Rosa DeLauro

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California [Ms. Pelosi].

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California [Ms. Waters].

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I yield I minute to the gentlewoman from Maryland [Mrs. Morella].

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from New York [Mrs. Maloney].

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York [Mrs. Lowey].

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentlewoman from California [Ms. Millender-McDonald].

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I thank the ranking member of the Committee on National Security for yielding. Let me just say to my colleagues in closing that I want to emphasize that this amendment is not about public funding, nor is it about special treatment. As the ranking member has said, this is a matter of simple fairness. It is about preserving the right to choose and save health care for American military women, women who are far from home, far from their families and who sacrifice, sacrifice their lives every single day, for the United States of America. They are protected under the Constitution of the United States, and if they were to serve their time in this country the right to choose would be protected. We have said to them, ``We will send you overseas. Fight for the United States, for its freedom and its democracy,'' and yet we would take that freedom and democracy away from them. We ask them to leave their constitutional rights at the border. It is wrong. It is about upholding the Constitution, and it is letting military women and their dependents maintain those rights. It is about fairness for military women. I urge the support of this amendment, and I would just say to my colleagues this is antiwomen. Make no mistake about what is being done here. We have an obligation and we have a commitment to those who serve on our behalf, men and women. Do not deny women in this country their constitutional rights because they want to serve and they willingly serve on our behalf. This is at their own expense. There is a conscience clause. No doctor, no nurse has to provide this kind of a service. The women pay for it themselves. We have made sure that not a dime of taxpayers' money is being spent on their behalf. They make their checks out to the U.S. Treasury. Let us protect women's rights, let us make sure they have safe and healthy health care when they are abroad.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, the Republican budget released in the last 2 days is truly a throwback to the Republican budget that was rejected overwhelmingly by the American people just last year. Last year, the American people examined the Republican proposals to cut Medicare, to pay for tax breaks for the privileged few, for wealthy Americans, and the American people said, ``These are not our values. These are not our priorities. This is not what we want to see. We don't want to see the funding for education, for environment, for Medicare and Medicaid, slashed.'' And because the American people really spoke out, they rose up against this budget last year, Congress in the end passed a budget that protects our Nation's priorities. Yesterday, when the congressional majority, when their leadership unveiled their new budget, it was as Yogi Berra once said, deja vu all over again. We see the same skewed priorities, the same skewed values, and a willingness to do harm to working middle-class families in this country. One of the most disturbing parts of this budget is the way that it undercuts medical protection for our Nation's seniors. Republicans propose cutting $168 billion from Medicare, once again they propose, and their proposals and these Medicare cuts will result in less choice for seniors in choosing their doctors, the potential for closing down hospitals in this country, and for creating a second rate health care system for seniors in the United States of America. The $168 billion they want to cut from Medicare is not, do not let them fool you, is not necessary to make the Medicare system solvent. They may say that, but again, do not let them fool you, and do not buy it, the way you did not buy it in the last go- round. The money that is being cut is not going to be put back into the Medicare trust fund. Once again, it is going to pay for tax breaks. The President proposed extending the solvency of Medicare for the same amount of time without making the same deep cuts in the Medicare system. They are using the money from these Medicare cuts to fund $176 billion in unnecessary tax breaks. If you want to know the real agenda of the Republican leadership on Medicare, all you need to do is to recall the words of House Speaker Newt Gingrich on Medicare not too many months ago. Not years ago, but not too many months ago. The Speaker said, ``Now we don't get rid of it in round one, because we don't think that is the politically smart thing to do, and we do not think that is the right way to go through a transition. But we believe it is going to wither on the vine, because we think people are voluntarily going to leave it.'' The majority leader of the other body said that he was proud to have voted in 1965 against Medicare because ``it is a system that does not work.'' These people truly believe that Medicare is a wrong system, a bad system, and that it needs to be destroyed. Do not let them kid you in the direction they want to take the Medicare system. That is what the Republicans really want to do to Medicare. They want it to wither on the vine. The Republican assault on health care for seniors does not stop with Medicare. In their budget they also propose cutting Medicaid by $72 billion. That cut, combined with the block grant approach, will jeopardize the guarantee of coverage for folks who are in nursing homes. Most people do not understand what Medicaid is about. It is seniors who are in nursing homes that Medicaid covers. In addition to cuts in Medicare and Medicaid, they propose including risky medical savings accounts in the Medicare system, a system that would allow wealthy seniors to operate out of the Medicare system, thereby weakening the program, allowing those who are most ill, most frail, to stay in traditional insurance programs, driving those premiums up, and not allowing people to be able to get health care. To sum up, what this new Republican budget amounts to is yet another assault on the health care system for our Nation's seniors. Unless they withdraw this budget and rework their proposals, I expect that they will ignite, and I certainly hope they do, the same firestorm that forced their retreat last year. Their proposal is wrong and irresponsible.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman who just spoke would be reminded that Mary Matalin, who is an enormously talented woman, was ousted from the Dole campaign because she happened to be married to James Carville. People in glass houses should not throw stones. Mr. Speaker, with Mother's Day only 2 days away, I know many people are puzzled about what to get Mom on Sunday. Let's look at what Republicans have offered the mothers of America in the budget they unwrapped earlier this week. If your mother depends on Medicare for her health care, the Republicans have given her a $168 billion cut to pay for unnecessary tax breaks including those that benefit the wealthy. If your mother is in a nursing home on Medicaid, the Republicans have given her a $72 billion cut combined with a block grant approach that jeopardizes the coverage for her nursing home care. The greatest gift congressional Republicans can give mothers and their hard working families is a new budget rather than this rehash of the same extreme positions and the same skewed priorities as the budget they proposed last year. It's time for Newt Gingrich and the Republican leadership to put families first.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, it is deja vu all over again. Although it is early for summer reruns, the Republicans yesterday released their budget, which is a rehash of the document that the American public resoundingly defeated and rejected in 1995. It has the same identical budget priorities, drastically cuts the amount of money spent on health care for seniors, a $168 billion cut in Medicare, the potential for hospitals to close across this country. The Republicans cut Medicare once again, and they propose tax benefits for the wealthy. The money that they propose to cut does not go into the Medicare trust fund, but it goes to pay for the tax increases; the prescription that caused the outcry last year, that caused them to retreat from this issue. But you have to admire their consistency; they are back here again with the same priorities, and that is because their budget is the consequence of their values, of their priorities, and their willingness to do harm to the American people, and they are sincere in wanting to do harm to working men and women in this country. Mr. Speaker, the American people want a government that is on its side, not the side of special interests.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, at the end of this 1995-96 academic year, Barbara Reiber will retire from the Hamden Public School System after 40 years of dedicated service. As a committed high school teacher, she has worked tirelessly to educate students, and engage them in their community. It is with tremendous pleasure that I rise today to salute this incredible individual, who means so much to me and has contributed so much to the town of Hamden. Barbara's dedication to expanding the minds of high school students is illustrated by a lifetime of public service. Her career has involved teaching U.S. history, world history, and Third World history as a teacher in the social studies department at Hamden High School. In addition, she has been extremely active in curriculum and staff development throughout her 40 years in the system. Most characteristic of Barbara, however, has been her tremendous energy and generosity in contributing to extracurricular activities at Hamden High School. She has recognized the importance of developing young leaders, and expanding their education through community involvement. Throughout her career she has supported and strengthened several student organizations. Having served as advisor to the student council and human relations club, Barbara enhanced the awareness and leadership skills of many Hamden High School students. During the past 2 years Barbara has been very supportive of an initiative that is of special significance to me, the Anti-Crime Youth Council. Without the commitment and effort of people like her, this regional organization, which involves high school students in projects to tackle issues related to youth violence, would never have developed. Time and time again she offered energy and ideas to this organization, and was dedicated to engaging Hamden High School students in the process. She recognized the value of creating opportunities for teenagers to address common problems at a regional level, and worked closely with my staff to organize Anti-Crime Youth Council activities. It is exactly this commitment to community that distinguishes the career of Barbara Reiber and it is with great pleasure that I commend her for 40 years of achievement and service to our community. I join her colleagues, and her friends and family members in thanking Barbara for caring so much for Hamden's youth, and in wishing her a very enjoyable retirement.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I rise to urge my colleagues to vote to defeat the previous question on this rule so that we can offer a clean up-or-down vote to raise the minimum wage. Mr. Speaker, the minimum wage now stands at a 40-year low in real purchasing power. Working American families go to their jobs every day, they play by the rules, and they provide for their families. It is about time someone gave them a break. Today the Republican majority wants to increase the rents for those who are on the minimum wage, but they will not give them a wage increase. Democrats in this body support the modest proposal to raise the minimum wage by 90 cents. At least 21 majority Members have had the courage to buck the Republican leadership and sign on to a raise for working folks. Mr. Speaker, I say to the gentleman from Washington [Mr. Metcalf], the gentleman from California [Mr. Horn], and the gentleman from New York [Mr. Lazio], please vote against the previous question so we can have a vote on the minimum wage. A majority of this body supports raising the minimum wage. On April 17, Speaker Gingrich promised hearings on the minimum wage. Anyone who may have believed that promise, it has now been 21 days. Speaker Gingrich's taxpayer-funded salary has paid him $9,867 since April 17, but a minimum-wage worker takes home only $8,840 in an entire year. Mr. Speaker, I call on this House, I call on the Speaker, to stop stiffing working Americans. Defeat the previous question so we can get a clean up-or-down vote to raise the minimum wage in this country.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, today we celebrate the birthday of a truly great American. Harry Truman was a straight talking, commonsense Democrat who took over as President after the death of Franklin Roosevelt and led this Nation to victory in World War II. Harry Truman took responsibility for his actions. He kept a sign on his desk in the oval office that said, ``The buck stops here.'' And he wasn't afraid of his critics. He often said, ``If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen.'' Republican House Speaker Newt Gingrich would do well to consult the wisdom of Harry Truman who could offer better advice than the management gurus the Speaker turned to when he led us to two Government shutdowns. In today's Washington Post, the Speaker attacks the press and says that there is what he calls a conspiracy in the media that is undoing the Republican revolution. Mr. Speaker, there is no conspiracy. The American people reviewed your program and rejected it. As Harry Truman would have said, ``If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen.''

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, the Republican leadership continues to put special interests first and working families dead last. Now they want to cut education to give a windfall to big oil. I support repealing the gas tax. But it must help consumers rather than the oil companies. In the last week, the wholesale price of gas has fallen by 4.4 cents. But the retail price is up two-tenths of a cent. The money should go into the pockets of consumers through lower prices at the pump. But Republicans are willing to let the money go into the bulging bank accounts of big oil instead. My Republican colleagues are falling all over themselves to shell out this windfall to big oil. Could it be because 90 percent of the $2.1 million oil and gas companies gave in campaign contributions went to Republicans? Is that why they want to cut education rather than cutting corporate welfare to pay for the gas tax? We can repeal the gas tax. But let's put working families first by making sure they get the benefit rather than getting the shaft.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer an extremely important amendment to improve the protections that are already included in this measure for our Nation's children, elderly and other vulnerable citizens. Public citizens today are facing a deadly new threat on the streets of my home State of Connecticut and across the Nation: the new threat is the emergence of laser sighting devices that are aimed at our law-abiding citizens. These laser sights, mounted on the barrel of a gun, emit a tiny red beam of light that the shooter uses to line up the targets. In the hands of a criminal, these high-technology weapons turn ordinary street thugs into sharpshooters. My amendment directs the U.S. Sentencing Commission to increase penalties for individuals convicted of crimes of violence involving laser sighting devices when that crime is against a child, a senior, or a vulnerable person as defined by the bill. The amendment will deter the use of laser sight technology in street crime and require the Sentencing Commission to collect data on laser sighting devices in violent criminal activity throughout the Nation. It is narrowly crafted legislation. It focuses on the criminal to crack down on violent crime. It is a noncontroversial approach that Members can support regardless of their views on gun legislation in general. I offered a similar, but broader, amendment to the antiterrorism legislation in March. The amendment had wide bipartisan support and passed by voice vote. Unfortunately, the amendment was removed in conference. Let me stress the amendment does not ban laser sight technology, nor does it ban guns equipped with laser sights. Again, it does not ban laser sight technology, nor does it ban guns equipped with laser sights. This is not about gun control, it is about crime control and justice for the victims of violent crime. Mr. Chairman, I crafted this legislation with the help of local law enforcement in Connecticut. With their input, this legislation has won endorsements from the National Fraternal Order of Police, the International Brotherhood of Police and others. Let me read directly from the letter of support that I received from the National Fraternal Order of Police regarding the legislation. The citizens of this nation already suffer far too much from tragedies precipitated by firearms crime. This problem is exacerbated by criminals using laser sights to make their criminal activity even more deadly. Proliferation of this new technology is growing at an alarming rate among street thugs in communities across America. On Christmas Day of last year and during the first weeks of the New Year, guns equipped with laser sights have taken lives and evoked fear amongst families in my district. That is why I am offering in this amendment today. The enhanced accuracy that these laser sighting devices generate in the hands of the violent criminal create a ``Super-gun,'' which aimed directly or indirectly at a target, make victims of innocent children, our seniors and other community members as they live and work in our neighborhoods. In closing, let me read to my colleagues from a letter I received from the Connecticut Police Chiefs Association's president, Chief James Thomas, in strong support of my amendment: Your legislation is a step in the right direction to reaffirm that society will not tolerate the use of sophisticated weapons by criminals against its citizens. This bill punishes the criminal, not law-abiding gun users or gun owners, and I urge its immediate passage. I urge my colleagues to protect our most vulnerable citizens from violent crimes involving laser sights. Mr. Chairman, I ask for a favorable vote on this amendment.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, increasingly the extreme agenda of the gentleman from Georgia [Mr. Gingrich] and his leadership team reminds me of a bad 1950's B movie plot: The thing that would not die. They continue to resurrect bad ideas that have rightfully been shot down because in fact they have hurt working families in this country. The latest example of a bad idea that will not stay dead is the House Republicans' plan to cut education. It was only about 2 weeks ago when Speaker Gingrich and other congressional Republicans waved the white flag and surrendered their extreme position on cutting education. They proposed making the deepest cuts in the history of public education in this Nation, totaling $3.1 billion, and it took the outrage of parents and teachers and students at the grassroots level in addition to the determination of the President, of the congressional Democrats, to force Republican leadership to stop this wrongheaded attitude and attack on our Nation's future. But let me say that parents do not rest easy. No sooner do we think that this bad idea is dead and buried, that then it finds new life. Yesterday House Majority Leader Dick Armey proposed cutting education to pay for the repeal of the gas tax. I quote: But the fact of the matter is, given our ability to contain the cost of energy and give tax relief, maybe we ought to take another look at the amount of money we are spending on education. Direct quote: I watched the program. Now I support a cut in the gas tax and would vote for such a thing. But who is going to get the benefit of it? Is the consumer going to get the 4.3 cents, or is that money going to go into the pockets of big oil? That is what the danger is here, and what is going to get cut in order to pay for that tax cut? The last thing I want to see is a political game being played that does not really save the consumers any money in the end. Is it not funny that when the increase, when it goes up, when the stock market goes up in its price, and the gas prices go up at the pump, when that goes down, when the stock market goes down, is it not funny that the gas prices for consumers and for families grudgingly comes down and takes a very, very long time for it to do it? If we are going to cut the gas tax, then we should have the big oil companies pay for that gas tax cut and not education programs that serve working families in this country. The other thing that we ought to consider at the same time is how come the prices rose so quickly, how come all the prices went up at the exact same time with the exact amount of increase? Is not that strange? Let us take a look at and investigate that portion of this debate. Let me just say that instead of cutting corporate pork the gentleman from the big oil State of Texas proposes cutting education for our kids to pay for a tax cut that will have resulted in a major windfall for the wealthy oil barons in this Nation. We all know that education holds the key to the American dream for the progress of working families in this country, yet the extreme agenda of the Republican revolution calls for devastating cuts in education. Their bill last year would have cut basic skills training, reading, writing, arithmetic by 17 percent. The Republican majority tried last year to cut safe and drug-free schools by 57 percent, which would have denied 23 million children in this country these common-sense protections. The extremists would have proposed killing President Bush's bipartisan Goals 2000 initiative which is helping 44 million children nationwide raise the standards of their educational performance, and in an age when tuition costs for college are going through the roof, the majority attempted to roll back direct student loans which would have denied 1,200 schools and 2.5 million students the opportunity to participate in this initiative that makes college more affordable for working families in this country. Mr. Speaker, I think the Republican leader's advisers must have been too close to the gas fumes when they told him to propose that one. Hard-working American families struggle and scrimp every simple day to provide educational opportunities for their kids. They know, no one knows better than them, that in today's economy what you earn depends on what you learn. So these middle-class folks take responsibility for their families, and maybe they do not take that vacation, and maybe they do not buy expensive clothes. We should honor their sacrifice. Let us help working families play by the rules. Help them get their kids a good education. Let us not give a tax break and pork to the special interests. Let us help working families and not cut education programs.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to join my colleagues in honoring the gentleman from Florida, my dear friend, Sam Gibbons. I would like to say thank you to the gentlewoman from Florida [Ms. Brown] for organizing this tribute to a man who has served his country with distinction for over half a century. Sam Gibbons is truly an American hero. Most people know Sam for his work here in the House in steadfast defense of Medicare for our Nation's seniors. He understands what Medicare has meant in the lives of seniors. He understands what health insurance has meant to the seniors of this Nation. He has been inspiring in leading the charge in that important fight and I am proud to have served with Sam Gibbons. Yet, outstanding service to our Nation is nothing new to Sam. Mr. Speaker, 52 years ago this June Sam Gibbons led the charge as American and Allied troops stormed the beaches in Normandy in Operation Overlord, the invasion that liberated Nazi-occupied France and marked the beginning of the end of World War II. Sam won the Bronze Star for parachuting into France the night before the invasion. As President Clinton remarked during the 50th anniversary ceremony commemorating brave men like Sam, and I quote, ``What we must remember is that when they were young, these men saved the world.'' Throughout his 34 years of service to the American people in this House, Sam Gibbons has worked long and hard to provide opportunity and progress for the American people. Sam was instrumental in the enactment of President Lyndon Johnson's Job Corps, Head Start, and other antipoverty initiatives. As the former chairman and current ranking Democrat of the Committee on Ways and Means, Sam has long been a leader on pension reform, international trade, health care, welfare, and tax policies. Again, to the gentlewoman from Florida [Ms. Brown], I thank you for allowing me to participate in this tribute to this true American hero. The people's House, which is what this body is, will not be the same without Sam Gibbons. We will miss his intelligence, his dignity, his indomitable will, his commitment to the people of this country, his love for a good fight, and his desire to make this place a better world, a better country for American men and women. Mr. Speaker, I wish the gentleman from Florida the best fortune in his future endeavors.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, today I call upon my colleagues to defeat the previous question so that we can go back to the Committee on Rules and have a vote on raising the minimum wage. My colleagues and I have been trying for weeks to convince Newt Gingrich and the rest of the Republican leadership to allow a vote on raising the minimum wage, a mere 90-cent increase for the hard-working men and women of this country at a time in our Nation's history when we are looking at corporate CEO's who are making on average $2 to $3 million a year, and working Americans have not seen a raise in their income in the last several years. They scramble every week to try to pay their bills. Mr. Speaker, last month I went to the Committee on Rules, and I testified in favor of allowing a vote on raising the minimum wage. My request was denied. On this floor the next day my Democratic colleagues offered a motion to allow a vote on raising the minimum wage. Again, our effort to give working families a raise was denied. As a matter of fact, the House Parliamentarian ruled that the Republican leadership was using an invalid procedure to kill that vote. After denying us the right in this body, the people's House, to raise the people's interests, we were not allowed to have this come up for a vote. Yesterday the Speaker of the House said that it is not his intention to schedule a vote on the minimum wage. He refuses to do it. Yesterday or the day before yesterday, the third ranking member of the Republican leadership in this body said that the minimum wage families do not exist. There is a movement here and a pattern to not allow us to be able to vote in this Nation on the minimum wage. Eighty-four percent of the people in this country want us to increase the minimum wage. Stop playing parliamentary games with America's working families. Please, give them a simple yes or no vote on raising the minimum wage in this country. Stop denying hard-working families, people that we ought to honor for taking on the personal responsibility of working hard every single day. All they want to do is to get their kids to school. They want a decent retirement for themselves. That is all they are asking for. And they make $8,500 a year. Mr. Speaker, let me tell my colleagues in this body, during the shutdown in the Christmas holidays, Members of this body made more than minimum wage workers made in 1 year. It is unfair. Let us vote now, let us vote right away, an up or down vote on raising the minimum wage in this country.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, my Republican colleagues continue to refuse to allow a vote on the minimum wage. It was only minutes ago in this body that they once again rejected a democratic effort to bring the minimum wage increase to the floor for a vote. I might add that in that vote were 15 Republican colleagues who only days ago, along with a few others, who said that they were splitting with their leadership; they believed that we ought to pass a minimum wage, and that that vote ought to be brought up in this body. Fifteen of them, when they had the opportunity, they would have made the difference, they would have made the difference in the vote, so that the people's House, the House of Representatives, could have voted to raise the minimum wage a mere 90 cents. As a matter of fact, because I was watching the clock, when there was about 220 votes, that is enough in order to defeat the opportunity to bring the vote up, several of them hung back, waited until it was lost, and then cast their vote against bringing it up. Talk about profiles in courage? Real courage. But it is nice to get the press accounts in the last few days of how you break with leadership and call for a minimum wage. And when you have the opportunity which this body afforded only a few minutes ago, they took a walk. I am sure that their constituents are going to take a hard look at this vote. I have bad news for those who oppose a fair minimum wage. We are not done. We will be back, again and again and again, until we see the minimum wage increased in this country. We will not give up, because there is a lot at stake in this minimum wage debate and in this vote. This debate is not about yet another way for my Republican colleagues to reward the rich and the powerful in this country. It is not another perk for those in power or a payoff to some special interest lobby. What is at stake here is whether or not this Congress will honor and reward hard work and tell the hard working men and women in this Nation that we care about what you do, we honor what you do, and we know what a difficult struggle it is every single week to scramble, to pay those bills, to make sure that your kids can go to college. And then, my God, after these years of work, that you can have a decent and dignified and secure retirement. We will tell minimum wage workers that we respect that valiant struggle. The minimum wage is already at a 40-year low. It continues to plummet in value. And what we do is we discourage people from working. We say to people, go ahead, be on welfare. That is crazy. We want to reward work in this country. That is what it is all about. That is what the people are about, that is what my folks are about. They worked hard. They worked hard to be able to send me to school. And people who are doing that ought to understand that those who they elect are going to reward that hard work. Who are the typical minimum wage workers? The typical minimum worker is a woman. Almost two-thirds are adults, 20 years of age or older. Do not let them get away with saying the minimum wage workers are teenagers. They are not. That is not true. The average minimum wage worker brings home half of his or her family's earnings, and about 40 percent of this Nation's minimum wage workers are the sole bread winner of their family. A full-time minimum wage worker makes $8,500 a year. It is less than what people on welfare do get today in this country. Think about it. An increase in the minimum wage would help working men and women who are providing the only source of income for their families, and we could honor their hard work. These are the ordinary folks, average people, waiters, waitresses, people who wash the dishes. They are struggling everyday. Do you know that when the Government shut down in December, the Members of this body, Members of Congress who make over $130,000 a year, they got more in that period of shutdown than a full-time minimum wage worker makes in an entire year? It is wrong. Raise the minimum wage. Let us do it now. Let us bring this up for a vote.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, this bill is a victory for American values. It is a triumph of American's priorities in areas like education, the environment and Medicare, over the politics and the policies of government gridlock and shutdown. It shows the power of mainstream values in this Nation and the utter bankruptcy of the policy of extremism. It proves and demonstrates that in fact we can cut spending in these difficult economic times with a lack of resources and at the same time hold on to and preserve those values of education and the environment that this Nation holds dear. Mr. Speaker, we can remember the commentary in the past several months about a willingness to shut the Government down, not once but twice. We can remember the commentary about making the biggest cuts in education in this Nation's history. That failed. The proposal of disastrous environmental policies, they failed. Mr. Speaker, because of the steadfastness, today we vote on appropriation bills that protect America's priorities.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, yesterday Newt Gingrich and his leadership team stiffed America's hardworking families once again. These are the families who work hard; they play by the rules. They are working longer and harder to pay the bills to save for education and for retirement. These families support an increase in the minimum wage. Eighty-four percent of the American people favor raising the minimum wage, everyone, that is, except for the House Republican leadership. Yesterday the Republican majority leader said he will not schedule a vote on the minimum wage. Why do House Republicans continue to give working families the back of their hand rather than extending a hand? Because, as a top business lobbyist said yesterday, we made them, and this is a quote, ``We made them the majority.'' Republicans continue to pay off their special interest pals rather than helping America's hardworking families. Mr. Speaker, this is the people's House, not the House of special interests. Stop hurting working families in this country. Raise the minimum wage now.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, my Republican colleagues are reaching new heights of desperation as they scurry to dodge a vote on raising the minimum wage, even though the minimum wage is at a 40-year low, even though a 90-cent increase would help over 10 million workers in this country, and even though the average minimum-wage worker brings home more than half of his or her family's income. It might be interesting to note that Members of this Congress earned more during the shutdown of this Government during the Christmas holidays than a full-time minimum-wage worker makes in an entire year. But despite all that, the Republican leadership will go to any length to kill an increase in the minimum wage. They are not even afraid of resorting to fantasy. Yesterday the House majority whip said, ``Emotional appeals about working families trying to get by on $4.25 an hour are hard to resist. Fortunately, such families don't really exist.'' They do not believe that people do exist on the $8,500 a year or are trying to exist on that amount of money. Tell it to the 300,000 families in this country who are minimum-wage workers. Let us go to a clean, straight vote on raising the minimum wage.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, what I want to do is to engage in this effort tonight to have a dialog, if you will, and discussion with several of my colleagues to talk about the minimum wage. I will yield to my colleague, the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Gene Green], and thank him for participating with us tonight. I would ask him to just kick off this effort tonight for us.