Donna Christensen

Mrs. CHRISTENSEN

Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. I have an amendment at the desk.

Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. This bill stands as an effort to dramatically weaken the Clean Air Act and delay implementation of vital public health protections against toxic particles. The adverse health effects of particulate matter are serious and have been well documented. Thousands of studies published over the last 9 years make a much stronger case for the regulation of fine particles and indicate that the current standards must be revisited in order to ensure the public health is protected. The major health effects of fine particulate matter include reduced lung function, cough, wheezing, missed school days due to respiratory symptoms, increased use of asthma medication, strokes, emergency room visits, hospital admissions, lung cancer, and premature death--at levels well below the current national air quality standards. This bill, H.R. 1633, eliminates EPA's authority to control so-called ``nuisance dust'' except in a very narrow set of circumstances. First, the Administrator must find that nuisance dust causes substantial adverse public health and welfare effects. Second, even if the Administrator determines that nuisance dust causes substantial harm, she must also find that the benefits of regulating nuisance dust outweigh the cost, including impacts on employment. This approach upends the way EPA has been setting health- based air pollution standards for 40 years. The Clean Air Act requires EPA to set each air quality standard based purely on science and medical evidence showing the health effects of exposure to the pollutant. The standard basically identifies the level of pollution that is safe to breathe. The Clean Air Act also requires EPA to set the standard with an adequate margin of safety to account for uncertainty and protect sensitive subpopulations, such as children with asthma. Essentially, this bill would require EPA to determine the level of air pollution that is safe to breathe based on the costs of control, not the medical evidence. Third, under this bill, the Administrator only has this limited authority in areas where State, local or tribal governments are not regulating nuisance dust. But the bill provides no minimum standard of protection, no Federal floor. That means that even the most minimal State or local requirement is sufficient to bar EPA action on anything that falls under the definition of nuisance dust. It is absurd, Mr. Chairman, to claim that any State or local dust regulation, no matter how minimal, would be sufficient to protect the public health. We tried to address air pollution only on the State and local level throughout the 1960s. It did not work. Companies blocked cleaner air protections by threatening to leave for other States with weaker standards. This widely acknowledged failure produced overwhelming support for the cooperative federalism approach embodied in the Clean Air Act since 1970. Under this approach, the Federal Government sets minimum uniform standards to protect health, and States and localities then decide how to achieve those standards. Since 1970, every American has had the same basic right to clean and healthy air. My amendment simply preserves those rights. It ensures that the residents of every State and locality are afforded a baseline level of protection against particle pollution. My amendment says that if the State, local, or tribal laws are not sufficient to protect public health from exposure to dangerous particle pollution, then EPA has the authority under the Clean Air Act to step in and take action to reduce that pollution. This bill tries to turn back the clock to a time when State and local air pollution laws weren't strong enough to protect public health. Those who are ignorant of history are doomed to repeat it. Let's learn our history and recognize that both States and the Federal Government play valuable roles in ensuring that Americans breathe clean and healthy air. I urge my colleagues to support my amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. I would just like to add that my amendment does not really take away any authority from the State, local, and tribal governments; it just ensures that they set standards that are based on the protection of the public health. With that, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mrs. CHRISTENSEN

Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to a devoted servant of God, the Reverend Leon H. Matthias who will retire from active ministry on December 31, 2011. Sunday, December 8, 1946 seemed to be a perfect day for the arrival of Leon Henson Matthias to George and Ethel Matthias. His humble home provided his first real setting where Christian nurture would take place. The family were members of Gracefield Moravian Church in Cedar Grove and Adrian Joseph, the grandfather, was the sexton of this small- congregation. After primary and High School he gained four subjects at Ordinary Level from the University of London. In September 1967, he entered the teaching profession and was appointed as an uncertified teacher at the St. James Government School in Cedar Grove where he had received his early primary education. At 19, he was elected as chairman of the Board of Stewards at Gracefield. The members of the congregation recognized that God was calling him to a special task in His church. Leon Henson Matthias began his theological training on the island of Trinidad in 1970 and in 1974 he completed the Licentiate in Theology at the United Theological College of the West Indies in Kingston, Jamaica. He served as student pastor in the Antigua and Tobago Conferences and on August 24, 1975 Brother Matthias was ordained a Deacon. On September 1, 1975, he began his first appointment as a Moravian Pastor in St. Kitts. Six years after his ordination as a Deacon in the Moravian Church, Rev. Matthias was consecrated a Presbyter. On August 28, 1976, Rev. Leon Matthias made another decision in his life. He joined in matrimony to Mable Hall in that beautiful western Jamaica Town of Montego Bay. God blessed this marriage with three wonderful sons, Lennox, Leon Jr. and L Richard. From all accounts, Brother Leon was as popular as he was active. He has always had an abundance of energy that seems contagious, and this has manifested itself throughout his life and the life of anyone with whom he has had contact. As an executive of the Rivals Sports Club in Cedar Grove, where he was a serious cricketer and concert performer, to Youth Soccer Coach in Richmond, Virginia, he displayed versatility and his love of sports. Rev. Matthias has always enjoyed leadership roles in the church and the community. He however developed a new interest in 1992. In 1990, he was invited by the Lutheran Church in the United States Virgin Islands to participate in an oral history workshop led by Judy Saxton of Baylor University. This opened for him a vast new field of inquiry and an unquenchable thirst for the unwritten folk history of his people. This he has pursued in his visits to Tanzania, London, Johannesburg and Cape Town. The versatility of the good Reverend has also been manifested in his editing of many publications including Rapport' magazine and the writing of four books--Boy from Popeshead (1995), Against the Odds (1996), A history of the Friedensberg Moravian Church, Tales from the Hill (1997) and Winds of Change (1999) Gracefield--A Northern Star(2005)Down Punty Hill(2008)A Cloud of Great Witnesses ( 2011). Brother Matthias holds a Licentiate in Theology from the University of the West Indies and a Master of Arts Degree from the Presbyterian School of Christian Education. .In 2002 he obtained an, MLS Degree from Catholic University of America in Washington, DC, specializing in Archival Studies. His ministry has spanned forty years and the Western Hemisphere-- beginning in Jamaica as a Student Pastor in 1971, serving the Virgin Islands Conference in St. Croix from 1988 to 1996 and St. Thomas and Tortola from 1996 to 2000, then New York from 2002 to 2009 and lastly in Washington DC. In that time he has served in many positions of church leadership, has mentored many young pastors and served every congregation and community with excellence, dedication and compassion. We are thankful to God for his service, which overcame many obstacles over the years, and for his family who served by his side these many years. I ask my colleagues to join me in asking God's blessings on Reverend Leon H. Matthias, his wife, Mable and the entire family with gratitude for a life of exemplary service.

Mrs. CHRISTENSEN

Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. Mr. Chair, the REIN Act is the culmination of all of the anti-regulation, anti-government and especially anti-President Obama legislation that has been brought to this body since January 2009. All of the political gymnastics we and the White House have been put through has made it extremely difficult for our President who tried very hard to craft bipartisan solutions to be able to pass much of his agenda. I am glad that he is now doing whatever he can through executive orders, because yes--our country cannot wait. Even today, with only a few weeks before the deadlines, our Republican colleagues are blocking extending the payroll tax to keep families from losing about 1,000 badly needed dollars next year, they are blocking the extension of unemployment benefits which not only helps families, including children, but is clearly one of the best stimuli for our struggling economy; and they are blocking even just a temporary fix to cuts in fairer payments to the doctors who take care of our elderly and people with disabilities. But that was not bad enough, now comes the REIN Act to prevent government from fulfilling its critical role to provide services, and to protect the safety, health and wellbeing of people of this country. They claim they are doing this to get Congress to do their job. Well as far as I can see Congress was doing their job pretty well in the recent Congresses, but that all ground to a halt with this one. In all of the over 9 months of this Congress the Republican leadership has talked a lot about jobs but done absolutely nothing to create even one and they have held up or weakened laws that would have created the jobs the American people need. In fact they have wasted these nine months by insisting on bringing legislation to the floor with rhetoric that would keep the fringe elements of their party happy, but go absolutely nowhere and do absolutely nothing. This is yet another bad bill, with a bad intent that has wasted our time. The people of this country want government to be there to protect their homes, their money and their retirement, to keep them safe at work and in their neighborhoods, to provide them with access to quality health care, to ensure that their children will have a sound education and meaningful opportunities. I ask my colleagues to do what the people are calling on us to: create jobs, extend the payroll reduction and unemployment insurance and pay our doctors a fairer fee for their services; and to stop attacking these necessary functions of government. They not only undermine the role of government, but they are weakening our country and making us the laughing stock of the world. They should withdraw the REIN Act, but since they won't, we need to vote it down and get on with the important issues our fellow Americans want us to address.

Mrs. CHRISTENSEN

Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. Madam Speaker, I want to again thank our leader, Nancy Pelosi, and the Democratic Caucus for allowing the Congressional Black Caucus to have this Special Order hour once again. Before I begin my discussion today, though, I want to take this opportunity to wish a very happy birthday to my daughter Karida Green. I am blessed to have two wonderful daughters and four fantastic grandchildren, whom I was able to spend the past weekend with as we celebrated Kobi's, one of my grandsons, 5th birthday. I also want to extend congratulations to the Federal team that's now in place in the U.S. Virgin Islands. Congratulations to our new district court judge, Wilma A. Lewis, who joins Chief Judge Curtis Gomez and Senior Sitting Judge Raymond Finch in the district court of the Virgin Islands; to congratulate U.S. Attorney Ronald W. Sharpe, who had his investiture this morning; and also Chief Marshal Cheryl Jacobs, who was sworn in about 2 weeks ago. We welcome all of them and thank President Obama and Attorney General Holder for their nominations and the Senate for their timely confirmation. And let me once again thank all of those men and women who have served in our Nation's Armed Forces and those who serve today for their courage and their sacrifice, and I also want to thank their families who serve and sacrifice along with them. We in the Congressional Black Caucus and, indeed, I think, the entire Congress look forward also to sometime in the not-too-distant future to honor the Montford Marines with a well-deserved and long overdue Congressional Gold Medal. But this evening, Madam Speaker, the Congressional Black Caucus continues our focus on the need for jobs and to reiterate the call for the leadership of this Congress to bring legislation to the floor that would create jobs. But tonight we also want to call our attention to the continuing plight of the poor in this country and how the budget and other battles that have been fought on the floor of this House and over in the Senate have been hurting them and what is at stake for them also if the supercommittee does not come to a balanced agreement that would reduce the deficit by $1.2 trillion or more--and, I would say, hopefully more. Earlier this month, nine Members of the House joined the Fighting Poverty with Faith initiative and took the food stamp challenge. We agreed to live on what is the average food stamp allotment for a week, $31.50, and I can tell you that it is not easy. There are over 48 million Americans today who are food insecure. More than 16 million children live in households that are food insecure in the richest country in the world. Millions face hunger every day in this country, a fact that we should all be ashamed of. These numbers are only getting worse, not just because of the recession but because almost all of the growth of wealth in the past decade went to the top 10 percent of people in this country. For most Americans, their incomes dropped; their incomes really crashed. And the gap between the rich and the poor got wider, a dangerous trend for a country already struggling to maintain its leadership in the world, something everyone should want to do everything in our power to maintain. For all of our 40 years of existence, the goal of the Congressional Black Caucus has been to close the gap that leaves some communities behind or some out altogether; to close the income gap, the job gap, the housing gap, the health gap, the education gap, and all of the disparities that have been so doggedly persistent for some communities, not because those on the losing side didn't want them to change or didn't work for change but because the opportunity too often was just not there. Colleagues, America is the land of opportunity and all of us, not just the 43 members of the Congressional Black Caucus but all 441 or, really, all 541, need to be working together to make sure that it is for all and not just for some. This country was founded on the principle that all men and women are created equal and endowed with certain inalienable rights, not to be separated from us. Inalienable rights--the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Many times even when we pass programs that should have helped, they don't reach communities that need them most. Those communities in some cases are not prepared to compete or they may not be priorities for the Governors of those States who often get to decide where those programs go. And that's why our assistant leader, James Clyburn, joined with Congressman Rangel to develop the 10-20-30 program, an initiative that they have taken to the White House and to the Republican as well as the Democratic leadership. Under this initiative, which seeks to help out the most chronically distressed communities, 10 percent of all funding and programs would go to communities with 20 percent or higher poverty levels for 30 or more years. And it may surprise everyone, but two-thirds of all of the jurisdictions that would qualify for that 10 percent are in Republican districts. I think if it were under any other administration or if it were proposed by someone on the other side of the aisle, perhaps this would have been passed long ago; but today those communities, not all of which are racial and ethnic minority in makeup--many are, but not all are--would continue to suffer and, in essence, be denied those inalienable rights, and that's not the country that we know and love. At our annual legislative conference in September, we heard from researchers who reported on persistent poverty and its impact on health and the quality of life in the communities that are chronically distressed. Their report tracked the stubborn persistence of concentrated poverty in U.S. metropolitan areas over a period of nearly 40 years. Neighborhoods with poverty rates above 30 percent have been recognized as places with few opportunities for employment and education, high levels of disinvestment and crime, and meager civic participation. Living in such neighborhoods over extended periods of time reduces the life chances of children, whether their families are poor or not. The report also looked more deeply at a subset of urban neighborhoods that can be characterized as the ``original ghetto,'' extensive areas whose cores were almost exclusively nonwhite and poor in 1970. The report showed that the Nation continues to suffer from racially and economically divided cities, undercutting efforts to reach important goals for our country, for health, for education, for employment and civic engagement. More specifically, that report found that concentrated poverty has risen substantially since 2000. About one in 11 residents of American metropolitan areas, or 22.3 million people, now live in a neighborhood where 30 percent or more of their neighbors live in poverty. Such neighborhoods suffer from private sector disinvestment, poor public services and schools, and unacceptable levels of exposure to crime, natural hazards, and pollution. The number of people in high-poverty neighborhoods increased by nearly 5 million people since 2000, when 18.4 million metropolitan residents, 7.9 percent of the total, lived in high-poverty neighborhoods. The rise since 2000 is a significant setback compared to the progress of the 1990s. The number of people in high-poverty neighborhoods stabilized in the 1990s and the concentrated poverty rate fell, fueling optimism that faith-based initiatives and rising prosperity were reversing a crisis that had grown dire in the 1980s. Today, however, it appears that the improvement of the 1990s was just a temporary respite. The increase in the number of Americans living in high-poverty neighborhoods tracks directly with the Nation's increasing poverty rate. Between 2000 and 2009, the number of people in poverty grew by 10 million, from 33 million to 43 million, raising the poverty rate from 11.3 percent to 14.3 percent in 2009. Today it's over 15 percent. And we all have seen the Pew report which shows that white wealth is 20 times more than African American wealth, 18 times more than Hispanic wealth, and that more African Americans live in extreme poverty. If this trend continues, it is a very bad prognosis for the economic health of our Nation. Also, everyone knows that I'm a family doctor by training, training that I received right here in the Nation's Capital at George Washington University's School of Medicine and Howard University Medical Center, so the health of my fellow Americans is very important to me. So I have to just point out that poverty is a sure prescription for poor health and for premature, preventible disability and death. Just eliminating poverty alone would improve the health of millions and the terrible health standing of our country, which is an embarrassment. Or let me quote one of our Surgeon Generals, ``An affront both to our ideals and to the ongoing genius of American medicine,'' as was said by former Surgeon General Margaret Heckler back in 1985, and it continues to be true today. As many have said, the American Dream has become a nightmare for too many in this country, including those who recently came in pursuit of it, our immigrant community. The Rebuild American Dream movement and many of the Occupy Wall Street protests are all about making it a good dream again, and not just a dream, but an opportunity to make it a reality. As quiet as it's kept--and we, Democrats, have really been too quiet--Democrats have always been about keeping the American Dream alive for everyone who lives and who comes to this country, for making opportunity available to all for a solid education, good health, a decent job, a home in a safe neighborhood, and a secure retirement. We have never lost sight of or lost faith in this. And we continue to fight for it, despite the big money opposition and the special interests who think they will win out in the end, but they won't because we are on the side of the American people, and they will always side with what is in their best interests and not in the best interests of our country. Before we went out over our break--one more break than we needed-- Congresswoman Barbara Lee introduced H.R. 3300, the Half in Ten Act of 2011, which proposes to cut poverty in half within the next 10 years. In 2008, House Concurrent Resolution 198 unanimously passed Congress and committed us to doing just that, cutting poverty in half. The new bill provides us with a framework for doing it, and we need to honor the commitment that we made in 2008 and pass the bill, H.R. 3300. The Half in Ten Act would establish a Federal interagency working group on reducing poverty. The working group will develop and implement a national plan to reduce poverty by half in 10 years while working to eliminate extreme poverty, which I talked about earlier, child poverty, and the historic disparity in poverty rates in communities of color. The working group will improve how we collect data on those who are in poverty and near poverty, and make regular reports on their progress so that Congress and the American people can better understand the impact of our policies and programs and make more informed decisions about how we as a people treat our most vulnerable. The working group will be charged with developing and implementing a national plan on poverty with four distinct but interrelated goals: one, to reduce the national poverty rate by half in 10 years; two, to eliminate extreme poverty, those with income under 50 percent of poverty; three, to eliminate child poverty; and four, to eliminate the historic disparity in poverty rates in communities of color. That working group would consult with experts across all relevant Federal agencies as well as outside poverty groups who work directly with those most affected by those Federal programs so that we can develop a comprehensive, far-reaching, sustainable plan. I really want to thank the gentlewoman from California, Congresswoman Barbara Lee, our former chair of the Congressional Black Caucus, for her work on eliminating poverty, for her leadership of the Out of Poverty Caucus, and for introducing H.R. 3300. We have another bill that will soon be introduced by Congresswoman Gwen Moore which also speaks to poverty. She's preparing a bill that would reform TANF, and I think everyone would agree that TANF has not really worked as it was intended to. As we look at it, it's created a permanent underclass. Block grants are locked in at 1994 levels. Many who move off of assistance after 5 years still don't have jobs, and they don't have child care. The rise in food stamp usage shows where those pushed off of assistance have gone. The average age of a TANF recipient is 7.8 years of age. Twenty percent of children live in abject poverty in this country. It has damaged the social safety net that was meant to respond to the countercyclical nature of the economy. When there is a recession, as there is now, it's supposed to be that last bit of help. So the bill is still being drafted, but some of the things that it would do are, it would stipulate that the number one goal of TANF is child poverty reduction. It would stop the clock during a recession. It would guarantee child care for TANF work-eligible recipients. It would lift all time limits on work participation requirements and the 30 percent safe cap on education. And it would adjust the Federal work participation requirements so that States could get credit when individuals with disabilities participate in work-related activities, even if the nature of those activities or the number of hours do not match the standard TANF requirements. Those are just some of the things that we expect to have going into the bill. And again, in addition to H.R. 3300, when Congresswoman Gwen Moore introduces her TANF reform bill, we hope that all of our colleagues will support it. There is an elephant in this hallowed room and every room in this Congress, and that's, of course, the deficit-cutting proposal that the supercommittee is responsible for bringing forth in about 9 days. Actually, it would be more than a proposal because we would have to vote on it as it is, just up or down, no amendments. We hear that there will, more than likely, within those 9 days be an agreement. And if there's any hope for a fair and balanced agreement, it's because we know that the House Members that the Democratic Caucus has placed on the committee will work to ensure that it is. And those are our assistant Democratic leader Jim Clyburn, vice chair of the caucus Xavier Becerra, and our Budget Committee ranking member Chris Van Hollen. We've said over and over again that this plan needs to include a further extension of unemployment benefits, which is something that has been demonstrated over and over again as a guaranteed stimulus for the recession that we're not yet out of. But it also, of course, provides a needed bridge until we can get this Congress to create jobs again. It's been over 300 days, and we still have yet to see the Republican leadership produce and enact a jobs agenda for this country, something that we all know is so badly needed. And just to talk about where we are, in the third quarter of 2011, 31.8 percent of 14 million Americans who are out of work have been so for more than a year. That amounts to 4.4 million people. Older workers are more likely to remain out of work for a year or longer; 43 percent of unemployed workers older than 55 have been out of work for at least a year. Although those with more education are less likely to lose jobs, once unemployed, long-term joblessness is distributed across all educational levels. And we keep hearing about employers who might have a job opening, saying for those who are jobless, don't apply. Now that just does not make any sense. Unemployment cuts across every industry and occupation. More than 20 percent of unemployed workers in every industry have been out of work for a year or longer. And in mining, manufacturing, transportation, utilities, financial activities, the percentage of workers who have been jobless for a year or longer is over 40 percent. We cannot get out of this recession without jobs. So, again, we call on the leadership of this body to enact a jobs agenda. We, the Democrats, have proposed and requested in the strongest way possible that the American Jobs Act be a part of the supercommittee's report. It in itself, because of the tax and other revenue it would generate, is an important part of reducing our deficit. We also want other revenues to be a part of that agreement. This is not in any way class warfare. The poor and the middle class have already given up much, have made major concessions and sacrifices. And in the interest of saving our country, they would likely do more up to a point. But now it's time for everyone else to give. It's the patriotic thing to do. Unless some, or even all, of the Bush tax cuts, which were meant to be temporary and should have expired already, are allowed to expire, the majority of the deficit will come out of programs that would help the middle class and the poor. The country I pledge allegiance to is a fair country. Congress has a sacred responsibility to keep it fair, and with liberty and justice for all. If no agreement is reached or if the House and Senate fail to pass whatever agreement is reached, mandatory across-the-board cuts will be imposed. And the President has already said he will prevent any attempts to stop the mandatory cuts from taking place, and I hope that threat extends to mandatory defense cuts, because what we keep hearing is that those defense cuts will just not ever happen. And if defense is spared, the mandatory discretionary cuts would further come out of programs that would help the poor and the middle class and would hurt them even more than some of the budget agreements we have already reached. Some of the cuts that this Congress has already made would hurt the poor and hurt jobs. Just in 2011, 250 programs were cut that probably eliminated about 370,000 jobs. Those are just some of the things that we have already lost. There are almost 60,000 jobs lost from the spring budget cuts of the Federal Government in three areas, with secondary impact on a wide array of businesses, ranging from automobile producers to local restaurants and dry cleaning establishments. Federal support for law enforcement, environmental cleanup of nuclear weapons production facilities, and General Services Administration Federal buildings fund, those are some of the cuts that have just wiped out jobs at a time when we need to be creating them. So we need to make sure that we allow our economy to grow. We need to continue, or begin, to invest in education and health care and renewable energy and innovation of all kinds. The only way we can do this is with a big agreement, but one that includes far more revenue than the mere $300 billion that is now on the table. So we want balance and fairness from the supercommittee. We want a jobs agenda enacted. We want to see the American Jobs Act be a part of it. We want to see unemployment payments continued and extended beyond where they are today, and we want to go further to make sure that poverty is reduced in our country because, again, over 16 million children in this country are going hungry every day and living in poverty; and that is something that any country worth its salt should not tolerate. I would now like to yield to my colleague from Texas, Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee.

Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. Absolutely.

Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. Absolutely.

Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. Thank you, Congresswoman Jackson Lee, for joining us. Thank you for the work that you do on the Judiciary Committee, and especially for your strong defense of children and the rights of children and the protection of children in this country. We look forward to the introduction of your bills as well, and we ask for the support of our colleagues for them, both as cosponsors and when they get to the floor.

Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. I yield to the gentlewoman.

Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. Thank you. And thank you for the optimism about the outcome of the Affordable Care Act at the Supreme Court. I wish I shared your optimism, but we'll take that as a very positive outlook on the outcome, and I hope that indeed your predictions are correct. General Leave

Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the subject of the Special Order this evening.

Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. CHRISTENSEN

Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. Mr. Speaker, I am honored to join my colleagues in support of H.R. 2447. Nearly 70 years after the Marine Corps became the last military branch to accept blacks under orders from President Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1941, Congress will vote today on whether to grant the Montford Point Marines the Congressional Gold Medal, the nation's highest civilian honor. I would like to commend my colleague, Congresswoman Corrine Brown, for her leadership in sponsoring this important and historical legislation and shepherding the bill to the House floor. ``Loyalty and Service'' to our nation despite prejudice and discrimination is one of the mantras used to describe the first African-Americans to serve in the United States Marines. These black marines were segregated during their basic training at Montford Point Camp between 1942-1949. Overall, 19,168 African-Americans served in the Marine Corps in World War II and helped pave the way for the future of African-Americans in the Marine Corps. Although we have come a long way, we cannot be satisfied and neither is the Marine Commandant. Today, of the 22,155 African American who currently serve in the Marine Corps, there are only about 1,326 officers. The Marine Corps has 88 generals today, but only six are black. I applaud the efforts of advocates who have committed to increasing the number of African-American officers in the Marine Corps and am a staunch supporter of this legislation. African-Americans continue a legacy of service in the Marine Corps and increasing the number of black officers is long overdue. But today, we honor those African-Americans who were the first to serve and all who have served and are currently serving. Most of the 19,000 Montford Point Marines have died, but today we join the movement to honor their legacy by bestowing them with the highest military decoration awarded by the U.S. government. This is long overdue and I urge passage of this historical legislation.

Mrs. CHRISTENSEN

Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. Mr. Speaker, I expect to be joined by several of my colleagues in a few minutes, but let me begin. We are pleased, and I want to take this opportunity to thank the Democratic leader for again allowing the Congressional Black Caucus to control this hour of Special Orders. And here we are again, Mr. Speaker, 10 months into this Congress and not one job-creating bill has been brought to the floor. I know that the people in my district are suffering, as are constituents in all of our districts, and we need to do something significant to help them, not next year, but now. As a physician, it amazes me that it's even affecting people's health. It's increasing violence and crime in some of the hardest-hit communities. When we were here a few weeks ago, I was remarking on an article that showed how the mortgage crisis was affecting people's health adversely. But, of course, joblessness is. People don't have insurance. They don't have money to buy their medication. They are putting off needed health care to try to save money for other things to provide a roof over their family's heads and food on the table for their families. And so this long-term unemployment is affecting people's health, and it's especially hard in those communities that have been distressed for long periods of time, even before this recession. With no movement from the leadership in this body to even just bring the American Jobs Act to the floor where we can debate it and have it voted on, the people are really beginning to lose hope. To the extent that some have not yet lost hope, I think it's because they see President Obama and this Congressional Black Caucus, as well as the Occupy Wall Street and occupy all of the other places where those demonstrations are being held and the Reclaim the Dream movement all working relentlessly on their behalf. Today the President is rolling out his new proposals to address the crisis, the crisis that began this recession in the first place, the mortgage crisis. I understand the theme is ``We can't wait.'' And we can't wait here in this House either because the American people have been waiting on us for help, and they can't and should not have to wait any longer. I hope that my colleagues across the aisle would also add a strong dose of compassion to their passion for reducing the deficit. In fact, at this time, in addition to compassion, setting politics aside and doing what's best for the economy and our country is what needs to take precedence. And it is not cuts. It's not repealing the health care reform bill, the Affordable Care Act. It's not stopping regulations that protect the health and wealth of the people in this country. It's not destroying the safety nets that enable the poor to survive and then provide them with a chance to lift them and their families out of poverty. Not just Democrats, we should all be ashamed that so much of this country's wealth is concentrated in the top 1 percent while our fellow Americans, including millions of children, are going homeless and hungry. I want to focus for a moment on health care jobs, especially since the Affordable Care Act, a job creator, is on the Republican chopping block. If it were repealed, it would not only set health care back, but it would place a heavy burden on an already hard-hit economy. Already we know that the health care sector is the only one where jobs are being created; and according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, over the next decade, the 30 fastest-growing jobs, 17 of them, more than half of them, will be health-care related. They also report that during the recession, while most industries lost jobs, health care added over 600,000 jobs. With an anticipated coverage of over 30 million new individuals, it isn't rocket science to see how the Affordable Care Act doesn't kill jobs but will be the sector to bring this economy back to life. The provisions in that act are projected to create more than 4 million jobs over the next 10 years. What we need to be doing now is what the President has called for, improving math and science in our schools, and then we should be providing education and training for those jobs on all levels, from the community health workers to doctors, nurses, and allied health, to the most technical jobs in research and technology. And many of those jobs are available right now. They will just increase over the next 10 years. I want to read from ``Health Care Employment Set to Explode,'' which was published in FierceHealthcare on October 20 of this year. It reads: Amid health care reform changes to promote health care integration, and national deficit reduction to save, health care jobs are projected to soar, according to a report by Bipartisan Policy Center Health Professional Workforce Initiative, with The Deloitte Workforce Initiative, released on Tuesday of that week. Health care employment is expected to rise to 11.9 percent in 2018, and that means total health care employment will jump from 15.8 million, where it was in 2008, to 19.8 million in 2018, according to that report. From 2008 to 2018, health care employment will grow by 23 percent compared to only 9 percent in all other employment sectors, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. During that time, health care professionals will see the following changes in job growth: registered nurses will grow by 22.2 percent; licensed practical and licensed vocational nurses will grow by 20.7 percent; home health aides will grow by 50 percent; nursing aides, orderlies, and attendants will grow by 18.8 percent; personal and home care aides will grow by 46 percent; and physicians and surgeons by 21.8 percent. There have been so many misrepresentations about the bill from its opponents both inside Congress and out, and it's not fair to the American public who at the very least ought to be able to depend on their elected representatives for accurate information, and they ought to be able to expect us to act on that accurate information. There are some analyses that suggest that the effect on the economy will be minimal, and even though I do not agree, I want to read from the conclusion of one such paper, and that paper is entitled ``How Will the Affordable Care Act Affect Jobs? Timely Analysis of Immediate Health Policy Issues,'' written by John Holahan and Bowen Garrett, and it helps to dispel some of the erroneous representations about what the Affordable Care Act would or would not do. In its conclusion they write: The Affordable Care Act is unlikely to have major aggregate effects on the U.S. economy. But they also say increased spending because the Affordable Care Act will increase demand for health services and demand for labor in the health sector. Cuts in Medicare and various cost-containment provisions, if successful as proposed by the Ryan plan, would have just the opposite effect--it would kill jobs. New taxes on insurers, medical devices, and pharmaceutical manufacturers could have adverse effects on those industries except for the fact, they say, that coverage expansion would provide new revenues well in excess of any new tax obligations. Cost- containment efforts, if successful, will have the opposite effect, reducing growth in spending on Medicare and Medicaid. So cost- containment efforts, if successful, will have somewhat opposite effects, reducing the growth of spending on Medicare and Medicaid, which will reduce taxes or borrowing the Federal Government would have to undertake. Cost containment then that reduces the Federal budget deficit would result in faster economic growth, more employment, and higher family incomes. Cost containment would also free up private dollars to be spent in nonhealth areas of the economy, thus stimulating the economy in many ways. They also go on to say that concern over the impact of the Affordable Care Act on small businesses is misplaced. All small businesses with fewer than 50 workers will be exempt from the assessments. Most larger firms already provide health insurance to their workers and so are unlikely to face assessments under the law. Small businesses should benefit from the availability of lower-cost plans and the efforts to increase competition and contain costs within the exchange. So I hope that begins to clear up some of the misrepresentations about how that bill would hurt the economy, because it would not kill jobs, it would not hurt small businesses, and it's not likely to have a great impact on larger businesses either. The Congressional Black Caucus comes to the floor every Monday night that we are in session to call attention to the issues that we know are important to our constituents and important to Americans across this country. The primary one is jobs, but access to health care is not far behind, and we ought to support rather than misrepresent or try to repeal the Affordable Care Act, a good bill that's good for the American people, good for our economy, and good for our country. We are once again calling on this body to pass the American Jobs Act. The fact that it comes from President Obama should not be a reason to dismiss it and declare it dead on arrival, as some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have said. After all, many of the proposals come directly out of bills that they themselves have proposed. So I would say to my colleagues, please, the American people are sick of the politics. They're sick of the bickering. They need jobs now. They can't wait. We should not wait. Let's pass the Jobs Act now. With that, Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. CHRISTENSEN

Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Mrs. CHRISTENSEN

Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. Madam Speaker, today I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 358: a bill that is completely unnecessary; a bill that denies women the freedom of choice; a bill that re-opens an abortion debate that was settled in 2010; and a bill that will have a detrimental impact on the health and health care of women across the United States and in the U.S. Territories. Contrary to the very false claims of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, not only is the Hyde Amendment fully in effect and fully enforced, but the Affordable Care Act includes several strong provisions that explicitly prohibit the use of U.S. taxpayer dollars to fund abortions. In fact, those provisions were endorsed by the Catholic Health Association. Additionally, there have been numerous audits-- including by the Government Accounting Office and the Inspector General--as well as congressional hearings, they all concluded that the law is being followed. The sad irony here is that this bill is named the ``Protect Life Act.'' However, despite its name, this bill does very little to protect and improve the lives of women. What this bill would do, however, is to restrict--for the first time in history--how millions of women with private health insurance can spend their own private health insurance dollars. It also will undermine the success we achieved in expanding access to affordable, quality health care for women because it will force health plans participating in the health insurance Exchanges-- which will begin in 2014 and which are expected to lift tens of millions of Americans out of the ranks of the uninsured--to drop comprehensive coverage. And, if those aspects of this bill are not bad enough, consider this: H.R. 358 also eliminates the existing protections for women who seek abortion care in emergency circumstances and in situations that would literally save the woman's life. How, I must ask, does such a provision protect a woman's life? Today, millions of Americans are suffering the consequences of very real hardships--so many of which sometimes seem insurmountable. In times like these, we should be working together to create jobs by passing the American Jobs Act and we should be working together to move this nation forward building upon--and not trying to dismantle--the many successes we achieved with the historical health reform law. The problems we are facing today are very serious and require serious people to develop serious solutions instead of pursuing an ideological agenda that divides the nation. As a physician, I fully support legislation that would actually protect and improve lives, not only in title, but in reality. This bill, however, is not such a bill. I, therefore, strongly oppose H.R. 358 and urge my colleagues to do the same.

Mrs. CHRISTENSEN

Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. Mr. Chairman, as a physician, a mother, and as a person of a racial minority, which often bears the disproportionate impact of pollution, I rise in opposition to H.R. 2250 as well as H.R. 2681, which was just passed, and I rise in strong support of the Waxman amendment, which I urge every colleague to support. Both bills, H.R. 2681 and H.R. 2250, essentially wipe out EPA's regulations, first of cement kilns, now of industrial boilers and incinerators. It would have serious public health impacts because it would allow for the high emissions of dangerous pollutants, which would cause more asthma, heart attacks, birth defects, impaired brain development, which I'll come back to, and other illnesses at a time when we're working to improve the health of all Americans, to reduce health care costs, and when we are already struggling to remain competitive. All EPA is asking these entities to do is to meet the best existing standards in the industry--existing standards--standards that they've had years to meet. Mr. Chairman and colleagues, allowing these regulations to go forward is critical because these entities emit lead, arsenic, particulate matter, and other toxic substances, especially mercury. If the Republican majority proponents of this bill have their way, we will see more than 15,000 more cases of aggravated asthma, over 1,500 more heart attacks, over 600 more cases of chronic bronchitis every year, and we will also have over 100,000 additional missed working days, which means lost productivity--all at a time when we're trying to improve the health of all Americans, as I said, and improve American competitiveness. But most importantly, the large boilers and incinerators are the second-largest source of mercury, which, as you've heard, is a grave risk to our children both before and after birth, especially on their brain development, which makes these bills especially dangerous to the public health and can damage the learning and, thus, the social and economic potential of our children, as mercury stays in the environment for a long time. As an African American, I have to be particularly concerned. With more than 60 percent of polluting industries located in or near minority communities, it is clear that the learning and other neurological deficiencies caused by mercury would primarily impact our communities. This not only ought to concern African Americans, for the children of Latinos, Asians, and American Indians would also be more likely to be impaired. It should be of concern to all of us. All the time spent on this bill and the other bill that was just passed that the House majority leadership knows are going nowhere is a pure waste of time and a waste of money. I guess it's not important, because it's being used to try to kill programs they've never liked. They probably think it could hurt President Obama if it doesn't pass. It also protects the big corporations. Beyond that, it creates no jobs. It just creates the potential to cause more sickness and premature deaths, to damage the potential of our children and, therefore, to damage our country's potential as well. The claims of lost jobs, I believe, are highly exaggerated. Bringing forth and pushing these extremely misguided and dangerous bills says that the proponents are willing to put our country and the future of their and our constituents--of their and our children--at risk. I ask my colleagues to vote for this amendment, this amendment that protects the public health and that will save our children from a life that would not be what we would want for them, one in which they might not be able to enjoy all of the benefits of this country or fully realize their potential or the American Dream. Support this amendment. Reject the underlying bill and all of the bills that attempt to weaken the EPA. Vote, instead, for our children, our grandchildren and this country. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. CHRISTENSEN

Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. Mr. Speaker, October 10th marks the 100th anniversary of China's Wuchang Uprising which led to the creation of the Republic of China, ROC, that now exists on Taiwan. The uprising marked the end of the Qing Dynasty in what is now the ROC, effectively ending 2,000 years of imperial rule and resulting in East Asia's now- oldest republic. It is worthy of note that the Republic of China was born at a time when many repressive and colonial regimes ruled much of East Asia. Its founding father, Sun Yat-sen, had hoped the ROC would one day develop into a fully democratic society modeled on many of the same principles and norms that he had observed while an adolescent in Hawaii. And though it came to pass well after he left this world, and on a different land mass, his dreams of representative democracy are an undeniable reality on Taiwan today. The ROC's emulation of American principles and ideals has not been limited to the political arena. Time after time, whether it be in the struggle against fascism, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, or joining us in calling for the removal of Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein in 2003, the ROC--be it housed on mainland China, or Taiwan--has stood shoulder to shoulder with the United States to defend and promote the very values and ideals that inspired Dr. Sun to create the ROC in the first place. In recognition of all of the foregoing, I ask my colleagues to join me in congratulating the Republic of China on Taiwan on its 100th anniversary, while also acknowledging its Founding Fathers' foresight and--most of all--thanking the government and the people of Taiwan for their loyalty, friendship and support for an entire century.

Mrs. CHRISTENSEN

Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. At this time, I am joined by two of my colleagues. I would like to yield to the gentlelady from Ohio, who, for 2 years religiously, had the responsibility in the last Congress to lead us in these Special Orders--with a lot of conviction and great information to share with the American people. Congresswoman Marcia Fudge of Ohio.

Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. First of all, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to add extraneous material on the subject under discussion this evening.

Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. Absolutely, absolutely. We have been joined by another former chair of the Congressional Black Caucus and the leader of our Health Care Task Force, Congresswoman Maxine Waters, and I would like to yield such time as she might consume to her.

Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Congressional Black Caucus is pleased, and we thank the Democratic leadership for allowing us, once again, to come to the floor for the Democratic hour. General Leave