Mark DeSaulnier

Mr. DeSAULNIER

Mr. DeSAULNIER. Madam Speaker, I yield the gentlewoman from Connecticut an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. DeSAULNIER. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Connolly).

Mr. DeSAULNIER. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Green).

Mr. DeSAULNIER. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Scanlon), distinguished member of the Rules Committee.

Mr. DeSAULNIER. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Doggett).

Mr. DeSAULNIER. Madam Speaker, I yield another 30 seconds to the gentleman from Texas.

Mr. DeSAULNIER. Madam Speaker, I have no more speakers. So, if the gentleman from Texas would like to close, I am prepared to close. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DeSAULNIER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. I just want to thank everyone who came down and spoke on this important issue. In my view, there is nothing more important. You don't have to read the 600 pages in Thomas Piketty to know that the level of inequality in this country right now. And I acknowledge some of the improvements that globalism has given to people who earn $1 a day and are now up to the astronomical level of $2 a day, but that has not benefited the American worker. As I said in my opening comments, 40 percent of American households live on $30,000 a year. That is not helping everybody. Most of the benefits of the last 50 years went to the top 1 percent, people, as I said before, who earn--not own, earn--$7 million a year as opposed to the 99 percent below them who earn $54,000 a year. We have to fix this. This is not democracy, as Brandeis and Lincoln said. As Eisenhower said, when the economy was growing at historic records, as I mentioned in my opening statements. And this is how times have changed, particularly as a former Republican, former small business owner, former teamster, and former hotel and restaurant union member. Those jobs, that protection, gave me the money to save enough money to go into business for myself and treat my employees as I would want to be treated, which helped my customers. Eisenhower said: Only a handful of reactionaries harbor the ugly thought of breaking unions and depriving working men and women of the right to join the union of their choice. President Eisenhower said: I have no use for those, regardless of their political party, who hold some vain and foolish dream of spinning the clock back to days when organized labor was a huddled, almost helpless mass. Eisenhower said: Only a fool would try to deprive working men and women of the right to join the union of their choice. Lincoln said: All that harms labor is treason to America. Madam Speaker, for decades, tax breaks, rollbacks on regulations that benefited the ultrawealthy and powerful corporations, unfair labor laws and the enactment and enforcement of those laws, and the rise of monopolies have fueled inequality to the point where we are at Great Depression levels, and we will suffer the consequences if we don't address that in this room. It will be addressed outside of this room. We have an opportunity today to move this country in the right direction with these three measures. I urge a ``yes'' vote on the rule and the previous question. And I have two last quotes. Plutarch said, 2,000 years ago, that the oldest and fatal flaw to republics has always been the imbalance between the rich and the poor. Samuel Gompers, great union leader, when he was fighting to organize Americans during the Depression, said: Unions and equality, and until we get it, no surrender. The text of the material previously referred to by Mr. Burgess is as follows: Amendment to House Resolution 833 At the end of the resolution, add the following: Sec. 4. Immediately upon adoption of this resolution, the House shall proceed to the consideration in the House of the resolution (H. Res. 834) supporting policies that are a part of the ``Best is Yet to Come'' blueprint, outlined by President Trump during his historic, optimistic State of the Union Address. The resolution shall be considered as read. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the resolution and preamble to adoption without intervening motion or demand for division of the question except one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the Majority and Minority Leaders or their designees. Clause 1(c) of rule XIX shall not apply to the consideration of House Resolution 834.

Mr. DeSAULNIER. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Mr. DeSAULNIER

Mr. DeSAULNIER. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support this commonsense amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. DeSAULNIER. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. DeSAULNIER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I first state my admiration for the chair of the committee and Ms. Pressley and everyone who has worked on this piece of legislation. Mr. Chairman, credit scores and credit reports impact our daily lives, often in ways that we don't realize. They determine whether you can get a loan for a car that you need to get to work every day. They determine whether you can get a loan to buy a home or rent an apartment and how much interest you are going to pay on your home loan. They impact your insurance premium and your cell phone. In many States, these scores can even determine whether you get a job or not. Unfortunately, even though they can have an enormous consequence on a person's life, these reports have very little oversight and can easily be inaccurate. Even when inaccuracies are spotted by consumers, the process for removing or correcting the mistakes is perhaps intentionally complicated and time consuming for the average American. A person with multiple jobs or no knowledge of credit reporting systems could very well give up--and often does--because the system is too complex for them. This is not only a frustrating cycle but is also damaging to a person's financial reputation. We need to know more about how mistakes are made, who is responsible for fixing them, and what the impacts of those mistakes are on individual Americans' lives. For too long, financial stability has been used as an excuse to keep lower income people out of traditionally wealthy and middle-class neighborhoods. This process, known as ``redlining,'' has been banned, but we continue to see the segregation of our neighborhoods along demographic and economic lines. Credit scores are being weaponized to exclude and separate communities. To address this problem, we need reliable data. That is why this amendment would require the nonpartisan GAO to study how credit scores are used in housing decisions and examine whether individuals are being discriminated against in those decisions based on race, gender, age, sexual orientation, geographic location, socioeconomic status, and more. Our society cannot continue to be broken into neighborhoods and communities based on the color of our skin or the amount of money in our bank accounts. This amendment will help us right this wrong and encourage housing decisions that are more equitable and fair for all Americans. Mr. Chairman, I encourage my colleagues to join me in support of this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DeSAULNIER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I agree, and as a former small business owner, I see the value of credit reports if done fairly and equitably. It should be balanced against the need for the lenders and the people who are seeking credit. In my area in northern California, I hear stories over and over again about people who are working two jobs, and, through no mistake of their own, their credit report is not perfect. They don't have the time or the expertise to hire someone or to go back in and correct the problems. Often, problems can be left on even when they go through the process. As somebody who was in the retail business, I see this as another example of customer service being put on the customer. Twenty, 30 years ago, to the credit agencies and retailers--at least, in theory--customer service meant you reached out to the client and tried to figure out what the problem is. My experience and the experience I get anecdotally and the research that I see is that, particularly in difficult housing markets, the ability for people to get into the housing market either for rental or for purchase is inhibited and is an obstacle to current reporting. So, for this amendment, it is about getting more knowledge in a dynamic that only 10 years ago was almost disastrous to the economy when the housing implosion happened and is happening in many ways again as we, as researchers say, in urban areas resegregate based on ethnicity and demographics. So, in order to get a better understanding, I think this amendment is a minimal standard of understanding how the situation has changed and how we can protect both the people who are the lenders and also the people who may not be lenders but are just trying to get to a point where they can rent an apartment or own a home. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DeSAULNIER

Mr. DeSAULNIER. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the comments by the ranking member, and I hope we will continue our respect and friendship even though we are in disagreement on this. I urge support of this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. DeSAULNIER. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. DeSAULNIER. Mr. Chair, the American workforce is getting older and working longer than ever before. In fact, by 2024, the Bureau of Labor Statistics estimated that 25 percent of the U.S. workforce will be composed of workers over the age of 55, and a third of those workers will be older than 65. At the same time, complaints of age discrimination are on the rise. According to enforcement statistics, the EEOC received over 20,000 complaints of age discrimination in 2017, accounting for 23 percent of all discrimination charges filed that year. That is a jump of 4,000 charges of age discrimination since the year 2000 and is likely a severe underestimate, as cases of age discrimination often go unreported. More so, a 2018 study published by the AARP found that more than 60 percent of workers age 45 and older have seen or experienced age discrimination, and 76 percent say that they consider age discrimination to be a major obstacle to finding a new job. The Protecting Older Workers Against Discrimination Act would help address this problem by making the burden of proof for age discrimination claims more equitable and more in line with other forms of discrimination. This has important implications for older workers. Fewer cases could be thrown out or settled before trial, meaning long overdue justice for older Americans. It would also have important implications for the EEOC, ushering in a significant increase to the number of age discrimination claims and, therefore, EEOC's workload. My amendment goes one step further and ensures that Congress has a full picture of the scope of age discrimination in the American workforce and a better understanding of existing gaps in the EEOC's ability to address and prevent workplace age discrimination. This would allow Congress to better support the EEOC in its work, meaningfully address age discrimination in the American workforce, and empower millions of older Americans. I would like to thank my colleague, Congressman Davis, for his bipartisan partnership, and I urge support for this amendment. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DeSAULNIER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Rodney Davis), my friend.

Mr. DeSAULNIER

Mr. DeSAULNIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Shalala), a distinguished member of the Rules Committee.

Mr. DeSAULNIER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members be given 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.

Mr. DeSAULNIER. Mr. Speaker, on Monday, the Rules Committee met and reported a rule, House Resolution 790, providing for consideration of two measures: H.R. 1230, the Protecting Older Workers Against Discrimination Act, and H.J. Res. 76, providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Department of Education relating to ``Borrower Defense Institutional Accountability.'' The rule provides for consideration of H.R. 1230 under a structured rule, with 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the Committee on Education and Labor. It makes in order five amendments and provides one motion to recommit. The rule provides for consideration of H.J. Res. 76 under a closed rule, with 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and the ranking member of the Committee on Education and Labor, and it provides one motion to recommit. Finally, the rule provides for standard district work period instructions from January 17 through January 24, 2020. Mr. Speaker, since taking the majority a year ago, Democrats have made it a priority to protect our Nation's students and workers. As a member of the Committee on Education and Labor, I am proud that I have played a role in passing legislation that will provide students and workers the support they need to thrive. We have that opportunity once again this week with these bills, both of which I am proud to cosponsor. First, we are taking a stand against the Department of Education's deliberate disregard for students who have been defrauded by institutions. In 2019, student loan debt reached an all-time high in the United States of $1.41 trillion. Our Nation is truly in a student debt crisis. Even more significantly impacted by this crisis are students who have been defrauded by predatory for-profit colleges. On top of their crushing debt, they have useless degrees and none of the job opportunities that they were promised. In 2016, following the collapse of two major predatory for-profit institutions, President Obama established the borrower defense rule to help students access relief from their student loans. Instead of helping students, Secretary DeVos modified the rule, creating an intentionally complicated process that restricts how much relief defrauded students can receive. According to The Institute for College Access and Success, the new rule would forgive only about 3 cents on every dollar borrowed. Even in cases where schools clearly violate the law, this new rule denies students relief if they can't prove the school intentionally defrauded them, can't file their claim fast enough, or can't document exactly how much financial harm they have suffered due to fraud. Although we don't have the full picture because their investments are shrouded in secrecy, Secretary DeVos' connections to the for-profit college industry led me to believe that her siding with the industry is not a coincidence. The bill we will consider this week would bring us back to the Obama- era rules that put students first and profit second. Second, we will bring to the floor the Protecting Older Workers Against Discrimination Act. One in four adults age 65 and older are part of the workforce, and that number is still growing. While some of the reasons behind this shift in the labor force are positive, like better health and job satisfaction, many older Americans must keep working because they are not financially prepared for retirement. Sadly, aging American adults have a median savings of just over $150,000 for retirement. If a person is fortunate enough to live a long, healthy life and has 30 years of retirement, that would leave them with just $5,000 a year, a sum no one could retire on anywhere in this country. Unfortunately, older workers suffer disproportionately from long-term unemployment and age discrimination in the workforce. Six out of 10 older workers have experienced age discrimination, but a 2009 Supreme Court ruling has made it harder for them to prove it. The decision upended decades of precedent, making it more difficult for older workers to get justice through the courts. This legislation restores workplace protections for older Americans, paving the way for a more inclusive and diverse workforce. Taken together, these bills honor our commitment to students and workers and offer us the opportunity to reverse two misguided and harmful policies. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DeSAULNIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee).

Mr. DeSAULNIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to respond to the comments from my friend from California. We know the Government of Iran admitted to mistakenly shooting down the Ukraine International Airlines flight. It was a tragedy, and tragedies led to tragedy. The people of Iran stood up and demanded accountability and are standing up from their government today. This Congress supports those who have stood up to their government demanding transparency and fighting for their rights. That is why the concurrent resolution we passed last week reaffirmed that it is in our national interest to support the people of Iran and other Middle Eastern countries who demand an end to government corruption in violation of basic human rights. As of this morning, the Foreign Affairs Committee is holding a hearing to examine our policy with Iran. While the Foreign Affairs Committee is hearing from experts on Iran, the House is taking action to protect students and protect Americans from discrimination in the workplace, and that is what this rule is about. Make no mistake, defeating the previous question is not a vote on the McCarthy resolution, it is a vote to hand over control of the House floor to the minority. I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the previous question so we may proceed to these critical pieces of legislation without delay. I might add, just on a personal note, I would ask my colleagues to help--and I am sure they have had some cases of this--the Iranian Americans who have come to my office in my district with very troubling stories about their relatives who regularly have come to visit them in this country who are unable to come right now because of the travel ban by this administration. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Raskin), a distinguished member of the Rules Committee.

Mr. DeSAULNIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. Tlaib).

Mr. DeSAULNIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Mr. DeSAULNIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, these two issues are extremely important to the American public. When I think of the comments from my friend from Iowa and the comments about having made a payroll, I reflect on my career making those obligations. He neglected to say that doing what he suggested employers would do is discriminatory on its face. I knew that when I instructed my managers and when I interviewed prospective employees, I was not to discriminate based on certain Federal and State categories. So by taking the lead that he assumed that some employers might do, that you wouldn't hire somebody who is older because you might find yourself in court, that would in itself be discriminatory. What we are doing with this legislation is just bringing this to an equal perspective with other categories. You shouldn't discriminate based on ethnicity, gender, or sexual preference. Why should you have any different performance standards or adhere to the same level for older people? Given that baby boomers, people of my generation, find they have to work longer and harder, and given the issues around retirement, I would think that all of us would want to make sure that they were protected and that the economy would get the benefit of their wisdom and experience, and not have them discriminated against. On the second subject, Ben Franklin once famously said at the beginning of this country that an investment in education is always the best investment. Sadly, with this administration, Mr. Franklin might not say that because young people who are encouraged to get degrees, to get undergraduate degrees and graduate degrees to be part of a knowledge- based economy, to take that access to the best educational system in the world in higher education in this country, it would end with them in debt and with a degree that is worthless in the open marketplace. I would think that all Members of Congress would want to protect both aging workers and students who are defrauded. Mr. Speaker, as you can see, we are on the floor this week to restore justice to those who need our help. Struggling students and workers deserve our support, not for us to turn our backs on them. Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote on the rule and the previous question.