the Democratic alternative, which is focused on the middle class.

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor one of Los Angeles' greatest landmarks, Dodger Stadium, home of the Los Angeles Dodgers. The 2012 season marks the 50th anniversary of Dodger Stadium. It ranks as the third oldest, continually-used park in Major League Baseball and still one of the most attended and highly regarded stadiums in America. Dodger Stadium has hosted more than 143 million fans since it opened its doors in 1962. The club topped the 3.85 million attendance mark in 2007, which stands as the all-time franchise record. Ever since Brooklyn Dodger President Walter O'Malley decided to move his team to Los Angeles in 1958 and bring Major League Baseball to California for the first time, this stadium has been home to some of the most memorable events in Dodger history. Many Dodger fans still recall Sandy Koufax's perfect game in 1965, the rise of Fernandomania, and Kirk Gibson's walk-off home run in Game 1 of the 1988 World Series. Since opening its gates, Dodger Stadium has hosted eight World Series and the Los Angeles Dodgers have won four World Championships, eight National League pennants, 11 National League Western Division crowns and two National League Wild Card berths. From 1992 to 1996, the Dodgers set a major league baseball record with five consecutive players being named Rookie of the year: Eric Karros, Mike Piazza, Raul Mondesi, Hideo Nomo and Todd Hollandsworth. Dodger Stadium has awed spectators with a breathtaking view of downtown Los Angeles to the south; green, tree-lined Elysian hills to the north and east; and the San Gabriel Mountains beyond. Walter O'Malley and architecht Emil Praeger designed the 56,000-seat stadium, the second privately financed ballpark in baseball history. Its wavy roof atop each outfield pavilion, cantilevered grandstands and unique terraced-earthworks parking lot behind the main stands make Dodger Stadium one of the most innovatively designed baseball stadiums. Besides being home of the Los Angeles Dodgers, the stadium has played host to the Major League Baseball All-Star Game in 1980 and the Olympic Games' baseball competition in 1984. The eight-team competition during the 1984 Olympic Games marked baseball's greatest involvement in the Olympic Games to that point. The Olympic spirit returned to Los Angeles again in 1991, as Dodger Stadium hosted the Opening Ceremonies for the United States Olympic Festival. In 2004, the Olympic Torch relay in Los Angeles concluded at Dodger Stadium as Rafer Johnson lit the cauldron at Chavez Ravine. Dodger Stadium has also been the site of numerous non-baseball major events. On September 16, 1987 Pope John Paul II celebrated Mass at Dodger Stadium to a crowd of 63,000 people. Entertainers from around the world have performed here as well, such as Madonna, The Beatles and Michael Jackson. Dodger Stadium also staged one of the world's greatest entertainment events in 1994, when internationally-renowned tenors Jose Carreras, Placido Domingo and Luciano Pavarotti reunited for a spectacular concert performance ``Encore--The Three Tenors'' with conductor Zubin Mehta. Without a doubt, Dodger Stadium is one of America's treasured venues. It continues to be a major part of the history and tradition of the Dodgers. It has been the home of one of professional sports' most storied franchises, a destination for a worldwide fan base and an enduring monument for a bustling, multicultural city. For 50 years in the heart of Los Angeles, Dodger Stadium has truly been a home for both a team and a community. I am honored to have such an organization and landmark in the 31st Congressional District of California. Mr. Speaker, it is with deep pride that I ask my colleagues to join me in celebrating the ``Golden Anniversary'' of one of America's great landmarks, Dodger Stadium.

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, yesterday I was unavoidably detained and missed rollcall votes 499 and 500. If present, I would have voted ``nay'' on rollcall vote 499 and ``nay'' on rollcall vote 500.

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, yesterday I was unavoidably detained and missed rollcall vote 472. If present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall vote 472.

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. I thank the chairman for yielding the time. It took 19 Presidents and 100 years dating back to President Teddy Roosevelt to open the door to all Americans, to quality health care that is centered on the patient-doctor relationship; 105 million Americans who will fall ill will no longer have a lifetime limit on the coverage they receive from their health insurance company. Up to 17 million children today who have preexisting conditions cannot be denied coverage by an insurance company; 6.6 million young adults under the age of 26 today can stay on the health care policy of their parents; 5.3 million seniors today received an average $600 to help cover the cost of their prescription drugs when they fall into the so-called doughnut hole; 360,000 small businesses in America, men and women who own their own businesses, got assistance through a tax credit to help provide health insurance coverage to their employees. Thirteen million Americans will benefit in insurance premium rebates from insurance companies, who must now show that they are spending the premium money they get from those Americans for health care, not on paying CEO salaries or not on profits--$1.1 billion national rebates for 13 million Americans. Perhaps the most important thing that most Americans don't recognize, the thousands of dollars that those of us who do have health insurance throughout America that we pay premiums to our insurance companies to cover care, not for us and our families, but for those of us who don't have insurance, the free-riders, that will start to drop. Those are the things that are at stake. Yet while it took 100 years for us to get to this point, it has taken our Republican colleagues only a year and a half to vote over 30 times to try to repeal these patient rights and protections, patient rights and protections that President Obama promised, this Congress delivered, and the Supreme Court affirmed. My Republican colleagues say that to repeal and replace these patient rights protections is the right way to go, but the only thing we have seen from them on this floor is all repeal and no replace. It's time for this Congress to get to work on the most important thing before us, getting Americans back to work. Let us vote this down and get to work.

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing, along with my colleagues, the ``WIPA and PABSS Continuation of Services Act of 2012,'' which would support Americans with severe disabilities who want to attempt to work and potentially reduce their need for Social Security Disability Insurance (DI) and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) disability benefits. It does so by ensuring the continuation of two important community-based programs that assist individuals who wish to transition off of benefits by seeking and maintaining paid employment. These programs have in the past been extended with overwhelming bipartisan support. Unfortunately, due to lack of action by the majority, the programs are today on the verge of expiring, and disability beneficiaries who want to try to work will be without the assistance they need to move ahead. We have worked extensively to find another solution, but we have reached an impasse. I have received many letters, calls and emails of support for extending WIPA and PABSS. I'd like to submit three of these for inclusion in the Congressional Record--the endorsements of the bill by the Consortium for Citizens with Disabilities Task Force on Social Security, the National Disability Rights Network, and Easter Seals. Helping individuals with disabilities who want to return to work should not be a partisan issue. I encourage all Members to join me in support of this legislation, and I hope we can move forward promptly, so Americans who are disabled are not denied the support they need to return to work. More detailed information about WIPA and PABBS, and a description of the bill, follows. ``Work Incentives Planning and Assistance'' (WIPA) When Congress passed the Ticket to Work Act in 1999, we recognized that beneficiaries needed help in navigating the work rules for DI and SSI recipients, which can seem like a complex maze. The Social Security Administration (SSA) lacked and still lacks the resources to be able to provide the kind of individualized assistance beneficiaries often need in order to use the work incentives. Moreover, Congress recognized that beneficiaries may be reluctant to discuss with SSA their interest in trying to work despite the obstacles, out of fear that they may lose their benefits even if their attempt to work fails. WIPA was created to fill this vacuum. WIPA funds community-based programs through which trained benefit counselors help beneficiaries understand how to use the SSA work incentives. These counselors help people with disabilities in a number of ways: They provide basic information on how disability beneficiaries can test out their ability to obtain and sustain employment, using work incentive provisions in DI, SSI and other programs to transition off of benefits. They provide intensive, individualized guidance on the operation of these complex benefit rules and help beneficiaries report their earnings to SSA. Their guidance helps reduce the likelihood of overpayments and increase beneficiaries' confidence that their attempt to work will not risk a catastrophic loss of basic economic security. Recognizing the reality that SSA cannot always adjust benefit payments quickly in light of an individual's earnings, WIPA staff also counsel clients to set aside any overpaid benefits so that they are prepared to repay the overpayment once SSA processes their case. Since their inception in 2000, WIPA programs have served nearly half a million SSA beneficiaries. SSA currently funds 140 WIPA grantees, using $23 million included in its overall annual operating budget. However, funding for more than half of the WIPA programs will expire on June 30, 2012, unless Congress or SSA is able to extend them. ``Protection and Advocacy for Beneficiaries of Social Security'' (PABSS) During consideration of the Ticket to Work Act, Congress also recognized that Americans with disabilities who can work may need legal advocacy in order to be able to obtain a job or maintain employment, so that they eventually won't need disability benefits. The PABSS program was established to assist such Americans. PABSS organizations provide a wide range of services in support of work by persons with disabilities: An individual with an intellectual disability was told that the job- coach assistance that enabled her to work would be terminated. Her local PABSS program intervened and the client was able to maintain her employment. A blind individual had accommodations in place at work, but a software change at his company made it impossible to use them to perform his job. The PABSS office helped the employer upgrade the accommodations and worked with the Commission for the Blind to split the cost. An individual with muscular dystrophy who lived in a rural area needed car repairs so he could get to his job. PABSS helped him resolve the issue with his warranty company so that his car could be repaired and he could keep his job. A disabled individual was able to drive a taxi, but needed prompt payment of his past-due DI benefits in order to purchase a vehicle. PABSS helped the client obtain his past-due benefits, and he was able to purchase the cab. PABSS operates through the protection and advocacy agencies in each state and territory. Since its inception, PABSS has assisted more than 80,000 individuals. The $7 million annual cost is included in SSA's annual operating budget. Funding for PABSS expires September 30, 2012. Status of WIPA and PABSS Both programs are permanently authorized, and SSA uses its annual appropriation for the agency's overall operating expenses to fund the grantees. To reinforce and clarify the underlying law, Congress has several times adopted legislation, with overwhelming bipartisan support, to extend SSA's specific authorization to use already- appropriated operating budget funds. However, in the 112th Congress, the majority has not been able to pass an extension and has not introduced any legislation on this topic. We have been working to find an administrative solution, since the programs are permanently authorized in statute, but the issues are complicated. The simplest way to address the problem is to pass legislation. The WIPA and PABSS Continuation of Services Act of 2012 The legislation would clarify the existing law by removing any ambiguity about SSA's authority to continue WIPA and PABSS grants. The bill removes a conflicting provision from the statute that authorized a particular amount and time frame for funding of the WIPA and PABSS programs. It leaves in place the underlying provisions that permanently establish the two programs, including the standing authorization for SSA to use its annual operating budget to fund them. I urge all Members to support this legislation. I hope that Congress will act promptly so that we can keep these programs in operation and continue to serve Americans with disabilities. National Disability Rights Network, June 27, 2012. Hon. Xavier Becerra, Ranking Member, House Ways and Means Social Security Subcommittee, Washington, DC. Dear Ranking Member Becerra: On behalf of the National Disability Rights Network (NDRN), and the 57 Protection and Advocacy (P&A) agencies we represent in every state and territory, I write to express our strong support for the ``WIPA and PABSS Continuation of Services Act of 2012'' that you are introducing. NDRN is the national membership association for the fifty- seven P&A agencies that run the Protection and Advocacy for Beneficiaries of Social Security (PABSS) program in every state, the District of Columbia, and all U.S. territories. Collectively, the P&A Network is the largest provider of legally-based advocacy services for persons with disabilities in the United States. NDRN strives to promote a society where people with disabilities have equality of opportunity and are able to participate fully in community life (including employment) by exercising informed choice and self- determination. Every year, the PABSS program and the Work Incentives Planning and Assistance (WIPA) program help thousands of people with disabilities enter or stay in the workforce, and to progress towards independence and economic self- sufficiency. Ensuring that these programs continue is critical to addressing the high unemployment and low labor participation rates for people with disabilities in this country, while simultaneously helping beneficiaries of Social Security disability benefits attain economic self- sufficiency. The PABSS program was created in 1999 as part of the Ticket to Work and Work Incentives Act to protect the rights of beneficiaries as they attempt to go to work. PABSS provides a wide range of services to Social Security beneficiaries. This includes information and advice about obtaining vocational rehabilitation and employment services, information and referral services on work incentives, and advocacy or other legal services that a beneficiary needs to secure, maintain, or regain gainful employment. Advocates funded by PABSS can investigate and advocate to remedy complaints of employment discrimination and other civil and legal rights violations. These advocates also address deficiencies in entities providing employment supports and services to beneficiaries. Authorization for both the PABSS and WIPA programs expired on September 30, 2011. Fortunately, the Social Security Administration (SSA) was able to set aside funding to sustain the WIPA program until June 30, 2012, and the PABSS program until September 30, 2012. However, without the passage of a new authorization bill, like your legislation, the Social Security Administration says that the funding for these programs will end, which will cause many Social Security recipients to go without services to help them return to work. Additionally, layoffs and long-term disruptions to the ability of grantees to provide these services will occur with the loss of experienced personnel. Failure to reauthorize these programs will mean that the following success story, which repeats around the country every day, will no longer be able to occur: PABSS staff represented a 57-year-old female and SSDI beneficiary, diagnosed with bilateral blindness and orthopedic disabilities. She had not been employed since losing her eyesight several years ago. She sought to return to work, and applied for services from the Division of Vocational Rehabilitation (DVR). DVR took her application, disregarded her statutory presumptive eligibility, and sent her a letter stating that she was ineligible for DVR services because of ``transferable job skills.'' As a direct result of PABSS advocacy, DVR reopened this woman's case, found her presumptively eligible, conducted an appropriate Comprehensive Assessment of Rehabilitation Needs, and negotiated with her former employer to allow her to return to her previous job. As a result, this woman has returned to the workforce. Examples, such as the above story, demonstrate that losing the PABSS program will hurt efforts to encourage people with disabilities to return to work, which in turn leads to further depletion of the Social Security Disability trust fund. Again, thank you for introducing the ``WIPA and PABSS Continuation of Services Act of 2012.'' We look forward to working with you and your colleagues to enact this important legislation into law. Sincerely, Curt Decker, Executive Director.

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, I have introduced the Taxpayer Bill of Rights every Congress since 2008, and today I am proud to introduce the Taxpayer Bill of Rights Act of 2012, legislation that contains important provisions to improve services for and protect the rights of American taxpayers, particularly those with modest incomes. Senator Bingaman of New Mexico, a dedicated advocate for taxpayer rights, is introducing companion legislation in the Senate. Many of these provisions are based on proposals from the National Taxpayer Advocate, Nina Olson, who has long been a champion of improving taxpayer services and tax administration at the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). As former Nixon Treasury Secretary William Simon said, ``The nation should have a tax system that looks like someone designed it on purpose.'' As we look for ways to restructure the tax code to make it fairer and more transparent for all taxpayers, it is critical that ideas to help improve IRS service and accessibility are included in this conversation. Every year, millions of taxpayers file their returns with the IRS and inevitably issues of tax administration come to the forefront. These issues range from taxpayers not knowing their legal rights when interacting with the IRS, to taxpayers enlisting unscrupulous or poorly-trained preparers to help them complete one of their most important financial transactions of the year. This legislation aims to help prevent taxpayers from finding themselves in these avoidable situations, and to build on and improve taxpayer services provided through the IRS. The centerpiece of this Act is the requirement that Treasury publish a Taxpayer Bill of Rights. The Taxpayer Bill of Rights will be be a simple and straightforward statement that enumerates all taxpayers' rights and obligations, as well as reference their location in the tax code. As the National Taxpayer Advocate explained in her 2011 Report to Congress: ``In a time when the IRS will feel pressure to bring in additional tax revenue, it is crucial to provide taxpayers with strong protection for their rights.'' Currently, these rights and obligations are scattered throughout the tax code and Internal Revenue Manual, making them neither accessible nor written in plain language that most taxpayers can understand. This Act also helps improve the quality and accessibility of tax preparation services and advice available to taxpayers in several different ways. First, it builds on the IRS's initiative to regulate unenrolled tax preparers through examination and continuing education requirements, for which I have been a long time advocate. Implementation of the IRS tax return preparer framework is well underway, and this legislation will simply codify the existing authority of the IRS to regulate tax return preparers. The Act also helps ensure moderate income taxpayers have access to qualified tax assistance by supporting a grant program for free income tax assistance services, and by allowing IRS referrals to Low-Income Taxpayer Clinics, which provide representation to modest income taxpayers in their disputes with the IRS. The Act also provides for oversight over facilitators of high cost tax refund anticipation loans and other tax refund delivery products, and significantly increases penalties on preparers of fraudulent tax returns. Finally, this bill includes several provisions that would improve IRS taxpayer services. One important provision provides greater protections for taxpayers when they are faced with a Notice of a Federal Tax Lien filing (NFTL). Filing of an NFTL can result in significant, long-term hardship to a taxpayer, and may adversely affect the taxpayer's credit, thus impairing his or her ability to conduct financial transactions or secure employment. The Taxpayer Bill of Rights Act requires the IRS to make individualized determinations before the filing of an NFTL, and also requires consideration of hardship factors and a taxpayer's history of compliance before these determinations are made. Many of the problems identified in this bill have gone unaddressed for too long, causing confusion and undue hardship for taxpayers across the country. I encourage all of my colleagues to support these common sense provisions to promote taxpayer rights and services for all Americans.

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, earlier today I was unavoidably detained and missed rollcall vote 438. If present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall vote 438. Stated against:

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, on June 20, 2012, I was unavoidably detained and missed rollcall vote 390. If present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall vote 390.

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, on June 5, 2012, I was unavoidably detained and missed rollcall votes 315, 316, 317, and 318. If present, I would have voted ``no'' on rollcall votes 315 and 317, and ``yea'' on rollcall votes 316 and 318.

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Madam Speaker, 2 out of every 10 women in America will be a victim of rape in her lifetime. More than that will experience severe physical violence by an intimate partner. Madam Speaker, which one of those women is not worthy of protection or support as a result of this legislation? H.R. 4970 is opposed by tribal governments because Native American women will have less protection under this bill. H.R. 4970 is opposed by groups that support immigrants because immigrant women will find themselves victims of these crimes without the support that they need. And the community of LGBT Americans will find themselves without the support they would get under the Senate version of this legislation. Once again, the House majority demonstrates the dysfunction in Washington, D.C. Instead of applauding the overwhelming vote in the Senate with a bipartisan vote that passed just recently by 68 votes in the Senate for a Violence Against Women Act to be reauthorized and putting that bipartisan bill on this floor, our Republican colleagues in the House went the other way. Madam Speaker, it is time for us to put the Senate bill on the floor, get this work done, follow the lead of the American public that says: Get to work, make it happen, and protect women who are the victims of violence in this country.

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. I thank the gentleman for yielding. When you hear of small business, what comes up in your mind first? The corner drug store? The tech troubleshooting startup? My daughter's martial arts instructor? How about Donald Trump? How about Trump Sales and Leasing, or Paris Hilton Entertainment? What about Larry Flynt Publications? Not that any of these latter companies have volunteered to show me their tax returns, but by all accounts, these are the businesses that will devour the lion's share of the tax breaks in this legislation. Mr. Speaker, 3 percent of the businesses in America will get 56 percent of the tax breaks provided. The rich and famous will get most of the money. 125,000 millionaires in America will get $58,000 in tax breaks this year alone, which is the first year of this tax break. That's how targeted this particular bill is. More than that, what we find is that most Americans don't believe that our tax system is fair. They believe that it is skewed towards the very wealthy. H.R. 9 proves that they are right. Seventy percent of Americans believe that the tax system is skewed against them and favors the very wealthy. If Paris Hilton, who has what we understand are about five employees based in Beverly Hills, can take advantage of this tax cut, or if Donald Trump or Larry Flynt or Kim Kardashian or Oprah Winfrey--all small business people--can take advantage and get, maybe, $58,000 in tax breaks while most small businesses will get barely anything, then I think the American public is correct. Remember, most businesses in America are sole proprietorships. Most of those sole proprietorships have no employees. Under this bill, if you're a sole proprietor and have no employees, you get zero of the tax break benefits. I have another example. Two companies, both have 500 employees. One company decides to hire more Americans; 10 more Americans are put on the payroll. The other company of 500 employees decides, I think it's easier for me to make more money if I take some of those jobs and put them overseas, so I'm going to fire 10 Americans here in America, and I'm going to start those jobs overseas, outsource those jobs. Guess who gets the tax break--the company that hires 10 new American employees? No. They get nothing. The firm that fires 10 American employees here and outsources those jobs to another country, that company will get the benefits of this tax break. The American public is correct. Today's tax system is skewed towards the wealthy, and that's why we have to vote against this legislation. Let us have job creation legislation. Let us focus on small businesses. This does neither. I urge my colleagues to vote against H.R. 9.

Mr. BECERRA. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. BECERRA. What the gentleman Mr. Levin is saying is correct, and I want to correct Mr. Cantor because he misspoke about the Democratic alternative. The Democratic alternative requires that a small business make an investment in a plant or small machinery. If Paris Hilton wishes to invest in a plant and machinery, then perhaps she will qualify. If Larry Flynt would want to invest in plants and machinery for his business, perhaps he would qualify. Otherwise, this is a giveaway. Ours requires you to make investments in America.

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. I thank the gentlelady from Connecticut, my good friend Rosa DeLauro, for not just this evening, but for the years of work that she has done in committee, for her district, and simply in Congress as being one of the champions of not just children and families who are in need, but the fight to make sure that all these families have an opportunity to have access to real nutrition, not just food, but real nutrition. Because there were days when ketchup was called a vegetable. And some people made the fight to make sure that nutrition really meant good food, so that if we were going to help Americans--as we want to, as good Americans, help our fellow Americans--then let's be sure we're doing it so that they end up healthy Americans as well. So we're here to talk about the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, SNAP. SNAP is the acronym. But really what we're here to talk about is the fact that in America children still go to bed hungry. It's hard to believe, but that's the way it is for too many families in our country. Now, the numbers are staggering. They're staggering because of the Bush recession which left so many Americans in a place they had never been before. In fact, you had to go back some 70, 80 years to find a situation similar, when we saw the Great Depression in America. We went from somewhere in the mid-twenties, some 26 million Americans who qualified for SNAP assistance, to over 45 million, around 45 million families during the height of this Great Recession who qualified for benefits. Most of those folks who qualified included families with children, or seniors, or persons with disabilities. It should come as no surprise. But what's really disheartening is to see how many Americans live in extreme poverty, a life that most of us would not recognize. When we talk about extreme poverty, we are talking about Americans who are living on less than $2 a day. The number of Americans who were living on less than $2 a day doubled during the Bush recession. The number of poor children who were in extreme poverty doubled during the Bush recession. Most of the people we're talking about, as my colleagues have said earlier, are living on less than $22,000 a year as a family of four. Those in extreme poverty are living on, obviously, far less. With an individual, not a family but just an individual, we're talking about someone who would have to have an income of $11,000 or less to be able to qualify for any assistance with the SNAP program. What probably makes it the most difficult for many of us here in Congress and for most Americans to really grapple with as to this issue of food insecurity and children in America going to sleep hungry is the fact that this Congress is taking on legislation which would actually provide tax cuts to millionaires and billionaires at this very moment that we speak about food insecurity. So it is difficult to comprehend how we could say to Americans today, who are working hard but earning very little and who are trying to figure out how to keep their kids from going to sleep hungry at night, that we still have the money to provide tax breaks to millionaires and billionaires but that we can't figure out a way to continue a great program called SNAP that relies on our farmers to grow this food and then to make some of it available at a discounted rate to American families who are having a tough time. This is all about values. This is all about the American family. It's all about whether we believe in the better days still to come for our country. I happen to be someone who grew up in a very tiny house--about a 600- square-foot home--with my three sisters. My father got about a sixth grade education. My mother came from Guadalajara, Jalisco, Mexico, when she married my father at the age of 18. They came to Sacramento, California, with only the money they had in their pockets. They never once had to ask for assistance. They worked very hard. They were fortunate that they always found a way to make ends meet. I never had the Converse or the Keds or the Levi's jeans. My first bike was a bike that my friend was willing to sell to my father and me because he had just gotten a new one, but I never went to sleep hungry. So I will tell you right now that it's a different thing to experience something where the thing you want the most before you go to sleep is a bite to eat. Too many of our kids are upset that they didn't get to watch that television program or didn't get to play on the computer very much at night. There are still too many American children who are concerned that, when they go to bed, they wish they'd have something else in their stomachs. I believe America has the moral fiber to say that we're going to deal with this problem. I thank the gentlelady from Connecticut for, once again, continuing the fight, because the reality is that we could figure out a way to help millionaires and billionaires continue to be successful and create the next wave of wealthy and successful Americans. At the same time, we should be able to figure out a way to make sure that the SNAP program is there for Americans who, through no fault of their own, find themselves without work and who, through no fault of their own, are trying to figure out how they will let their children go to bed with full stomachs. If we do this the right way, we'll get it solved. I sat on the Bowles-Simpson Commission a year and a half ago, which found a way to save $4 trillion in our budget. It did not touch the SNAP program. I sat on the supercommittee, which was supposed to also fashion a budget deficit reduction deal, and that task force was also going to come up with a deal that would not have touched the SNAP program. We can certainly do far better than what we see in the House Republican budget, which is going after the SNAP program. I encourage all of my colleagues to stand up, not just for the SNAP program but for Americans today, because there are some families who tonight are trying to figure out how they can keep their children from going to bed hungry. So I thank the gentlelady from Connecticut for all she has done for so long to champion this issue.