Michael Capuano

Mr. CAPUANO

Mr. CAPUANO. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. CAPUANO

Mr. CAPUANO. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro).

Mr. CAPUANO

Mr. CAPUANO. Mr. Speaker, I rise to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the MIT/Wellesley Upward Bound Program. The program offers excellent teaching and consistent mentoring; and it has proved that young people whose parents have not themselves benefitted from higher education can succeed academically. Each year, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and Wellesley College provide year round educational support to 50 low-income and/or first generation youth in grades 9-12, from the city of Cambridge, Massachusetts. The program's goal is to give its participants the skills, confidence, and determination to graduate from high school and succeed in postsecondary education. MIT/Wellesley Upward Bound provides an intensive six-week summer session, conducted in residence at Wellesley College. Rigorous academic courses are taught by experienced high school teachers and graduate and undergraduate students from MIT, Wellesley College, and other local colleges and universities. Classes stress English and foreign language arts; reading, writing, oral communication, social studies and critical thinking. Plus, quantitative skills, mathematics, laboratory sciences, and the use of computers. Individual tutorials are available on an as- needed basis, and the academic rigor is enriched by cultural activities and field trips. During the academic year, participants attend supervised study sessions and one-on-one tutorials, for a minimum of four hours per week, at MIT. Participants must meet with program staff regularly to review their academic progress and participation performance. Additionally, the program provides college admissions, financial aid, and career advice workshops to participants and their parents. About 80-85 percent of Cambridge public school students who participate enroll in post-secondary education. I salute the remarkable success of the Upward Bound Program. For 50 years, MIT and Wellesley students have made an immense difference in the lives of less fortunate young people, and we draw inspiration from everyone associated with this extraordinary program.

Mr. CAPUANO

Mr. CAPUANO. Mr. Speaker, I don't like being here. I had meetings I had to cancel. I had phone calls I had to put off. But I am committed to doing everything I can to get two votes on the floor--just two. They are simple issues: no fly, no buy, and closing the gaping loopholes in background checks for the purchase of a gun. That shouldn't be a problem. I don't know anybody who opposes those items. We can't get a bill on the floor because the Republican majority is afraid of their own position. They are scared to let the American people know where they stand on these issues. Just yesterday, we had to use a legislative gimmick called a motion to recommit, which nobody in America understands--I didn't understand it before I got here--but it was the only way we could get the issue on the floor. And even then, when Mr. Thompson offered it, it was ruled out of order. Through machinations of rule on rule on rule, we weren't even allowed to vote on that. The item was ruled nongermane and a motion was made to lay it on the table. The only vote we got was to overrule the ruling of the Republican chair to lay it on the table. The people who voted to lay it on the table yesterday voted to allow terrorists to buy weapons. The people who voted to lay it on the table yesterday voted to allow criminals and terrorists to continue to buy guns under our current gaps in the background check law. That is what that vote was. Now, I know no Republican who voted that way will go home and explain it to their constituents. They will say: Oh, no, it was just a procedural motion. And many of them will probably get away with it. That is a shame. What I don't understand is why people claim this is somehow against due process--and, by the way, the bills have due process in them; written by a Republican during a Republican Presidential administration--when there is plenty of due process. If anybody wants to add more, we will add more. No one was concerned about due process when they voted for the PATRIOT Act that allowed the NSA to listen to everybody's cell phone conversations. No one was caring about due process when Americans grabbed people from around the world and kept them under lock and key for as long as we want. But now we are concerned about it. God forbid we offer an amendment to deal with their concerns. All I want is a vote. All I want is Members of this body to have the courage of their convictions. If you think those bills are bad, bring them to the floor and vote ``no'' and go home and explain it to your constituents. I do it all the time. That is why I came here. I thought that is what we did. We are not supposed to be the people who hide. We are supposed to be leaders. Lead. Don't cower in fear behind political nonsense and gimmickry because you haven't got the courage of your convictions. This issue will not go away. The American people are tired--and have been for a long time--of politicians who refuse to stand up and be counted for their principles. We don't mind disagreements. I don't mind losing on an issue here and there. I do mind not being given the opportunity to debate and vote on the important issues of the day, issues that everybody in America wants. Mr. Speaker, that is why I am here. We will debate the merits another time--if we are lucky--but it will not go away, and you cannot hide from your refusal to allow a vote on these two simple, commonsense proposals.

Mr. CAPUANO

Mr. CAPUANO. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to bring up H.R. 1217, the bipartisan expanded background checks legislation, to honor the memory of Officer Steven Todd Dooley, a victim of gun violence who never received a moment of action on this House floor. And, Mr. Speaker, I would like to know: What are you afraid of? Why won't you give Officer Dooley his time? What are you afraid of, Mr. Speaker? Bring the bill to the floor.

Mr. CAPUANO

Mr. CAPUANO. Mr. Speaker, the issues are pretty clear. I came up for one simple reason: I am asking my Republican friends: What are you afraid of? What are you afraid of? You get the votes. I ran for Congress to debate and vote on the issues of the day, vote my conscience--win some, lose some. What did you run for? Did you run to stifle democratic debate? Did you run to simply say to the American people, ``We don't care what you say''? If you believe the words you have been saying for the last week, put the bills on the floor and have a vote. That is the American way. What are you afraid of? Are you afraid you can't control your Members? Are you afraid some of your Members may actually have to stand up, find some courage, and vote their conscience? Put these two bills on the floor. The American people want it, the American people deserve it, and the American people are demanding it.

Mr. CAPUANO

Mr. CAPUANO. Mr. Speaker, pretty much everything has been said, except I think, obviously, the leadership is still not hearing us. And it is not just us who are saying this; the American people are saying this. Everyone has seen the polls. Everyone knows the reality that, in the last couple of weeks, 90 percent of the American people want us to do very simple things: no fly, no buy and closing gaping, not small, but gaping loopholes in the background check. Now, like some of my colleagues, I personally would go further. My constituents would support that. There are many things we could be doing, but we are not asking for those things because we know that is a difficult lift in the House of Representatives. But I represent the same number of people as every other Member here, about 750,000 people. And when 90 percent of those constituents in every district wants us to take simple, direct action, I think it is a dereliction of duty and responsibility and our oath to ignore that unless there is some moral reason for us to disagree with some constituents. On this issue, I can't believe anyone has a moral disagreement with this. Everyone's talking about Orlando, and that is obviously the most important, most compelling one. But since the Orlando shooting, in the last 10 days, the last 10 days in America, there have been 77 people, at least, killed with guns--at least. And I say that because many of these things get minimal reporting. Why? Because all of us are used to turning on the local news in every corner of this country every single night and seeing another act of violence, almost always committed with a gun, across America. It is not an urban problem or a rural problem; it is across the country. And we have become a little desensitized to it because it happens all the time. Once in a while, we will get an Orlando tragedy or a Sandy Hook tragedy, and we will all jump up and down and say how upset we are. But, as has been pointed out many times, we don't seem to get all that upset when two or three people get shot in the middle of some other place. Sometimes, we think: well, it is probably just gang violence. It is just one gang member shooting another gang member. Maybe they deserve it. America is better off. How do you say that when there is a 3-year-old who gets shot, or a 7- year-old? How dare you say that. Or a woman walking down the street, or people literally just sitting in their homes innocently. People say that some of the proposals that have been made wouldn't have stopped Orlando or wouldn't have stopped Sandy Hook or wouldn't have stopped something else. You know what? Maybe they are right. I don't know. But I have never in my life, either politically or personally, used the excuse that because I can't do everything that, therefore, I should do nothing. That is nothing more than a lame excuse. If we can save the life of one person by taking simple actions that everybody seems to agree with--if you can't fly, you can't buy a gun; close the loopholes in background checks--no one has a problem with background checks. Most Americans don't know there are loopholes. And I don't mean little ones. I mean gaping ones. As you heard earlier, about 40 percent of the guns sold in this country are not subject to background checks. That is not a loophole. That is a gaping loophole. In the last 10 days, 239 Americans have been injured with guns. Now, some say, well, it is in home defense, it is accidental shootings. And that is true. Some of them are. All this stuff is available to anybody who wants to take 5 minutes and do a simple Internet search like I did. There are dozens of reputable Web sites that have this information. One of them, the Gun Violence Archive--simple statistics, not advocating, statistics--in 2015, the last calendar year, they list 13,433 deaths by gun. That is 36.8 per day. And, this year, we are on pace to exceed that. Of that, two children under the age of 11 per day were shot--two per day. Yes, about 10 percent of the incidents were home invasions, defensive use, and accidental shooting, which is why none of us are trying to impede law-abiding American citizens from owning a gun. But that leaves 90 percent of the gun activity outside that. For us to not take action, in my opinion, is indefensible. In 18 years, I have never participated in this Morning Hour discussion. I haven't done it because I find most of this, more often than not, somebody's reason to make a political statement. And I guess on some levels that is what I am doing right now. But, on occasion, things get to the point where we, as a group, have to stand up, that we, individually, have to stand up and demand what is the simplest action imaginable--if you are too dangerous to fly, you are too dangerous to buy--the simplest action, put it on the floor. I would respect someone for coming up and voting ``no.'' I would disagree, but at least they wouldn't be able to hide behind their own political rhetoric that somehow people like me are trying to pull guns away from them. The truth is it is a simple action. And I will tell you, as a House Member, I am a bit embarrassed that the Senate was at least able to put it on the floor. At least they will have to answer to their constituents.

Mr. CAPUANO. I understand that, Mr. Speaker. This issue has not expired, and this issue will not go away. And this issue will not be the end of this debate today or tomorrow, until we get a vote on these simple issues and do something to protect the children of America.

Mr. CAPUANO

Mr. CAPUANO. Madam Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to His Holiness the Dalai Lama. He has come to Washington to be present when the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) awards its Democracy Service Medal posthumously to another heroic spiritual leader, Tenzin Delek Rinpoche, who died in captivity in China in July of last year. The NED will also honor the Central Tibetan Administration, based in Dharamshala, India, for its commitment to freedom and democracy. It is fitting, too, as Prime Minister Nahrendra Modi concludes his visit, to recognize the generosity India has shown to exiles seeking political and religious liberty within its borders. With His Holiness and with all Tibetans, we grieve for all they have endured since the Chinese invasion, the sorrows of those who live in exile and the sufferings of those who remain. I am outraged that oppression and murder continue unabated. With His Holiness and with Tenzin Delek Rinpoche's cousin Geshe Nyima, representing his bereaved family, we mourn the shameful persecution and tragic death of a man committed to nonviolence. I urge the House to approve H. Res 584, urging President Obama to seek an independent investigation of his death and to call publicly for an end to the repressive policies of the People's Republic of China in Tibet. It has been in committee for many months. Elie Wiesel, like His Holiness awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, exhorts us: There may be times when we are powerless to prevent injustice, but there must never be a time when we fail to protest. Indeed, we do protest, and further we should never cease to hold oppressors accountable. The people of Tibet, inspired by the Dalai Lama, continue to cherish their culture and traditions. I wish them all his faith and courage, today, tomorrow and every day until Tibet is free.

Mr. CAPUANO

Mr. CAPUANO. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. CAPUANO. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding. I want to step up and basically add my name to this and my support and say it is a good amendment. It should pass.

Mr. CAPUANO

Mr. CAPUANO. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone), the ranking member of the Energy and Commerce Committee.

Mr. CAPUANO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. As you have just heard, this is a great piece of legislation. This is exactly the way that Congress is supposed to work. We had our differences, but we worked them out because everybody gave a little bit to get to the middle--to get something good for America. This is the kind of bill that, on an average day, will not get any of us elected or unelected, but it is something that is good for the safety of America on pipelines and hazardous materials. I would like to point out just a few items that, I think, are particularly important: For the first time, we have added an emergency order authority so that our regulators, when there is a problem, can quickly address it as opposed to having to wait around and let it burn out on its own; We added some provisions in there to boost funding to the States and the localities so that they can train their own people on how to deal with these things, because they are, after all, the first responders; We added some information relative to oil spill response plans. For me, I thought it was very important that we added a section that makes sure that there are no conflicts of interest on the studies done by PHMSA, on which we rely. There are many other provisions in this bill that are deserving of our support--as always, like with any bill. Any one of us can point out things that we don't like or that we wanted more on, but that is what compromise is all about. I am proud to be here again with another bill that comes out of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and for the traditional way that we have worked for many, many years in a bipartisan way. I thank Messrs. Denham, Shuster, and DeFazio, all of the members of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee and the members of the Energy and Commerce Committee. This particular bill is more difficult than usual because there were two committees involved. It makes four different sides and eight different sides on the House, plus the Senate; yet we did it in a reasonable fashion and in a relatively quick way. It proves the system can work when you have people at the table who want it to work. I thank everybody who has been involved with this, and I look forward to the passage of the bill. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CAPUANO. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio), the ranking member of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.

Mr. CAPUANO. Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentleman from Oregon an additional 1 minute.

Mr. CAPUANO. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Rush), the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Energy and Power--which, of course, I love that name--from the Energy and Commerce Committee.

Mr. CAPUANO. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentleman.

Mr. CAPUANO. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gene Green), my friend who serves on the Energy and Commerce Committee.

Mr. CAPUANO. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Sherman).

Mr. CAPUANO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. I would just like to close out by simply repeating what I said earlier. I am very happy, very proud to have worked on this bill. I am very happy and very satisfied with the way we worked cooperatively. I want to thank the staff on our side who worked on it, Jennifer Esposito Homendy and Steve Carlson on my staff. I want to thank all the staff on the Republican side. I know that America has this view that we hate each other and we never talk to each other and we do nothing but call each other names. I have done that in private, of course, but the truth is this is exactly the way it is supposed to work. Absent not getting a few things I wanted, this was actually a pleasure to work on. I am very proud of the work product. I am very proud of the work environment that we have. I think this is a bill that the American people can be proud of. I think it is a bill that the Congress can be proud of. Again, I want to thank everyone who worked with us on this. I look forward to the President's signature. Again, I want to thank the staff. Let's be honest, we take all the credit. We do the big speeches and all that kind of stuff, but without the staff, we couldn't get this done. I want to thank everybody involved with it for their professionalism, for their enthusiasm, for their long nights and difficult time. I look forward to doing this again in 4 years. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. CAPUANO

Mr. CAPUANO. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Delaware (Mr. Carney), the primary Democratic sponsor of this bill.

Mr. CAPUANO. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. CAPUANO

Mr. CAPUANO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I also rise to support H.R. 4096 for the exact reasons that Mr. Garrett just pointed out. I would like to be as clear as I can. I am a strong proponent and supporter of the Volcker Rule, and I would not support anything that would undermine that rule. That is not what this does. This is simply a clarification of an item that was never intended. Even as a supporter of that rule, this is not the outcome we intended. It is simply to clarify naming abilities by certain entities. I want to be also clear that nothing in this provision would allow something like the Bank of America Fund. You still cannot name it after a bank. These are subsidiaries of some banks. In this particular case, Natixis happens to be located in my district. They are the ones who brought this issue to my attention. They also happen to be affiliated with Loomis Sayles. Loomis Sayles is not a bank, but it is an affiliate of a bank. Therefore, Loomis Sayles would not be allowed to say this is a Loomis Sayles item. They have to call it some funny name, ABCD Fund or whatever it might be. That was never the intention of the Volcker Rule. The Volcker Rule was to make sure that the finances of this country and this world are as stable as possible so that people couldn't have conflicts of interest and on and on and on. This is a technical amendment, something that I strongly support. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. CAPUANO

Mr. CAPUANO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this bill, H.R. 2901, and I want to congratulate Mr. Ross and Mr. Murphy for coming up with a piece of bipartisan legislation. I want to be clear that the issues surrounding flood insurance are difficult and complicated, and there are differences of opinion as to how much of a role private insurance can play. This bill threads that needle. This bill says we all agree that there is more role for private insurance and we should remove any barriers that might be there so that people can be better served and have better competition. I think this bill does a pretty good job doing that. I don't think private insurance is ever going to--I am not sure that is possible, but it is a different debate--take the place of national flood insurance. And we are working on that. Mr. Ross has been a great leader on that, as has Mr. Murphy. I want to thank them and congratulate them, and I look forward to working with them further to do more as we move forward. This particular bill is one good step in the right direction, and I want to congratulate the two authors and thank them for their leadership. I look forward to supporting this bill. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CAPUANO. Mr. Speaker, you learn something new every day. I am one of those people. I never expected a guy from New Mexico to be speaking on the flood insurance bill. I thank Mr. Pearce for educating me even further. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.