Yvette Clarke

Ms. CLARKE of New York

Ms. CLARKE of New York. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Ms. CLARKE of New York. I thank the gentleman for his remarks, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. CLARKE of New York

Ms. CLARKE of New York. I thank the gentlelady for yielding. Today, the House passed H.R. 4628, the Interest Rate Reduction Act, or, as I like to refer to it, the ``take from the poor--give to the poor not in our interest act.'' This Republican-led bill will prevent the student loan interest rate from doubling to 6.8 percent, but in doing so would effectively gut the prevention and public health trust fund, a key component of the Affordable Care Act. When my Republican colleagues finally acknowledged the need to prevent student loan interest rates from rising on July 1, I had a glimmer of hope, hope that somewhere in their hearts remained some small bit of compassion for their fellow Americans. But I was quickly slapped back into reality when I saw that the Republicans intended to pay for this bill, as they usually do, on the backs of middle class families and the poor. The prevention and public health trust fund was created to ensure adequate funding for preventive health initiatives. These initiatives help to improve the health of poor and middle class families and, by improving health, also help to lower health care costs. Initiatives supported by this fund are successful because they are community-based, and as such, are uniquely tailored to the needs of targeted communities. Already, there are several key initiatives supported by the fund that benefit Americans. Two of the initiatives which directly benefit the 11th Congressional District of New York are the Chronic Disease Prevention Act, which enables communities to use evidence-based intervention to reduce chronic conditions and prevent heart attacks, diabetes, strokes, and other conditions; and the HIV/ AIDS Prevention Act, which focuses on HIV prevention in high-risk populations and communities by increasing HIV testing opportunities, linking HIV positive persons with needed services and filling critical gaps in data collection. To eliminate funding for programs that improve the health and lives of millions of Americans and lower health care costs is not prudent, which is why this ill-conceived bill is the wrong way to address this crisis. Luckily, there are two ways that this crisis can be averted. Specifically, I ask that Speaker Boehner bring to the floor either H.R. 3826, a bill introduced by my friend and colleague, Representative Joe Courtney, or H.R. 4816, a bill introduced by another of my Democratic colleagues, John Tierney. While both bills will prevent an increase in the student loan interest rate, H.R. 4816 would also pay for this by decreasing the amount of subsidies given to Big Oil companies. So, as opposed to paying for this interest rate freeze on the backs of the middle class and the poor, the Democratic-sponsored H.R. 4816 would require that Big Oil companies pay their fair share. So in closing, I'm issuing a call to action to all students, postgraduates, and their families: pick up the phone, email, tweet and send a Facebook message and demand that he immediately either bring H.R. 3826 or H.R. 4816 to the floor for a vote. So, my colleagues, we have a challenge ahead of us: Do we take from the poor to give to the poor, or do we do what is right by the American people? And that is, to make sure that our students' interest rates do not increase and that we meet the demands for health care in our civil society.

Ms. CLARKE of New York

Ms. CLARKE of New York. Mr. Speaker, on April 25, 2012, the United States Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in United States v. Arizona, a case that could determine whether, through the guise of immigration enforcement, states can once again legally sanction discriminatory practices. Sixty-eight Members of Congress, including myself, have filed a brief to inform the Supreme Court that we believe that Arizona, through SB 1070, has unconstitutionally stepped upon exclusively federal domain. I stand before you today to explain why many of the leading Members of this Chamber have decided to take a stand against this law. Arizona's SB 1070, like other state laws inspired by SB 1070, opens the gates for legally sanctioned racial profiling. If allowed to go into effect, Arizonans who look or sound ``foreign'' could be asked for their papers at any given moment--and punished for failing to produce them. We don't want to become a country where an accent or a skin tone could make you a suspect. Our Framers gave Congress exclusive domain over immigration policy. Immigration policy, like foreign policy, must remain in federal hands. They understood that the United States needed a single immigration policy, because a patchwork of 50 immigration laws would create a logistical nightmare for U.S. citizens and immigrants alike. A family from Brooklyn, for example, shouldn't have to bring passports to visit the Grand Canyon, but that's what would be needed if a law like SB 1070 were allowed to go into effect. Our Constitution guarantees that all people--no matter where they were born or what color of skin--have the same basic rights. These rights cannot be allowed to be threatened by a law like SB 1070, which, if allowed to go into effect, would undoubtedly lead to irreparable violations of these constitutional rights for anyone who appears to be ``foreign.'' These ``show me your papers'' laws allow extremist legislators like those in Arizona and Alabama to turn back the clock on some of our hardest won and most important civil rights. State-based immigration policy won't fix our federal immigration system. I call upon my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to put aside partisan rhetoric and work together on creating a federal immigration policy that puts our family, economy, and country first. We must create an immigration system that reflects our values and moves us forward together. It is up to the Supreme Court to ensure that all Americans, no matter their appearance, are treated equally. Failing to preserve these constitutional protections would undermine our values of liberty and justice for all.

Ms. CLARKE of New York

Ms. CLARKE of New York. I thank my colleague, Barbara Lee. Madam Speaker, today I'm here to pay tribute to a quintessential public servant, a person who tirelessly fought on behalf of his constituents of the 10th Congressional District of New Jersey, and for all Americans of all backgrounds across this Nation. Today I pay tribute and celebrate the life of our beloved colleague, Congressman Donald Payne. Donald made history as the first African American in New Jersey to be elected to Congress. He served as the former chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus and was recent chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation, where I really saw him go to work on behalf of the people across this Nation. Along with many others, I consider Representative Payne not just an accomplished colleague, but a role model and a dear friend. He was a relentless and iconic advocate for the continent of Africa, the African diaspora, as well as the Caribbean region. He spoke out boldly against genocide in Darfur and Rwanda, and fought alongside the Congressional Black Caucus to help Haiti recover from the devastating earthquake that struck the nation in 2010. Congressman Payne was a representative of Newark, but his leadership was global. We are grateful for his world view. We will never forget his passion, zeal, and commitment to improve the United States diplomatic relations around the world. I count myself fortunate to have established a real bond with Congressman Payne. He shared with me his quick wit, and we shared a lot of laughs together. We often joked about who was tougher, Newark or Brooklyn. And he was also very skilled on the dance floor. I had an opportunity to trip the world fantastic with Mr. Payne. And so, I extend my condolences to his son, Councilman Donald Payne, Jr.; to his very devoted brother; his daughters Nicole and Wanda; his grandchildren; great grandchildren; his close friends; his devoted staff; and the people of the 10th Congressional District of New Jersey. Know that he has left us a great legacy, building blocks, if you will, for future generations of leaders. We will continue to celebrate the contributions of this great statesman. The stars in the heavens will twinkle just a bit brighter as Congressman Donald Payne makes his transition to be with our Creator in heaven. Thank you, Congressman, for all your commitment and sacrifice for the betterment of our global community.

Ms. CLARKE of New York

Ms. CLARKE of New York. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained in my district and missed the vote on Monday, March 5, 2012. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall No. 95, H.R. 3637, the ``Roy Schallern Rood Post Office Building.''

Ms. CLARKE of New York

Ms. CLARKE of New York. Madam Speaker, the American people's patience is wearing thin. A majority of the American people believe that jobs should be the number one priority of the 112th Congress. However, over a year has passed since the Republican majority took control of the people's House, and we have still not passed a single significant jobs bill. To avoid any confusion, let's discuss what a jobs bill is not. A jobs bill is not a tax cut for the multimillionaires and billionaires. A jobs bill is not protecting subsidies for corporations that ship jobs overseas. And a jobs bill is not, Madam Speaker, dismissing out of hand the President's plan for reviving American manufacturing and creating a stronger and a more skilled workforce. As our economy continues to recover from the recent economic downturn, it is past time for the Republican majority to work with the President and get our Nation back to work.

Ms. CLARKE of New York

Ms. CLARKE of New York. Madam Speaker, today we find ourselves in the unfortunate and familiar position of running out the clock on the American people. The Republican majority seems to have no problem moving Heaven and Earth to preserve tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans. However, they seem content to allow taxes to rise for the working poor and middle class. The majority's orthodoxy that tax cuts solve every problem seems not to extend to those that need it the most. This tax hypocrisy has not gone unnoticed by the American people. Madam Speaker, the 112th Congress has not passed one job-creating bill in the face of this stubbornly high unemployment. And instead of addressing the jobs crisis, they are continuing their assault on the unemployed by threatening to cut off aid to those who would rather have a job in the first place. I urge the majority to put aside election-year politics and pass a long-term payroll tax extension and extend unemployment benefits, especially in light of their failure to address the need for more job opportunity.

Ms. CLARKE of New York

Ms. CLARKE of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Prostate Cancer Awareness Observance Day, as recognized by the Brown Byrd Prostate Cancer Foundation in my district and numerous organizations and municipalities. Affecting 1 in 6 men, prostate cancer is the most commonly diagnosed non-skin cancer and the second cause of cancer-related deaths among males. A new case occurs every 2.7 minutes, and is the cause of death of an afflicted individual every 19 minutes. Though for reasons yet to be discovered, prostate cancer is especially prevalent within the African American community, which makes awareness of this disease especially important within communities like my Borough of Brooklyn, New York. Despite these disparaging statistics, many forms of prostate cancer are readily treatable, and with increased early detection and treatment, current trends can be reversed. Education regarding prostate cancer and early detection strategies is crucial to saving lives and preserving our families; 200,000 men will be diagnosed and over 75,000 men will die from prostate cancer annually. At any age, deaths due to prostate cancer devastate families through loss of income, partnership, and support. In recognition of this disease and the large number of families and communities it afflicts, I stand with those today that recognize February 2, 2012, as a day to remember those who lost the battle against prostate cancer, and to pray for the families and friends that have dealt with such a tragedy. As a community, we also remember those living with prostate cancer, celebrate the lives of survivors, and thank all the prostate cancer organizations and medical professionals throughout the entire country who aid in victories against this insidious disease. One such organization I would like to recognize today is the Brown Byrd Prostate Cancer Foundation. Started by two young individuals in my own district, Kevin Byrd and Blossom Brown to honor their grandfathers who were both lost to prostate cancer, the foundation has done a good deal of work within New York and nationally to bring attention to Prostate Cancer and methods to combat its continued threat to the wellbeing of our communities. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and may we all offer up our prayers today to every individual that has been affected by prostate cancer.

Ms. CLARKE of New York

Ms. CLARKE of New York. Mr. Speaker, what has happened today would be comical if it weren't so damaging to our nation's middle-class. Mr. Speaker, the American People need to know the facts: The fact is, Mr. Speaker is that this body passed a tax cut bill that they knew would not make it through the other body The fact is, Mr. Speaker, that the other body, in about as bipartisan a manner as this 112th Congress has ever seen, voted overwhelmingly to pass a two month extension of the payroll tax cut so that taxes would not go up for millions of Americans on the 1st of January. The fact is, instead of passing this common-sense legislation which would have bought time for a comprehensive full year extension of the payroll tax cut to be negotiated, the GOP-led House would not allow a vote. Mr. Speaker, the Majority has instead decided to kill the payroll tax cut altogether and not buy Congress time for a comprehensive deal. Mr. Speaker, I hope that when it's time to let tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires to expire, the Republicans will show the same callous disregard they have shown our nations struggling middle- class.

Ms. CLARKE of New York

Ms. CLARKE of New York. Mr. Speaker, here we go again. For the third time this calendar year, we are facing the real likelihood of a government shutdown. And why? Because, Mr. Speaker, of all things, Republican opposition to a tax cut proposal. The Republican majority, which has spent the last 49 weeks of the American people's time protecting tax cuts for millionaires, multimillionaires, and billionaires, does not want to extend the same courtesy to the struggling middle class. It's a shame, Mr. Speaker, that the people's House cannot agree to pass commonsense legislation that benefits the majority of the American people without including poison pills that ensure the air we breathe is clean, our water is safe to drink, and our seniors have access to quality health care. Unfortunately, this should not come as a surprise to the American people who have watched the Republican-led 112th Congress unleash an all-out assault on our middle class and aspiring middle class and the most vulnerable amongst us. Mr. Speaker, during these tough times, we cannot afford to pass partisan legislation that toys with and diminishes the livelihoods of the American people, that harms our economic recovery efforts, and removes environmental safeguards. We must put politics aside, pass commonsense legislation that helps the American people, and not use them as political bargaining chips. I would like to take this opportunity to welcome home America's servicewomen and -men and thank you for your service to our Nation.

Ms. CLARKE of New York

Ms. CLARKE of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012. As a member of the Committee on Homeland Security, I am well aware of the threats that face this nation from home and abroad, but even though this struggle is of the highest stakes, we must remember the very values and basic rights that set us apart from those who would seek to destroy us. We must remember that we cannot sacrifice our freedom or the freedom of others in order to maintain it. To follow such a path represents a fundamental contradiction and degrades any moral high ground we claim to possess. The indefinite detention provisions do just that; they continue a shameful precedent set in the wake of the attacks against our nation on 9/11 that allows our military to detain suspected terrorists, foreign and domestic, indefinitely and with limited ability for redress. It has been reported that if enacted, the detention provisions would codify authority for indefinite detention without charge and mandatory military detention, authorizing their application on the basis of suspicion to virtually anyone picked up in the anti-terrorism efforts; including those arrested on U.S. soil. In effect, the U.S. military would become the sole authority over terrorism suspects, to the exclusion of the U.S. judicial system. Mr. Speaker, this blatant eradication of Habeas Corpus is a scary thing, particularly for the people of New York City who live under the constant threat of terrorism and the ever present surveillance of law enforcement. That, among other reasons is why I'm not voting against this bill, and I urge my colleagues to do the same. H.R. 1540, The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012

Ms. CLARKE of New York

Ms. CLARKE of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in recognition of the tenth anniversary of the war with Afghanistan. For ten years our country, and the brave men and women who fight for us on the battlefield, have been mired in a seemingly unwinnable war in Afghanistan, a war that has resulted in tens of thousands of casualties, and the death of 1,723 American service members. More and more Americans are expressing a desire to end the war in Afghanistan. Recent polls have shown that 73% of Americans want to withdraw troops, and 66% of all veterans believe the war is not worth its cost. There is no better time than now, on the 10th anniversary of this war, to reevaluate the continued conflict, and to commit to bringing our troops home. It is irresponsible to continue to spend over one hundred billion dollars a year on a war that Americans support less and less each day, especially as our country tries to fight its way out of the worst economic recession of our lifetimes. This is money that is desperately needed domestically, and would be better spent on fixing our deteriorating infrastructure and fixing our education system. Our mission after September 11th 2001 was to dismantle the infrastructure of al-Qaeda and to bring Osama bin Laden to justice, and there is no denying that the current administration and our courageous men and women serving overseas have accomplished these goals. It is time to bring our troops home, reinvest in our nation, and let the Afghani people take responsibility for securing their own nation. I believe the time to withdraw from Afghanistan is now, which is why I joined my colleagues from both sides of the aisle in support of H.R. 651, the United States-Afghanistan Status of Forces Agreement Act of 2011 which would establish a redeployment date for U.S. troops. I will continue to work with my colleagues in Congress, the President, and commanders in our Armed Forces to press for a speedier end to this war. I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. CLARKE of New York

Ms. CLARKE of New York. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained in my district and missed the votes on October 3, 2011. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall No. 742, H.R. 686; rollcall No. 743, H.R. 765; and rollcall No. 744, H.R. 670.

Ms. CLARKE of New York

Ms. CLARKE of New York. Mr. Speaker, the American people made it abundantly clear what they expected from the 112th Congress. They expect us to stop fighting each other and to do the right thing for the country. However, instead of doing that, the Republican majority has done the exact opposite by engaging in partisan political games that cost the U.S. our triple-A credit rating, resulted in several near government shutdowns and nearly led to the first national default in our history. These actions don't reflect the American people's will, but rather the priorities of the Republican leadership of the House. The American people have done everything they can to make it clear, but Mr. Speaker, allow me to repeat their refrain: Jobs! Last month, President Obama unveiled his vision for job creation in the United States. While I would like to see a bit more with regards to direct job creation, it is a good start to addressing our nation's high unemployment, a rate that hovers around 16 percent for African American communities. Mr. Speaker, the Congressional Black Caucus has been at the forefront of the call for jobs legislation in the 112th Congress. The CBC put together a nationwide jobs fair to not only bring attention to the appalling unemployment numbers in the black community and help bring those seeking jobs together with employers, but to turn up the volume on a national crisis that has taken a back seat to the majority's favored approach of simply cutting our way to prosperity. Would you believe Mr. Speaker, that just today, the Majority Leader said that the House would not be holding a vote on the American Jobs Act; saying that voting on the complete package was ``unreasonable''. Mr. Speaker, what Americans find ``unreasonable'' is that the Republican majority is, once again, going to allow the American people to continue to suffer through our national jobs nightmare and continue in their insistence to not bring a single jobs bill to the floor. What, Mr. Speaker, is the majority afraid of? Are they afraid that the American people, recognizing that this could be the start toward resolving our national unemployment tragedy? Is the Republican leadership so afraid of the tea party that they are willing to allow continued national misery to satisfy a minority of their caucus? Regardless, as Members of Congress we represent the concerns of our constituents and I know what my constituents are telling me. They are telling me that Congress needs to get its act together and start focusing on the priorities of the American people and not those of a tiny, radical fringe of the majority.

Ms. CLARKE of New York

Ms. CLARKE of New York. Mr. Speaker, today I rise in opposition to H.R. 2587. This bill, which was rammed through committee without so much as a legislative hearing, does not create or protect jobs, in spite of its misleading title. What this bill does is give American workers an unfair choice: your rights or your job. H.R. 2587 creates an open season for CEOs to punish workers for exercising their rights. This bill allows companies to relocate or eliminate jobs in retaliation against employees who exercise their right to organize, strike, or engage in collective bargaining activity. This Republican-sponsored bill accomplishes this by eliminating the National Labor Relations Board's power to order work be restored or reinstated. In practical terms, this would mean that if a CEO wanted to punish workers for organizing or striking, the CEO could simply choose to relocate or eliminate the work and thereby eliminate the worker without fear of being held accountable. I ask my colleagues to oppose this bill and vote it down today.

Ms. CLARKE of New York

Ms. CLARKE of New York. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained in my district and missed the vote on September 7, 2011. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall No. 692, H. Con. Res. 67.

Ms. CLARKE of New York

Ms. CLARKE of New York. Mr. Speaker, our colleagues on the other side of the aisle have been in the majority for a full 29 weeks, and they still have not addressed the number one priority of the American people: jobs. The Republican majority has, instead, used the time and energy that should have been focused on jobs to manufacture a crisis that could very well destroy the full faith and credit of our Nation. What makes this made-up crisis so undignified is that the other side has taken the American people hostage to their radical plan of placing the burden of deficit reduction on the backs of poor, working poor, and struggling middle class families while asking absolutely nothing of the most fortunate among us. Why, Mr. Speaker, have those who have done very well in America been asked to do so little for the country that made their success possible? The Republican-led 112th Congress has totally ignored the jobs crisis and has actually managed to create another. The 112th Congress owes the American people an apology for continuing to waste their time. Where are the jobs? We owe the American people real job creation.

Ms. CLARKE of New York

Ms. CLARKE of New York. I thank my good friend from Ohio for the time. Madam Speaker, the Republican majority would like the American people to believe that a near financial collapse never happened, never occurred. To hear the majority's narrative over the course of the 112th Congress, you would think that nothing is wrong with the economy that deregulation and tax cuts for multi-millionaires and billionaires can't solve. What the Republican majority refuses to acknowledge in their revisionist narrative is that their tax cuts for multi-millionaires and billionaires helped lead our country from surplus into massive deficits. The majority's revisionist narrative also omits the fact that years of deregulation and lax oversight of financial institutions is what caused the economic downturn we are struggling to fully recover from. Madam Speaker, the near collapse of the national economy not only cost the American people billions of dollars in bailouts but also resulted in millions of Americans losing their jobs, their homes and life savings through no fault of their own. The number one priority of the 112th Congress should be to continue the economic recovery work of the 111th Congress. The American people expect the other side to work with the President and congressional Democrats to put Americans back to work. So I find it unbelievable, Madam Speaker, that, in the face of 9.2 percent unemployment and when millions of Americans are struggling simply to stay in their homes, the majority would declare war on the very agency that would prevent a similar financial crisis from ever happening again. By decreasing accountability, muddling decision-making and starving it for funds, the Republican majority is threatening to turn the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau into a gridlocked agency that cannot possibly fulfill their mandate as a financial industry watchdog, leaving the American people once again vulnerable to the predatory lending that precipitated the financial collapse in the first place. Madam Speaker, the 112th Congress has been in session for over 6 months, and we still have not had one comprehensive jobs bill, nor have we voted on one single bill that would help struggling homeowners stay in their homes. We have, unfortunately, been forced to vote to protect tax cuts for multi-millionaires and billionaires, we have voted to protect the profits of companies who ship jobs overseas, and we have voted on bills that undercut the social safety net for Americans at a time when the most vulnerable amongst us need it the most. In other words, Madam Speaker, we have wasted the American people's time. If the Republican majority claims to speak for the American people, then perhaps they should listen to the American people, stop playing games and bring legislation to the floor that addresses the number one priority of the American people: jobs. By bringing this bill to the floor, the Republican majority either doesn't remember the recent financial crisis or simply doesn't care about the hardships facing the American people. I support the gentlewoman from Ohio in bringing this point of order.

Ms. CLARKE of New York

Ms. CLARKE of New York. I thank my colleague for the time. Mr. Speaker, the Republican majority has spent over 6 months of the American people's time making it abundantly clear what their priorities are not. The Republican majority does not have time to address jobs. As I stated, we are here over 6 months into the 112th Congress, and we have yet to take one vote on a single comprehensive jobs bill. The Republican majority does not have time to address the economic realities facing millions of homeowners still facing foreclosure. In fact, we have voted on Republican bills that further undercut those who have lost their homes. The Republican majority does not have time to work with the President and congressional Democrats to deal with our national debt. They would rather protect tax cuts for multi-millionaires and billionaires and tax loopholes for corporate interests. What the Republican majority does have time for is playing games, spending 4 hours debating a bill that, thank God, is dead on arrival in the Senate.

Ms. CLARKE of New York

Ms. CLARKE of New York. I rise today in opposition to the underlying bill, H.R. 2112, the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act of 2012, and the cuts to the WIC program. We want to talk about right to life. WIC is a right to life. It's an essential program that offers nutrition, education, breast feeding support, referrals, and a variety of nutritious foods to low-income pregnant, breast feeding and postpartum women, infants, and children up to the age of 5. The program is administered through county health departments, hospitals, mobile clinics, community centers, schools, public housing sites, migrant health centers and camps, and Indian health service facilities. In New York State, the WIC program provides services to nearly one- half million low-income women, infants, and children through 103 local WIC agencies statewide. Local agencies such as Brooklyn's Healthy Start have provided WIC services to low-income women in my district for more than 20 years. It is the work of the Brooklyn Healthy Start and other WIC programs who are on the front lines that are fighting against this country's already shamefully high infant mortality rate. Decreasing funding to WIC programs will undoubtedly increase my district's infant mortality rate and infant mortality rates across this Nation. Given the spike in demand for WIC and other nutrition programs like SNAP and food stamps, school meals, summer, after-school, and child care food programs, it is unconscionable that the Republican-led Congress is seeking to cut these critical programs that help seniors, children, and low-income people who aspire to be part of our Nation's middle class. First, Republicans went after our Nation's seniors who rely on Medicare, and now they're going after the children and mothers who rely on our social compact for food assistance. If we got rid of tax breaks for multimillionaires and billionaires for just 1 week, we would pay for the entire WIC program for a year. It is my belief that cuts to the WIC program are based on an ideological political rationale that defies human understanding and not an honest desire to cut deficits. This Agriculture appropriations bill continues to protect tax cuts for multimillionaires while having poor women and children stuck to pay the dear price. WIC has been shown to improve the health of pregnant women, new mothers, and infants and children. The food provided through WIC is a good source of essential nutrients that are often missing from the diets of women and young children. WIC participants have longer, healthier pregnancies and fewer premature births. We all understand the need to reduce the deficit, but we must do so in a way that is consistent with our shared values. It is a moral imperative that we look after those who are forgotten, marginalized in our society. In the words of a prolific, poetic philosopher, Kanye West, ``How could you be so heartless?'' Republicans shouldn't destroy programs upon which citizens depend on the most in exchange to pay for $45 billion in tax breaks for multimillionaires. Shame. I urge my colleagues to vote against this bill and protect low-income women, infants, and children. I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. CLARKE of New York. Mr. Chair, I move to strike the last word.

Ms. CLARKE of New York

Ms. CLARKE of New York. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to H.R. 2017--the Department of Homeland Security FY12 Appropriations Act. As we come upon the 10-year anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the House should not be voting to reduce funding in homeland security, mass transit, and port security grants. These grant programs would receive a 50-percent cut in funding if this bill were passed. Investments in these critical areas are needed as we remain vigilant. Terrorist events around the world have shown that mass transit systems, like other modes of transportation, are often targets of attack. New York City has one of the largest subway systems in the world. Millions of people ride the system every day. A plot to attack the New York City subway system was thwarted in September 2009. The Metropolitan Transportation Authority in New York City has worked hard to keep the passengers safe. Our Nation's first responders deserve more. Finally, this bill proposes an appropriation of $891.24 million in net discretionary spending for Infrastructure Protection and Information Security, which is a decrease of $45.25 million below the President's FY 2012 budget request. Increasing funding to the Administration's request will help to prevent attacks against U.S. information networks. Our safety and our way of life depend upon our critical infrastructure as well as the strength of our economy. Our critical infrastructure--such as the electricity grid, financial sector, and transportation networks that sustain our way of life--have suffered repeated cyber intrusions, and cyber crime has increased dramatically over the last decade. It has become clear that our Nation cannot fully defend against these threats unless certain parts of Cybersecurity efforts are updated. Congress needs to focus on improving cybersecurity for the American people, our Nation's critical infrastructure, and the Federal Government's own networks and computers. As a New York City Member on the House Homeland Security Committee, I will work to ensure that our Nation is better prepared to prevent terrorist attacks. This appropriations bill is a statement of our values. We need to adequately invest in our response capacities to safeguard our citizens. At a time when our Nation is dealing with the emergency management of natural disasters that ravaged the Midwest and South and is working to prevent potential bio-terrorism attacks, this is not the time to make drastic cuts to our Homeland Security Appropriations. I urge my colleagues to oppose this bill.

Ms. CLARKE of New York

Ms. CLARKE of New York. Madam Chair, I rise today in support of the Conyers, Clarke, Cohen, Duncan Amendment, opposing the deployment of ground troops in Libya. It is unconscionable for us to deploy our already strained troops into harm's way again when many of them have served two, three or more tours in Iraq and Afghanistan. It is also irresponsible for us to spend more money on another open- ended military conflict without a cogent plan of action and withdrawal. As a Member of Congress, I cannot take part in another act of aggression further straining the budget we are so desperately working to fix and our troops who have answered above and beyond the call of duty. My constituents and I already feel that the war in Afghanistan has gone on long enough without a clear and sufficient exit strategy. We cannot partake in another fruitless war. We must shift our focus to getting out of Iraq and Afghanistan, stabilizing our economy and creating jobs for the American people. Instead let us focus on securing funding for small businesses rather than spending money on another open-end conflict. Madam Chair, as a representative of the 11th congressional district of New York, our hearts and minds go out to the people's struggle for freedom in Libya. And as a nation, we should continue our support for their quest for freedom, through NATO forces. However it is our duty as a Members of Congress to protect and serve our fellow Americans first. Therefore, I urge my colleagues to join us and support this amendment.

Ms. CLARKE of New York

Ms. CLARKE of New York. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained in my district and missed several votes on May 23, 2011. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall No. 330, H.R. 1627, ``yea'' on rollcall No. 331, H.R. 1383, and ``yea'' on rollcall No. 332, H.R. 1657.