Joe Crowley

Mr. CROWLEY

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Speaker, it was 50 years ago that then-President Lyndon Johnson declared a war on poverty. I rise today to join my colleagues in recognizing the 50th anniversary of this declaration, this promise that America will be a better place for the generations that come after us. I join them in restating our commitment to fighting for policies that lift all Americans up. That American Dream that we so often speak of, it only happens if we embrace national initiatives that respect and encourage that dream-- guaranteeing a fair wage, promoting educational opportunity, and investing in an economy that works for the 21st century. That is what we should be spending our time on here in Congress, not gutting consumer and safety protections, or political distractions like we see on this week's agenda. I am not worried that the Republican Party has surrendered in the war on poverty; I am worried that they were never interested in it to begin with. A life in poverty shouldn't be a life sentence with no future, but for too many Americans, that is exactly what it is. Mr. Speaker, 46.5 million Americans live in poverty today; 16 million of those are children. In my hometown of New York City, that is one in three children. One in three children. These families, these children, find themselves trapped in poverty, and they need a government that is willing to help them out of that morass. Helping those in need has long been a part of our country's philosophy. That is why we have unemployment insurance for when workers lose a job through no fault of their own. That is why we have Social Security so that seniors no longer have to live out their final days in grinding poverty. That is why we have SNAP benefits so that no child goes hungry in the richest Nation on Earth. These programs and other lifelines are under threat, putting millions of Americans in danger of slipping further into poverty. We cannot let that happen. We cannot let the threads of our social safety net slip apart. We have to make sure that a hard day's work pays enough to make ends meet. Today, we have millions of Americans who are the working poor. That means they get up every morning, get dressed, go to work, and they put in 40-plus hours of work--or I would suggest even more--every week, but they are not making enough money to pay the bills or even meet basic needs like food and shelter. To me, that is not how America should be. If you work a full-time job, you should be able to feed and support your family, but the fact is, someone who works full time on minimum wage only makes about $14,000 a year--$14,000 a year. That is just not enough money, no matter how many ways you slice it to make ends meet, and it is definitely not enough to take care of children or families. It shouldn't be this way. For all of our differences, we should be united in the desire to give our children a better way of life than we had. That is what I know my grandparents were thinking when they immigrated here from Ireland, just like many others. They passed the Statue of Liberty, the famous signal of hope and opportunity. The words at the base say, ``Give me your tired, your poor.'' The Statue of Liberty doesn't say we should forget about poor children. No, it says give us your tired, give us your poor. Give us. Imagine what a wonderful message that is, that America is actually about helping the poor. It is because that is who we are as Americans. That is what the war on poverty demands of us, living up to the ideals we have set for our country. I urge every one of my colleagues to look inside themselves and recommit themselves to fighting the war on poverty, a fight that, as President Johnson said, we cannot afford to lose.

Mr. CROWLEY

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time is remaining on both sides, for housekeeping purposes?

Mr. CROWLEY. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, we have all heard the outrage and the innuendos from my Republican colleagues and their chief mouthpiece, FOX News. The facts should show this is phony, a phony investigation against President Obama launched for political purposes: facts like the person who began these investigations was a self-described conservative Republican; facts like more than 500,000 pages of documents have been provided to Congress, and there is no smoking gun; facts like, of the five dozen interviews of IRS employees at 15 congressional hearings, that nothing was found. These are the facts, but I realize some will choose to not believe the facts versus fiction. Let me provide some basic commonsense information. The inspector general who oversees the IRS, someone who was appointed by then-President George W. Bush--someone who has admitted that he covered up political targeting of progressive groups in his report to Congress; someone who had a number of private meetings with the Republican chair of the Oversight Committee, Darrell Issa, and then came out to issue public statements as facts--this someone, J. Russell George, has testified under oath that he notified Congressman Darrell Issa of his investigation into the IRS in the summer of 2012. Do you know what else was happening in the summer of 2012? A very close Presidential election. Does anyone honestly think, if there was an actual scandal or an actual targeting of just Tea Party groups by the administration in the months and the weeks leading up to the 2012 elections when Barack Obama was going to the ballot, that Congressman Darrell Issa wouldn't blow the whistle and expose it when he was notified that an investigation was ongoing and occurring? It just doesn't pass the laugh test. This is another phony scam in the realm of phony scams my Republican colleagues make up to go after Democratic Presidents. But what is also interesting is that, just as the Republicans continue their crusade to discredit the IRS, the Republicans have rallied around their version of tax reform--I have a copy of the summation right here; this is just the summation--a radical version that will empower--empower--the IRS. This legislation that they are offering today will empower the IRS and raise taxes on families while cutting them for multinational corporations. For the past several years, the public has been told that the Republicans would try to rip the Tax Code out from its roots and that it would be rewritten by Democrats and Republicans together. Well, guess what. Democrats were never once invited to help draft, draft this bill. Speaker Boehner even dismissed Democratic criticism of the process by saying, ``Blah, blah, blah.'' So what is the result? A radical Republican tax plan that will, if enacted, end the tax break for families to deduct their State and local income taxes that they already paid in taxes to the States and local governments. It will slash the mortgage interest deduction for homeowners. It will create a new tax on Social Security. It will tax workers for the health care offered by their employer. It will increase taxes on hundreds of thousands of our military families. It will institute the chained CPI to raise taxes, and it is also known to reduce veterans' and Social Security benefit checks. This really does beg the question: Whose side are our Republican colleagues on? They try to look populist by creating false and fake scandals and bashing the IRS, but in reality, their words and actions mask their bill to empower the IRS and radically redesign the Tax Code, making families pay more so international corporations can pay less. That is the real scandal here this afternoon, Mr. Speaker. With that, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Speaker, I just want to remind the gentleman from Ohio that this tax bill, know as the Tax Reform Act of 2014, which was made public today, will be a sucker punch to the guts of families who live in higher tax States, like Illinois, Wisconsin, Nebraska, New York, and Ohio. All of these States have representation from the Republican Party on the Ways and Means Committee. They helped to draft this legislation. The question is: Whose side are they on? With that, Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Washington State (Mr. McDermott). (Mr. McDERMOTT asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. CROWLEY. The only threat, Mr. Speaker, to the freedoms of Americans is not the bill we are discussing on the floor today but the bill that was announced this afternoon, the Tax Reform Act of 2014--the freedom of Americans to purchase their first homes, the freedom of Americans not to have attacks placed on their health care. Those are the types of freedoms that are being threatened today. With that, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Becerra), the chair of the Democratic Caucus of the House of Representatives.

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. My good friend from Louisiana would continue to have you believe that only right-wing and conservative groups were being investigated when in fact he knows and we know that it went well beyond that. There were progressive groups who were also subject to this investigation. Mr. Speaker, let me also point out to my friend from Louisiana, he mentioned that maybe members of the Democratic Caucus had not yet perused the Republican Tax Reform Act of 2014. I would just point out for the record that I am assuming he read the proposed regulations. He mentioned that money was not mentioned, when in fact on the first page, in the fourth standout: Contributions of money or anything of value to, or solicitation of contributions on behalf of, a candidate, political organization, or any other section 501(c) organization engaged in candidate-related political activity. So money is mentioned on the first page, just to set the record straight, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, this Republican radical tax plan will, for the first time, tax workers for their health insurance benefits that they are provided through their job and tax previously untaxed Social Security income. The question, again, is: Whose side are they on? With that, Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey, Mr. Bill Pascrell, my friend.

Mr. CROWLEY. I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. CROWLEY. I yield the gentleman an additional 1 minute.

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Speaker, how much time is left on both sides?

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from New Mexico (Ms. Michelle Lujan Grisham).

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Obviously my Republican colleagues don't want to talk about their radical Republican tax bill. I understand. I know why, because it is an actual bill on the American taxpaying public, a bill that would tax Social Security and would eliminate tax deductions on State and local taxes that taxpayers have already paid. It will implement chainsaw CPI. Instead, they want to focus on a phony scandal--I understand it--and not this extreme scandal Republican tax bill, a bill they will force upon the American public. With that, Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Van Hollen).

Mr. CROWLEY

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may consume. I thank the gentleman from Michigan, the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, for his responsible commitment to vote for this bill today. I wish I could say that a majority of his party was going to be responsible and vote for this bill today, but I cannot. First, I am pleased that the Republican Party seems to be shedding at least part of its extremist Tea Party ideology in the prevailing belief of holding the Nation hostage to meet the whims of a select few. Now, I would just like to take a moment to explain what the House is and is not voting on today. We are voting today to ensure that our country can pay the bills we have already incurred--not new bills, old bills, so that Social Security checks can continue to be mailed, so that doctors serving Medicare patients will be reimbursed for their services, so that veterans' pensions and compensation will be paid out, and so income tax refund checks will continue to be processed and paid out. What we are not voting for--what we are not voting for--we are not voting for a bill to spend money. Our Republican colleagues will argue that this bill allows the Federal Government to continue to borrow and, therefore, spend more money. They say tax revenues come in and even more goes out in spending for government services and programs, services and programs that we all agree benefit our mutual constituents. So what is the alternative the Republicans would offer instead? My Republican colleagues would offer default, because not supporting this bill would mean you support default and defaulting on our Nation's debt. Default would mean taxpayer dollars would still come into the government. We would still collect. The IRS would still collect taxes, but no money would go out. There would be no services or programs that benefit our constituents; they would be shut down. Do you all remember how angry the country was during the Republican shutdown of our government when military death benefits were not paid? That would only be magnified under a default led by the Republican side of the aisle. Not only would there be no death benefits, there would be no veterans' benefits at all, and no money for VA hospitals, doctors, and nurses. And a default wouldn't just affect our military and our veterans. There would be no funds for food inspectors, no Pell grants, no air traffic controllers or any other government service because of the default. Let's be clear. If you liked the Republican-engineered shutdown of our government, you will love the default the Republicans who would vote ``no'' today would perpetuate on the American public. This is a debt that the Republican caucus helped create. You own a portion of this debt. The American people are watching this vote. They are confounded, once again, that the majority of the majority will vote to default. The overwhelming majority of the minority will vote not to default. I ask the American people, which party is the responsible party? The answer is clear. The Democratic Party will be responsible today. We will vote overwhelmingly for this bill not to default on our Nation's debt, not to raise interest rates on our constituents, and not to raise the cost of money for the government to borrow, either. I yield as much time as the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Neal) may consume.

Mr. CROWLEY. I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentlelady from California, Nancy Pelosi, the leader of the Democratic Caucus in the House.

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Speaker, I would inquire as to the time remaining on both sides.

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin), the ranking member of the Ways and Means Committee. (Mr. LEVIN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), the minority whip.

Mr. CROWLEY. I yield an additional 3 minutes to the gentleman.

Mr. CROWLEY. I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentleman.

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters), ranking member of the Financial Services Committee

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Honda).

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).

Mr. CROWLEY. Does the gentleman from Michigan have any additional speakers?

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close as well, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. In closing, I appreciate all of my colleagues coming down to the floor this afternoon to speak in favor of this proposed bill. I do think it is noteworthy to point out that only the gentleman from Michigan has come down to speak on behalf of the majority today and ably, I should say, he is voting for this bill, and I appreciate his support. But I notice that no one took time in opposition on the other side of the aisle. Maybe they just don't really care as much about this issue as we thought they did. But the reality is, as I have said before, every vote against this bill is a vote for default. The Republican colleagues have an answer for that. They have a plan. They intend to default some day so they have a plan. They have a bill they call the Full Faith and Credit Act. We call it the ``Pay China First Act'' because what it does is it says, in the event of a default, we will pay those people who own our bonds, we will pay foreign governments first, and everyone else gets put down to the bottom of the barrel. But they have a plan; the Republicans have a plan in the case that we default. Let me say, Mr. Speaker, I think it is totally irresponsible to even have had a debate on this floor on a bill that would determine the payments of our debt in lieu of default. I think it is irresponsible. The fact that we have had this man-made brinkmanship is irresponsible. Once again, the Republican Party and their caucus is showing that they are not responsible enough to be ruling and to be governing here in the House of Representatives. Mr. Speaker, with that, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. CROWLEY

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend and colleague from Massachusetts for yielding me this time. This legislation is commonly referred to as the ``farm bill,'' but it is also a ``food bill.'' On that note, it falls short. To be clear, this is miles ahead of where we started with what I consider a truly heartless Republican proposal, and I know that our conferees worked hard to make improvements to this bill. In particular, I want to thank Collin Peterson and the Members of the Democratic side of the aisle who are dedicated to work to improve this bill. But it still leaves too many families behind. The SNAP cut in this bill may seem small on paper, but it is not to the families that it will affect. It is not to the food banks that are already stretched well beyond their means. In New York City, 280,000 households are expected to see their benefits drop under this bill. Those are benefits that don't go anywhere near far enough to begin with. We see every day in New York City how deep the need for food assistance is. Our food banks and community hunger organizations are doing everything they can to provide food to hungry families. They are joined by citizen heroes like Jorge Munoz, who I was honored to host last night as my guest to the State of the Union. Jorge has been called ``an angel in Queens'' for his work in feeding the hungry. He saw a need on the streets of Queens and he jumped in to fill it, serving home-cooked meals out of his truck to what started as a small group of homeless and unemployed New Yorkers. As word grew of his generosity, so did the crowds eager just for something to get through that night. Since 2004, Jorge has served over 225,000 meals on the streets of Queens, New York. He and I know there are more people out there who are hungry, who are cold, and who are in need of every bit of assistance that they get.