Yvette Clarke

Ms. CLARKE

Ms. CLARKE. Mr. Speaker, today I rise in opposition to H.R. 1797. This act is both dangerous and unconstitutional and violates the rights of women who are in need of an abortion. It is blatantly unconstitutional and in clear violation of more than 40 years of Supreme Court precedent that protect women's access to abortion prior to viability, that is, prior to 24 not 20 weeks. This precedent was first established in Roe v. Wade and affirmed in Planned Parenthood v. Casey. Make no mistake, pregnancy due to violent and unfortunate circumstances such as rape and incest happens to thousands of women every year, not to mention medical complications that imperil the life of the mother. Women impacted by rape and incest must not be further victimized by this misguided legislation. We must not allow our Nation's right to choose to be infringed upon by a minority of people in this Nation. We cannot let them bully the rest of the country into accepting their world view. That is why I will continue to support a woman's right to choose and stand in opposition to H.R. 1797, and I stand up for women's right to self-determination.

Ms. CLARKE

Ms. CLARKE. Let me thank you, Mr. Speaker. And I'd like to thank my colleague, Mr. Horsford of Nevada, and my colleague and neighbor from Brooklyn, New York, the Honorable Congressman Hakeem Jeffries, for yielding their time and for their tremendous leadership, week in and week out, in providing a view into the Congressional Black Caucus perspective on the issues of the day. Mr. Speaker, it has been nearly 5 years since our Nation experienced the worst financial calamity since the Great Depression. However, as our economy continues to recover, unemployment remains stubbornly high, sitting at 7.5 percent nationally, with unemployment at 13.2 percent and 9 percent, respectively, for African Americans and Latino Americans. As a member of the House Small Business Committee, I know the challenges facing our Nation's minority-owned small businesses and entrepreneurs, from access to capital, a problem for minority-owned and disadvantaged small businesses in the best of economic times, or a lack of access to knowledge and information of the available options to assist them. I understand that we must--that we must work increasingly and unceasingly to ensure that, even as the media focuses on the booming stock market, that our Nation's real job creators are not forgotten, not marginalized and overlooked. Their success is vital, not only for a more robust recovery, but it is to fully addressing our Nation's national employment crisis. Ironically enough, Mr. Speaker, this week is the 50th commemoration of National Small Business Week. It appears, though, that the Republican-led House is totally tone deaf to the millions of Americans still unable to find gainful employment, that not one of the bills before the House this week supports job creation, real job creation, nor do they rescind the harmful effects of the sequester, which, by almost every measure, has been clearly detrimental to our Nation's economy and is tantamount, it is tantamount to negligence. In my capacity as a member of the Small Business Committee, I've worked with my colleagues to promote all small businesses, especially minority, women, and veteran-owned small businesses in my district and across the Nation as they try to navigate these self-imposed and manufactured uncertain economic times. I am a strong supporter of the SCORE Program, which provides technical assistance necessary for small businesses in underserved communities to just get off the ground. I also work with the SBA and the SBA's Office of Advocacy to ensure that all the firms that qualify for SBA contracting and capital access programs are provided an equal opportunity for participation. Mr. Speaker, I have the honor and privilege of representing Brooklyn's Ninth Congressional District. My constituency includes an extremely large small business community with commerce corridors lined from block to block with small mom-and-pop businesses and storefronts. This unique community provides the foundation of not only the economic but the unique social fabric of Brooklyn. We must build on this foundation in Brooklyn, New York, and across our great Nation. Every day that the House majority focuses the people's time on issues that divide us is another day that our small businesses are treated as a subordinate concern. It is another day that our Nation's job-seekers spend time searching in vain, looking for the proverbial ``needle in the haystack,'' and another day that our Nation will have to wait for the engine that powers our economy to be firing on all cylinders. Mr. Speaker, as our Nation celebrates National Small Business Week, I look forward to a genuine debate that addresses the totality of our Nation's small business communities, and not cherry-picking the low- hanging fruit. I'd like to thank the Congressional Black Caucus, which, like myself, treats every week as Small Business Week, for focusing on this crucially important issue and for having me this evening. In closing, I just want to share with you that, as we go through the immigration debate, we acknowledge that oftentimes in the Black community much of our entrepreneurial spirit is found in those entrepreneurs who have come to the United States and find a niche market where they can provide goods, services, and products to people from their homes of origin and, by extension, to the rest of the Nation. I had the distinct honor and privilege of meeting a gentleman who immigrated to the United States from the island nation of Jamaica. One of the great delicacies, and they've actually become nationally renowned, it's called the beef patty. This gentleman's name is none other than Lowell Hawthorne, and he started with a small storefront in the Bronx, New York, and has now grown that storefront into a franchise opportunity that has made him, his family, and all those who have engaged very wealthy individuals, created job opportunities for hundreds of people and has provided one of the most delicious delicacies that one can ever taste. Lowell Hawthorne is truly an entrepreneur who has availed himself of small business support from the SBA and has been able to grow his business. This is a success story that can be modeled and patterned after. We need to make sure that those entrepreneurs who have ideas that are innovative and that are creative get the support they need to continue to build this great country of ours. I'd like to thank my colleague for anchoring this CBC Special Order.

Ms. CLARKE

Ms. CLARKE. Mr. Chair, I rise today to support the Polis Amendment to defund the 287(g) program, a program that promotes racial profiling and injustice. The 287(g) program allows local law enforcement to act as immigration officials, which has led to rampant abuses throughout the country, most notably in Arizona, where the practices under 287(g) led to an unprecedented civil rights investigation by the Department of Justice. As the Representative of the 9th Congressional District of New York, I have worked diligently to decrease the amount of racial profiling in New York City. I have worked to reduce the number of stop and frisks for the past year and eliminate the racial and ethnic intolerance that has plagued New York City and other cities around the country. By cutting the funding for a program that relies on racial profiling like 287(g), we are sending a clear message that we will not tolerate bigotry. Programs like 287(g) have created mistrust between Latino and other immigrant communities throughout the country and local law enforcement. Ending the 287(g) program will move our country in the right direction to repair the trust that has been lost and is a step forward in fixing our broken immigration system and restoring the rule of law. We must continue to work to build a supportive environment for immigrant and minority communities in every part of our civil society.

Ms. CLARKE

Ms. CLARKE. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained in my district and missed the votes on Monday, June 3, 2013. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall No. 184, H.R. 1206--Permanent Electronic Duck Stamp Act of 2013 and ``yea'' on rollcall No. 185, S. 622--Animal Drug and Animal Generic Drug User Fee Reauthorization Act of 2013.

Ms. CLARKE

Ms. CLARKE. Madam Chair, I rise today disappointed in last week's adoption of the Steve King Amendment to H.R. 2217, the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2014. This amendment would bar implementation of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrival, DACA, for DREAMers, prevent them from acquiring work permits, and eliminate the exercise of discretion to protect victims of trafficking and crime victims. Prosecutorial discretion and deferred action are done on a case-by- case basis and do not provide relief or legal status en masse. Instead, these practices ensure fair and just outcomes, and prompt law enforcement officials to closely consider compelling circumstances such as disability, age, or military service. This blatant attempt to undermine the Presidents' action to address certain aspects of our broken immigration system and to restrict certain benefits of deferred action shocks the conscience. There are thousands of young Americans without legal status who want to attend school, find jobs, and start families--to participate in the American Dream. The promise of deferred action and work authorization was affirmed by millions of Americans in November 2012. If we break this promise, we will have failed in our duty to a nation of immigrants from every part of world. As the only New York City Member of Congress on the House Homeland Security Committee, I understand the need to fund programs that keep us safe against the threat of both physical and cyber attacks. However, to hold DACA recipients hostage for politics is unconscionable. I represent one of the largest immigrant districts in the country, with many who are currently benefitting from DACA; I could not and did not support the King Amendment, nor did I vote for the underlying bill.

Ms. CLARKE

Ms. CLARKE. Today, I rise in opposition to this rule and the underlying bill, H.R. 1911, Smarter Solutions for Students Act, the so- called Republican solution to address the impending student loan interest rate raise. Despite their rhetoric, the Republicans do not want the American economy more competitive. If they did, they would not have introduced this bill. Under the current law, student loan interest rates are fixed. However, H.R. 1911 would change that and student loan interest rates will become variable rates based on the Treasury interest rate plus additional percentage points. This is truly a bait and switch. Students could start their college careers with a 5 percent student interest rate, but by the time they reach their senior year, have a 7.7 to 8.5 percent student loan rate. Education has traditionally been and still remains a path out of poverty and into the middle class. And it is middle class that has historically been the backbone of America society. Instead of doing the right thing by permanently lowering student loan interest rates, the Republicans have once again decided to do things the wrong way. The Republicans just don't get it. Oppose this rule and the underlying bill.

Ms. CLARKE

Ms. CLARKE. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 45--To Repeal the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and health care- related provisions in the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010. This legislation would completely repeal the Affordable Care Act, which was signed into law in 2010 and was declared constitutionally sound by the U.S. Supreme Court last year. The Affordable Care Act extends healthcare coverage to all Americans regardless of their gender, health condition or ability to pay. It is a disgrace that this country, which is the wealthiest country in the world, denies universal healthcare coverage to its citizens. Repealing the Affordable Care Act will allow this disgrace to continue. The Affordable Care Act is a good law. Because of the Affordable Care Act, Americans now have access to a wide variety of free preventive services; insurers can no longer drop women from coverage when they become pregnant; Medicare is stronger due to some of the cost savings and other provisions in the act; Seniors are paying less for prescription drugs; Americans no longer face lifetime limits on care; and families are receiving rebates from insurance companies, when they unfairly inflate their costs. In fact, thousands of people in my district, the 9th Congressional District of Brooklyn, New York, are already benefiting from the Affordable Care Act. An analysis done in March of 2012 showed that the health care reform law had already: Provided 390 small businesses in my district with tax credits to help maintain or expand health care coverage for their employees; Provided 5,100 young adults in my district with access to health insurance coverage under their parents' insurance plan; Provided Medicare preventive services, at no costs to the patient, for 46,000 seniors in the district; And, provided $2.5 million in public health grants for community health centers, hospitals, doctors, and other healthcare providers in the district to improve the community's health. I have always believed that healthcare is a fundamental right, not a privilege. And this is why I vehemently oppose H.R. 45--To Repeal the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. It is wrong, and it is a step backwards for our country.

Ms. CLARKE

Ms. CLARKE. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to voice my opposition to the proposed $20 billion in cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, also known as the SNAP program. This program currently provides food assistance to 47 million Americans who otherwise would not have access to one of the most basic human necessities--food. Two million low-income Americans--most of whom are working families with children, senior citizens, and people with disabilities--will lose their food assistance as a result of these cuts. Of that number, 200,000 children would also lose access to their free school meals because their eligibility for these meals is tied to their receipt of SNAP. Let me ask my Republican colleagues: How often do your children have to learn on empty stomachs or come home and study on empty stomachs? I dare say not often, if ever. But that is what the Republicans are proposing that we do to close to a quarter of a million children. They are asking them not only to learn on empty stomachs, but also to come home and study on empty stomachs. This cannot stand.

Ms. CLARKE

Ms. CLARKE. Mr. Speaker, today, I rise in opposition to H.R. 1406, The Working Families Flexibility Act. This bill is a sham! It does not offer working families flexibility, nor does it protect employee rights. But what it does is strip employees of their rights by eliminating the Federal Labor Standards Act statute guaranteeing overtime pay for time worked over 40 hours per week. It shifts control of overtime from a monetarily incentivized program for the employee to an employer-controlled one incentivized by cheaper labor and less need to hire more workers. This bill also contains no avenue for employees to file grievances if requests for time off are denied or not responded to. Under H.R. 1406, after the employee makes a request to use compensatory time, the employer's only responsibility is to permit the employee ``to use such time within a reasonable period after making the request if the use of the compensatory time does not unduly disrupt the operations of the employer.'' There is no responsibility on the part of the employer to respond in a timely manner or accommodate an employee request. H.R. 1406 turns back years of hard won victories for American workers and their families by undermining the Federal Labor Standards Act and giving the employer virtually complete control over when the overtime is used. The AFL-CIO, the Communication Workers of America, the National Partnership for Women & Families, and numerous other organizations oppose this bill. However, imagine my surprise when I received an e- mail from the U.S. Women's Chamber of Commerce also urging me to oppose this bill! As a rule, Chambers of Commerce usually support ``pro-employer'' bills. However, in this case, the U.S. Women's Chamber of Commerce wrote, ``all employers want as low a payroll expenditure as possible but there is a reason to be concerned that employers incentivized by H.R. 1406 would reward those employees who agree to ``comp time'' in lieu of overtime payments. Employers incentivized by a reduced payroll might well give ``comp time'' employees the preferred shifts, the needed hours, and the promotions. There is no protection in H.R. 1406 against this kind of employer behavior.'' Make no mistake about it--H.R. 1406 hurts American workers and their families. This bill is just another Republican attempt to destroy the American worker. So I ask my colleagues to join me in opposing H.R. 1406.

Ms. CLARKE

Ms. CLARKE. Madam Speaker, today we find ourselves debating a bill that could result in the United States of America defaulting on our debts. It seems that the Republican majority of the 113th Congress has decided to continue the practice of governing from one manufactured crisis to another. H.R. 807, the Pay China First Act, is a part of this majority's campaign of playing politics with our national economy at a time when the number one priority of this Congress should be putting Americans back to work. Madam Speaker, we raise our nation's debt ceiling to pay the bills that our nation has already accrued. The Republican majority's insistence on using the debt ceiling in their crusade against a short- term deficit crisis that doesn't exist, has already harmed our nation's recovery. This bill, which the Republican majority knows full well has no chance in the Senate, is nothing more than political posturing at its worst. It is nothing more, Madam Speaker, than an attempt by the Republican majority to wash their hands of the calamitous effects their economic policies are having on the American people who want nothing more than their Congress to stop playing politics and get about the work they were elected to do. Instead, the Republican majority has continued their crusade of irresponsible spending and tax cuts which disproportionally affect those who need it the most. The number one priority of the 113th Congress should be putting Americans back to work and supporting policies that promote growth. Madam Speaker, the people of Brooklyn's 9th Congressional district, whom I have the honor of representing in this body, are tired of the 113th Congress undermining the recovery our nation needs. This bill is not worthy of the American people. Madam Speaker, I submit an article in today's New York Times that, using analysis from leading public and private-sector economists, lays out the harm that the majority's focus on irresponsible spending cuts is having on our struggling economy. [From the New York Times, May 8, 2013] Economists See Deficit Emphasis as Impeding Recovery (By Jackie Calmes and Jonathan Weisman) Washington--The nation's unemployment rate would probably be nearly a point lower, roughly 6.5 percent, and economic growth almost two points higher this year if Washington had not cut spending and raised taxes as it has since 2011, according to private-sector and government economists. After two years in which President Obama and Republicans in Congress have fought to a draw over their clashing approaches to job creation and budget deficits, the consensus about the result is clear: Immediate deficit reduction is a drag on full economic recovery. Hardly a day goes by when either government analysts or the macroeconomists and financial forecasters who advise investors and businesses do not report on the latest signs of economic growth--in housing, consumer spending, business investment. And then they add that things would be better but for the fiscal policy out of Washington. Tax increases and especially spending cuts, these critics say, take money from an economy that still needs some stimulus now, and is getting it only through the expansionary monetary policy of the Federal Reserve. ``Fiscal tightening is hurting,'' Ian Shepherdson, chief economist of Pantheon Macroeconomic Advisors, wrote to clients recently. The investment bank Jefferies wrote of ``ongoing fiscal mismanagement'' in its midyear report on Tuesday, and noted that while the recovery and expansion would be four years old next month, reduced government spending ``has detracted from growth in five of past seven quarters.'' That period roughly coincides with the time that Mr. Obama and Congressional Republicans have shared governance since Republicans took control of the House in 2011, promising an immediate $100 billion in spending cuts. Republicans did not get that much then, but the series of budget compromises with the president since--while not so great as they wanted--will soon reduce annual discretionary spending for domestic and military programs to the lowest level in half a century. As for revenues, Mr. Obama forced Republicans to acquiesce in January to higher taxes from wealthy Americans. But worse, in the macroeconomists' view, both parties agreed not to extend a two-year-old cut in Americans' payroll taxes for Social Security, reducing their spending money. In all this time, the president has fought unsuccessfully to combine deficit reduction, including spending cuts and tax increases, with spending increases and targeted tax cuts for job-creation initiatives in areas like infrastructure, manufacturing, research and education. That is a formula closer to what the economists propose. But Republicans have insisted on spending cuts alone and smaller government as the key to economic growth. The results, Mr. Obama has taken to saying, despite his complicity, are ``self-inflicted wounds.'' ``The only way the problem does get fixed is if both parties sit down and they say, `How are we going to make sure that we're reducing our deficit sensibly?' '' he said last week at a news conference. ``How are we making sure that we're investing in things like rebuilding our airports and our roads and our bridges, and investing in early childhood education, basic research--all the things that are going to help us grow?'' Mr. Obama added, ``I cannot force Republicans to embrace those common-sense solutions.'' Speaker John A. Boehner stood by the Republicans' policies during a session Tuesday with reporters. ``After four years of mediocre job creation, it's obvious that we don't need more tax hikes and more government spending,'' he said. ``We need smarter policies to make America more competitive and expand opportunities for everyone in our country.'' ``We're the ones pushing this town to do the right thing when it comes to the economy and jobs,'' Mr. Boehner added. The Federal Open Market Committee, which sets policy for the central bank, noted signs of improvement in the private sector last week in a statement. ``But fiscal policy is restraining economic growth,'' it added, echoing public comments that Ben S. Bernanke, the Fed chairman, has made for months. In April, the International Monetary Fund said the United States would achieve further growth ``in the face of a very strong, indeed overly strong, fiscal consolidation.'' Thursday will capture as plainly as any day lately the differing approaches of Mr. Obama and Republicans toward the economy and government's role. Mr. Obama plans to travel to Austin, Tex., to visit technology students, workers and entrepreneurs and promote his ideas to support efforts like theirs--the kind of initiatives that Republicans have blocked. House Republicans expect to pass a measure that would allow the Treasury to ``prioritize'' debt payments if Congress and Mr. Obama cannot agree this year to increase the nation's debt ceiling so the Treasury can keep borrowing money to pay all creditors. Under the bill, as tax receipts came in, the first priority would be paying creditors--like China, Democratic opponents argue--and second would be Social Security checks. But the measure would likely die in the Democratic-controlled Senate. The ``prioritization'' proposal first arose in 2011 from among the most conservative House Republicans, those who were driving hardest against the White House on raising the debt ceiling and expressing unconcern about default, but it has now become mainstream in the House ranks. Economists and financial analysts generally dismiss the idea as unworkable if not dangerous, and count on Democrats to block it. Gregory Daco, a senior principal economist at IHS Global Insight, said the Republicans' proposal was the kind that caused his clients to ignore the fiscal policy out of Washington, and rely instead on the Fed to buttress the recovery. ``Whenever I talk to our customers or clients, they sort of brush off everything that's related to fiscal policy,'' Mr. Daco said. ``The view is, 'Oh, it doesn't matter.' That's what I hear a lot.'' ``What we try to convey is that it does matter,'' he said. ``It is important in terms of growth. It's also important in terms of confidence.'' He noted that the economy was much stronger than Europe's largely because the United States initially opted for stimulus measures and allowed deficits to increase when the recession and financial crisis hit five years ago. European governments pursued austerity policies to cut their debts, further stalling economic activity and in turn inflating deficits. The more recent austerity policies here are helping to bring annual deficits down, as a new report of the Congressional Budget Office shows, after four years of trillion-dollar shortfalls. Yet many analysts would prefer that the measures had been timed for when the economy is strong and unemployment below 7 percent. ``While I agree that the U.S. must get its fiscal house in order,'' Jerry Webman, chief economist at OppenheimerFunds, wrote, ``I join the likes of the I.M.F. in cautioning that too much austerity, too soon, is likely counterproductive.''

Ms. CLARKE

Ms. CLARKE. Thank you, very much, Congressman Horsford, and I thank you for your leadership along with Congressman Jeffries in leading the Special Order hour for the Congressional Black Caucus. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to join my colleagues in the Congressional Black Caucus to raise awareness about health disparities that continue to affect racial and ethnic minorities in the United States of America. Despite medical advances that save many lives in our country, there has been very limited progress in ending the racial and ethnic disparities in health. In a 1985 report, the United States Department of Health and Human Services called health disparities in this country ``an affront both to our ideals and to the ongoing genius of American medicine.'' Now, decades later, health disparities still exist between black and white and rich and poor. A primary reason for these disparities is, quite frankly, the lack of health insurance that has been a problem for all these many years. For instance, African Americans make up 13 percent of the entire population but account for more than half of all people who are uninsured. Blacks also have disproportionately lower access to primary care and face more obstacles in seeking treatment. Across our Nation, health disparities continue to persist and widen in communities historically marginalized as a result of poverty and other social, economic and environmental barriers. These communities are experiencing a high burden of life-threatening diseases and poor health outcomes. Population-based approaches such as recent efforts to reduce childhood obesity rates, while showing evidence of success, have been primarily focused on white children in affluent communities. For example, in a report released in 2012 by the CDC, New York showed an overall decline of as much as 10 percent in obesity rates for kindergartners. However, for poor black children, the decline was only 1.9 percent, and for Hispanic children it was 3.4 percent. In my district in Brooklyn, New York, I represent a very large number of immigrants. Close to 40 percent of the residents are first- and second-generation Americans. Culturally significant and linguistically tailored education is required to address health disparities. This education is one of the building blocks upon which improvements in early detection and screening in these communities have been built. Health disparities are a serious matter. According to the National Urban League's State of Urban Health report, in 2009, health disparities cost the United States economy $82.2 billion. I firmly believe in prevention and addressing health disparities, and that it will go a long way in bringing these costs down. It is important that we fully engage in a full implementation of the Affordable Care Act. This will lead us to closing these disparities, this health disparity gap. I look forward to working with my colleagues in the Congressional Black Caucus and, quite frankly, all Members of goodwill to find solid solutions to addressing health disparities in communities of color across this Nation. Having said that, Mr. Speaker, I thank you for the time.

Ms. CLARKE

Ms. CLARKE. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained in my district and missed the votes on Tuesday, April 23, 2013. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall No. 118, H.R. 1067--To make revisions in title 36, United States Code, as necessary to keep the title current and make technical corrections and improvements, ``yea'' on rollcall No. 119, H.R. 1068--To enact title 54, United States Code, ``National Park Service and Related Programs'', and ``yea'' on rollcall No. 120, Journal Vote.

Ms. CLARKE

Ms. CLARKE. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained in my district and missed the votes on Monday, April 15, 2013. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall No. 103, H.R. 1162--GAO Improvement Act, ``yea'' on rollcall No. 104, H.R. 882-- The Contracting and Tax Accountability Act of 2013 and ``no'' on rollcall No. 105, H.R. 249--Federal Employee Tax Accountability Act.

Ms. CLARKE

Ms. CLARKE. Mr. Speaker, I rise to express my support of the Equal Pay Day, April 9, 2013, which recognized the critical disparity between the working wages between men and women. Women have come so far in our society and make up 50 percent of the workforce by contributing their skills and experiences that drive our economy, making it the most dynamic in the world. But, women are not worth their work according to their wages and the services they provide. On average, we still earn 77 cents for every dollar earned by men. For a woman working full time, the current wage gap represents a loss of $430,000 over the course of her career. There are many women in my district who are the sole providers for their family. They act as the mother and the father rearing their family and struggling to put food on the table and a roof over their heads. One of our top priorities should be closing the wage gap. By doing so, the middle class will be stronger and struggling Americans will have the support they need. I am a proud sponsor of the Equal Pay Day Resolution and urge my colleagues to become a cosponsor.

Ms. CLARKE

Ms. CLARKE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize this week, April 8-12, 2013, as Retirement Planning Week. This week is held during the national effort to observe Financial Literacy Month. This endeavor promotes the education and awareness of important financial issues and provides Americans with essential retirement planning information. Comprehensive retirement planning is an important step that will lead Americans into a financially secure future. But, the process can be challenging for consumers which leads many Americans into retirement without an adequate financial plan. We must make this a national priority and convey to our constituents the value of retirement planning so that more Americans can appropriately prepare for and attain financial security during their retirement years. Social Security and Medicare face long-term challenges. My constituents depend on Social Security and Medicare for their livelihood. It is important for everyone to think about long-term financial needs, plan for a secure retirement, and create a comprehensive retirement plan. It is vital to have a plan that will leave Americans better prepared and more confident in their financial future.

Ms. CLARKE

Ms. CLARKE. Mr. Chair, I rise today to ask my colleagues to reject the budget put forth by Chairman Ryan and the Republican led Congress and support the FY 2014 Congressional Black Caucus Alternative Budget, the Congressional Progressive Caucus Alternative Budget, and Democratic Substitute Budget. These budgets will protect our families, put Americans back to work, restore fairness to our tax code, and make critical investments in education, transportation, innovation, research, and job creation. The proposals submitted by the Republicans would undermine vital programs such as Medicare, Medicaid, and SNAP. The Ryan budget cuts programs that assist low-income families, communities of color, young children, students, older people, individuals with disabilities, the unemployed, and the uninsured. Specifically, the CBC Alternative Budget proposes a balanced plan that focuses on economic growth, invests in communities, and creates economic opportunity for all. The CBC budget: Cancels the sequester; creates a $500 billion jobs program to accelerate the Nation's economic recovery; provides $230 billion in investments for America's crumbling infrastructure; reduces the deficit by $2.8 trillion over the next 10 years; addresses the Medicare Doc Fix;. protects and enhances Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, SNAP, and TANF; proposes the 10-20-30 plan which targets resources to the communities that need assistance the most; addresses health disparities through full funding for the Affordable Care Act and strong support for the National Institutes of Health. Again, I ask my colleagues to vote against the Ryan Budget that does not balance the budget, and will harm our children, seniors, and the middle class, and to vote for resolutions that strike a sensible balance between revenue increases and spending cuts.

Ms. CLARKE

Ms. CLARKE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my disappointment with the budget sequester that seems almost certain to occur. These automatic budget cuts will become effective tomorrow, Friday, March 1, 2013 unless Congress acts immediately. Many of my Democratic colleagues have proposed serious alternatives to the cuts, which I fully support. Since the start of the 113th Congress, House Republicans have failed to bring a single bill to the floor that would prevent the cuts. The sequester will harm every American, especially the constituents of my district. Estimates from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities demonstrate that the Women, Infant and Children nutrition program will be unable to assist between 600,000 and 775,000 individuals. Low income families depend on food assistance programs. Too many children in my district come to school hungry, which leads to the inability to focus on their schoolwork. Sequestration will also undermine federally-funded programs that provide low income, underinsured, and uninsured women access to breast and cervical cancer screening and diagnostic testing. The women in my community need these programs to receive proper treatment. Layoffs and furloughs to the Social Security Administration will slow the processing of Social Security applications. Many of my constituents who are retired or have disabilities depend on Social Security. Americans have worked for their Social Security benefits, and have the right to expect service. As a member of the Homeland Security Committee, I am concerned about cuts to airport security. This issue has enormous importance to me and my fellow New Yorkers, many of whom work in airport security at JFK and LaGuardia airports. The cuts present serious risks to the workers at these airports and to our national security. These men and women have dedicated their lives to serving this country to keep it safe. A reduction in security workers will increase complications in air travel and increase the possibility of danger to this nation and its people. The sequester will also harm small businesses, by reducing support for loan programs administered by the Small Business Administration as well as government contracts, and training program for small businesses. I am extremely sensitive to the plight of small businesses, as a member of the Small Business Committee. I urge my colleagues to prevent these cuts to important programs. Our constituents want us to compromise to prevent these drastic cuts. In the words of Mohandas Gandhi, ``The best way to find yourself is to lose yourself in the service of others.'' We swore an oath to defend, protect and serve this country. Americans are depending on us to make the right decision. We should not delay a vote. We need to come together, make a decision and protect the interests of the people we represent.

Ms. CLARKE

Ms. CLARKE. Mr. Speaker, the struggle for equality and justice through the Civil Rights Movement would not have attained its level of success without dedicated leaders such as Rosa Parks, Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Rev Jesse Jackson Sr., and my colleague, Representative John Lewis who put their lives on the line to make it so So here we are, nearly 50 years after the Voting Rights Act was signed into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson, the Supreme Court heard Shelby County v. Holder, the outcome of which holds the possibility of setting our nation back centuries. Much of the debate regarding Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act has been focused on the plight of the south and relevance to the southern perspective as it should. We are all too aware of the blood that was shed to demand basic human, racial equality. However, I stand here today in solidarity with my colleagues to lend a voice and perspective to this debate of Section 5 covered areas outside of Southern States. When most people think of Brooklyn, New York, a progressive mentality comes to mind. However, Brooklyn is likewise a Section 5 covered jurisdiction and historically ``Brooklynites'' have encountered voter discrimination tactics that has resulted in Kings County being subjected to the requirements of Section 5's preclearance rules and provisions. In 1921, New York State enacted an English-only literacy test that remained on the books through the 1960s. During this time, New York State experienced a ``Great Migration'' from the South, as well as, from Puerto Rico and other areas of Latino decent. Most of these migrants lived in communities such as Harlem in Manhattan, the South Bronx, and the Bedford-Stuyvesant section of Brooklyn. At that time, New York State law included a literacy test which proved difficult, if not impossible for people with educational or language barriers. Coincidentally, there were three counties in New York City with low voter turnout in the 1968 elections, due in large part to the fact that these literacy tests could not be passed. This ultimately became the reason why jurisdictions for Section 5 preclearance were extended to specific counties in New York, in particular, Brooklyn, New York. On May 10, 1967, a federal court ruled that the hodgepodge of gerrymandered congressional districts that snaked in and out of Bedford-Stuyvesant, Brooklyn were unconstitutional, in that they operated ``to minimize or cancel out the voting strength of racial or political elements of the voting population, violated the recently passed Voting Rights Act and deprived one of the nation's largest and densest African-American communities the right to adequate representation. Andrew W. Cooper, a community activist, was the impetus for this historic change. A year after the Voting Rights Act became law he sued New York State officials in a case called Cooper v. Power. The ensuing legal battle led to the redrawing of the now historically famous 12th Congressional District of New York (the district was later reapportioned to parts of the 11th District and now 9th Congressional District). The ruling set in motion a monumental shift in voting rights in New York and beyond, redefining political representation for people of color. It was built on the foundation of civil rights gains made in the south and helped push the agenda for Voting Rights nationwide. As a woman of color, a witness to the re-election of our nation's first Black President, and the U.S. Representative for the Ninth Congressional District, which is a majority-minority district covered under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, I am deeply concerned by the potential ramifications of this case and the impact of its ruling on people of color and their right to vote. Most recently a Brooklyn elected official wrote an editorial questioning the validity and significance of Brooklyn's classification as a Section 5 covered jurisdiction. Brooklyn NY has one of the largest concentrations of people of color in the nation. It is also worth noting that another elected official from Brooklyn appeared in ``Black face'', just this Sunday. These types of hostile inquiries and acts erode the fabric of American democracy and speak to the heart of why Section 5 preclearance is vital to the realization of justice and equality. In many areas, racially polarized voting and the intent to disenfranchise Black voters demonstrate that the requirements of Section Five remain crucial to the basic function of our democracy. The 9th Congressional district of New York, which I presently represent, was birthed in 1965 when Andrew Cooper brought suit under the Voting Rights Act against racial gerrymandering and in response to widespread and prolific discriminatory voting practices in Brooklyn. This suit gave birth to New York's 12th Congressional district and the election in 1968 of Shirley Chisholm, the first Black woman ever elected to the U.S. Congress to whom I have the distinct honor and privilege of succeeding almost 40 years later. Even in the years after the formation of the Congressional Black Caucus in 1971, people of color remain underrepresented at every level of elected offices. These are just a few examples of why Section 5, and in particular its preclearance clauses, are essential to ensure that changes to voting rules and practices do not result in voter suppression, retrogression, and discrimination. Without the existence of majority-minority districts, the voices of millions of Americans will be excluded from Capitol Hill; and their perspectives would not inform public debate. Without Section 5 covered districts, our democracy would exist in form, but not in fact. When I was elected to Congress in 2006, and after Congress had just reauthorized the Voting Rights Act, I would never have thought that today we would be re-litigating issues that I believed were long since settled and resolved. It took our nation over 200 years to obtain the victories of the Civil Rights Movement, now less than 50 years after the Voting Rights Act was signed into law are we truly to be believe that systemic racial discrimination and voter suppression has ended?, I think not! These advancements in the struggle for equality, permitting All Americans to freely exercise their right to vote will take more than a lifetime to protect and preserve. Jurists of the Supreme Court, a word of advice- If it ain't broke, don't fix it!

Ms. CLARKE

Ms. CLARKE. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained in my district and missed the vote on Monday, February 25, 2013. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall No. 47, H.R. 667--To redesignate the Dryden Flight Research Center as the Neil A. Armstrong Flight Research Center and the Western Aeronautical Test Range as the Hugh L. Dryden Aeronautical Test Range.

Ms. CLARKE

Ms. CLARKE. Madam Speaker, today, I rise in support of the Senate passed bill, S. 47, the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2013 also known as ``VAWA.'' This bipartisan bill expands the authority of the Federal Government, the States, law enforcement, and service providers to prevent domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assaults and stalking. In 2012, the New York City Police Department responded to two hundred sixty three thousand two hundred seven (263,207) domestic violence incidents; this averages to over 720 incidents per day. Yet, there are countless more people that are victims of domestic violence that did not call the police. Estimates range from one to three million victims per year, who have experienced violence by a current or former spouse, boyfriend, or girlfriend. These stats are more than numbers--they represent our sons and daughters; our mothers and fathers; our friends and neighbors. Victims of all races, genders, sexual orientation and nationality are equally vulnerable to violence by an intimate partner. The Senate bill includes provisions that that will allow every victim of domestic violence to receive protection. The bill specifically includes language that makes it clear that members of the LGBT community should be afforded protection under the reauthorized VAWA. It also extends the protection of domestic violence laws to undocumented immigrants. Undocumented immigrants are often one of the most vulnerable populations due to their fear of deportation and due to the fact that they were denied access to many of the programs funded by VAWA. Often undocumented immigrants and members of the LGBT community suffered--and died--in silence as a result of domestic violence. So, I applaud the Senate for recognizing that the status quo simply just won't do! And I ask my colleagues to vote in support of this long overdue reauthorization.

Ms. CLARKE

Ms. CLARKE. Mr. Speaker, Monday, November 26, 2012, is a great day for the residents of my town. New York City went 24 hours without a single person being injured or killed by gun violence. That day, the Brownsville section of Brooklyn within my district, which has experienced more shooting victims last year than any other part of the city, saw a most-needed reprieve from the violence it experiences on a daily basis. Mr. Speaker, women and children are gunned down every day in urban communities across the country by illegal handgun violence. In fact, on average, more than 100,000 people in the United States are shot and killed with a gun annually. This is endemic in communities of color where illegal handgun violence has become a very serious public health issue. These numbers are unacceptable, especially in a State and city with some of the strictest gun laws in the Nation. Lastly, gun violence is not an inevitable problem, yet it continues to plague our communities. We owe it to the people we represent and to future generations to act with urgency and conviction to put an end to this senseless pattern of gun violence.

Ms. CLARKE

Ms. CLARKE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to add my voice to the CBC and amplify the message of support for true and real comprehensive immigration reform. First, I would like to thank our newly elected colleagues, the gentleman from Brooklyn, New York, Congressman Hakeem Jeffries, and the gentleman from Las Vegas, Nevada, Mr. Steven Horsford, for hosting this evening's CBC hour. Mr. Speaker, I commend President Obama for his commitment to comprehensive immigration reform, and I reaffirm my commitment to working with his administration and our colleagues to make true reform a reality. Having said that, I want to challenge the President and all of our colleagues to expand upon the face and the voice of immigration, adding new dimensions to the unfolding debate. When two major immigration speeches such as those that President Obama made in El Paso, Texas, in 2011, and last week in Las Vegas, Nevada, in Mr. Horsford's part of the country, omit the contributions of immigrants from the continent of Africa, it paints an incomplete picture of the idealized gorgeous mosaic or melting pot, if you will, that the United States of America represents. We must embrace the diversity of those who are impacted by reform and understand that this debate cannot solely rest on the shoulders of our Latino sisters and brothers. The stigmatization of the Latino population as the target immigrant population has resulted in a skewed depiction of the true diversity of the immigrant population resident in our country. We have immigrants represented from almost every Nation around the world, and we must recognize all of those who are building communities and strengthening our Nation. Since 2009, I've been working with my colleagues to diversify the voice and the face of the immigration debate. The burden of a broken system does not encumber one group of immigrants alone. There are approximately 3 million immigrants from the African diaspora in the United States, the vast majority of whom entered the country with legal documentation. The impact of immigrants of the African diaspora from the continent of Africa, the Caribbean region, and South and Central America has been massive in scale. As the representative of the Ninth Congressional District of New York, I am proud to serve a very significant Caribbean, South and Central American, and continental African immigrant community whose immigration experience is as diverse as the countries from which they've come. In fact, I represent one of the most diverse, immigrant-rich districts in the Nation, with people who have come from the Middle East, South Asia, Asia, Russia, the Eastern European nations. It's a virtual United Nations. Many entered our shores with student visas, like my parents did, to pursue careers in medicine, science, education, and other professions. Many are proud business owners of law firms, restaurants, grocery stores, shipping companies, and hair braiding venues. There are those who come as asylum seekers, fleeing the tumult of war, famine, and genocide. No matter their reason for immigrating, they've come to the U.S. to be productive, taxpaying members of our civil society and to attain the American Dream. Unfortunately, immigrants of the African diaspora, like so many other groups from around the world, are dealing with backlogged immigration processing; families being ripped apart; falling ``out of status'' because they have aged out of the legal immigration process; racial and status discrimination; unfair criminal aggravated felony laws that prohibit judicial review; deportation processes that violate civil and human rights; an insecure and prohibitive student visa program; limited access to work permits; and much, much more. You see, many immigrants arrive on our shores during a time in their lives when they are the most productive. Any delay in processing these individuals, in bringing them to the fore, denies us the opportunity to access their talents, their skills, and their ability in the prime of their lives. Additionally, African Americans, those descendants of the slave trade--whom I fondly call long-time stakeholders of this Nation--have been affected by the broken system as well. Working-class Americans of all backgrounds, races, and ethnicities are adversely affected with a broken immigration system. They are facing depressed wages due to unscrupulous and illegal corporate hiring practices. Urban communities aren't being adequately counted by the Census and other surveys, resulting in the reduction of adequate government services and Federal resources to meet the needs of the actual population in the communities and increasing the strain on current public services. Urban communities are exposed to more crime, as the undocumented are more reluctant to report crimes; and African Americans are dealing with increased racial and status discrimination, as many are subjected to interrogations based on citizenship. This is why, as a child of the Caribbean--second-generation American--and a sister of the African diaspora, I believe that it is my duty and that of the Congressional Black Caucus to ensure that the voices of immigrants of the African diaspora will be at the forefront, shoulder to shoulder with the Congressional Hispanic Caucus and the Caucus of the Asian and Pacific Islanders; that the voices of the immigrants of the African diaspora will be heard. We will make sure that this debate is as diverse as the population it encompasses. The effectiveness of the immigration reform debate will rely heavily on the diversity of its support. That is why I call upon my sisters and brothers within the African diaspora to join with the members of the CBC, myself and our colleagues, in making sure that our voices are heard and our needs are adequately addressed. Mr. Speaker, the time is now to pass a comprehensive bill that includes streamlining the immigration process, humane enforcement strategies that address the needs of children and other vulnerable people, use alternatives to detention, create enforceable detention standards, safeguard our investments in our DREAM Act kids, and outline essential due process reforms. Our national security is at stake. Our moral standing in the world depends upon it. And the American people--many of whom are first- and second-generation immigrants--have demanded it. If we turn our backs on those law-abiding contributors to our civil society that come to our shores only to embrace the American Dream, to labor in rebuilding our great Nation, to strengthen our economy, to serve honorably in our military, we turn our back on ourselves and our future. You don't have to believe me. Just ask the people of Japan, where population growth has been stagnant as a result of a prohibitive immigration policy. It is time for people of good will to stand for those who fear or are unable to stand for themselves. Let us stand together for comprehensive immigration reform.

Ms. CLARKE

Ms. CLARKE. I thank the gentleman for the time. And I want to urge all of my colleagues to support the Frelinghuysen amendment, which ensures a full $60.1 billion package will jump-start a recovery process for the families and small businesses of the affected four-State region. I represent an area called Gerritsen Beach in Brooklyn, New York, a quaint bungalow community. Operative word, bungalow. They were subgrade, and totally deluged during the event known as Superstorm Sandy. This is a working-class community of people, real solid Americans who have played by the rules all of their lives, and now their homes have been moved off of their foundations by the sheer force of this storm. This amendment, this work that we do today, is why people have sent us here, to know that we've got their backs, that we are there, as their representatives, in time of need. I want to thank my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, in particular, those from the affected region, for their advocacy on behalf of the people who have been victimized by Sandy.

Ms. CLARKE

Ms. CLARKE. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the chairwoman of the Congressional Black Caucus, the gentlelady from Ohio (Ms. Fudge), for summoning us to be a part of this Special Order this evening. It is quite timely as we mark the 1-month anniversary of the slaughter of the innocents in Newtown, Connecticut, as we all reflect on the many challenges that we face within our own neighborhoods, our own communities, of longstanding reckless gun violence. Mr. Speaker, just last week a 90-year-old woman by the name of Gloria Johnson, 90 years old, was shot twice as she walked to the laundromat in East New York, Brooklyn. She lived 90 years to be gunned down in Brooklyn, New York. Two weeks ago, AK-47 shells were found in Queens, New York, at the scene of the murder of a 17-year-old child--AK-47. You find those types of shells in Iraq, in Afghanistan, not in Queens, New York. But there's a new reality that we are all facing, and that is assault weapons in an urban environment. And this summer a young 13-year-old boy named Ronald Wallace III was shot in the back by a barrage of gunfire in the streets of Brownsville, Brooklyn, within my own district. Although New York City has some of the strictest gun laws in the Nation, senseless crimes like these occur all too frequently in my district and across New York City and in other urban communities across the United States. In 2012, the New York City Police Department reported 226 incidents of handgun violence in Brooklyn, New York, alone. Illegal gun trafficking and gaping holes in Federal background check requirements are to blame for many of these incidents. Eighty-five percent of the guns used in crimes in New York City are first purchased in States like Virginia and Georgia that do not extend the background check to purchase limitation requirements for private sellers. Mr. Speaker, I stand with my fellow lawmakers in Congress, with Mayor Michael Bloomberg and with Governor Cuomo, in demanding Federal legislation that specifically addresses illegal trafficking of guns across State lines and the requirement of background checks in all gun purchase transactions. To truly put an end to the random gun violence that plagues New York City and other urban areas, however, we must also address other policy areas that have profound effects on the level of gun violence that we see. Yes, I agree that mental health and mental illness are important factors that have to be explored and addressed when trying to mitigate against gun violence; however, there's some additional factors that contribute to what has become tantamount to a public health crisis. One such factor is poor educational outcomes. According to the American Economic Review, a 1-year increase in the average years of education completed reduces violent crime by nearly 30 percent. In fact, between 2000 and 2005, New York State increased its higher education expenditures by roughly 40 percent. During the same period, the State violent crime rate decreased by roughly 20 percent. These statistics are an indication that there is a direct correlation between investment in education and the reduction of violent crime, specifically gun crime. It is my hope that any legislative measure brought to the floor for consideration also takes into account true and real investment in the inadequate or ineffectual educational systems across this Nation. By bolstering our educational institutions, we help set our children on a path to success instead of one that leads to violent crime, death, and incarceration. Gun violence is not an inevitable part of life, yet it continues to plague our communities. We are not helpless in this endeavor. We owe it to our constituents, to our Nation, and to future generations to act with urgency and conviction to put an end to the senseless pattern of gun violence, not only in suburban America, but in every community across this Nation, urban America as well. Mr. Speaker, my colleagues, I look forward to working with you in whatever capacity necessary to save another family from the hurt, the harm, and the trauma of the senseless acts of violence that take place in our communities across this Nation due to illegal handguns and gun trafficking. With that, Madam Chair, I thank you for yielding.

Ms. CLARKE

Ms. CLARKE. Madam Speaker, I rise today to ask all of my colleagues to support H.R. 41, a bipartisan proposal to replenish the National Flood Insurance Fund which will increase its borrowing authority and allow the program to continue paying claims from those affected by Hurricane Sandy. Without the enactment of this bill, the NFlP might reach its ceiling and could no longer pay out claims. The families in my district and the States of New York, New Jersey and Connecticut are suffering. Even as I am excited that we are considering this bill today, I am disappointed that there were seventy days of inaction by Congress. Congress has a history of providing assistance to the American people in times of disaster and devastation--in this country, we help our neighbors. Since 1989, Congress has approved $290 billion in disaster relief aid. Indeed, only two weeks after Hurricane Katrina devastated parts of the Gulf Coast, Congress appropriated $62 billion in disaster aid. Those impacted by Superstorm Sandy have been waiting for more than two months, and cannot afford to wait any longer. The recovery depends on this emergency funding. Again, I ask that all of my colleagues support the first portion of the Superstorm Sandy Disaster Relief package. Through enactment of this critical bill, many home and business owners flooded out by Superstorm Sandy will soon be able to get flood insurance payments.