Rosa DeLauro

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I am Rosa DeLauro from the State of Connecticut. I represent the Third Congressional District. I am so proud today to join with my colleagues on the issue of what do we do in the United States Congress, the body that deliberates the major issues of the day, the body that is entrusted by the people who put their faith and trust in their elected representatives to do right, to do right by the American people, yes, to keep them and their families safe. In Connecticut, gun homicides in 2013 were 71; in 2014, 56--we went down; 2015, 79. Probably one of the most searing events in the United States of America was the massacre of children, of babies in Sandy Hook. That isn't to say that in every city in this country children are not dying every day. Since Sandy Hook, one American child is killed every single day. These are our children. Almost 100,000 have died by gun violence since Sandy Hook. What I would like to do is to read to you the names of victims at Sandy Hook. These are not what we are here today to speak about. Yes, we talk about statistics and we talk about percentages, but what is important is to know about the flesh and blood behind those numbers. At Sandy Hook: Rachel D'Avino, 29, a teacher's aide. Dawn Hochsprung, 47, principal of Sandy Hook Elementary School. Ann Marie Murphy, 52, a teacher's aide. Lauren Rousseau, 30, a teacher. Mary Sherlach, 56, school psychologist. Victoria Leigh Soto, 27, a teacher who hid her children in a closet. And I know, because she was a constituent, her family today suffers every day because of her loss. She shielded these babies, and she lost her life. And who are these babies? Charlotte Bacon, 6 years old. Daniel Barden, 7. Olivia Engel, 6. Josephine Gay, 7. Dylan Hockley, 6. Madeleine Hsu, 6. Catherine Hubbard, 6. Chase Kowalski, 7. Jesse Lewis, 6. Ana Marquez-Greene, 6. James Mattioli, 6. Grace McDonnell, 7. Emilie Parker, 6. Jack Pinto, 6. Noah Pozner, 6. Caroline Previdi, 6. Jessica Rekos, 6. Avielle Richman, 6. Benjamin Wheeler, 6. Allison Wyatt, 6. We all have children. We have grandchildren. And I won't forget that day because my grandchildren at that time were 5, 6, 7, and 8 years old. I had to steel myself to be away from them because when I looked at them I just began to cry, because it can be anyone's child, anyone's grandchild who will lose their life. One child every single day is killed by gun violence in the United States of America. They leave families, they leave siblings who are unable to even cope with the sense of loss. These families have tried to channel their grief by the Newtown Promise. Why are we here today? We are here today to say: universal background checks; no fly, no buy. It is as simple as that. And for me personally, as my colleague from Rhode Island said, we should ban assault weapons. We should ban them. That is what occurred at Sandy Hook and several other of these tragedies. The American people sent us here to vote. That is what you have done, demand that this Congress vote on this issue. Debate it and vote, and people can be free to vote whatever way they choose to, but our Constitution says we vote on these issues. We should not be denied. Those children all over America, the adults, should not be forgotten. They should be remembered and that this body was allowed to vote on their behalf.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained and so I missed Roll Call vote number 297 regarding ``United States-Caribbean Strategic Engagement Act of 2016''. Had I been present, I would have voted ``Yea''. I missed Roll Call vote number 298 regarding ``Networking and Information Technology Research and Development Modernization Act''. Had I been present, I would have voted ``Yea''.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to rise today to join the community of Middlefield, Connecticut in extending my congratulations to the Lyman family as they mark the 275th Anniversary of Lyman Orchards--a very special milestone for this wonderful community treasure. The story of Lyman Orchards begins in 1741 when John and Hope Lyman purchased thirty-seven acres of land and started the family farm. Eight generations later, Lyman Orchards remains family-run and is, in fact, the 12th oldest family run business still in operation in the United States. Over its 275-year history, Lyman Orchards has grown and today encompasses over 1,100 acres of land where it produces over one hundred varieties of fruit and is home to the Apple Barrel where shoppers can purchase produce from the farm as well as products created by that produce like their famous high-top apple pie, cider donuts, and fresh apple cider. Families can enjoy the ``pick-your-own'' opportunities, a business model that Lyman Orchards was the first to introduce in 1966. From apples and pumpkins in the fall to strawberries, blueberries, and raspberries in the early summer and peaches, nectarines, and pears in the late summer, you can pick your own favorites nearly all year long. More recently, Lyman Orchards has added attractions like the Corn Maze and Sunflower Maze the proceeds from which are donated to the American Cancer Society and the Connecticut Children's Medical Center respectively. There is the Paint the Pumpkin Pink event that raises money for the Middlesex Comprehensive Breast Center and the Sunshine Kids Road Race that benefits children with cancer. Lyman Orchards is also home to two 18-hole golf courses and a golf training center. Designed by legendary Hall of Fame architect Robert Trent Jones and Hall of Fame golfer Gary Player, these championship golf courses are both ranked among the best in the Northeast. During my tenure in Congress, I have had many opportunities to visit Lyman Orchards and have always been in awe of their forward-thinking vision, always coupled with their commitment to preserving and celebrating their rich history. Rooted, both literally and figuratively, in the Middlefield community, Lyman Orchards and the Lyman family are not only a part of the fabric of Middlefield, they are a warp thread--a vertical thread that forms the base of the fabric's weave. Theirs is a story that is a reflection of the history not only of Connecticut, but of New England. I am proud to stand today to offer my heartfelt congratulations to John Lyman, III and the entire Lyman family as they mark the 275th Anniversary of Lyman Orchards and extend my very best wishes for continued success.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I am very proud to rise today to extend my heartfelt congratulations to the communities of Middlefield and Rockfall, Connecticut as they celebrate the Town's 150th Anniversary. This is a very special milestone for this small community of just over four thousand residents. Over the course of the year, celebratory activities have been organized by a dedicated group of volunteers. Though small in number, the community is mighty in spirit--working together every day to meet the changing needs of its residents while preserving the unique, quintessentially New England, rural character of the Town. Originally a part of Middletown, in 1744 the Connecticut General Assembly recognized Middlefield as a separate religious society but it was not until 1866 that is was officially incorporated as a separate town. In fact it was one of the last of Connecticut's 169 cities, towns, and boroughs. From the Millers and Lymans to the Hubbards, Coes, and Augurs, the community is still home to many descendants of its founding members--one of the many things that makes this community a special place to live. Middlefield has a rich agricultural and industrial history that continues to today. In its earliest years, it was settled by farmers and in fact it remains home to one of the oldest family-run businesses in the United States, Lyman Orchards. In time, light industry came to town with a paper mill and later a powder mill coming into operation, followed by factories for nail cutting and pistol making as well as a grist and saw mill. Today, Middlefield is home to the Cooper Atkins Corporation as well as Zygo Corporation and the Cahill & Sons companies. The Town is also full of beautiful natural resources and protected open spaces. Wadsworth State Park offers a beach and small lake for swimming as well as trails for hiking. It is also home to Wadsworth Falls, one of the largest and finest waterfalls in Connecticut, where the West River falls thirty-five feet and when the river is running high the roar of the falls can be heard for miles around. Pekham Park offers residents and visitors a wide variety of year round activities including ice-skating, baseball, basketball, soccer, and a wonderful jungle gym. On Lake Beseck you can often find the locals fishing or simply enjoying the water. And, of course, at Lyman Orchards you can pick your own fruit in the summer and fall and enjoy apple-picking, the corn and sunflower mazes, and pumpkin fields in the fall. It has been an honor for me to serve as Middlefield's U.S. Representative these last twenty-five years and I am proud to have this opportunity to extend my heartfelt congratulations to every member of this special community as they celebrate their 150th Anniversary.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I rise today to join the community of Durham, Connecticut as well as a host of surrounding communities in extending my heartfelt congratulations to the Durham Fair Association as they mark the 100th Anniversary of the Durham Fair, Connecticut's largest agricultural fair and a cherished local legacy. Each year, on the last full weekend of September, thousands converge on the historic Durham Fairgrounds for this wonderful celebration of Connecticut's rich agricultural history. Before the gates open each day, the national anthem is sung; down in the Cow Palace and Animal Buildings, farms from across the state showcase a variety of animals including beef and dairy cattle, horses, llamas, pigs, rabbits, chickens, goats, and sheep; in the Commercial Building the vendors offer everything from farm equipment to vacuum cleaners; and in the Crafts Tent you can enjoy the works of local artists selling wares from handmade pottery, clothing, and jewelry to some of the world's best fudge. Art, baking, canning, crafts & collections, needlework and photography--there is no shortage of categories for the skills of adults and youth showcased throughout the ``Best in Show'' exhibits. Entries from quilts and woodworking to jams, pies and cakes, as well as pumpkin carving are on display competing for the coveted blue ribbon awards. Each extraordinary exhibit harkens back to the heritage and hallmarks of a true country fair. And you cannot miss the Farm Museum where their vast collection of antique farm equipment and collectibles will transport you back to the days of hand-cranked tractors, blacksmiths, and pot-bellied stoves. The Midway offers a variety of classic amusement rides and games and on the four different stages throughout the fairgrounds, musical entertainment from favorite local bands to major headliners comes with your admission ticket. And, of course, there are also the annual favorites--the tractor pull and demolition derby. It is nothing short of an extraordinary experience. Of course, one cannot talk about the Durham Fair without mentioning the incredible variety of food one can enjoy throughout the fairgrounds. And while there are private vendors that contract with the Fair, much of the fare offered is from local nonprofit organizations that the Association has opened the Fair to over the years. Ears of corn-on-the-cob, corn muffins, and popcorn are available from the PTA of Lyman Elementary School; the Coginchaug Benchwarmers have burgers and hotdogs; the Middlefield Lions have sausage and pepper grinders and fantastic donuts on their menu; the Portland Fire Department offers up the Fair's best french fries; Lime Rickeys are on tap at the Durham United Churches booth; and the Middletown Elks always have an extensive menu--and those are just a sampling of the more than two dozen local non-profits that participate in this event every year. The Durham Fair Association takes great pride in distributing profits from the fair back to the community through scholarships and support of numerous projects and events. In fact, proceeds from the Durham Fair have allowed the Association to award over $500,000 in academic scholarships, make more than $50,000 in charitable donations, and assist in community projects such as fencing and maintaining the Old Cemetery, help with the repairs to the Durham Library and contribute to other library building projects, and purchase the Durham Fire Company's first Jaws of Life. Over its 100-year history, what began as a single-day event has grown into a four-day celebration of agriculture past and present. What makes the Durham Fair particularly unique is that it remains a completely volunteer-run event--a testament to the special place it holds in the hearts of community members in Durham and neighboring communities. The Durham Fair is a local legacy that contributes to the enrichment of the Durham community in countless ways. Today, as they mark their centennial anniversary, I am proud to stand and extend my heartfelt congratulations and very best wishes for another century of continued success.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, today marks the end of an era at the United Way of Greater New Haven as family, friends, and colleagues gather to thank Jack Healy, the organization's President and CEO, as he celebrates his retirement after two decades of dedicated service. A native of New Haven, Jack's early professional career took him to many other parts of the country yet his focus always followed his passion--human resources and philanthropy. In fact, much of his time away from Connecticut was spent at United Way branches in other communities. Returning to New Haven in 1996, Jack took on the position of Executive Vice President at the United Way of Greater New Haven and was promoted to President & CEO in 2006. His time at the United Way of Greater New Haven has been focused on guiding the organization through a shift in the fundamental way it supports the community. Jack's leadership and vision has enabled the United Way of Greater New Haven to grow in its positive community impact by transforming from an organization that fundraised for nonprofits to becoming a driving force in collectively tackling such issues as income inequality, homelessness, and early childhood education. It has been under this new model of operation that the United Way of Greater New Haven has been able to make some real differences in our community. Most recently, the ALICE, ``Asset-Limited, Income- Constrained, Employed'' report released by the United Way of Greater New Haven has demonstrated the unique challenges faced by our working families. By identifying the areas in which families are struggling, the results of the ALICE report are enabling our social service agencies and non-profit organizations to better direct their resources, programs, and services to meet these needs. Perhaps Jack's proudest accomplishment is the United Way of Greater New Haven's active involvement in the development and implementation of ``BOOST!''--a partnership with New Haven Public Schools and the City of New Haven to provide wrap-around services to our community's most vulnerable children. This initiative is currently serving more than seven thousand students in sixteen schools and is making sure that those children are not only achieving academically while in school, but are also receiving the supportive services they and their families need to thrive in the community. I would be remiss if I did not also take a moment to extend a personal note of thanks to Jack for his many years of friendship and support. I am honored to rise today to join the many family, friends, colleagues and community leaders who have gathered today to extend sincere thanks and appreciation to Jack Healy for two decades of dedicated service to the United Way of Greater New Haven. I wish him, his wife, Barbara; his two sons, Dan and wife Ashley as well as Ryan and wife Rebecca; and granddaughter Lettie, many more years of health and happiness as he enjoys his retirement.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I just will say, what my colleague, Mr. Sessions, just said: that the NIH had $600 million in unused Ebola money, that really is false. The NIH has used all of its Ebola funds that Congress allocated. So the statement of the gentleman from Texas is not factual. The Zika virus is a public health emergency. It is a crisis, and we must treat it as such. As of last week, there were almost 1,400 confirmed cases of Zika in the United States and its territories. Nearly 300 of them are pregnant women. And one person has died. This Congress, when we appropriate money for defense or defense spending or for wars, Republicans say: Listen to the generals in the field; they are the ones who know best. Well, we are in the midst of a war against the Zika virus, and we should be listening to the generals and the experts in the field. And who are they? They are at the Centers for Disease Control; they are at the National Institutes of Health; and they are the scientists in our country. We need to give them the resources that they need, and they have told us that they need $1.9 billion. We should do the right thing. We should fund their request. One-third of that request, which is what the House Republicans have proposed, is not adequate. Typically, microcephaly occurs in 0.02 percent to 0.12 percent of all U.S. births, but The Washington Post reported yesterday that, among Zika-infected pregnant women, that risk is as high as 13 percent. This summer, every woman who is pregnant or trying to get pregnant will be afraid: afraid to go out on the patio, afraid to take your kids to the Little League, afraid to go to a barbecue. It is our duty here to do everything that we can to ease those fears, to stop this disease from spreading any further. We must not put American women in a predicament of choosing whether or not they should get pregnant or, if they are already pregnant, wondering whether or not their baby is going to be okay. Ron Klain, the Ebola czar, wrote in The Washington Post: ``It is not a question of whether babies will be born in the United States with Zika-related microcephaly--it is a question of when and how many. For years to come, these children will be a visible, human reminder of the cost of absurd wrangling in Washington, of preventable suffering, of a failure of our political system to respond to the threat that infectious diseases pose.'' According to the CDC, pregnant women are already facing unacceptably long delays in learning Zika results. CDC Director Tom Frieden has said that experts estimate a single child with birth defects can usually cost $10 million to care for--or more. That says nothing about the life of that child with microcephaly. They cannot eat; they cannot speak; they cannot walk. I do not often quote Senator Marco Rubio, but last week, he said: It is a mistake for Congress to try to deal with the Zika virus on the cheap. If we don't spend money on the front end, I think we are going to spend a lot more later, because this problem is not going away. We could not agree more. We have stolen $44 million from our States to deal with this crisis, and the Republican bill does not reimburse our States for the money that they need for dealing with emergencies such as this. We should defeat the previous question, and we should consider the Lowey-DeLauro-Wasserman Schultz amendment and fully fund the President's request of $1.9 billion. It is the responsible and moral thing to do.

Ms. DeLAURO. Months from now, when the results of our inaction become apparent, we will ask ourselves: Why did we delay? Why did we wait? We must take appropriate action now. We must reject the previous question. We must do what is the morally right thing for the people of this country who put their faith and trust in us to come and represent their best interests and the public health.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, this bill is woefully inadequate. The Zika virus is a public health emergency. It is a crisis. Last week, 1,204 confirmed cases in the United States and its territories, over 100 of them pregnant women. One person has died. Temperatures are rising already and reaching high levels in the United States in the areas where these mosquitoes thrive, and we are told that this could spread to 30 States. The Olympics are less than 80 days away in Brazil. We are going to send our young men and women into harm's way. The window for us to act on this effort is closing, and the majority's Zika Response Appropriations Act is too little. It is too late. It only provides a third of the President's request. Without additional funding, the CDC will not be able to protect pregnant women by better understanding the link between Zika and adverse health effects. They will not be able to control and mitigate mosquito populations before the epidemic spreads further. They lose laboratory capacity, they lose the ability of surveillance as the outbreak is moving on. The most immediate needs of State and local public health departments are woefully underfunded by the House Republican bill. Our States' and our municipalities' emergency funds have been slashed. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record the list of all of the States in this country and the loss of preparedness funds in order to be able to deal with the crisis.

Ms. DeLAURO. While the administration requested $743 million for CDC's public health activities, the House bill provides only $120 million, 84 percent below the request. Who are we kidding? This is going to put millions of pregnant women in danger. According to the CDC, pregnant women are already facing unacceptably long delays in learning Zika test results. Physicians are advising women not to get pregnant. Pregnant women are scared to death about what is going to happen to the child that they are carrying. Director Tom Frieden has said that experts estimate a single child with birth defects can cost $10 million to care for. We need to prevent this. And the amount of money that the majority has talked about is inadequate to prevent it. If each child takes $10 million to care for, and we take a look at $622 million, we are going to look at our ability to take care of 62 children who might be affected with microcephaly. This says nothing about what the child's quality of life is, the delays in learning to speak, to walk.

Ms. DeLAURO. It is a delay in learning to speak, walk, hear and eat. Imagine. But we can stop this crisis before it gets worse. We have to act now, and we have to fully fund the President's request. It is the responsible thing to do. More importantly, it is the moral thing to do. Months from now, when the results of our inaction become apparent, we will ask ourselves, why did we delay? Why did we wait? You know, I do not often quote Senator Marco Rubio, but yesterday he said this about the House bill, and I quote: ``Frankly, that's just not going to cut it. If we don't spend more than that on the front end, I think we are going to spend a lot more later because the problem is not going to go away.'' I could not agree more. We need to act now. That is our responsibility. The President's request was in February. It is now almost the end of May. People are suffering, and we have the power in this body to stop that.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to join the Albertus Magnus College community as they pay tribute to the woman who has led this outstanding institution for the last thirty-four years, Dr. Julia M. McNamara. Over the course of her tenure, she has guided Albertus Magnus through a myriad of transitions which have expanded the college in countless ways. Her vision, dedication, and seemingly endless energy have ensured that Albertus Magnus has continually met the changing needs of its students and faculty. To say that Julia has left an indelible mark on this institution would be an understatement. For perspective, just last year Albertus celebrated its 90th Anniversary which means that for more than one third of its existence, Julia has been at its helm. Shortly after she was appointed President, Albertus Magnus became coeducational after sixty years as a women's college and in that same year, an innovative and highly successful Accelerated Degree Program for adult students was established. Julia oversaw the completion of a $6 million capital campaign, the largest in the school's history, as well as the construction of state-of-the-art indoor and outdoor athletic facilities that has allowed the College to join the NCAA-Division III. Ensuring that all of their student's needs were being met, Julia was also instrumental in the College becoming a participant in the Post 9/11 G.I. Bill Yellow Ribbon Program, where Albertus works closely with veterans to help them succeed in accelerated programs. Under Julia's direction Albertus expanded opportunities for its students with the establishment of the Master of Arts in Liberal Studies Program, the first post-graduate degree in the College's history, and New Dimensions, a degree completion program for adult professionals, was begun in 1994. Today, the College also offers a Master of Science in Management degree, Master of Arts in Art Therapy-- the only one in Connecticut--Master of Business Administration, a Master of Arts in Leadership, Master of Science in Education, Master of Fine Arts in Writing and Master of Science in Human Services, Master of Science in Accounting and the Master of Science in Criminal Justice. Julia's contributions to our community extend far beyond her work at Albertus Magnus. She is a past Chair of the Yale-New Haven Hospital Board of Trustees and currently serves as Vice Chair. She has also served on the Board of Directors of The Community Foundation for Greater New Haven, the International Festival of Arts & Ideas, the United Way of Greater New Haven and the Shubert Theatre. In 1990, she became the first woman to serve on the Committee of the Proprietors of the Common and Undivided Lands, which oversees the use of the New Haven Green and she currently serves on the Board of Directors of the Association of Catholic Colleges and Universities. The Greater New Haven Chamber of Commerce's Community Leadership Award, the New Haven YWCA's Women in Leadership Distinguished Service Award, Columbus House's Outstanding Service to the Community Award, the Academy of Our Lady of Mercy, Lauralton Hall's Claven Award, and the New Haven Business Times' Women in Business Lifetime Achievement Award are just a sampling of the myriad of awards and recognitions with which Julia has been honored for her service to the community. I would be remiss if I did not take a moment to extend a personal note of thanks and appreciation to Julia for her many years of friendship and support. In addition to being a constant resource on higher education challenges and policies, she has served on the Ted DeLauro Scholarship Committee, a scholarship given to high school seniors for service to the community which I established in my father's name, since its inception in 1991. Julia is an extraordinary woman and I, like so many others, consider myself fortunate to call her my friend. Today, as she reflects on her career with Albertus Magnus, family, friends, and colleagues gather to pay tribute to unparalleled leadership and commitment, not only to Albertus Magnus, but to higher education and our community. I am proud to have this opportunity to extend my deepest thanks and appreciation to Dr. Julia M. McNamara for her invaluable contributions. I wish her, her husband, Dick, as well as the apples of their eyes, their three dogs, Kerry, Fiona, and Nova, all the best for many more years of health and happiness as she enjoys her retirement.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained and so I missed Roll Call vote number 164 regarding ``H.R. 4820: Combating Terrorist Recruitment Act of 2016.'' Had I been present, I would have voted ``No.'' I missed Roll Call vote number 165 regarding ``H.R. 4096: Investor Clarity and Bank Parity Act.'' Had I been present, I would have voted ``Yea.''

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor and to celebrate the life of Mary Ann Wasil, one of my personal heroes and one of the strongest women I have ever known, who passed away earlier this month. Mary Ann possessed a tenacious spirit, an unyielding faith, a heart full of love, and an infectious smile. She was one of a kind. She was a police officer, an actor, a development officer for her church and its elementary school, and the founder of a nonprofit organization, a health activist, and a mother to three incredible children. Breast cancer was what took Mary Ann from us, but it is also what one of her lasting legacies was born from--a successful and much-needed breast health initiative, the Get in Touch Foundation. She was a vocal champion for the Affordable Care Act and access to high quality, affordable health care for all. In 2010, Mary Ann won a contract from Balboa Press to publish her memoir, ``A Diary of Healing: My Intense and Meaningful Life With Cancer.'' Throughout its pages, you can hear Mary Ann's laughter, you can feel her courage, and you will often find yourself crying with her, experiencing the twists and the turns of her journey. My heart goes out to Betsy, to Mary, and to Eddy. Your mother was quite simply an extraordinary human being, activist, author, mentor, friend, and mother. She lives on in our hearts forever.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this resolution, which would block the implementation of the Department of Labor's conflict of interest rule. I strongly support what the Department of Labor is trying to do with this rule: simply to ensure that financial advisers act in the best interest of the consumer. Unfortunately, the rule is necessary because some financial advisers are recommending financial instruments that offer rewards or commissions to the adviser for steering the client to those particular instruments instead of recommending retirement options that are in the best interest of the customer. This is about safeguarding worker retirement savings. The White House Council of Economic Advisers estimates that conflicts of interest cost about $17 billion per year in lost savings for Americans who are trying to save for retirement. This is unacceptable. When hardworking Americans seek advice on how to invest for retirement, they should not have to worry about being led to make decisions that are not in their best interest. By establishing this fiduciary duty that would require advisers to act in the interest of the customer, we could end this predatory practice. The rule requires brokers to disclose their fees and financial incentives when offering a financial product, introducing much-needed transparency to the process. Right now, advisers are under no obligation to disclose this information. When it comes to retirement, every penny counts. It is unconscionable that we would allow self-interested advisers to rob hardworking American families of their hard-earned retirement savings. The bottom line is that we must pursue policy solutions that benefit working families and that help them to adequately prepare for retirement. Please oppose the resolution.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague. I am proud to join with him this afternoon to talk about an issue of critical importance to the people of this Nation. Obviously, I want to be very, very clear about the issue of a rise in our minimum wage. For the length of time that I have served in this body, which is for 25 years, I have been a strong supporter of increasing the minimum wage. I believe that it has sustained America's working families and it is justified, which is why I strongly support the Raise the Wage Act. We need to index the minimum wage. It needs to keep up with inflation. It is long past time that this gets done. Time goes on, costs increase, and the minimum wage ought to increase. We can't afford to settle for the status quo. Full-time, year-round work at the current minimum wage of $7.25 leaves a family of three below the Federal poverty line. This disproportionately, by the way, hurts women, who make up nearly two out of three workers making the minimum wage. This means low-wage workers have to work longer hours just to achieve the standard of living that was considered the bare minimum almost a half century ago. The greatest economic challenge that faces our Nation today is that too many Americans are in jobs that do not pay them enough to live on. Raising the minimum wage would directly or indirectly lift wages for more than 35 million workers--or more than one in four in the United States. The Raise the Wage Act would lift 4.5 million Americans out of poverty and reduce income inequality. The low minimum wage, by the way, is not just bad for workers. It is bad for business, and it is bad for the entire economy. Low wages limit consumer demand, which stalls our country's economic growth. That hurts everyone. A raise is long overdue for hardworking Americans if you realize, between 1948 and 1973, productivity and compensation grew at nearly equal rates; but from 1973 to 2014, American workers' productivity grew by 72 percent--they were producing more--while hourly worker compensation grew by just 9 percent. Wages for the top 1 percent have grown 138 percent since 1979, while wages for the bottom 90 percent have only grown 15 percent. We have an opportunity to make a real step toward closing this gap. There is a broad and growing consensus on a need to raise the wage. In a poll--and my colleagues have referenced this poll. This is a poll of business executives, and I think they were trying to hide it. I don't think that they wanted to get it out. But business executives-- and this is a poll conducted by Frank Luntz, who is a Republican pollster, and he found that 80 percent supported raising the Federal minimum wage. If our colleagues across the aisle want to make a real impact on poverty in the United States, they would support legislation that helps working families cope with rising costs like the Raise the Wage Act. The American people have waited long enough. It is time to make sure that all of our workers can make decent pay for a hard day's work, get a decent day's pay. I urge my colleagues to pass this legislation. Also, if I can, Mr. Speaker, Republicans contend that they can't raise the wage because doing so would kill jobs. So I include in the Record a paper from the National Employment Law Project describing, among other research, two meta-studies on the effect of the minimum wage on employment. Employment and Business Effects of Minimum Wage Increases Introduction While the U.S. economy continues to see steady growth, wages have been flat or falling for much of the labor force. This dynamic has spurred the most significant wave of action to raise the minimum wage in fifty years, with momentum for significant increases at the federal, state and local levels. The growing momentum for raising the minimum wage has focused attention on the impact of higher minimum wages on employment levels. Supporters argue that higher minimum wages help workers and the economy, and that research shows any adverse effect on jobs is minimal. Opponents, by contrast, generally contend that higher wages will reduce employment or slow job growth. The fact that many states and cities in the U.S. have raised their minimum wages in recent years while others have not has created a rich store of data for research and analysis and has made the minimum wage one of the most studied questions in economics. This brief reviews the extensive body of research on the impact of higher minimum wages in the U.S. over the past twenty years and draws these key findings: The bulk of rigorous research examining hundreds of case studies of minimum wage increases at the state and local levels finds that raising the minimum wage boosts incomes for low-paid workers without reducing overall employment job growth to any significant degree. The minority of researchers reaching different conclusions rely on less precise or flawed methodologies that fail to take advantage of the most recent advancements in economic research. Businesses are able to absorb the cost of paying higher wages without reducing employment through a range of channels, including savings from increased employee productivity and reductions in employee turnover that consistently result from minimum wage increases. The minimum wage is one of the most studied subjects in the field of economics. Since the early 1990s, economists--armed with richer data than previously available and the computational power to analyze it--have conducted scores of studies in an effort to better understand the employment effects of raising the minimum wage. Many of these studies, often referred to as the ``new minimum wage research,'' have used sophisticated methodologies that control for variables unrelated to the minimum wage--such as regional employment trends not driven by minimum wage changes--that otherwise may bias a study's findings. The results overwhelmingly suggest that raising the minimum wage has very little effect on employment. Most prominently, two leading ``meta-studies'' survey and pool the data from over four decades of research. The meta- studies represent the most reliable and sophisticated approaches to studying the employment impact of raising the minimum wage, as they aggregate data from dozens of studies containing thousands of different estimates of the employment impacts of minimum wage increases. The first meta-study, by Hristos Doucouliagos and T.D. Stanley (2009), shows that there is ``little or no significant impact of minimum wage increases on employment,'' as noted by the Center for Economic and Policy Research in its review of the minimum wage literature. This is illustrated in Figure 1, which arrays 1,492 different findings from 64 different studies, mapping their conclusions on employment impacts against the statistical precision of the findings. As economist Jared Bernstein summarizes, ``the strong clumping around zero [impact on jobs] provides a useful summary of decades of research on this question [of whether minimum wage increases cost jobs]. Drawing on the methodological insights of Doucouliagos and Stanley, the second meta-study by Dale Belman and Paul Wolfson (2014) reviews more than 70 studies and 439 distinct estimates to come to a very similar conclusion: ``[i]t appears that if negative effects on employment are present, they are too small to be statistically detectable. Such effects would be too modest to have meaningful consequences in the dynamically changing labor markets of the United States,'' and too small to merit policy or political controversy. In addition to these meta-studies, state-of-the-art individual studies have developed new research methods to enable economists to better isolate and analyze the actual impact of minimum wage increases--and have confirmed that raising the minimum wage does not reduce employment. Two of these leading individual studies are: ``Minimum Wage Effects Across State Borders,'' in which economists Arindrajit Dube, T. William Lester and Michael Reich (2010) apply innovative new research methods to examine the real-world impact of state minimum wage increases on employment. In order to completely isolate other factors influencing state job growth trends, the study compares employment trends in neighboring counties that are economically similar except for having different minimum wages (by virtue of being on different sides of a state border). The study looks at employment levels among every pair of neighboring U.S. counties that had differing minimum wage levels at any time between 1990 and 2006--and finds that higher minimum wages did not lead business in those states to reduce their hiring or shift their hiring to neighboring counties with lower minimum wage rates. ``Do Minimum Wages Really Reduce Teen Employment?,'' in which economists Sylvia Allegretto, Arindrajit Dube and Michael Reich (2011) demonstrate that neglecting to control for regional employment trends leads observers to erroneously attribute reductions in employment in certain states to an increase in the minimum wage. They find that, after controlling for regional trends, the negative effects on teen employment in regions with higher minimum wages not only disappeared, but turned slightly positive, and that these observations hold true whether the economy is growing or in a downturn. The fact that there is no evidence that past U.S. minimum wage increases have reduced teen employment is significant since, if there were any adverse effects associated with minimum wage increases, one might expect to see them among teens who are new entrants to the labor market. The innovative approach used by Dube, Lester and Reich in the 2010 study has won praise from leading labor economists at top universities, such as Harvard economist Lawrence Katz and Massachusetts Institute of Technology economists David Autor and Michael Greenstone. As Autor explained, ``The paper presents a fairly irrefutable case that state minimum wage laws do raise earnings in low wage jobs but do not reduce employment to any meaningful degree. Beyond this substantive contribution, the paper presents careful and compelling reanalysis of earlier work in this literature, showing that it appears biased by spatial correlation in employment trends.'' The new body of research has led to a shift in the views of mainstream economists on the employment impact of minimum wage increases. Indicative is a February 2013 poll of leading economists by the University of Chicago's Booth School of Business, in which economists by a more than 3 to 1 margin believe that the benefits of raising the minimum wage and indexing it for inflation outweigh any costs. Similarly, centrist economists, including Larry Summers and Robert Rubin, have called for raising the minimum wage and empowering workers as part of a strategy to help grow the middle class and move the economy forward; and Goldman Sachs released an analysis of minimum wage increases, which did not mention disemployment at all--neither as an immediate effect, nor as a forecast. The shrinking body of economic research that continues to argue that increases in the minimum wage cost jobs emanates in large part from a single source: University of California- Irvine economist David Neumark. Neumark is the author of both a survey that claims that the weight of minimum wage research points towards evidence of job losses, and of several studies that claim to show the same. However, both Neumark's survey and the methodology he uses in his individual studies have been shown to be skewed and inaccurate. Neumark's 2006 survey (coauthored with William Wascher), ``Minimum Wages and Employment: A Review of Evidence from the New Minimum Wage Research,'' maintains that 85 percent of the ``most credible'' research on the impact of raising the minimum wage finds job losses as a result. However, other economists have pointed out that this survey--which is not a true meta-study--was conducted in a highly subjective manner, generating its unrepresentative conclusions. Specifically, Neumark's survey: 1. Fails to comprehensively review the economic research on the impact of raising the minimum wage, and instead selects just 33 studies that the author subjectively designates as the ``most credible;'' 2. Omits several of the most important recent studies on the impact of minimum wage increases in the United States, with the result that half of the studies analyzed by Neumark focus on foreign labor markets, rendering their conclusions less relevant to the U.S.; and 3. Is skewed towards Neumark's own research, which makes up a full 26 percent of the U.S.-based studies that he elects to include. Neumark's research, as well as the few other studies which continue to maintain that minimum wage increases cost jobs, have used variants on a single approach: comparing job growth in states with higher minimum wages against job growth in states with lower minimum wages. However, as demonstrated by Dube, Lester and Reich (2010) and Allegretto, Dube and Reich (2011), Neumark's simplistic approach cannot accurately assess the impact of a higher minimum wage since It does not adequately control for the wide range of varying local economic conditions--such as regional trends in manufacturing jobs losses, population shifts to the sun belt, and the local severity of economic shocks such as the housing bubble collapse--that affect job growth in state labor markets. As a result of these inadequate controls, Neumark and other conservative economists erroneously attribute differences in regional job growth levels to minimum wage differences. More recent and sophisticated research does a better job of controlling for those regional economic differences. The 2010 study by Dube, Lester and Reich, for example, uses a methodology similar to Neumark's. But rather than comparing job growth rates among all states nationwide, it focuses on comparisons among states in the same region of the country that have differing minimum wages. Dube, Lester and Reich show that when one uses a regional focus to control for extraneous economic trends, any evidence of job losses disappear. The strength of the new research has led major business publications to endorse its findings and methodologies--and to reject opposition research as faulty and inaccurate. In 2012, Bloomberg News, for example, called for increasing the minimum wage and indexing it for inflation, writing that, ``[a] wave of new economic research is disproving those arguments about job losses and youth employment. Previous studies tended not to control for regional economic trends that were already affecting employment levels, such as a manufacturing-dependent state that was shedding jobs. The new research looks at micro-level employment patterns for a more accurate employment picture. The studies find minimum-wage increases even provide an economic boost, albeit a small one, as strapped workers immediately spend their raises.'' Despite the advances made in new research on the minimum wage, in 2014 the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) published a report, based partially on older research, suggesting that an increase in the minimum wage would reduce total U.S. employment by about 500,000 workers--though it acknowledged the possibility of an impact ranging from near-zero to one million jobs lost. Economists who have studied the minimum wage, however, have criticized the report for a major flaw in its analysis: Despite acknowledging the greater accuracy of newer methodologies, in its synthesis of minimum wage studies the CBO gave equal weight to older methodologies as to new, without explaining its reason for doing so. Michael Reich--one of the critics of the report and coauthor of two of the studies discussed above--notes the CBO erred when it took the findings of research by Neumark/ Wascher and Reich/Dube and averaged them, as if those studies were similar enough in methodology, time and data sets used to justify doing so. He writes, ``We conclude, and many other labor economists agree, that our studies invalidate the previous approach used in many studies by Neumark and Wascher and others. It makes no sense to take an average between a rigorous study and one that has been shown to be flawed.'' Giving equal weight to these studies likely biased the CBO's conclusions. Goldman Sachs analysts also reviewed the CBO report and concluded that its job loss estimates are overstated. The analysts cite the findings of the new minimum wage research, which find little to no effects on employment (see the first section of this brief); a boost in demand from higher earnings; a concentration of employment impacts on only two industries (retail and leisure & hospitality); and the fact that states and localities have taken the lead in increasing the minimum wage in the face of congressional inaction, as reasons the CBO estimates are likely too high. Even with its flawed analysis, taken as a whole the CBO report nonetheless demonstrates that the benefits of raising the minimum wage far outweigh any drawbacks. Among its positive findings, the report concluded that 24.5 million workers would benefit from a wage increase to $10.10, and nearly one million would be lifted out of poverty. In January 2014, House of Representatives Speaker John Boehner made the following claim in explaining his opposition to raising the minimum wage: ``When you raise the cost of something, you get less of it.'' This idea seems intuitive to many who learned about supply and demand in an introductory economics class. But in fact, both research and real life experiences show that, rather than automatically raising costs and forcing layoffs, higher wages can lead to significant savings for businesses, offsetting a large portion of the higher payroll costs. Among the leading factors explaining this seemingly counter-intuitive observation are two related concepts: employee turnover and productivity. Low wages are associated with high levels of employee turnover. Workers earning low wages tend to be less committed to their jobs than better paid workers and are less likely to stay at their jobs for long. Unsurprisingly, the accommodations and food services sector--one of the lowest- paying sectors--has an annual turnover rate of nearly 63 percent, while ``limited service restaurants''--a subsector which includes fast food restaurants like McDonald's and Burger King--have a turnover rate of well over 100 percent each year. The retail trade, which employs cashiers, customer service representatives, stock clerks and other low-wage workers, has a turnover rate of nearly 50 percent. Employee turnover forces businesses to constantly find and train new workers, costing firms significant amounts of money and time. In the fast food industry, the cost of turnover is approximately $4,700 each time a worker leaves his or her job. Studies show that higher wages can substantially reduce turnover and the costs associated with replacing lost workers. In the fast food industry, increasing the minimum wage could lead to as much as $5.2 billion in cost savings to businesses and as many as 1.1 million fewer separations. Overall, savings from reduced turnover alone can offset as much as 30 percent of the cost of a minimum wage increase--even to $15 per hour. Low pay also impacts productivity. While experienced workers tend to be more productive, new workers may not be as optimally efficient during their training period, and this can incur indirect costs to businesses from lost sales and imperfect customer service as new workers learn on the job. While the savings from greater productivity and lower turnover may not fully pay for a minimum wage increase, these savings can nonetheless substantially offset the higher labor costs associated with an increase. The benefits from higher productivity and lower turnover helps explain why large companies as well as many small businesses have chosen to invest in higher wages as part of a highly competitive business strategy. As MIT business school professor Zeynep Ton explains, ``Highly successful retail chains--such as QuikTrip convenience stores, Mercadona and Trader Joe's supermarkets, and Costco wholesale clubs--not only invest heavily in store employees but also have the lowest prices in their industries, solid financial performance, and better customer service than their competitors. They have demonstrated that, even in the lowest- price segment of retail, bad jobs are not a cost-driven necessity but a choice. And they have proven that the key to breaking the trade-off is a combination of investment in the workforce and operational practices that benefit employees, customers, and the company.'' Many employers can afford to pay better wages. The vast majority of small businesses (89 percent) already pay their employees more than the federal minimum wage, a strong majority (60 percent) support raising the minimum wage to $12 and adjusting it for inflation each year, and a growing number of employers see $15 as a fair minimum wage. Many also believe that higher wages level the playing field by preventing larger or less scrupulous firms from gaining a competitive advantage through very low labor costs. Large businesses, in particular, are in the position to improve their wages. Corporations like Walmart, T.J. Maxx, Gap and Ikea, which employ the majority of low-wage workers, have been enjoying record profits for years. According to the St. Louis Federal Reserve Bank, in the second quarter of 2015, corporate profits amounted to $1.8 trillion--the highest since the late 1940s. Conclusion ``When employers stop thinking about employees as costs to cut, but instead as customers, they see it is in their self- interest to raise the minimum wage. We need to change their concept of self-interest.''--Nick Hanauer, entrepreneur and venture capitalist. The most recent and sophisticated research--as well as the experiences of leading employers like Trader Joe's, Costco and thousands of small businesses--strongly suggest that higher wages increase incomes for low-wage workers without reducing overall employment or hurting businesses. Not only do employers benefit from the savings they accrue from lower turnover and higher productivity; they also benefit from an increase in demand for the goods and services they offer. As observers from Nick Hanauer to Larry Summers point out, workers are customers--and the better a worker's ability to participate in the economy as a consumer, the better off will be both individual businesses and the economy as a whole.

Ms. DeLAURO. This document examined 64 minimum wage studies measuring the effect of minimum wages on teenage employment in the United States published between 1972 and 2007. While these studies estimated a range of employment effects, Mr. Stanley and Mr. Doucouliagos found the most precise estimates in the studies were around zero or near zero employment effects. The second is from Paul Wolfson and Dale Belman. It examined studies published since 2007 on the employment effect on minimum wage increases. This meta-analysis also found that the best estimates in the compiled studies revealed no statistically significant negative employment effects. We all have listened over many years that any increase in the minimum wage would, my gosh, send the U.S. economy into a tailspin, and every time it has proven false. It was false then; it is false now. Let us raise the minimum wage, and let us support the Raise the Wage Act. I thank my colleague from California for including me in this Special Order.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I submit the following list of States, and their loss of Health Preparedness grants. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Cuts Grantee (dollars) Cuts (%) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Alabama...................................... -613,733 -6.90 Alaska....................................... -194,836 -4.63 American Samoa............................... -6,600 -1.82 Arizona...................................... -915,853 -7.74 Arkansas..................................... -377,461 -5.70 California................................... -3,979,850 -9.35 Chicago...................................... -530,926 -5.42 Colorado..................................... -706,343 -7.21 Connecticut.................................. -490,363 -6.35 Delaware..................................... -143,256 -3.27 District of Columbia......................... -142,165 -2.23 Florida...................................... -2,653,185 -9.00 Georgia...................................... -1,351,184 -8.44 Guam......................................... -19,345 -3.98 Hawaii....................................... -196,065 -4.01 Idaho........................................ -211,568 -4.20 Illinois..................................... -1,422,463 -8.51 Indiana...................................... -872,687 -7.66 Iowa......................................... -393,286 -5.80 Kansas....................................... -388,911 -5.77 Kentucky..................................... -568,480 -6.72 Los Angeles.................................. -1,575,170 -7.98 Louisiana.................................... -613,015 -6.89 Maine........................................ -177,231 -3.77 Marshall Islands............................. -8,413 -2.21 Maryland..................................... -856,366 -7.60 Massachusetts................................ -937,359 -7.14 Michigan..................................... -1,310,210 -7.86 Micronesia................................... -12,798 -3.03 Minnesota.................................... -744,017 -6.61 Mississippi.................................. -384,621 -5.74 Missouri..................................... -818,745 -7.52 Montana...................................... -139,375 -3.21 N. Mariana Islands........................... -6,172 -1.72 Nebraska..................................... -245,839 -4.58 Nevada....................................... -390,223 -5.77 New Hampshire................................ -187,880 -3.90 New Jersey................................... -1,303,734 -8.36 New Mexico................................... -275,903 -4.09 New York..................................... -1,564,792 -7.90 New York City................................ -1,158,820 -6.27 North Carolina............................... -1,240,926 -8.32 North Dakota................................. -194,836 -4.63 Ohio......................................... -1,548,159 -8.65 Oklahoma..................................... -499,358 -6.40 Oregon....................................... -522,990 -6.51 Palau........................................ -2,546 -0.78 Pennsylvania................................. -1,716,179 -8.79 Puerto Rico.................................. -433,740 -6.06 Rhode Island................................. -155,523 -3.45 South Carolina............................... -605,876 -6.16 South Dakota................................. -118,947 -2.87 Tennessee.................................... -857,750 -7.62 Texas........................................ -3,598,615 -9.55 Utah......................................... -380,115 -5.71 Vermont...................................... -194,836 -4.63 Virgin Islands (US).......................... -12,633 -3.00 Virginia..................................... -1,149,940 -7.64 Washington................................... -948,052 -7.81 West Virginia................................ -242,010 -4.54 Wisconsin.................................... -742,890 -6.41 Wyoming...................................... -194,836 -4.63

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the previous question. I ask Members to defeat it so that the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern) can offer an amendment for this House to immediately consider legislation to confront the Zika crisis. There are already 891 confirmed cases of the Zika virus in the United States and its territories, and 81 of them are pregnant women. This is an emergency. We do have a disaster relief fund in this Congress. It is about $8 billion so that when there is a flood, when there is a fire, when there is a hurricane, we can immediately move to take that money and address the costs of life and other costs from that disaster. Unfortunately, we don't have a public health emergency fund, which is why the President is asking for $1.9 billion. This is an emergency. We cannot afford to wait another day to approve the President's request. Every day we delay, we redirect crucial resources away from city and State emergency preparedness funding. We are robbing Peter to pay Paul. Cities and States across the country are being robbed of emergency preparedness grants, $44 million in total. Not only will these States have fewer resources to address public health crises, they will have fewer resources to address the Zika virus itself. Already in addition to that $44 million, the administration has reprogrammed $510 million from the Ebola crisis funding, and that crisis is not over in western Africa.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I am going to include in the Record a list of all of the States and the amount of money that they have already lost in emergency grants for preparedness for health emergencies. California, almost 10 percent loss; Florida, almost 10 percent loss; North Carolina, 8 percent; Texas, almost 10 percent in money taken away from preparedness grants. Mr. Speaker, it is unconscionable that in the midst of a global health crisis, we cannot appropriate emergency funds to save lives and instead resort to gutting our States' emergency preparedness. I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to think of the women across our country and the predicament that they face today of choosing whether or not they should get pregnant or, if they are already pregnant, wondering whether or not their baby is okay. We must fund the President's request. It is the responsible and moral thing to do. Yes, today, physicians are divided as to whether or not they should tell women of the United States not to get pregnant. Is that the message we want to send to American women? I don't think so.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, it is with the heaviest of hearts that I rise today to take a moment to pay tribute to an incredible woman who I consider one of my personal heroes, Mary Ann Wasil who lost a brilliant battle with breast cancer late last week. Mary Ann possessed a tenacious spirit, an unyielding faith, a heart full of love, and an infectious smile--she was one-of-a-kind and will be deeply missed by all of those fortunate enough to have known and worked with her. For one whose life was cut so short, Mary Ann had an extraordinary story. She was a police officer, an actor, a development officer for her church and its elementary school, the founder of a non-profit organization, a health activist, and, most importantly and above all others, a mother of three. She gave 110 percent to everything that she did, every project she undertook, and every battle she fought. Breast cancer was what took Mary Ann from us, but it is also what one of her lasting legacies was born from. Battling to remission after her first diagnosis with Stage II breast cancer in 2004, Mary Ann took her experience and turned it into, not only a teachable moment, but a successful and much needed breast health initiative, the Get in Touch Foundation. Mary Ann discovered the initial lump in her breast while doing a self-breast examination and her cancer was only diagnosed correctly and quickly because she was so familiar with her body and her breasts. Even with some doctors telling her not to worry, to wait, Mary Ann pushed on because she knew it was more than a simple fluctuation. As Mary Ann waged her war with breast cancer, she looked into the eyes of her two young daughters and knew she wanted to do something to make sure that they, as well as young girls everywhere, were armed with all of the information and tools they would need to be strong and smart in breast health. Thus, the Get in Touch Foundation was born. The Get In Touch Girls Program and Daisy Wheel teaches girls to ``get in touch'' with their bodies through self-examination. Developed by board members and members of the medical community, including focus-groups of girls ages 8 through 18, the interactive Daisy Wheel teaches the importance of and how to do a breast self-examination. The Daisy Wheel is given to girls in grades 9 through 12 when health educators discuss hygiene and the girls' changing bodies. The program has been implemented in more than twenty-six countries across the globe and the Daisy Wheel has been downloaded in more than eighty countries. The impact of this program is as extraordinary as its founder. In 2010 Mary Ann won a contract from Balboa Press to publish her memoir, A Diary of Healing: My Intense and Meaningful Life with Cancer. Throughout its pages you can hear Mary Ann's laughter, feel her outrage, and you will often find yourself crying with her, experiencing the twists and turns of her journey. Mary Ann battled back to remission several times over the last decade, always grateful for the additional time she had with family and friends. And though she lost this last battle, her story will continue to be an inspiration. My heart goes out to her children, Betsy, Mary, and Eddy. Just thirteen, twelve, and ten at the time of their mother's diagnosis, they were forced to grow-up remarkably quickly but always in the warmth of Mary Ann's smile and secure in the knowledge of her love for them. I know that, in each their own way, they will carry-on Mary Ann's legacy of love, courage, education, and hope. Over the years, I developed a deep friendship with Mary Ann and I consider myself so fortunate to have known her. She was, quite simply, an extraordinary human being. Activist, author, mentor, friend, and mother--Mary Ann Wasil was a woman whose time with us, though short, left an indelible mark on all our lives. Though we will all miss her tenacity, dedication, and, of course, her smile, family and friends will gather in their brightest, most vividly colored clothes, wearing their fanciest shows and celebrate the life of Mary Ann Wasil and the many gifts she brought to all of our lives. As Mary Ann would say--Hope Lives.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this bill. It would hamstring the IRS and would make no real impact on tax avoidance in the United States. This bill is shameful. If we are serious about cracking down on tax dodging, we would focus on ending corporate inversions. Our government must stand up and say to these corporations: Stop cheating the American people. We cannot continue to allow corporations to pretend that they are American companies reaping the benefits that this country has to offer and all the while claiming to be a foreign corporation when the tax bill comes. They don't pay their fair share of taxes in the United States. Corporations are cheating the American people out of revenue that could make such a real difference in the lives of children and families so that they can dodge taxes and gouge prices. A quote from an article in The New York Times last week by Nicholas Kristof says: ``The Real Welfare Cheats. One academic study found that tax dodging by major corporations costs the U.S. Treasury up to $111 billion a year. By my math, less than one-fifth of that annually would mean more than enough to pay the additional costs of full-day prekindergarten for all 4-year-olds''--that is about $15 billion-- ``prevent lead poisoning in tens of thousands of children ($2 billion), provide books and parent coaching for at-risk kids across the country ($1 billion) and end family homelessness ($2 billion).'' The administration has issued new rules to curb inversions, but the Congress--the Congress--needs to work to end this abhorrent practice. It is absurd that the U.S. Treasury does not have the authority to share a list of inverted corporations with other government agencies. Congress can give them that authority. It is up to us to make sure that Treasury can provide such a list. Congress also needs to strengthen the definition of an inverted corporation in the Tax Code. We should also consider inversions a deal breaker when we dole out Federal contracts. Inverted corporations should not receive Federal contracts. They are bad actors, and we should not be rewarding them with lucrative contracts for moving their mailboxes to avoid paying their taxes in the United States. That is why Congressman Doggett and I introduced the No Federal Contracts for Corporate Deserters Act, so that inverted companies will no longer be able to benefit from Federal contracts at the expense of companies who do pay their fair share.

Ms. DeLAURO. Instead of pursuing this unnecessary and misguided bill that would punish the IRS, but honestly makes very little impact on tax avoidance, what we should do is we need to go after those corporations. They game our system at the expense of the American taxpayer of up to almost $11 billion. Wouldn't every American like to have an opportunity to be able to say that they can send their kid to school, that they don't have to risk homelessness, and that they can provide their kid with an education instead of these corporations taking and ripping off the United States? Let's get real on the floor of this House of Representatives. Do you want to do the right thing? Do you want to do what is morally responsible? Then, let us end these inverted corporations. Let them pay their fair share of taxes or tell them that it is illegal and that we can prosecute them.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to rise today to join the University of New Haven as they celebrate and pay tribute to one of our nation's great minds, Dr. Henry C. Lee. Known as the ``grandfather of forensic science,'' Dr. Lee has left an indelible mark on the field of forensic science, the University of New Haven, and our nation. A nationally and internationally acknowledged visionary, Dr. Lee has built a distinguished reputation while creating one of the most respected forensic science programs in the country. Under his leadership, forensic studies have grown exponentially over the last forty years at the University of New Haven. What began as a small classroom equipped with only a single fingerprinting kit has blossomed into an internationally-recognized, multi-disciplined academic department with state-of-the-art technology--an Institute of Forensic Science named in his honor. Attracting students from across the globe, the Henry C. Lee Institute of Forensic Science is training the next generation of forensic scientists and constantly advancing the field as well as the technologies and techniques used in identifying crucial evidence. Dr. Lee's extraordinary career extends far beyond the forensic program he built at the University of New Haven. He earned his undergraduate degree in police science from Central Police College in Taiwan, a Bachelor's of Science degree in forensic science from John Jay College of Criminal Justice, and then his master's degree and doctoral degree in biochemistry from New York University. He joined the Connecticut State police more than three decades ago serving as the State's first criminologist. The driving force behind the creation of the Connecticut State Police Major Crime Squad and Forensic Science Laboratory, he oversaw its expansion into one of the finest in the country. Dr. Lee also served as the Commissioner of the Connecticut Department of Public Safety from 1998 to 2000, during which time he brought the department to the forefront of technology with the development of a new radio system and the Sex Offender Registry Database. Dr. Lee has served as a forensic expert in all fifty states as well as forty-two countries and consulted with more than 600 law enforcement agencies around the world. Here in the United States he is probably best-known for his assistance with the investigations into the high- profile cases of the deaths of JonBenet Ramsey, Nicole Brown-Simpson, and Ron Goldman, as well as the review of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. However, those are only a sample of the more than 8,000 criminal cases he has helped investigate. Dr. Lee has authored or co-authored forty books and hundreds of articles in professional journals; taught at more than a dozen universities, law schools and medical schools; and lectured throughout the world. His innovation and leadership has been recognized with more than 20 honorary degrees, and, in 1996, he was awarded the Medal of Justice from the Justice Foundation. Today, as he marks his 40th Anniversary with the University of New Haven I am proud to join his colleagues, family, and friends, in extending my sincere congratulations to Dr. Henry C. Lee and my sincere thanks and appreciation for his innumerable contributions to higher education and the field of forensic science.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, today marks the end of an era at the Jewish Federation and Jewish Community Center of Greater New Haven as they gather to celebrate the retirement of their President and CEO, and my dear friend, Sydney Alderman Perry. Sydney began her career with the Jewish Federation and JCC nearly 30 years ago in the Department of Jewish Education. Education was her passion and over the course of her seventeen years in that department she not only worked to improve the synagogue supplementary schools, she also developed and implemented a number of innovative education programs for both adults and teens. In addition to ``A Taste of Honey,'' an adult learning lecture series that attracts hundreds of adults, Sydney spearheaded the Israel Experience Savings program, which helps young people travel to Israel and initiated Talmud Torah Meyuchad, an individualized Jewish education program for children with special needs. But perhaps the contribution she is most proud of is the establishment of the successful community Hebrew High School, MAKOM, which serves hundreds of teens throughout the New Haven area every year. She was tapped as associate executive director to supervise such things as the Holocaust Education and Prejudice Reduction Project and went on to become the executive director of the federation for six years, before taking on the title of CEO of the merged federation and the Jewish Community Center of New Haven. Under her leadership the federation has expanded its agenda and outreach to enhance Jewish life and enrich the lives of those most in need both locally and internationally. Food4Kids sends local students who depend on the breakfast and lunch programs home with a backpack of staples for the weekends. The Jewish Coalition for Literacy has more than two hundred volunteers who read and talk with students. The federation supports the elderly housing complexes as well as educational institutions across Greater New Haven and raises funds for Yale Hillel and the University of Connecticut Hillel; the Jewish Historical Society and the JCC. Beyond her leadership at the Jewish Federation and JCC, Sydney is an extraordinary advocate for Jewish continuity. She has served as a consultant to the community on educational endeavors, including the Anne Frank Project, Shepherd '92, Jerusalem 3000 and the celebration of Israel's 50th Anniversary. Sydney is an extraordinary scholar, often called upon nationally to give workshops and has served as scholar-in- residence for several communities. Sydney has shown an unparalleled dedication to Jewish education in our community and throughout the nation--a commitment that is reflected in the myriad of awards she has been honored with over the years. She is an inspiration. I am proud to join the many family, friends, and colleagues who have gathered this evening in extending my sincere thanks and appreciation to Sydney Alderman Perry for her incredible work with the Jewish Federation and Jewish Community Center of Greater New Haven and her outstanding service to our community. My very best wishes to her, her children, and grandchildren for many more years of health and happiness as she enjoys her retirement.