Rosa DeLauro

Mr. DeLAURO

Mr. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order against the amendment because it proposes to change existing law and constitutes legislation on an appropriation bill and therefore violates clause 2 of rule XXI. The rule states in pertinent part: ``An amendment to a general appropriation bill shall not be in order if changing existing law.'' It waives existing law. I ask for a ruling from the Chair.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

Ms. DeLAURO. I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Murphy).

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Owens).

Ms. DeLAURO. I remind the gentleman that the courts are split two and two. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Butterfield).

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

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

Ms. DeLAURO. I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey. (Mr. ANDREWS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Ms. DeLAURO. May I inquire how much time I have remaining.

Ms. DeLAURO. I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Washington State (Mr. McDermott).

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

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I now yield to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Dicks).

Ms. DeLAURO. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Chairman, once again, as to what we are doing here, this amendment just mirrors the prior amendment of which we had a discussion. We keep saying it over and over again: Your inability to come here, as you promised, to create jobs for the American people, to lower the deficit for them, and to turn the economy around has failed.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Ms. DeLAURO. I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Neal).

Ms. DeLAURO. I yield 1 minute to the gentlelady from Florida (Ms. Wilson).

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I rise to make a point of order on the amendment.

Ms. DeLAURO. I yield 1 minute to the gentlelady from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).

Ms. DeLAURO. Madam Chairman, the American people want us to focus our time and attention on creating jobs. They want us to turn the economy around. They want us to reduce the deficit. The total of the two amendments that have just come before this body would increase the deficit, increase it, the first one by $5.5 billion over the next several years, and this one at about $5.3 billion over the next 5 years. That's not what you told them you were going to do. You told them you were going to create jobs and roll back the deficit. What you are doing here is putting the American people in the hands of the insurance companies again to make their decisions about health care. And we have health care in this body. Millions in this Nation do not. I urge my colleagues to vote against this bill, which doesn't create jobs, doesn't turn the economy around, and adds to the deficit. Point of Order

Ms. DeLAURO. Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to the cuts to the Agriculture and FDA budget in H.R. 1. They are rashly made, and they will endanger both our food supply and our families. During my time as Chair of this subcommittee, we worked hard to provide the resources to better improve the safety of food, drugs and devices. We expanded access to fundamental nutrition and hunger programs. And we invested wisely in key areas like conservation and rural development. This continuing resolution threatens to undo all of our hard work. Instead of cutting special interest waste, like the subsidies that go to high-income farmers and corporate farms, this continuing resolution hurts everyone else. It hurts the economy, will cost us jobs, and it threatens the middle-class and working families we were elected to represent. We are already playing a dangerous game in terms of food safety--Far too many of the dishes on our kitchen table get there uninspected. But under this continuing resolution, there would be 2000 fewer firm inspections--and 10,000 fewer import inspections--conducted by the FDA. In fact, both the FDA and USDA would have to furlough thousands of inspectors under this plan. That is more than just a food safety problem. It means the nearly 6,300 meat and poultry plants across America would be legally required to stop operating--costing approximately $11 billion. And it would mean, by the basic principles of the market, that the price of meat and poultry would increase for every single family in America. In addition, this CR rolls back the budget of the Farm Service Agency--forcing a 40 day furlough of all employees and meaning long delays and less help for farmers and ranchers. In cuts food aid to the lowest it has been in a decade, 15 million people would lose desperately-needed emergency food assistance, which will endanger our war efforts and the security of our troops in Afghanistan. And 2.5 million more women and children lose the vital aid provided by McGovern-Dole, a program with long bipartisan support. There are many terrible ideas in this CR, but perhaps the unkindest cut of all is what will be done to the Commodity Supplemental Food Program and the Women with Infant Children feeding program. Instead of slashing subsidies for oil companies and saving $40 billion, the majority has decided to deny over 100,000 low-income seniors from receiving food packages, and cut almost $750 million from WIC, a program serving our most vulnerable citizens. They are quite literally taking food from hungry seniors and children's mouths, and giving it to the special interests--corporate farms and oil companies--who write their checks. It is unconscionable. I urge my colleagues to vote against these reckless and irresponsible cuts, and to work together on a budget that better reflects our priorities as a nation.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. If the majority party really wanted to do something about the deficit, they could look to other parts of the budget for significant cuts in savings instead of coming back over and over again with ever-deeper cuts to the programs that make investments in education, in health care, in job training and in scientific research. Democrats are committed to reducing the deficit. We believe you ought to start by ending the tax subsidies and special interest waste. Let's look at it: Forty billion dollars in oil subsidies, $8 billion in farm subsidies, $7.4 billion that could be saved by shutting down the practice of treaty shopping, $3 billion a year that could be saved if we allowed cheaper generic drugs in the market. This across-the-board amendment cut is an example of the majority's reckless rush to slash without regard to the impact on the economy, the businesses that create jobs, or middle class working people who are doing their best for their families and educating their kids for the future. The majority is hitting families and children and the elderly, and they are not laying a glove on the special interest tax subsidies.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Ms. DeLAURO. I yield myself 1\1/2\ minutes. Defunding the health insurance exchanges that we created in the Affordable Care Act will hurt small businesses, which are the driving force of our economy. It destroys jobs, takes away consumer choice and increases the deficit. By gaining access to the exchanges, small businesses will prosper from what large employers have enjoyed for years: large group rates, lower administrative costs and greater transparency. The exchanges also give small businesses and their employees access to a fuller range of plans. They give families across America access to the information that they need in order to be able to buy the best plan at a competitive price that suits their needs. The exchange has created a competitive marketplace for health insurance so that small businesses and middle class families across America can benefit from lower prices and more choices. This is basic free market principles at work. One would think the majority would support any attempt to bring competition to health care but, instead, they are carrying the water for big insurance companies who do not want competition. They want to preserve their monopoly. They want a captive market, forced to pay whatever exorbitant rates they feel like charging. That will not bring down health care costs or cut the deficit. The health insurance exchanges help slow the surging cost of health care by introducing competition into the marketplace. I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment which will threaten our economy, harm our small businesses and will destroy jobs. I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, do I have any time left?