Rosa DeLauro

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, this Transportation-Housing and Urban Development bill before us today is the latest in a long series of appropriations bills from the House majority that grossly underfunds the fundamental priorities of American families. Every time we see a new appropriations bill come from this majority, the vital national needs that are meant to be covered in that legislation have been cut to the bone. In this case, this bill makes deep cuts in everything from the upkeep of the traffic control system to Amtrak to Community Development Block Grants and HOME grants. This bill endangers our infrastructure, our public safety, and our communities. It is yet another example of the problems created by the majority's obsessive fixation on slashing all nondefense spending programs to the detriment of the priorities we were elected to uphold. Let's step back for a moment and look at the big picture. The Budget Control Act of 2011 placed strict limits on appropriations--defense as well as domestic--that are scheduled to remain in place through 2021. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has estimated that these caps will reduce spending by a total of $840 billion over 10 years, compared to the policies previously in place. Now, on top of these Budget Control Act caps, we also have the deep and indiscriminate across-the-board cuts caused by sequestration. Despite claims to the contrary by this majority, the effects of the sequester cuts are real. They're real and they are damaging. We are talking about children losing access to Head Start and the opportunities for their growth and development that early childhood education provides. Low-income women will lose access to the cancer screenings that could say their lives. Seniors will be hungry because Meals on Wheels distribution has been pared back. When the new school year starts in September, school districts already struggling to make ends meet will face an additional across- the-board 5 percent cut in Federal aid. And in terms of medical research, the National Institutes of Health will be supporting the smallest number of research project grants this year in more than a decade. These cuts will have profound and lasting consequences for families, for students, for the pace of scientific research. But despite that, the majority apparently thinks that the problem with sequestration, at least when it comes to domestic spending, is that the cuts were too small. They have been assembling a series of bills for 2014 that cut the resources for nondefense programs by a total of almost $47 billion below the 2013 postsequester level. That is not the right direction for this country. That's not what we ought to be doing. In total, the majority's 2014 budget bills will bring funding for nondefense appropriations to their lowest level on record as a share of GDP, with records on this basis going back to 1976. In other words, the majority proposes to spend less, relative to the economy, on things like infrastructure, scientific research, education, environmental protection--the key investments that grow our economy--than at any time in nearly the last 40 years. Within the total, some bills are targeted for larger cuts than others. Sequestration already cuts the transportation, housing, and infrastructure programs covered in today's bill by more than $3 billion, and this legislation would slash another $4.4 billion. That's bad enough, but the largest cuts of all come in the Labor- Health and Human Services-Education bill, which the majority seems to consider the very lowest priority. The allocation to that bill starts with this year's $7 billion in sequestration cuts, and then cuts $28 billion more. Think about it for a moment. For programs like education, medical research, job training, public health, the majority does not just want to double down on sequestration; they want to quadruple down. This is not about saving money or reducing the deficit. This is about ideology, pure and simple. The majority's approach is not required by the Budget Control Act. On the contrary, in total, their bills are $47.7 billion below the Budget Control Act cap on non-defense spending, and that is the cap with sequestration in place. Because this bill is already far leaner than even the BCA and sequestration require, there are no offsets to be had to ameliorate the deep and dangerous cuts to Community Development Block Grants, housing, Amtrak, or mass transit. The bottom line is the majority is very explicitly trying to underfund the priorities in this legislation. They have put forward a budget that sets our government and our Nation up to fail. This is not the right choice for America, for our kids or our future. Responsible budgeting means making key investments that grow the economy and improve American families' quality of life. This is just not a responsible budget. I urge defeat of this grossly inadequate bill. I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, my amendment would prohibit funds in this bill from being used by the Defense Department to train the Afghan Special Mission Wing to operate or maintain Russian-made Mi-17 helicopters. Over 93,000 people have died in a tragic war in Syria that is being fueled by Russian arms being supplied to the Assad regime. Over 1.6 million Syrian refugees are now hosted across five countries. By the end of the year, half the population of Syria will be in need of aid. We know for a fact that the Russian arms manufacturer, Rosoboronexport, is arming Syria. The Syrian Army requested 20,000 Kalashnikov assault rifles, 20 million rounds of ammunition, machine guns, grenade launchers, grenades, and sniper rifles with night-vision sights. And Russia also recently announced it would provide Assad with advanced S-300 missile defense batteries. Yet, our Defense Department continues to channel business to this Russian arms manufacturer. DOD recently skirted around a prohibition on purchasing Mi-17 helicopters from Russia's state arms dealer in last year's Defense appropriations bill, signing a contract with Rosoboronexport to procure 30 Mi-17s for the Afghan Specialty Mission Wing using 2012 Afghanistan Security Forces Fund moneys. This contract signing, flying in the face of congressional intent, incredibly came just days after this House voted 423-0 to strengthen the prohibition on Pentagon business with the Russian arms dealer--a prohibition also included in this Defense appropriations bill. Even more egregious, it also came on the heels of a report by the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction that recommended suspension of the plans to purchase these helicopters for the Afghan Special Mission Wing as the Afghans do not even have the capacity to use them. The Defense Department touts the 30 years of experience the Afghans have with the Mi-17 helicopters as a key reason to purchase them, yet we are still trying to train them to fly these helicopters instead of American-made helicopters--training that the Inspector General report says has been slow and uneven. The report also argues that moving forward with the acquisition of these Mi-17 helicopters is highly imprudent until, among other things, an agreement is reached on NATO's Afghanistan Training Mission concept for reorganization within the Afghan Government to support this Special Mission Wing. Mr. Chairman, U.S. taxpayers should not be subsidizing the Russian state arms dealer that is fueling the war in Syria. The language already included in this bill states this. We should also not be spending money to train an Afghan unit to fly these Russian helicopters, particularly when the Inspector General has raised serious questions about the content of that unit's capabilities. I urge support for my amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. DeLAURO. I just want to say to my good friend that I think that we ought to be amenable to working with Afghanistan in these final days, but I don't make up this information. Our Defense Department continues to channel business to this Russian arms manufacturer. DOD skirted around the prohibition on purchasing Mi- 17 helicopters in the last appropriations bill. We voted overwhelmingly--I don't know that there has been a vote in this House on a bipartisan basis that was 423-0--to prohibit this. So what did the DOD do? The DOD went around that and went to a different pot of money. And one could acknowledge that, but in addition to acknowledging that, I'm going to quote to you from the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction: Afghan Special Mission Wing: DOD plans to spend $908 million to build air wing that the Afghans cannot operate and maintain. Now, I don't know why we keep in business an Inspector General that would give us this report, and then we fly in the face of it and not acknowledge its veracity. In addition to which, we are dealing with an arms dealer that is supplying arms, grenades, Kalashnikovs, missiles to Syria, where over 93,000 people have already been killed. The point is that we shouldn't enter a contract when there is no capability to fly these helicopters. I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining?

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Miller substitute amendment and in strong opposition to the underlying bill which, as it is, drastically underfunds our education system and sets up our children and our Nation to fail. Right now, the majority's bill freezes education funding through the end of the decade at just above the sequestration level in 2013. Compared to last year's level, this means a $570 million cut to education funding--one of our fundamental priorities as a Nation--for each of the next 5 years. Nor does the majority's bill allow for annual increases due to inflation or enrollment growth. In effect, the majority is trying to lock in Federal education spending at a level far below what is needed and then simply walking away from our schools and our kids. And keep in mind, all of these cuts come on top of several earlier rounds of deep cuts by the majority to education spending. Mr. Chairman, without access to quality education, there is no middle class. The compact is broken that allows hard work to pay off and allows future generations to do better. We cannot allow this to happen. I urge my colleagues to support the Miller substitute to this flawed bill.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to rise today to join the many families, parishioners, and community leaders as Our Lady of Mount Carmel Church celebrates its 75th Annual Feast--a celebration which raises funds to support the Our Lady of Mount Carmel School and its students. Over the last 75 years, the congregants of Our Lady of Mount Carmel Church have to commemorate ``the devotion that the Blessed Virgin Mary has to those who are committed to her.'' The four-day feast features food, fun, and fellowship. After Sunday Mass at noon, there is a procession of the Our Lady of Mount Carmel statute and a float featuring a young girl chosen to portray the feast's icon. The procession travels through an arch located behind the church, which was permanently installed and then two smaller temporary arches which have been erected for the occasion. Dozens of parishioners volunteer their time, working arduously for weeks preparing for this annual event. Two hundred pounds of ground beef, two hundred forty pounds of sausage, five hundred pounds of onions, over two thousand pounds of veal hearts and more than four thousand pounds of dough--the food preparation is a massive undertaking which utilizes the two permanent kitchens in the church hall as well as an industrial stove that is temporarily installed. Sausage and peppers, soffritto and fried dough are among the feast favorites. Perhaps what is most special about the Feast is that it is a means to preserve, celebrate, and pass on the culture and traditions of this Italian-American community. People across the country struggle to create a sense of community--a sense of belonging. Over the course of its 75 year history, the Our Lady of Mount Carmel Feast has served as a way for the families of Waterbury to do just that. It is events like the Our Lady of Mount Carmel Feast, those forged in the bonds of family and community, which allow generation after generation to understand and celebrate their shared heritage. They enrich our communities as well as renew our commitment to faith and family. I am honored to stand today to extend my warmest congratulations to the Our Lady of Mount Carmel Parish and its many families as they celebrate the 75th anniversary of their Feast. The annual tradition is a community treasure and I wish them all the best for many more successful years to come.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Historically, the farm bill has been a safety net for farmers and families. It has enjoyed bipartisan support up until now until this majority has rent that support asunder. A vote for this bill is a vote to end nutrition programs in America, to break the longstanding bipartisan compact that the farm bill represented for decades. It takes food out of the mouths of hungry children, seniors, veterans, and the disabled. It is immoral. These people are not extraneous. I urge my colleagues to reject this bill.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, a vote for this bill is a vote to end nutrition programs in America. Members on the other side of the aisle have already expressed that this morning. Imagine referring to the nutrition title of the farm bill as extraneous--extraneous. Dealing with hunger, dealing with people who have fallen on those hard times, dealing with their food insecurity and their being hungry and kids going to bed hungry every night in this Nation is extraneous. But that says it all. That tells you where their values are. Before we consider the content of this legislation, take a minute to review what just has happened. Shortly before 8 p.m. last night, the majority posted a 608-page bill online and announced a meeting at 9 to consider the bill. The majority violated their own rule of allowing at least 3 days to review legislation before a vote. I have a copy of the bill right here. This is the bill--608 pages. Have my colleagues read all of the 608 pages? Have they taken the time to know what is in it? Do they understand that in 2014, in fact, that what they have done adds to the deficit? No. Instead, we are recklessly pushing forward this partisan bill designed to inflict great harm. And even more pernicious is the substance of this bill, which throws millions of American families aside. This removes the entire nutrition title from the farm bill with no indication that the majority intends to take up those programs in the near future. Let's be clear about what this means. Food stamps are the critical central strand of our social safety net--our country's most important effort to deal with hunger--helping over 47 million Americans: nearly half of them are children; 99 percent of recipients live below the poverty line; and 75 percent of households receiving this aid include a child, a senior citizen, or an individual with a disability. These are the individuals and the people that this Republican majority has just called extraneous. They are not extraneous. The bill before us would mean the death knell of the food stamp program and the other nutrition programs that have been part of the farm bill for decades. This bill is immoral, and it is a serious risk to our society. 532 farm groups sent the Speaker a letter opposing the splitting off of nutrition programs. Bishop Stockton and other religious leaders wrote a letter calling food stamps ``one of the most effective and important Federal programs to combat hunger in the Nation,'' and ``a crucial part of the farm bill,'' relieving ``pressure on overwhelmed parishes, charities, food banks, pantries, and other emergency food providers.'' Yet this bill provides the way to gut the food stamp program.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I rise today to join the many family, friends, community leaders, and congregants of Cross Street AME Zion Church in Middletown, Connecticut as they gather to celebrate the 60th birthday of and pay tribute to Reverend Moses L. Harvill. Marking six decades of life and faith, this is certainly a remarkable milestone! Born in Birmingham, Alabama, Pastor Harvill attended Alabama A&M University receiving his undergraduate, degree in business management and later attended Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute where he received his MBA in Human Resources. Almost a decade later, he was called to a different mission. When he decided to pursue the ministry, Pastor Harvill attended Yale University's Divinity School where he earned a Master of Divinity in Parish Ministry. Pastor Harvill began his ministry at Middletown's Cross Street AME twenty years ago and it has been under his guidance and through his leadership that the Church has grown in every way--spiritually, numerically, and economically. Envisioning a Church where people would not only turn to for comfort but that could serve the community as well. In 2007 construction was complete on what can only be described as a stunning facility with a beautiful sanctuary as well as space to accommodate the more than forty ministries offered at the Church as well as serve as a gathering and meeting space for other community organizations. Always inspired by his faith, Pastor Harvill's deep commitment to the community extends far beyond his spiritual work within the Cross Street congregation. He is the founder and co-president of Home Ownership Providing Empowerment (HOME), a program that assists families in becoming first-time homeowners; chair of the City of Middletown Jones Fund, where he has been instrumental in raising and distributing funds to area residents in need; and he was actively involved in the organization and development of the Amazing Grace Food Pantry, an effort which continues today to meet the needs of the hungry. Pastor Harvill also hold a deep concern for education which is why he organized and developed Back to School Day, a program that provides school supplies and accessories to more than three hundred families in the Middletown community. As a religious leader, advocate, and friend, Pastor Harvill have touched the lives of thousands--helping to shape public policy and improving the quality of life for those most in need. Through all of his good work he has inspired others to join in his efforts--instilling hope and promise in those who had long since lost their way. His spiritual guidance has nourished the souls of many and his compassion has encouraged others to give more of themselves through civic service, Pastor Harvill has left an indelible mark on our community and I am proud to stand today to join his wife, Eledia, and all of those gathered in wishing him a very happy 60th birthday and extending my very best wishes for many more years of health and happiness. Happy Birthday!

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, it is with my heartfelt thanks and appreciation that I rise today to recognize an outstanding member of our community and my good friend, Dr. Reginald Mayo, Superintendent of Schools as he celebrates his retirement from the New Haven Public School system. In a career that has spanned 46 years, Reggie has dedicated a lifetime to education, quietly touching the lives of thousands by providing our young people with a strong foundation on which to build their future success. Reggie Mayo has devoted most of his professional career to the New Haven Public School system. He began as a science teacher at Troup Middle School in 1967 and rose through the ranks serving as Assistant Principal of Troup and then Principal of Jackie Robinson Middle School. He was promoted to K-8 Director of Schools and later Executive Director of School Operations until his appointment as Superintendent in 1992. During his tenure, Reggie earned a distinguished reputation for his commitment and vision. As superintendent, Reggie has steadily guided the District to set new standards in education. One of his earliest accomplishments was making New Haven the first school district in Connecticut to effectively end the practice of social promotion. As the State was rocked by the school desegregation case Sheff v. O'Neill, Reggie quietly and effectively built the largest interdistrict magnet program in Connecticut--with 1,300 suburban students enrolled it is a model program of urban- suburban exchange. Partnering with the city's mayor, John DeStefano, Reggie undertook a master plan which included the renovation or reconstruction of every school--every school--in the district. And in what will likely come to be known as his crowning achievement as superintendent, in 2010 Reggie, in cooperation with the Board of Education, teachers unions, and the city administration, launched what has become a nationally recognized school reform plan. This outstanding initiative, collaboratively built by administrators and educators, involves evaluating schools and teachers as well as intervening and implementing improvement plans in poor-performing schools. Over the course of the last two decades, Reggie Mayo, along with Mayor John DeStefano, has transformed the educational environment in New Haven. Schools have been rebuilt, outfitted with the latest in technology and resources, curriculum has been re-written, graduation rates have risen dramatically while drop-out rates dropped significantly, and real education reform has been launched. His is a remarkable legacy that will continue to inspire learning and nurture creativity for many years to come. I would be remiss if I did not extend a personal note of thanks to Reggie for his many years of friendship and support. During my tenure in Congress and before, I have had many opportunities to work with him and am always inspired by his unwavering energy and commitment. His presence in the New Haven Public School system will most certainly be missed, however, I have no doubt that he will continue to serve our community and enrich the lives of others. For his invaluable service to our city--but most importantly our children--I am proud to stand today and join the many family, friends, and colleagues who have gathered in extending my deepest thanks and sincere congratulations to Dr. Reginald Mayo. His vision, leadership, and contributions have changed the face of education in New Haven and made all the difference in the lives of our young people. We owe him a great debt of gratitude for the indelible mark that he has left on our community. I wish him, his wife, Patsy; their children, Reggie, Jr., Shawn, and Lisa, and his grandchildren, Reginald III, Ryland, Riece, and Shawn Jr., all the best for many more years of health and happiness.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, it is with a heavy heart that I rise today to take a moment to pay tribute to a very special member of the Greater New Haven community, Ann DeMatteo, who was taken from us much too soon when she lost her battle with breast cancer. Daughter, sister, aunt, colleague, mentor, and friend, Ann was a remarkable woman whose passion, good nature, and infectious laugh touched the lives of many and will long be remembered by all of those fortunate enough to have known her. Ann was a journalist spending the majority of her career as a reporter for the New Haven Register but also serving as the editor of the Middletown Press during the last years of her life. Anyone who has ever worked with Ann or been interviewed by her will tell you that no one knew more about the towns or issues they covered than she did. She delved into any story she was covering and served as a mentor to many up-and-coming reporters at the New Haven Register. Tough, but fair, Ann earned a distinguished reputation among her colleagues and in the community. When Ann was diagnosed with breast cancer, she did what she did best--shared the story. The result was her column, ``Inspirations,'' which she continued until the very end. She not only wrote about her own battle but shared the stories of others as well. Ann did not just write about breast cancer, she was actively involved in the fight to find a cure. She assisted local charities, serving as honorary chairwoman of the annual Silver Bullets Hamden Police Benefit game as well as Hamden Lights for Life, raising thousands of dollars for much needed research. She was named the New Haven Register's ``Person of the Year'' in 2008 and I was honored to join the National Organization of Italian American Women in recognizing her as one of the 2012 Wise Women. Her friends and family will tell you that as dedicated as she was to her professional and charitable work, Ann was also known as the life of the party. She loved karaoke and was always ready to dance. But it is her compassion, generosity, and kind heart that they will remember most. Her friend and colleague, Helen Bennett Harvey may have put it best when she recently said of Ann, ``In the end, what she gave so many of us also was an example of true grace under fire. Cancer took Ann's body, but it did not take the beauty and love that emanated from within her.'' As I stand today to pay tribute to Ann DeMatteo and honor her legacy, I extend my heartfelt sympathies to her family--her mother, Ann; her brother and sister-in-law, Joseph and Patricia; her nephew and godson, John; and her niece, Rebecca. Put simply, Ann was one of a kind and her presence in our lives will be deeply missed, however, the indelible mark that she left on our community and on our souls will continue to inspire us every day.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to rise today to join the many family, friends, colleagues, and community members who have gathered in celebration of Katrina Clark who is retiring from her position as Executive Director of the Fair Haven Community Health Center after forty years of dedicated service. Katrina has been at the helm of this organization for all but its first two years. It has been under her leadership and because of her vision that the Center has grown so successfully over the last four decades. I have had the privilege to know Katrina for many years. Her commitment to the people of the Fair Haven community is only equaled by her determination to ensure that they have access to quality, affordable health care. She is an extraordinary woman and I consider myself fortunate to benefit from her counsel and friendship. In 1971 a small group of dedicated nurses, doctors, students, and neighborhood volunteers, under the leadership of a community advocacy agency called the Alliance for Latin American Progress, opened the Fair Haven Clinic in a local elementary school. Two nights a week, the Clinic served adults and children on a walk-in basis for minor ailments, immunizations, and family planning services. With a budget of only five thousand dollars, made available through a grant from the Greater New Haven Community Foundation, they were able to accommodate over five hundred visits in their first year. It was clear that families were not only in need of these basic services, but of expanded health care as well. Over the next decade, guided by Katrina's remarkable leadership, the Clinic worked to expand the services that they were able to provide to more comprehensive primary health care. Today, the Fair Haven Community Health Center has grown into one of our community's most respected non-profit primary health care organizations, providing comprehensive health care--from prenatal and pediatric to adolescent, adult and geriatric care--to hundreds of residents every year. Katrina's passion for and dedication to providing children and families with access to quality, affordable health care has helped to guide the Fair Haven Community Health Center over the course of its history. Its success and the difference it continues to make in the lives of those it serves is her legacy. She has left an indelible mark on our community, setting a standard of service to which we should all strive. While her physical presence will most certainly be missed, I have no doubt that she will continue to serve as an inspiration to all of those at Fair Haven Community Health Center as they continue her good work. For her outstanding service to our community and unparalleled dedication to some of our most vulnerable citizens, I am honored to stand today to extend my deepest thanks and appreciation to Katrina Clark as she celebrates her retirement. I wish her, her partner Bonnie, and their children, Jared and Jonathan all the best for many more years of health and happiness.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. I rise in strong opposition to this amendment, the effect of which would be to increase hunger and hardship across America. We have experienced the most devastating recession since the Great Depression. Unemployment is at 7.5 percent. One in seven people today is availing himself of food stamps because there is a need to. People are struggling in our economy today. They want to work. They cannot find a job. Everyone is experiencing that in their own communities. This amendment would allow an unlimited number of States to require an adult to receive or even apply for food stamps to be working or in job training, or else they lose their food stamp benefits. Why would a State want to do this? Because the amendment also allows States to keep part of the savings from cutting people off the program, use the money for whatever purpose the State officials want, instead of feeding people with those dollars. States can cut taxes for companies or even maybe support special interest subsidies. And as my colleagues said, there is no funding in this bill for the creation of jobs; and my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, they refuse to deal with the issue of job creation and there is no worker-training money in this bill. So there is no funding to do what they would like to do. Let's take the crop insurance program, my friends. We just voted on an amendment that voted down reforming that program. We have 26 individuals in this Nation. We can't find out who they are. They get at least a million dollars in a subsidy. Do you think they're eating well? Three squares or better a day. You know what? They have no income threshold, no asset test, no cap. They don't even have to farm the land, and they don't have to follow conservation practices. Do you want to go and find out where we can save money here? Let's find out who these 26 people are or those people who are on the crop insurance program, and let's make sure that they are working otherwise we will cut their benefits. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this unbelievably misguided amendment.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. I would just say to my colleague that all of those arguments were debated and discussed during the time of the Food Safety Modernization Act. As I said, I worked very, very hard, along with members of the Energy and Commerce Committee, in which jurisdiction this actually resides. It does not reside in the jurisdiction of the farm bill. The fact of the matter is that we've had industry support of the legislation. I have a white paper, a summary by the United Fresh Producers Association issued in January 2011, which talks about all of the flexibility that exists for small farmers. The issue here is about public health and public safety. I recommended that we oppose this amendment.

Ms. DeLAURO. Let me just say to my colleague a few minutes ago who was up on this floor and talking against the food stamp program and against the McGovern amendment, I think it's important to note this is not my making this up, but this is an individual who has received almost $4.7 million in farm subsidies since 1995, including nearly $1.2 million in direct payments. Now, I don't know whether that is a program that is means tested, that's asset tested, and that has a cap on it. No, this is free money for people who serve in this body. And these are the same folks who want to cut the food stamp program. I rise in strong support of this amendment to replace those deep cuts to the food stamp program, which is our Nation's most important anti- hunger program. All across the country, cities, suburbs, rural communities, from the coast to the heartland, nearly 50 million Americans are struggling with hunger, and almost 20 million of them are our children. No part of the country is immune. We should not destroy what has been a longstanding, bipartisan tradition to give crucial nutrition assistance. This is what this farm bill does. It cuts out the nutrition program for 2 million people, a million of whom are children. And the research has shown us that the food stamp program is the most effective program pushing against the steep rise in poverty. Ninety- nine percent of recipients live under the poverty line. They're not getting $4.7 million in subsidies from the Federal Government. By the way, when my colleagues on the other side of the aisle talk about waste, fraud and abuse, this is a program with a 3.8 percent error rate. I defy you to go to any other agency of the Federal Government and find that they have as low an error rate. You want to talk about a program that really ought to be challenged in this farm bill? Let's take a look at the crop insurance program. Look at the crop insurance program. Support the McGovern amendment.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlelady. I think that this is really the height of temerity here to make reference to people who are on a food stamp program and make a presumption that because they're on a food stamp program that they are using drugs and that they should be tested. My gosh, I would just say that what about those people who are getting $4.7 million in direct payments from the Federal Government--as the gentleman from California does--and an additional $1.2 million from direct payments from the Federal Government? Maybe we ought to start drug testing all of the people who get some sort of a benefit from the Federal Government, and particularly those folks in this program, like the folks who are on crop insurance. We can't find out the names of the 26 individuals on crop insurance that get at least $1 million--$1 million they get in a premium subsidy. And do you know what, my friends? There is no cap on the amount of money, there is no threshold on what they can receive, they have no eligibility criteria. They just get the money, and they don't have to even farm the land. Why don't we drug test those folks today and not demean people who have fallen on hard times?

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim time in opposition to this amendment.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. This is unprecedented. This far-reaching amendment would quite literally hold millions of our country's poorest children, working families, seniors, and the disabled hostage to this Congress' ability to compromise and pass a farm bill. That is almost laughable. This Congress hasn't been able to come to an agreement or a compromise on anything. If the farm bill is not reauthorized by September 30, food stamps for all families of four would be cut about $64 a month. Right now, more than 47 million Americans, including more than 19 million children, rely on food stamps to put food on the table. They don't rely on the program because they want to; they rely on the food stamp program because they have no other choice. They either do not make enough money to afford food for their family because of the paltry minimum wage or they are temporarily unemployed because of the historic economic recession this country has experienced. This is a misguided amendment. It would impose deep cuts for each and every one of the households. The nonpartisan Center on Budget and Policy Priorities estimated that passing this amendment could result in a nearly 15 percent cut for households. That is $64 for a family of four when they only receive an average of less than $430 a month. Already, 90 percent of SNAP benefits are redeemed by the third week of the month, around the same time that food banks see more and more men, women, and children enrolled in the program turning to the food bank because their benefits ran out. All social safety net programs, including food stamps, have historically been protected from automatic across-the-board cuts. This was true when the law was enacted in 1985, 1987, 1990, 2010, and the Budget Control Act of 2011. SNAP was also protected in Simpson-Bowles, which recognizes the need not to reduce the deficit on the backs of the poor and the most vulnerable in this country. Christian leaders continue to call on this body to form a circle of protection around programs that help the neediest Americans, including those on food stamps. That circle of protection should surround this amendment. I urge my colleagues to heed that request and to oppose this amendment. I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, can you tell me how much time remains.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern).

Ms. DeLAURO. How much time remains, Mr. Chairman?

Ms. DeLAURO. I think it's really rather incredible that we, once again, in the prior amendment have singled out a group of people, many of whom today are people who were working but who lost their jobs through no fault of their own and who find themselves in a situation in which they have to access the food stamp program in order to feed their families. On the other hand, those people whom I singled out earlier--the 26 individuals--will get at least $1 million in a premium subsidy for crop insurance, and they have no income threshold at all. These folks, if we can't get to a compromise, will continue to get what they're getting. They're eating well. I would bet they have more than three squares a day. Let's think about who this amendment targets--76 percent of SNAP households, including child, senior or disabled individuals. The average household on SNAP has a gross monthly income of $744. The average SNAP allocation is already less than $1.50 per meal, and 55 percent of SNAP dollars go to households with incomes below half of the Federal poverty line. This targets the poorest. It asks them to pay a price for congressional farm bill politics. Let's talk about the Members of Congress. If they can't get it to a compromise, let's make sure they don't get their salaries and that we do something to those who are responsible for not getting the job done. Don't take it out on the poorest people in this Nation. This is unprecedented. It is immoral. I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment. I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. I rise in opposition to this rule and the underlying bill. It includes severe, immoral cuts to the food stamp program, slashing so deeply into nutrition support for hungry families at a time of great need all across this country. It is cruel, it is unnecessary, and it's an abdication of our responsibilities to the American people. Over the past 30 years of policies aimed at debt and deficit reduction, the key programs that help the most vulnerable among us to get by have always been protected from deep cuts. Recent examples: Simpson-Bowles. This has been a bipartisan tradition for decades. But this FARRM Bill destroys that tradition. This bill slashes food stamps by more than $20 billion. It hurts millions of Americans in our economy. It will force up to 2 million Americans to go hungry. It kicks roughly 210,000 children from the school lunch program, and it changes the relationship between the food stamp program and the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program, which takes benefits away from seniors and from our families. Let's make it clear: you cannot get food stamps unless you qualify for them. There is nothing automatic about it. Food stamps are our country's most important effort to deal with hunger here at home. Forty-seven million Americans are helped--half of them kids--and they are proven to curb hunger and improve low-income children's health, growth, and development. They have one of the lowest error rates of any government program. It's 3.8 percent. I tell my colleague from Texas: Do you want to find money in this budget? Go to the crop insurance program, which is ripping off billions of dollars from U.S. taxpayers. That's where the money is, not where the program is to feed our kids. Food stamps are good for the economy. They get resources into the hands of families who will spend them right away. And, most importantly, they are the right thing to do.

Ms. DeLAURO. Let me quote the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops: We must form a ``circle of protection'' around programs that serve the poor and vulnerable in our Nation and throughout the world. Harry Truman said: Nothing is more important in our national life than the welfare of our children, and proper nourishment comes first in attaining this welfare. Let's pursue a balanced approach. I urge my colleagues to vote against this rule. Vote against the underlying bill. Balancing the budget on the backs of hungry Americans, especially children, does not reflect the values of this great Nation, and it abdicates our moral responsibility in this Chamber.