Wm. Clay

Mr. CLAY

Mr. CLAY. Madam Chair, I thank the gentleman for yielding. The majority's plan to stop national safeguards will harm real Americans. Regulations affect real people, not just balance sheets. When we look at the cost of regulations, we have to examine more than cold dollar amounts. We also have to look at the benefits. We have to look at the real lives saved and at the real catastrophic injuries prevented. We have to look at the real American families who live healthier, happier, and safer lives because of Federal regulations, regulations that protect them in their homes, regulations that protect them at their jobs, and regulations that protect them in their communities, places of worship, the roads they drive on, the stores where they shop, the schools where their children learn, and the parks where they play. The majority's plan will have real negative consequences on the economy and on the health and safety of all Americans, especially those among us who need the most help. The majority's plan would prevent HUD from updating their housing subsidy rates, and more families would be without a place to live. Worker safety will be jeopardized because the majority's plan would block workplace regulations. Children will be put at greater risk because the majority's plan would prevent the Federal Government from protecting them. Madam Chair, we need to work together to create jobs and protect American families, and we don't have to choose between the two.

Mr. CLAY

Mr. CLAY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 459. This bill directs the Comptroller General to conduct an audit of the Federal Reserve. Since 1982, the GAO has had authority to audit the Federal Reserve Board and Bank, subject to exceptions for monetary policy-related decisions and activities. In 2009, Congress provided authority for the GAO to audit actions by the Fed under section 13(3) of the Federal Reserve Act to lend to any single and specific partnership or corporation, notwithstanding the generally applicable monetary policy-related exceptions. In 2010, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform Act added new audit authorities. In addition, GAO has conducted a number of other reviews of Federal Reserve activities; but we need a full audit, and I urge my colleagues to vote for the bill.

Mr. CLAY

Mr. CLAY. Mr. Speaker, I cannot believe we are asked for a 31st time to repeal the Affordable Care Act. This isn't just a policy issue. This is a moral test. This is one of the great moral tests of our time. Those who vote to repeal the Affordable Care Act are failing that moral test. They are utterly failing that test. Paying health insurance premiums and other health care bills has become very difficult for American families. Premiums have gone up each year and the cost of health care has escalated. Insurance companies have shifted costs to consumers through increases in deductibles and copayments and decreases in covered services. Low- and middle-income families need relief from skyrocketing health care costs. The constitutional ACA provides real relief to American families. First, the Affordable Care Act provides direct financial relief to millions of insured American families that struggle to pay health insurance premiums today. The new law allows families to shop for a plan in new State insurance exchanges and allows them to receive a big discount on their premiums. The ACA protects people from high deductibles, high copayments, and unexpected gaps in their insurance coverage in three ways. It eliminates lifetime and annual limits on how much an insurance plan will pay for covered benefits. That means payments won't suddenly run out. It caps how much a person must spend each year on deductibles and copayments for covered benefits. That means that families won't be forced to lose their homes because they get sick. And it provides additional help with out-of-pocket costs for lower-income families. Second, the ACA expands the affordable insurance options to families who could not afford coverage before. Medicaid will now be available to families at or lower than the 133 percent of the Federal poverty level. For people with incomes above that level and up to 400 percent of poverty, new premium tax credits will help them afford coverage. Reducing the number of uninsured will help reduce the ``hidden health tax'' that is imposed on insured families. We all pay higher premiums to pay for the care of the uninsured. Third, the Affordable Care Act will slow the growth of underlying health care costs and help all Americans. As I have said on this floor before, the ACA is the greatest improvement in women's health in decades. Under the ACA, millions of women are gaining access to affordable health care coverage. Women will not have to pay more than men for the same insurance policy, and women will not be denied coverage because they are sick or have preexisting conditions. Women will be guaranteed preventive services, such as mammograms and cervical cancer screenings, with no deductibles or copays. Senior women will have access to coordinated care. Senior women will save thousands of dollars as reform closes the Medicare prescription drug coverage gap. Family caregivers--who are typically women--will benefit from new supports that help them care for their loved ones while also taking care of themselves. Mr. Speaker, as the great Progressive Hubert Humphrey said: ``The moral test of government is how that government treats those who are in the dawn of life, the children; those who are in the twilight of life, the elderly; those who are in the shadows of life, the sick; the needy and the handicapped.'' By voting to repeal the ACA, my colleagues are failing that test, Mr. Speaker. They are failing that moral test.

Mr. CLAY

Mr. CLAY. Mr. Speaker, as a member of the Oversight Committee, I know that the gunwalking operations conducted by the ATF under both the previous and current administrations were absolutely wrong. But the leadership of this House is focused on shameful election-year political posturing instead of the real issue. The Justice Department, long ago, ended the practice of allowing these guns to ``walk'' across the border, putting communities in Mexico at great risk. But the same people who have relentlessly pursued a baseless, partisan attack on Attorney General Holder and the President have ignored the desperate pleas of the Mexican Government--to strengthen American gun laws and curb the gun trafficking that gave rise to the strategy in the first place. But focusing on the real issue would take time away from their playing politics with their oversight authority. Those on the other side of the aisle claim to be concerned about powerful assault weapons crossing the border into Mexico illegally, but how can they be completely fine with those same powerful assault weapons being sold right here in this country legally, putting our communities at even greater risk? This is nothing more than a political witch hunt. The disgraceful posturing that I witnessed at last week's markup has been continued on the floor today. I agree that it never should have come to this, but we are here debating this resolution solely because of the majority. They created the scandal and produced a showdown during an election season just to smear an honorable, dedicated public servant and to embarrass his boss. I urge my colleagues to reject this nakedly partisan abuse of power.

Mr. CLAY

Mr. CLAY. Madam Speaker, tomorrow this House is about to do something unprecedented and unwarranted. Motivated solely by politics, the leadership of this House is planning to smear a dedicated public servant. For the first time in our history, they are planning to hold the Attorney General of the United States in contempt of Congress. This is shameful. Not even during the nakedly partisan speakership of Newt Gingrich has this House even considered such a resolution. But even more shameful is that they are ignoring the real issue, the easily available assault weapons and the gun related violence that continues unabated in this country. Madam Speaker, they need to put aside politics and start caring about the safety of all of our citizens.

Mr. CLAY

Mr. CLAY. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. As a member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, I'm pleased to join my colleagues in consideration of H.R. 3412, to designate the facility of the U.S. Postal Service located at 1421 Veterans Memorial Drive in Abbeville, Louisiana, as the Sergeant Richard Franklin Abshire Post Office Building. As was mentioned, Sergeant Richard Abshire served as the platoon sergeant with Company G, Second Battalion, Fourth Marines, Ninth Marines Amphibious Brigade, during the Vietnam War. As was also mentioned, he was in a heavy firefight. Upon entering the village, Sergeant Abshire and his unit came under heavy enemy fire. The heavy small arms and automatic weapons fire halted the company, and Sergeant Abshire was directed to establish a defensive position with advantageous firing positions. As the hostilities increased, it became apparent that the Vietnamese were preparing to launch a counterattack. Sergeant Abshire exposed himself to enemy fire to deploy the grenades that temporarily disoriented the enemy. Returning to his unit, Sergeant Abshire moved along the line, shouting words of encouragement, and directing his unit's fire. The sergeant then provided covering fire as his unit pulled back. After expending his remaining ammunition, he attempted to rejoin his unit when he was mortally wounded in the head by a burst of enemy fire. Sergeant Abshire was posthumously awarded the Navy Cross for his heroic actions leading his unit and ensuring their return to safety. Madam Speaker, if anyone deserves a postal facility named after them, it is Sergeant Abshire. I urge the passage of the bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CLAY. Madam Speaker, I have no further speakers. I urge passage of H.R. 3412, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. CLAY. Madam Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mr. CLAY

Mr. CLAY. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. As a member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, I rise to join my colleagues in the consideration of H.R. 3501, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 125 Kerr Avenue in Rome City, Indiana, as the SPC Nicholas Scott Hartge Post Office. The measure before us was first introduced on November 18 by my colleague Representative Marlin Stutzman, and in accordance with the committee's requirements, this bill is cosponsored by all members of the Indiana delegation and was reported out of the committee by unanimous consent on February 7, 2012. Nicholas Hartge was adamant about joining the military after the profound personal effect that the September 11 attacks had on him. He enlisted in the Army before graduating from East Noble High School in Kendallville, Indiana, in 2005. In August of 2006, he was deployed and stationed in Baghdad. On May 14, 2007, Hartge was killed when the vehicle he was riding in came in contact with an improvised explosive device. Four other soldiers on patrol with Hartge sustained burn wounds on as much as 70 percent of their bodies from the attack. Nicholas Scott Hartge made the ultimate sacrifice for his country, and his dedication and courage are a testament to the men and women of the United States Armed Forces. For this reason, the post office in Rome City, Indiana, should be named in his honor. And I ask that we pass the underlying bill to honor the service, sacrifice, and valor of Specialist Nicholas Scott Hartge. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CLAY. Madam Speaker, I have no further requests for time. I urge passage of H.R. 3501, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. CLAY. Madam Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mr. CLAY

Mr. CLAY. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Florida, and I ask that we pass the underlying bill without reservation to recognize Reverend Abe Brown's contributions, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. CLAY. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. As a member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, I am pleased to join my colleagues in the consideration of H.R. 3276, a bill to designate the facility of the U.S. Postal Service on Hillsborough Avenue in Tampa, Florida, as the Reverend Abe Brown Post Office Building. This bill meets the requirements of our committee. At this time, I would like to yield to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Castor) such time as she may consume.

Mr. CLAY. Madam Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mr. CLAY

Mr. CLAY. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. As a member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, I join my colleagues in the consideration of H.R. 3772, a bill to designate the facility of the U.S. Postal Service at 150 South Union Street in Canton, Mississippi, as the First Sergeant Landres Cheeks Post Office Building. The measure was first introduced on January 13, 2012, by my colleague, Representative Bennie Thompson. In accordance with committee requirements, the bill is cosponsored by all members of the Mississippi delegation and was reported out of the committee by unanimous consent on February 7, 2012. Madam Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Thompson).

Mr. CLAY. Madam Speaker, we have no further requests for time. I think my friend and colleague from Mississippi has sufficiently given us the reasons why this House should adopt this resolution, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. CLAY. Madam Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mr. CLAY

Mr. CLAY. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I want to thank the chairman of the full committee, Mr. Issa, and the chair of the subcommittee, Mr. Gowdy, for working closely with our side on this bill so that we could get it to the floor today. I also thank the ranking member of the full committee, Mr. Cummings, and Mr. Davis, the subcommittee ranking member, for their very important consultation. H.R. 2297, which was introduced by my friend and colleague, Congresswoman Norton, will allow development of the waterfront area in Southwest Washington, DC. The bill makes technical changes concerning land owned on the Southwest waterfront by the District of Columbia since the early 1960s. The legislation that transferred the land to the District contained restrictions typical of the pre-Home Rule period. H.R. 2297 updates that obsolete legislation to allow for the highest and best use of the land. The restrictions serve no Federal purpose. However, the unintended effect was to make a wasted asset of land that could be productive and revenue- and jobs-producing. The relevant Federal agencies have been consulted on H.R. 2297 and have raised no objections. The bill will allow mixed-use development on the waterfront for the first time. It will create jobs and raise local revenue at a time when they are needed most. The Federal Government has no interest in the Southwest waterfront other than the Maine lobster memorial and the Titanic memorial, which the District and the National Park Service have worked together to preserve. Madam Speaker, the bill expands the types of goods that can be sold at the fish market on the waterfront in a market well known in the region. This is a noncontroversial bill that removes out-of-date restrictions and involves no cost to the Federal Government. At this time, I'd like to yield to the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton) for such time as she may consume.

Mr. CLAY. I urge passage of the bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. CLAY

Mr. CLAY. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. CLAY. Madam Chairman, the American Community Survey is absolutely vital. That's why I'm kind of stunned at what I'm hearing. It not only allowed us to replace the long form census, making it easier for everyone to participate in the decennial census, but it provides all Americans with important information. But one particular area is of great concern to me, and that's the use of ACS data in determining the distribution of a substantial proportion of Federal assistance. Now, we talk about accountability here. Well, let's start being accountable. Put your actions to words. In fiscal year 2008, 184 Federal domestic assistance programs used ACS-related data to help guide the distribution of $416 billion. That's not chump change; it's taxpayer dollars. This represents 29 percent of all Federal assistance. ACS-guided grants accounted for $389.2 billion, or 69 percent of all Federal grant funding. Most of ACS-guided Federal assistance goes to State governments through a handful of large formula grant programs to aid low-income households and support highway infrastructure. Medicaid alone accounts for 63 percent of ACS-guided funding. ACS-guided funding is highly concentrated in a small number of programs, recipient States, departments, and budget functions. State per capita ACS-guided funding is positively related to income inequality--high annual pay, high poverty--Medicaid income limits, and the percent of the population that is rural. The higher any of these measures, the higher per capita funding tends to be. The ACS is absolutely vital. If you want to eliminate that, I'm sure you have certain reasons to do it, but it will take away an essential tool for us to be accountable with taxpayer dollars. So sign your name on the bottom line if you want to, but I suggest you think twice before you eliminate the ACS. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. CLAY

Mr. CLAY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to have my name removed as a cosponsor from H.R. 3359.

Mr. CLAY

Mr. CLAY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Missouri's own Class 5 State Basketball Champions, the McCluer North High School Stars. McCluer North basketball and winning championships have become synonymous with one another, thanks to the tireless leadership of head coach Randy Reed and his group of determined and talented young men. High school students Alex Bluiett, Greg Brown, Galen Brown, Terrance Bush, Damon Clemons, Jacari Finley, Tremayne Garrett, Jordon Granger, Dorian Holland, Keith Jones, Mario McCoy, Bryon Ray, Zac Taylor, and Latron Thomas are now State champions. The Stars' run of excellence is unparalleled. In the past 6 years, McCluer North has won no fewer than 3 State championships and played for the State title 4 times, winning the State's most daunting district tournament 6 of the past 7 years. This season alone, the Stars won 26 straight games, culminating in their heroic victory over their rivals, the Nixa Eagles. Their recent victory marks a fitting end to a season of hard work and perseverance. Their combination of athleticism, experience, depth, and talent proved to be more than their most challenging competitors could handle. Mr. Speaker, Coach Reed and the men of the McCluer North Stars are true examples of sportsmanship and character, and I urge my colleagues to join me in honoring their remarkable achievement.

Mr. CLAY

Mr. CLAY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Missouri's own Class 4 State Basketball Champions, the Soldan High School Tigers. Soldan High School's convincing 55 42 victory over Springfield Hillcrest at the Mizzou Arena in Columbia was the culmination of three years hard work and dedication, resulting in the Tiger's first state championship in basketball in 31 years. Under the leadership of Head Coach Justin Tatum, the Tigers defeated some of the best teams in the nation, outscoring their playoff opponents by an unbelievable average of 24 points a game. The men of the Soldan High School Tigers are more than merely teammates, they are a band of brothers. Many of the Tigers have played on the same teams since grade school, their recent victory a fitting reward for years of dedication to both each other and the sport of basketball. Especially for Soldan's nine-man senior class of Devin Booker, Aaron Diamini, Kawan Griffin, Randy Holmes, Paul McRoberts, Jibreel Muhammad, Partice Sanders, Elva Shelton, and Rashad Simmons, the season, and their high school careers, ended exactly how they hoped they would. Mr. Speaker, Coach Tatum and the men of the Soldan High School Tigers are true examples of character and sportsmanship, and I urge my colleagues to join me in honoring their remarkable achievement.

Mr. CLAY

Mr. CLAY. I thank the gentleman from Michigan for yielding. Madam Chair, my friends on the other side of the aisle want to repeal the Affordable Care Act. Since straight-out repeal didn't work, they are trying to dismantle it bit by bit. I'd like to focus on the effects of the ACA, or the Affordable Care Act, on women's health. The ACA is the greatest improvement for women's health in decades. The health care needs of women are greater. Historically, women have played a central role in coordinating health care for family members. Here are just some of the ways that the ACA, a bill that I am proud to have helped pass, will improve women's health: Women will not have to pay more than men for the same insurance policies. Imagine that. Women will not be denied coverage because they are sick or have preexisting conditions. Oh, that's an improvement. Women will be guaranteed preventive services with no deductibles or co- pays. More low-income women will have timely access to family-planning services. Wow, miracle of miracles. Nursing mothers will have the right to a reasonable break time and a place to express breast milk at work. Pregnant and parenting women on Medicaid will get access to needed services. That would be an improvement. Senior women will save thousands of dollars as reform closes the Medicare prescription drug coverage gap. And women will be able to comparison shop when choosing health plans for their families. Family caregivers, who are typically women, will benefit from new supports that help them care for their loved ones while also taking care of themselves. Madam Chair, as a son, as a father, and as an American, I strongly support the ACA and its improvements to health care for everyone, especially women. Dismantling the act, whether through immediate repeal, lawsuits, or piece by piece, means losing those improvements, and that is unacceptable.