Joe Crowley

Mr. CROWLEY

Mr. CROWLEY. I thank my friend from the Bronx. And I yield to the gentleman from Manhattan, Mr. Nadler.

Mr. CROWLEY. Well done, my friend from Brooklyn and Queens. Mr. Speaker, I now would like to yield to the gentlewoman from Flushing, Queens, New York, Ms. Grace Meng.

Mr. CROWLEY. I thank the gentlelady for her remarks. I thank all the members of the New York delegation, as well as Ms. Pelosi, the Democratic leader, for their remarks today and remembrance of the great Governor of the State of New York, Mario Cuomo. Mr. Speaker, I had the opportunity at the early age of 15 years of age to be engaged in, really, my first political campaign. My then- Uncle Walter Crowley, who was one of my political idols in life, along with a fellow by the name of Michael Dowd, were in charge of a portion of Queens County in terms of making sure that, I think, the Catholic vote came out for Mario Cuomo during the 1977 race for mayor of New York, which was famously won in that primary by Ed Koch. But that was not the only election that Mario Cuomo--and storied election--that Mario Cuomo was a part of. He had been a part of elections before that, and, lo and behold, in 1982 he once again found himself in a matchup between himself and Ed Koch, and Mario Cuomo prevailing in that statewide election. At 15 years of age, I remember handing out literature at the churches in western Queens and southern Queens, and it really was my entree into a political life. Then, in 1984, as a student at Queens College, I interned in the office of then-Governor Cuomo. And what an experience that was to be working with Bob Sullivan, his storied pollster, but officially, on the official side, was working in the statistics office with Dick Starkey, a former reporter, a storied reporter in New York City; Marty Steadman; to have Tim Russert walk into the room. We all died because Tim Russert just walked into the room. I can remember in 1986 when I was elected to the State assembly how supportive Mario Cuomo was to me as a young man, recommending me to travel around the world with ACYPL, to come here to Washington to get my feet wet as well, to get that Washington sense. I remember being on the second floor in 1988 in the Blue Room, what is known as the Blue Room where the Governor would give his budgets, anticipating his delving into, diving into the 1988 Presidential elections, only to have my heart broken when Mario Cuomo said he would not run in that election. Mario Cuomo was tough. He had one of the biggest hearts I have ever come to know. He had also gone to law school, my Uncle Walter, and there was an intimacy between the Crowleys and the Cuomo family in Queens County politics, one that exists to this day with his son Andrew, as Governor, and my family as well. Mario Cuomo always did the right thing. He always did the right thing. And Mario Cuomo had an incredible magnetism about him. I have never seen, outside of people who are Presidents of the United States, the kind of magnetic sense that Mario Cuomo emitted. People wanted to be around him. Whenever he was publicly out, he was walking in the street or at an event, it was hard to get near Mario Cuomo because everyone wanted to be around Mario Cuomo. I was always nervous around Mario Cuomo, a healthy nervousness, but I was excited to be around him. I always wanted to be around him. I loved the man. I loved him dearly, although I never had enough time to be with him. As Paul Tonko had said at the funeral--and what a beautiful funeral Mario Cuomo had, what an incredibly beautiful funeral--simple, yet elegant. That is how I describe it. His son Andrew and his entire family, how respectful they were of their father. And I think of the people who attended that funeral had to walk away knowing that these children, all of them, were raised so well: Andrew, Margaret, Madeline, Maria, and Christopher. And all their grandchildren, how they behaved. It was just remarkable, just wonderful to see the respect they had for their father and their grandfather, for their in-law. But Andrew had said that his father told him you don't tell people what they want to hear--and I am paraphrasing. He told them you tell them what they need to hear. You told them what you wanted to tell them, the message you wanted to get across. It wasn't always popular, the message of Mario Cuomo; but I do know that people, even when they disagreed with him, they respected him and they admired him because of his tenacity, because he believed in what he was saying. I think what they respected about him was he was always consistent as well in his thoughts. We will miss Mario Cuomo. Queens County, his home borough, will miss him. The city of New York and the State of New York, and, I think, the country have lost a great statesman, someone who didn't look to the next election but looked to the next great issue that needed to be tackled, not only in New York, because New York in many respects is the leader of State legislators in the country; he was thinking nationally, he was thinking globally as well. Mario Cuomo will forever be one of my heroes, as is Lincoln. Mario Cuomo was bipartisan. He loved Lincoln, a Republican, but was true to his own democratic principles and his party as well. There is not enough time to say everything about him. But, Mr. Speaker, I once again want to thank the delegation for their loyalty this evening and being here for as long as they were, and the indulgence of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. CROWLEY

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Speaker, myself and other members of the New York delegation were not able to be here on swearing-in day because we were attending the funeral of former Governor Mario Cuomo in New York, and we were also not here to cast a vote for Speaker of the House. Had I been present during that vote, I would have cast my ballot for the right Honorable Nancy Pelosi of California, and I would like the Record to reflect my vote for Ms. Pelosi.

Mr. CROWLEY

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Speaker, on January 6, 2015 I missed recorded votes #1-7 as I was attending the funeral of Governor Mario Cuomo in New York. I would like to submit how I would have voted if I were here and sworn into office: On Roll Call #1 I would have voted present (Quorum Call). On Roll Call #2 I would have voted for Nancy Pelosi for Speaker. On Roll Call #3 I would have voted no. On Roll Call #4 I would have voted no. On Roll Call #5 I would have voted yes. On Roll Call #6 I would have voted no. On Roll Call #7 I would have voted yes.

Mr. CROWLEY

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Speaker, today I have introduced a resolution commemorating the centennial anniversary of the World War I Christmas Truce of 1914. One hundred years ago this month, soldiers on the Western Front came together to unofficially pause hostilities and celebrate the Christmas holiday without regard for country lines or battle lines. The truce gave armies on both sides an opportunity to bury their fallen comrades, as well as share some festive cheer while far away from their homes and families. Reports from soldiers on the front lines were that soldiers engaged in singing carols, sharing food and other provisions, and even lighthearted games. One of the most well-known aspects of the Christmas Truce is the impromptu football game that took place among the men. Many football clubs to this day recognize the Christmas Truce by holding commemorative games, and this year's historic anniversary will feature a number of recognitions in the sporting world. The Christmas Truce has always inspired me as a reminder that it is possible for opponents to look beyond their differences and see each other as people, but I have a more personal connection as well. My great-grandfather was one of the soldiers present during the Christmas Truce, and his story and his experiences have been passed down as family lore. I've also been drawn to this year's commemorations by my good friend Don Mullan, an Irish author who has been championing worldwide celebrations of this proud moment in world history. Don has been developing a Christmas Truce and Flanders Peace Field Project in Messines, Belgium in partnership with the United Nations Office on Sport for Development and Peace and UNESCO. This project has gained the support of Nobel Peace Prize laureate Archbishop Desmond Tutu, and will help ensure that the Christmas Truce, and more importantly, the lessons it has taught us, will always be remembered. I hope that this holiday season, wherever we are, we can all take a moment to remember the Christmas Truce and to remind ourselves of a time when soldiers laid down their weapons and recognized how essential it is to value humanity. The Christmas Truce is a symbol of the triumph of the human spirit over adversity, and reminds us that even in the darkest times, we should always strive toward peace.

Mr. CROWLEY

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Speaker, on January 1, the laws governing the pension plans for over 10 million Americans will expire, threatening the retirement security for these families and causing great uncertainty for their employers who sponsor these retirement vehicles. These pension plans, known as multi-employer pension plans, are traditional pension plans that have provided millions of Americans a secure retirement for several generations. Multi-employer pension plans are retirement plans negotiated by a union with a group of employers, typically in the same industry. Collective bargaining contracts say how much the employers must contribute to the plans for their employees. The plans are run by trustees selected by the union and the employers. The trustees typically determine the amounts that the plans will pay in lifetime monthly benefits. While fewer workers may be utilizing these traditional pensions than in the past, Congress should be taking steps to bolster these traditional pension plans and help to expand their availability between businesses and workers, not slow walking their demise by allowing important funding rules to expire. While this bill is a simple one-year extension of the expiring rules, these rules provide needed certainty to businesses who offer pension plans to their workers. Without this certainty, businesses will be subject to outdated, unfamiliar rules that could threaten not only their employees' pensions, but also the basic sustainability of their business operations. Specifically, current multi-employer pension funding rules stipulate that if a pension plan becomes underfunded, or unable to meet its negotiated obligations, the trustees of the pension plan are given a set amount of time to create a restructuring plan to ensure that negotiated benefits can be paid out over the long term to employees. These pension plan trustees, who are appointed by both labor and management, can use this time to create a long-term framework to ensure all obligations are met. This works to the benefit of employers and employees. But if these funding rules are allowed to expire on January 1 and a pension plan becomes underfunded, instead of giving labor and management the tools to create a sustainable path forward, the law would demand excessive cash payments and excise fees from employers. Forcing companies to make massive cash infusions into their pension plan while also facing new government-levied excise taxes will not guarantee a fully funded pension plan for their workers. Rather, it increases the likelihood that the employer will be forced to abandon their pension plan. Abandoning pension plans does not benefit either employers or employees. Make no mistake, this legislation should not be seen as a long-term remedy to the issues involving retirement security. Rather, this bill is a simple extension of the law to prevent uncertainty and turmoil to employers, workers, and retirees. Next year, the Congress should re-examine the nation's pension laws-- those governing individual company plans as well as these labor- management negotiated plans. Enactment of this bill will not cost the federal taxpayers any money, but lack of action on this bill will cost both businesses and families, who could lose the security that these traditional retirement plans provide. I encourage my colleagues to support this commonsense legislation that provides certainty to employers, and protects the retirement security that workers and retirees have labored for during their careers.

Mr. CROWLEY

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the winner of the 2014 Veterans Day essay contest for New York's 14th Congressional District. Kezia Dickson, a student from I.S. 61 in Corona, Queens submitted the winning essay on the topic, ``What Veterans Day Means To Me.'' Kezia's essay reads as follows: Each day, millions of people in the Armed Forces risk their lives in order to protect us. They put losing their family, friends and life behind just so that they can protect us. These people show unexplainable bravery and courage. I can't even imagine putting my life on the line to fight in a war where I may possibly die. When I sit down and think about what these people are doing it blows my mind. I find it so honorable and breathtaking that someone would put themselves in such danger for strangers. That is why when Veterans Day comes along I make sure to do something for those members of the Armed Forces. This holiday is just a chance for me to say thank you and God bless you for your unimaginable courage and kindness. I can't even go on to think about the struggle and pain some of these family members may feel each day as they don't know if their husband, wife, son or daughter, mother or father is still alive. Just let alone going to sleep without having that type of awareness is hard. Sometimes we Americans take things for granted, especially other freedoms. Most people fail to understand that the freedom we have doesn't come for free. Sacrifices are made and people end up dying in the process. For some, Veterans Day is a day where you don't have to go to work or school. For me it's a time of reflection and renewal. That is why Veterans Day is very important to me. To know that somebody's husband/ wife, son/daughter, father/mother is dying just so that I can have my freedom makes me take a step back. It makes me think twice about the actions I'm taking and the things I'm doing right now. I just begin to say to myself: ``Are the things I'm doing now worth someone's life being lost?'' I appreciate these members of the Armed Forces with the deepest gratitude. They've helped save my life and protect other millions of Americans. In my family, I have uncles and cousins who have served and are serving now. I understand what they do is very hard and it takes mental, emotional, and physical strength to go through with it. They go through so many obstacles, but they seem to never give up. They make me proud to call myself an American. It is their bravery and audacity that keeps America living. What they do is just unbelievable. Basically, Veterans Day is my time to say, ``Thank you for saving my life and thank you for your service.''

Mr. CROWLEY

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Speaker, every so often, we have the chance to take action that affects how the world as a whole sees the United States. We have the chance to decide what our country stands for, and what we want to mean to the world. Today is one of those chances. The United States has long stood with those who are fleeing persecution and violence. We've stood alongside them, so they know they're not alone. We've stood behind them, to give them the ability to make a new life here. And we've stood up for them, to make it clear that there is no place in this world for the atrocities that drive people to leave their homes. That's who we are and what we do. We don't put all our efforts into making it easier to send people back. We don't say, ``Sorry, we'd rather score political points than try to help you.'' So why would we start now? Why would we turn our backs on people--children--who have endured unimaginable struggle and danger to come here for the chance at not just a better life, but a chance at life at all? That's what this is about--it's a life or death situation for these children. We need to look beyond politics and partisanship to something bigger--principles. And let one of those guiding principles be that we will be there when we are needed. We will respond not with hatred and vitriol, or with inaction and delay, but with empathy and support. To do anything less is beneath us--not only as Americans, but as human beings.

Mr. CROWLEY

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the New York Hall of Science on the 50th anniversary of its dedication. The Hall of Science is a true jewel that Queens and all New Yorkers are so proud to have in our city. This year, Flushing Meadows Corona Park in Queens celebrates the 75th anniversary of the 1939-40 World's Fair and the 50th anniversary of the 1964-65 World's Fair. The fairs brought the world together in Queens to share experiences and see the newest technologies and products that would one day change our world. What began as a fair pavilion showcasing exhibits about atomic energy, space exploration and satellite communication has evolved over five decades into one of the world's preeminent centers for science education and teacher professional development. The legacy of the Fair is present not just in the vintage NASA rockets still in the museum's front yard, but in the spirit of innovation, discovery and a quest for knowledge that still permeates the Hall of Science's more than 400 exhibits, which include the country's largest Science Playground and a miniature golf-course where each hole teaches a lesson in space physics. In celebration of its 50th anniversary, the Hall of Science has just completed a $50 million fundraising campaign. Two new exhibitions are coming on line this year. Design Lab will introduce visitors to the creative design process and Connected Worlds will present an immersive digital environment where visitors can explore sustainability and learn how their personal actions have a global impact. The campaign has also enabled a $25 million restoration of the Great Hall, the original World's Fair pavilion. Wallace Harrison's iconic space-age ``Cathedral to Science'' with its soaring stained glass walls rising 100 feet in the air once again stands as a majestic, inspirational destination for hundreds of thousands of people to get excited about science, technology, engineering and math. The New York Hall of Science is also preparing to host its fifth annual World Maker Faire on September 20-21. At the great World's Fairs, governments and industry presented exhibitions on what they thought the future would hold. At World Maker Faire, it is the makers themselves who are offering a preview of the future. More than 600 projects will be on display, giving people a glimpse at the best of creativity in all its forms. The Hall's President, Dr. Margaret Honey, was among the distinguished guests invited by the President to celebrate the first ever White House Maker Faire earlier this year, and the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy has been a major supporter of the maker movement as it has grown and evolved worldwide. The movement is tapping into our innate sense of curiosity, creativity and collaboration, with staggering results. More than 100 maker faires took place around the globe last year. The National Science Foundation, the Institute of Museum and Library Services, the Office of Naval Research, NASA and the U.S. Department of Education have all been major supporters of the Hall of Science. Recognizing this important institution's impact on education for students, teachers and families, these agencies, not to mention my office and the entire New York delegation, have all supported investments in new educational resources, exhibits and programs that each year serve a half-million museum visitors (many of them children on school field trips), help more than 3,000 teachers enhance their capacity as educators, and inspire countless young people to pursue careers in the STEM fields. Today, I salute the Hall of Science, a respected leading institution among science education centers worldwide. I wish that all Americans have the chance to visit the Hall at some point in their lives. For the New Yorkers that haven't visited yet, I hope you have a chance to visit this Queens treasure as soon as you can.

Mr. CROWLEY

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Massachusetts for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, 102 years ago, I assume a very frightened 14-year-old boy made his way on a boat called the RMS Caronia from Cork, Ireland, with his mother on his way to the United States, a very frightened 14- year-old boy who left behind his community, his friends and neighbors, and made his way to the United States. He later served in World War I and became a New York City police officer but didn't live long enough to see his grandson become a Member of the House of Representatives. But that 14-year-old boy contributed mightily to the United States of America in so many ways. He was a scared boy being brought to America in much the same way that children along our border today are coming to seek a better way. Don't turn our backs on these young children, these boys and girls, many of whom are suffering. Show the compassion and beauty of the United States. Welcome the best, the brightest, and the bravest.

Mr. CROWLEY

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise to bring up H.R. 377, the Paycheck Fairness Act, to jump-start the middle class, instead of this unprecedented, partisan lawsuit against our President.

Mr. CROWLEY

Mr. CROWLEY. I thank my friend, Mr. Levin, for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, when I go home, I often hear people who are disillusioned with politics in America. Some even say that they don't really see a difference between Democrats and Republicans. Today, my Republican colleagues are demonstrating just how significant the differences really are between Republicans and Democrats, especially when it comes to who is looking out for corporate America and who is looking out for hardworking, middle class America. This bill claims to do a lot of things, but what it really does is shifts the tax burden away from large multinational corporations and puts it on the backs of working families with children. Now, they are going to tell you that they are fighting fraud, but that is not what this bill is about today. If my Republican colleagues wanted to crack down on fraud, they would have joined with Democrats in closing loopholes that provide tax breaks to large companies that shift American jobs overseas, but they haven't done that. They would also join Democrats in cracking down on multinational corporations that avoid paying their fair share of taxes by simply changing the address of a headquarters to a post office box on the Cayman Islands. I will tell you, if middle class Americans could change their post office boxes to the Cayman Islands, my Republican colleagues would have a bill on the floor to stop that, but they don't have that luxury. Hardworking Americans can't change their address to a Cayman Island address, so they are just flat out of luck. Where is the outrage from our Republican colleagues, from my friends, on these abuses? Well, ladies and gentlemen, there simply isn't any outrage. In fact, the House has taken more than a dozen votes to end these abusive practices, and the majority of my Republican colleagues have opposed each and every one of them.

Mr. CROWLEY. The contrast between Republicans and Democrats could never be more clearer than it is right now. Republicans continue to want to protect corporate America, and Democrats want to protect, average, hardworking middle class Americans. That is the clear distinction, once again being demonstrated by this bill on the floor. Vote ``no'' on this bill. It is time to tell our Republican colleagues to put the interests of the middle class before corporate American interests.

Mr. CROWLEY

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Chairman, my amendment--and I say this in anticipation and hope that the Chair and the gentleman from Florida doesn't think I am tampering. Tampering has a very negative connotation to it. What I would like to think we are doing is legislating today, and I would hope that it is taken in that light. Mr. Chairman, my amendment would decrease part of the bill before us by $7.25 and increase the budget of the White House by that same amount. Why would I offer this amendment? It is such a small amount of money after all--$7.25. But just ask the millions of Americans who make only $7.25 an hour, otherwise known as the current minimum wage. What can the executive branch do with this money? They can buy pens, Mr. Chairman. They can buy pens that the President could use to keep signing executive orders focused on raising the wages of hardworking Americans. Last February, in light of no action from this Republic-controlled Congress, the President took the small but legal step of raising the minimum wage of employees working on Federal contracting projects, such as fast-food employees in Federal buildings and on our military bases. What has become crystal clear is that the Republican majority has no intention of putting forward an agenda focused on lifting hardworking Americans out of poverty. They have no intention of putting forward a jobs agenda. They have no intention of helping to foster economic growth in our country, but this administration wants to. And where Congress has failed, the administration has not faltered. Today, let's give $7.25 to the President so he can keep up that necessary work. If Republicans would join us in raising the minimum wage and lifting up American workers instead of putting language in this bill to forbid the President from trying to raise the wages of hardworking Americans, we wouldn't have this conversation today. That is right. Apparently it is not enough for Republicans to refuse to bring legislation for a vote that would raise the minimum wage; now they are also trying to stop the President from taking the small steps that he can do to raise the wages of Federal contractors, like those in the fast-food industry. They added sections 203 and 204 to this bill to specifically prohibit an executive order to do just that. I mean, come on, give us a break. Not only won't they allow a vote on the minimum wage, but now they want to tie the President's hands so that he can't help advance the issue either when they won't. Why are they fighting so hard against supporting working people in American families? No one working full-time should live in poverty. At $7.25 an hour, that is the reality facing 16.5 million Americans. So, when you hear that Congress is debating another huge spending bill, I want America to know that the Republican majority has snuck in language into this bill that actually prevents working people from getting a raise in their hourly pay. Democrats have a bill to raise the minimum wage and it is ready to go, but Republicans in Congress refuse to allow a simple up or down vote on that bill. What would happen if the Congress raised the minimum wage for every American from $7.25 an hour to $10.10 an hour? 16.5 million American workers would see a raise, not just the 2 million workers on Federal contracts. We would experience a boost to the economy, since more people with more money equals more spending in our economy; and we would be helping families and breadwinners, since the facts show adults make up 88 percent of the low wage workers. The average age of a minimum wage employee is 35 years of age. Raising the minimum wage helps others as well. It also helps people who earn more by reducing the need for full-time workers to rely on public assistance such as food stamps and Medicaid. So raising the pay of our lowest paid workers is not only good for minimum wage workers, but for all taxpayers. No one who works full-time should live in poverty. We need to raise the minimum wage, and we need to prevent any and every effort by House Republicans to roll back any incremental increases in pay the President can legally give to workers on Federal contracts. Let's pass this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. CROWLEY

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise with my colleague from Georgia, Congressman Doug Collins, to introduce legislation to extend section 181 of the tax code to continue to allow for the immediate tax write- off of the first $15 million (or $20 million where the production is made in a distressed community) of production expenditures for qualifying domestic film and television productions. In addition, our bill would extend section 181 treatment to live theatrical productions. Section 181 was first enacted in the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 and has been extended several times since. It was added to protect the U.S. television and film industry and to counteract the increasingly aggressive incentives offered by many foreign governments to attract production overseas. The Directors Guild of America noted, at the time that section 181 was passed, ``globalization, rising costs, foreign wage, tax and financing incentives, and technological advances, combined are causing a substantial transformation of what used to be a quintessentially American industry into an increasingly dispersed global industry.'' In enacting section 181, Congress recognized the important and unique contribution our television and film production industries make to providing high-paying jobs and economic benefits in communities across the country. These productions provide good jobs not just for actors, writers and directors, but also for the local carpenters and electricians, the drivers and equipment operators, the caterers and hotel-keepers who provide services to these productions. It is estimated that a major motion picture shooting on location contributes $225,000 every day to the local economy. For example, in 2011, the major studios alone paid over $2.7 billion to over 23,000 vendors in New York State. Moreover, in that same year, filmed production accounted for $7.1 billion in spending and employed 130,000 people in New York City, according to the Boston Consulting Group. Section 181 of the Internal Revenue Code allows production companies to deduct the cost of qualified U.S. productions immediately rather than capitalizing the costs and deducting them slowly over time. The incentive accelerates the timing of the deduction but it does not change the amount of the deduction. In order to qualify, a film must be domestically-produced, that is, at least 75 percent of the total compensation paid for the production must be for services performed in the U.S. by actors, directors, producers and other production staff personnel. The deduction applies to the first $15 million ($20 million for productions in low income communities or distressed area or isolated area of distress) of a qualified film or television production. The cost of the production above the dollar limitation is capitalized and recovered under the taxpayer's normal method of accounting. I believe that section 181 remains an appropriately targeted provision, designed to encourage television and film producers to stay here in the United States and keep those jobs in our communities. In the last decades, New York City and in particular my home borough of Queens has seen a resurgent television and film production sector bring new jobs and revenue into the community. Film production jobs in New York grew by nearly 25 percent between 2008 and 2011, at a time when private sector employment was falling. This bill will help to ensure that those jobs stay here in the U.S. The bill we are introducing today also includes a new feature to extend section 181 benefits to live theatrical productions. As with films, theater not only provides cultural benefits but also provides economic benefits to local communities in the U.S. For example, according to the Broadway League, Broadway contributed $11 billion in 2012-13 to New York City's economy on top of ticket sales and supports 86,000 jobs. And the benefits are not limited to New York. Traveling Broadway shows contributed almost $3.4 billion to the U.S. economy, which helps sustain regional and local theatres, allowing them to offer their cultural events. Live theatre audiences make numerous ancillary purchases, including restaurants, hotels, parking, taxis and souvenirs. Unfortunately, as with film, other countries are becoming more aggressive in attracting theatrical production overseas. This is important because future income associated with a production, such as licensing fees and royalties, return to the country of the production's origin. Thus, as more original productions move overseas, the U.S. will lose tax revenue associated with those productions. To help prevent this from occurring and to allow investors to recoup their risky investment more quickly, we believe it is important to extend section 181 to theatrical productions. Finally, it is important to note that, while both film and television production and theatre production are inherently risky capital- intensive businesses, neither industry qualifies for bonus depreciation that covered virtually every other American industry. Section 181 acts similarly to bonus depreciation to allow investors in these uniquely American industries to recoup their investments more rapidly. This can aid the decision to green-light a project or to produce it in the U.S. This will have ripple effects across the economy by generating revenue and jobs for a range of local businesses, such as caterers, hotels, equipment rentals, etc. This legislation works to protect these important industries and stem the flood of production to non-U.S. locations. Section 181, which expired at the end of 2013, should be extended and expanded as soon as possible in order to encourage domestic investment and keep television, film and theatrical production jobs in the United States.

Mr. CROWLEY

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Speaker, today, June 12, 2014 I missed a recorded vote, rollcall No. 308, the motion to recommit H.R. 4457. I would have voted ``yes'' on this measure.

Mr. CROWLEY

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Barbara Corker in recognition of her year of service as the New York Department President of the American Legion Auxiliary. Barbara Corker is a truly remarkable person. Barbara has been a member of the Throggs Neck Memorial Unit #1456, Bronx County for 35 years through the eligibility of her late father, George Farrell who served in the United States Army during WWII. Over these many years, she has worked tirelessly on behalf of veterans and their families throughout New York State. She served as First District President three times before serving as Department First, Second and Third Vice President. In 2009, as a member of the Throggs Neck Memorial Unit #1456, she was awarded the National Award for National Security for Best Overall National Security Program activities in the Eastern Division. In 2011, Barbara was awarded the National Award for Veterans Affairs & Rehabilitation for Best Overall VA&R Program in the Eastern Division. This past year, Barbara has focused her energy on Operation Comfort Warriors (OCW). OCW is a program dedicated to meeting the needs of wounded, injured or ill military personnel by providing them with comfort items not usually supplied by the government. Like President Corker's personal motto, OCW was built on Love, Loyalty and Friendship. Under her guidance, Operation Comfort Warriors has raised $50,000 so far, and is expected to continue growing. Barbara truly exemplifies the American Legion Auxiliary's motto of ``Service, Not Self''. She has served as Department Chairman for Cancer Awareness, Children & Youth and Membership. Barbara is a Certified Leadership Instructor. She has served as a housemother for the Empire Girls State Program and has been an instructor at the American Legion Auxiliary College. Her lifelong commitment to improve and support the lives of others, particularly those who have served our great country, reflects the best of our citizenry. Mr. Speaker, I join with her family, friends and Auxiliary members in celebrating Barbara Corker for her selfless contributions, leadership and accomplishments serving our veterans.

Mr. CROWLEY

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor a real American hero-- Queens' own Jeanne Manford. In 1972, Jeanne's openly gay son, Morty Manford, was beaten during a gay rights protest. That year, Jeanne marched with Morty in one of New York's earliest Pride parades. She carried a now-famous sign that read, ``Parents of Gays Unite in Support for Our Children.'' The phrase sparked Jeanne to found the organization Parents, Family and Friends of Lesbians and Gays, now known as PFLAG. Our Queens chapter was cofounded by Jeanne and Councilman Danny Dromm, who founded the Queens Pride Parade. Today, I introduce a resolution honoring Jeanne, and this Sunday, I will march in the Queens Pride Parade, remembering that my neighbor, Jeanne Manford, opened doors that led to progress we have seen these last few decades. I will march with the pride of knowing I live in a nation where history moves us toward accepting all people as equals, regardless of race, religion, sexual orientation or gender identity. Thank you, Jeanne.

Mr. CROWLEY

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Chair, I move to strike the requisite number of words.

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Chair, my initial intention was to offer an amendment today, but after consultation with both the offices of the chair and the ranking member, I now rise for the purpose of entering into a colloquy with Chairman Wolf and with Ranking Member Fattah. Seven years ago when the House considered reauthorization of the America COMPETES Act, I offered an amendment at that time with my colleagues, Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords and Congressman Jerry McNerney, to correct a longstanding inequity at the National Science Foundation. Unlike their counterparts of the Historically Black Colleges and Universities and Tribal Colleges and Universities, Hispanic-Serving Institutions have not benefited from a specific program at the NSF to provide them with the grants for research, curriculum, and infrastructure development. The amendment corrected this inequity, requiring the NSF to create a separate program for HSIs. It was adopted and it became law at that time. To this day, the NSF has not implemented the programs as codified in law and funding has yet to be provided. Hispanic-Serving Institutions serve the majority of nearly 2 million Latino students enrolled in college today. My district alone has about 10,000 students attending Hispanic-Serving Institutions offering degrees in the field of science. Without access to targeted grants, HSIs have difficulty increasing the ranks of Latinos in the STEM fields, where they have been historically underrepresented. We must ensure the Latinos, the youngest and fastest-growing ethnic group in our Nation, are prepared with the knowledge and skills that will contribute to our Nation's future, economic strength, security, and global leadership. I would like to work with Chairman Wolf and Ranking Member Fattah to aim for a dedicated stream of funding at the NSF to support STEM education programs at Hispanic-Serving Institutions. At this time, I would be pleased to yield to Ranking Member Fattah.

Mr. CROWLEY. Thank you, Mr. Fattah. I would also like to yield to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf).

Mr. CROWLEY. I thank the chair and the ranking member for agreeing to work towards this funding stream, and with that, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. CROWLEY

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to the life and service of Lou Durante. Lou was a beloved member of the Bronx community and passed away this year at 85 years of age. Lou was born in East Harlem and lived most of his life in Pelham Bay. He was immensely proud of his country and served with distinction and valor during World War II, when he was stationed in Europe. After finishing his service, Lou returned to the United States and began his career as an electrician. He also joined the Lawrence Keane Memorial Post 1458, where he was a member for 65 distinguished years, recently serving as Commander. I will never forget the passion that Lou displayed for his fellow veterans, past and present, including his efforts to recognize deceased veterans on a monument in Keane Square Park. While visiting the monument during one of the annual ceremonies that Lou put together, I could see firsthand how lucky the Lawrence Keane Memorial Post and the Bronx were to have someone like Lou, who did so much for his community. Lou's efforts went far beyond the monument at Keane Square Park. He also made sure current Bronx veterans and residents had a second home at the Lawrence Keane Memorial Post. Year after year, Lou worked with local leaders and elected officials to ensure the post had the funding necessary to remain a place where both veterans and community members could come together. Mr. Speaker, Lou's commitment to both community and country was, and will continue to be, an inspiration to all of us. I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring the life and legacy of Commander Lou Durante. May he rest in peace.