Rosa DeLauro

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chair, one more time, I yield time to the gentleman to clarify, but the amendment that was submitted, confirmed by the majority, is ``none of the funds made available by this act may be used to finalize, implement, or enforce the rule titled Unaccompanied Children Program Foundational Rule.'' The gentleman is speaking about something else altogether different than the proposed amendment. I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendment. I think this amendment is a good example of the Republican approach to appropriations bills. It is an overreaching effort to block seven separate executive orders related to climate change. Many of these executive orders have nothing to do with the Labor-HHS-Education appropriations bill. We are here to protect the welfare of the American public, and we cannot close our eyes to the impacts of climate change, such as the recurring drought, flooding, severe storms, and wildfire events that have been pummeling our country and, for that matter, the world. As of last month, the United States has experienced 24 confirmed weather/climate disaster events exceeding $1 billion in damages each-- each one. That is $24 billion; a new record. However, instead of addressing climate change, this amendment would block funding to develop more resilient communities, mitigate the impacts of climate change, and protect future generations. This amendment would ensure that we continue to pay billions of dollars more each year for disaster relief--though we don't seem to be able to get a supplemental bill that includes disaster relief for people who are struggling--rather than invest in strategies that minimize and prevent the acceleration of climate change or mitigate against its disastrous effects. I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to this amendment. Over and over again, I have said tonight there is no vaccine mandate. Understand it. Get it into your head. My only response is let's not waste any more time. Tutto finito. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment, even though I am not opposed to it.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chair, I congratulate the gentleman on his amendment. I think one of the places where we haven't really put in resources for a while is the National Eye Institute, and I am always interested in making sure that all the institutes are being plussed up. I have tried to do that in the 4 years that I served as chair of this committee because some of the smaller institutes do not get the resources that they need. Mr. Chair, I support my colleague's amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition, although I am not opposed to it.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chair, I guess this is kind of kumbaya here. I rise in support of the amendment. The amendment would add $2 million to the funding already provided to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to address Valley fever. CDC's Valley fever efforts received annual increases while I was chair of this subcommittee, and the bill before us includes an additional $10 million increase. The intention of offering this amendment is to highlight that even more should be done, given the growing impact of this fungus. To me, this amendment highlights the significant need to support the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention overall. The CDC has a wide range of programs. Each one does not operate in a vacuum. Core activities of public health data, infrastructure, workforce, health statistics, laboratory science at CDC must be supported to raise the tide for all programs. The majority of CDC's funding is provided to State, local, Tribal, and territorial public health partners. CDC is supporting efforts in each of our communities, and this amendment highlights the needs of public health efforts are growing. I urge my colleagues to support the amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chair, our luck ran out. I rise in strong opposition to the amendment. This amendment would further cut funding by 26 percent for important programs and services that provide opportunities for working families. The underlying bill already cuts tens of billions of dollars from programs that help families and low-income workers. This amendment would cut an additional $38 billion from education, health, job training, worker protection, and the Social Security Administration's operating budget. For instance, this amendment would cut Head Start by another $2.9 billion, almost $3.7 billion below this year 2023, leading to over 250,000 children losing access to high-quality early learning programs. It would cut the Childcare and Development Block Grant by $2.1 billion. This is amidst a childcare crisis when parents want to work, but they cannot find affordable childcare for their kids. It would cut the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program, LIHEAP, which is a bipartisan priority, by more than $1 billion. It would cut senior nutrition, including Meals on Wheels, by $277 million, resulting in more than 1 million low-income seniors losing access to home-delivered or prepackaged meals. It would cut biomedical research at the National Institutes of Health by more than $11 billion, resulting in a reduction of more than 10,000 new grants for potentially lifesaving research. It would cut nearly $2 billion from mental health and substance use disorder services, when CDC data shows nearly 110,000 deaths in 2022 related to drug overdoses, the highest number ever. It would cut title I funding for low-income public schools by $3.2 billion, reducing needed resources for 25 million low-income students. It would cut special education grants to States by $3.8 billion, reducing support for services for 7.5 million students with disabilities. It would cut Pell grants by $5.8 billion for students and families in need. Yes, it would cut the Social Security Administration's operating budget by more than $3 billion. It would shutter field offices and eliminate services for seniors. It is interesting to me that when it comes to the programs that are encompassed in the Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education appropriations bills, that there is a great worry about a deficit, there is a great worry about borrowing, but when we did $2 trillion for the richest one-tenth of 1 percent of the people in this country and the biggest corporations who pay no taxes, no one batted an eyelash. We continue on that road of looking at the biggest corporations who pay no taxes, and we will continue to make sure that they profit and that working families, middle-class families, the most vulnerable families, are at risk because someone has decided that it is no time to borrow and it is no time to make public investments in their lives. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chair, we have a revenue problem. We have a serious revenue problem, and the majority looks for every excuse to cut back the opportunity for increased revenues. Why do I say that? We are told that we leave $1 trillion on the table every year because we do not enforce our tax laws on the wealthiest, the billionaires, the Amazons, the Hewlett-Packards, the corporations who pay no tax. We cut the heart and soul out of the IRS when they are collecting millions of dollars from tax cheats.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong opposition to this amendment. This amendment would block the Department of Education's commonsense provision that prevents colleges from stretching out the length of their postsecondary training programs just to rake in more of the students' and taxpayers' money because the students will have to take out more loans. When a student goes to a higher education training program, they shouldn't have to complete 1\1/2\ times the training the State requires just to graduate and get a job, all so their college can make a few extra bucks. This provision of the Department's regulation rights a longstanding wrong that allowed colleges to exploit students and abuse taxpayer dollars by dragging out the time it takes to graduate from a program. Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chair, I continue to oppose this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to this amendment. Let me highlight the first sentence of this executive order: ``The right to vote is the foundation of American democracy.'' Amen. I agree. I find it really pretty extraordinary to say that we are weaponizing to protect the right to vote. The right to vote is enshrined. People have died for the right to vote in this Nation. This executive order recognizes that there are too many obstacles to voting. Unfortunately, those obstacles disproportionately exist for people of color, people with disabilities, and people who speak English as a second language. Members of our military serving overseas as well as other American citizens living abroad also face challenges to exercising their fundamental right to vote. Simply put, the Biden administration is trying to expand access to voter registration and election information. This order directs agencies to ensure that the online Federal voter registration form is accessible to people with disabilities. They have a right to vote. This order directs the Secretary of Defense to establish procedures consistent with the applicable law to offer each member of the Armed Forces the opportunity to register to vote in Federal elections. Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chair, it really is quite amazing that when the States have their purview. We have just been through an extraordinary time where States have legitimized the election of the President of the United States, and we have a whole bunch of folks here who deny what the States have said about the legitimate election of the President of the United States. Again, the right to vote is the foundation of American democracy. That is what this is about. We need to continue to enshrine the public's right to vote whether they are able, disabled, people of color, everyone, a veteran overseas, and Americans who are abroad who are allowed to vote. We need to make it possible for people to exercise their right to vote in the United States and not continue to circumscribe that right, as my colleagues on the other side have been doing for a very long time, and oppressing and suppressing a vote. Mr. Chair, I oppose this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chair, the amendment would block a reporting requirement related to COVID-19 vaccination coverage among healthcare personnel, which is submitted quarterly via a web-based tool. Mr. Chair, we know vaccines work. In the case of the COVID vaccine, we know they help to prevent illness as well as mitigate the severity of illness for those who get sick. For healthcare workers, being vaccinated is not only a matter of their own health. It is also good for the health of their patients. When healthcare workers get sick, they can unknowingly infect their patients, and patients who come to ambulatory surgical centers are already recovering from an illness or injury and cannot afford additional exposure or the risk of COVID. Vaccines help to keep workers healthy. Higher vaccination rates for healthcare workers mean fewer days of missed work because of illness, which is good for healthcare facilities, particularly facilities already struggling with staff shortages. It is good for patients, who do not have to worry about canceled appointments because healthcare workers are out sick. That is why healthcare staff vaccination rates are a useful measure in the quality reporting program. Mr. Chair, I urge a ``no'' vote on the amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chair, I oppose this amendment for the reasons that I have stated, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chair, I think as chair of this committee for 4 years, in a bipartisan way, we increased Head Start funding in higher numbers than had been dealt with in the recent past. I applaud the bipartisanship of that effort to deal with Head Start funding because of how critically important Head Start is, but it is stunning to me that we could look at a $750 million cut in Head Start with this bill. You mentioned spending. I will get back to you on revenue. Let's collect revenue, so we can make the public investments in Head Start and in education and other areas that have been begging. Let me assure the gentleman I will work along with all of my colleagues. I will fight against cuts to Head Start. Head Start will always be a priority for me.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to this amendment even though I strongly support the gentleman's interest in Head Start. Frankly, I thank my colleague for his interest in Head Start and his willingness to acknowledge the devastating cuts to the program in the current bill. The Head Start program was cut by $750 million. In real terms, that means roughly 80,000 Head Start and early Head Start children would no longer be able to receive services under the proposed Republican House appropriations bill. In Mr. Lawler's district alone, 1,400 low-income children and their families are benefiting from the education, health, and nutrition services provided by Head Start. Mr. Chair, 140 of these children, a tenth of those in his district, will lose services and support with the shameful cut in the bill that we are dealing with right now. Do I appreciate and support a $100 million increase to the program? Yes, but $750 million was cut. $100 million is a fraction of what is necessary. The whole cut needs to be restored, and Head Start needs additional resources so that none of the children currently lose their opportunity for Head Start, not just in Mr. Lawler's district, but the 1,600 children in Mr. Aderholt's district, as well as the 1,300 kids in my district, and the 1,000 children in Chair Granger's district. Now, let's talk about the offset. The gentleman wants to take from the Department of Education. Here we go again traveling down the road of eliminating public education in the United States. House Republicans don't support the Department of Education. We get it, but the Departmental Management Account has already been cut 18 percent. This amendment would slash another $100 million from this account, bringing the total cut to $177 million, or a stunning 41 percent. The Program Administration account funds the Federal civil servants who provide grants to States. You need a grant for your State, this is where you go. School districts need a grant, this is where they go. Institutes of higher education need a grant, this is where they go. These staff answer the questions. They provide vital funding to communities across the country. Head Start is critical for fostering school readiness, family development, and creating lifelong learners, and when these opportunities are taken from children, all of us in every community suffer. I appreciate my colleague's intent to increase Head Start, and I appreciate that another colleague on the other side of the aisle is willing to stand up and acknowledge how inadequate the funding level in this bill is, but we cannot destroy the Department of Education by decimating the nonpolitical career staff that administer its vital programs. Mr. Chair, I oppose this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chair, I move to strike the last word.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Massachusetts (Ms. Clark), the Democratic whip and former member of the Appropriations Committee and of the subcommittee, I might add.