Mark DeSaulnier

Mr. DeSAULNIER

Mr. DeSAULNIER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the life and service of a longtime friend and local champion, Ms. Barbara Maizie. Barbara dedicated her whole life to helping others. After arriving at Contra Costa Arc in 1974, her dogged work was instrumental to the creation, preservation, and evolution of life-enhancing supports for people with developmental disabilities and their families. Through her hard work and dedication, she helped Contra Costa Arc grow to be the largest provider of services in Contra Costa, serving over 900 of all ages. Her steadfast support for the Lanterman Act, both enforcing it and ensuring that people understood the rights they had been granted under it, were unmatched. Barbara and I met through her tireless work for those with developmental disabilities and their families. Her leadership in saving the George Miller Center, advocacy at state budget hearings, and work to close Developmental Centers has permanently changed our community and the State of California for the better. Barbara was not only a colleague, but a close friend. Because of Barbara's hard work, love, and support, the lives of Californians are much improved. She will be sincerely missed by all who had the pleasure of knowing her, myself included.

Mr. DeSAULNIER

Mr. DeSAULNIER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the many accomplishments of Dr. Bruce Harter as West Contra Costa Unified School District's (WCCUSD) Superintendent. As the second longest serving superintendent in the history of WCCUSD, Dr. Harter has played a large role in the district both in and out of the classroom. During his tenure, WCCUSD experienced significant increases in the success of English Language Learners, increases in graduation rates, decreases in drop-out rates, and a significant increase in the proportion of graduates attending postsecondary education. As a testament to his emphasis on addressing the whole child, WCCUSD has made great strides during his service to incorporate additional student services to help students learn and grow. To that point, WCCUSD is now the only school district in the Bay Area to have health centers in every high school, providing greater physical and emotional safety, and implementing social emotion programs that substantially reduced disciplinary actions. Dr. Harter's commitment to promoting the success and well-being of West Contra Costa's students is deeply appreciated by the community that he serves, and he should be proud of the clear and steady improvement in overall student achievement during his service. I thank Dr. Harter for his service and wish him the best of luck in his retirement.

Mr. DeSAULNIER

Mr. DeSAULNIER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the life and service of Richard ``Dick'' Allen. Dick dedicated his life to educating and empowering California's youth. Through his 41 years of service as a teacher, principal, and district administrator, Dick touched the lives of thousands of students through his leadership and deep affection for his students. As you may know, Dick spent the first decade of his career in the classroom, followed by a transition to the administrative team where he rose from Vice Principal to Director of Elementary Education and ultimately retired in 1997 as the Director of Continuing Education. After retiring, Dick was elected to the Board of Education to continue his dedication to public service. Included among his many accomplishments in service to the Bay Area are graduating 2,298 students, opening technology centers, expanding tutoring and mentoring services. He also helped implement a classroom for a language lab, fought to replace playground equipment, and began districtwide training in emergency preparation and crisis management. During his tenure, Walnut Acres Elementary was named a Federal No Child Left Behind Blue Ribbon School, the Board of Education received a California Council for Adult Education's ``Friend of Education'' award, and improved test scores at almost all grade levels. In addition to his role in our schools, Dick was a District Delegate to the California School Board Association, a Chair-elect of the Concord Chamber of Commerce, a Court Appointed Special Advocate on the Board of Directors, and a foster child educational advocate. Dick's long and decorated career is a testament to his values and dedication to education. I am saddened to hear of his passing, but his legacy will live on in Contra Costa County.

Mr. DeSAULNIER

Mr. DeSAULNIER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the life and service of Ted Radke, longtime member of the Board of Directors for East Bay Regional Parks District. Ted and I shared a passion for conservation. During his 36 year tenure on the East Bay Regional Parks District's board, Ted oversaw and was a key part of the Park District's expansion and growth. Specifically, Ted was instrumental in ensuring that the Park District's acreage more than doubled. After he partnered with former Representative George Miller, the Park District and I worked together to push for an increase in the size of the John Muir National Historic Site. Ted's commitment to the Park District is evident in that he was the longest-serving board member in its history. In addition to his impressive stint on the Park District's board from 1978 until 2014, Ted was a former Martinez City Councilman and still holds the title as the youngest person ever elected to the Martinez Council, at age 24. Predictably, he used his time on the Council to fight for the conservation of Martinez's waterfront and further the fight for environmental protection. Ted also served on the board of the Association of Bay Area Governments. Add to his public service a career at Contra Costa College, where Ted taught political science and history for 30 years, he also authored a book with his wife entitled ``The People's Choice: An Owner's Guide to Direct Democracy and Political Participation in California,'' and was co-founder of Contra Costa Ecology Action and Eco-Info. Ted was an inspiration and a friend. He passed away on August 28, 2016. His wife, Kathy, died in 2011, and he is survived by two sons and several grandchildren.

Mr. DeSAULNIER

Mr. DeSAULNIER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the life and service of a longtime Contra Costa resident, Mr. Alfred Lomeli. At an early age, Al committed to his passion for serving others by making his first attempt to join the Armed Forces. When he was turned down for being too young, he returned at the age of 18, after his graduation from Alhambra High School, and joined the Marines. Upon joining the Marines in September 1944, Lomeli and his division were the first to land on Peleliu, a tiny island in the western Pacific Ocean. While the mission was expected to only last a few days, the fighting dragged on through November and led to heavy American casualties. Al and his brother Raul's experiences in the Pacific Theater are the subjects of a book written by Al's daughter Rhonda entitled ``Semper Fi! Marine.'' Al's time in the Marines further shaped his commitment to service and to those he loved. After meeting his wife Guadalupe and settling in the Bay Area, Al began his career in finance that ultimately led him to the county treasurer-tax collector's office, which he was to in 1978. He also served as president of the National Association of County Treasurers and Finance Officers and the California Association of County Treasurers and Tax Collectors. Al's dedication to his job, his family, and his community was admirable. Al passed away on June 26, 2016. He will be missed sincerely by those who had the pleasure of knowing him, including his wife Patsy; daughters Celine, Gisele, and Rhonda; sons Jeffrey, Charles, and Lawrence; and dozens of grandchildren and great-grandchildren.

Mr. DeSAULNIER

Mr. DeSAULNIER. Mr. Speaker, our country has witnessed over 130 mass shootings since the beginning of this year. There are 270 million guns in the United States. That amounts to 89 per 100 Americans. On average, 31 Americans are murdered with guns every day in this country, and 151 are treated in America's emergency rooms. Gun violence costs this country $230 billion every year, which amounts to $200 per person. Gun death rates fell 56 percent in my State of California, from 1993 to 2010, because the legislature engaged in evidence-based research policy initiatives that have dropped that rate. Between 2004 and 2013, 316,000 Americans were killed by firearms. During that same timeframe, 313 Americans died from terrorist attacks, both internationally and domestically. Approximately 40 percent of all gun sales are private and are, therefore, exempted from the current background checks. Studies show that every day that background checks are used, the system stops more than 170 felons, 50 domestic abusers, and nearly 20 fugitives from buying a gun in the United States. Since 2004, more than 2,000 suspects on the FBI's terrorist watch list have bought weapons in the United States. A gun in a home in the U.S. is 22 times more likely to be used to kill or injure in a domestic homicide, suicide, or unintentional shooting, instead of being used in self-defense. From 2012 to 2013, at least 100 children were killed in unintentional shootings in the U.S.; almost 2 each week. Guns have killed more Americans in 12 years than AIDS, war, and illegal drug overdoses combined. On average, 55 Americans kill themselves with firearms each day in this country. In States that require background checks for private handgun sales, there are 48 percent fewer firearm suicides, while the rates of suicide by other methods are nearly identical. Suicides involving firearms are fatal at least 85 percent of the time in this country compared to the second most used attempted suicide level, which is pills. They are only successful 3 percent of the time. Mr. Speaker, for those of us who have lost a family member to firearm gun violence, this is an issue that cannot be reconciled with the current majority opinion. Twenty-eight years ago, my father took his life with a firearm. He had been under the care of a physician for 10 years to deal with depression. We still don't know how he got his gun. He is buried across the river, as a World War II vet, in Arlington. Mr. Speaker, for those of us who respect the Second Amendment, but also expect the Congress to act rationally on this public health issue, we expect Congress to respect victims of gun violence. For that reason, we demand, we ask respectfully, and we expect the Speaker and the majority to bring up for a vote two simple bills. We want a vote on the no fly, no buy bill, and we want a vote to close the loopholes on background checks. The victims of gun violence expect no less.

Mr. DeSAULNIER

Mr. DeSAULNIER. Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize Ms. Betty Reid Soskin, a constituent, friend, and influential figure in my congressional district in Contra Costa County, California. For my colleagues who may not know Betty, she is a fabled Park Ranger with the National Park Service at the Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front National Historic Park. She also enjoys the unique distinction of our nation's oldest Park Ranger at age 94. Betty has a tremendous life story. Born in Detroit, Betty and her family lived in New Orleans before relocating to Oakland, California in 1927. She worked as a file clerk for the Boilermakers Union A-36 during World War II, a Jim Crow all-African American union auxiliary. In the 1950s, she moved with her family to Walnut Creek where she fought against discrimination in her new mostly-white neighborhood, became active in her local church, and became a well-known songwriter during the civil rights movement during the 1960s. In 1995, Betty was named a ``Woman of the Year'' by the California State Legislature and was named one of the nation's ten outstanding women in 2006 by the National Women's History Project. As a field representative for members of the California legislature, Betty was active in the development of the Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front National Historic Park to acknowledge the role of black neighborhoods surrounding the Richmond, California site, which had been bulldozed after the war. She now serves the park as a Ranger. In 2015, the White House recognized Betty with a Presidential Coin after she introduced President Obama at the National Christmas Tree lighting ceremony at the White House. Last week, Betty was brutally assaulted and robbed when an unknown assailant broke into her home. True to form, Betty fought off her assailant, but during the encounter the thief managed to steal various personal items--among them, a special commemorative coin given to her by President Obama when she helped light the national Christmas tree last winter. Thanks to her strong spirit and perseverance, Betty is recovering quickly. Our office has been in touch with the White House to ensure Betty receives a new commemorative coin from the President to replace the one that was stolen. We are thankful that Betty was not more seriously injured, and we look forward to welcoming her back to full health. Her spirit and drive are an inspiration to Californians everywhere.

Mr. DeSAULNIER

Mr. DeSAULNIER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the many accomplishments of Dr. Bruce Harter as West Contra Costa Unified School District's (WCCUSD) Superintendent. As the second longest serving superintendent in the history of WCCUSD, Dr. Harter has played a large role in the district both in and out of the classroom. During his tenure, WCCUSD experienced significant increases in the success of English Language Learners, increases in graduation rates, decreases in drop-out rates, and a significant increase in the proportion of graduates attending postsecondary education. As a testament to his emphasis on addressing the whole child, WCCUSD has made great strides during his service to incorporate additional student services to help students learn and grow. To that point, WCCUSD is now the only school district in the Bay Area to have health centers in every high school, providing greater physical and emotional safety, and implementing social emotion programs that substantially reduced disciplinary actions. Dr. Harter's commitment to promoting the success and well-being of West Contra Costa's students is deeply appreciated by the community that he serves, and he should be proud of the clear and steady improvement in overall student achievement during his service. I thank Dr. Harter for his service and wish him the best of luck in his retirement

Mr. DeSAULNIER

Mr. DeSAULNIER. I thank my colleague. I will try to be brief. Mr. Speaker, this debate reminds me of the old expression by Mark Twain that, in California, whiskey is for drinking and water is for fighting. So for those of you who are listening, as somebody who has represented the delta in local and State government and now at the Federal level for 25 years, I think we are doing well in California. In a recent op-ed by Charles Fishman, who is an expert on water resources of the United States, the title of it is ``How California is Winning the Drought.'' He writes in this article that it has been the driest 4-year period in California history and the hottest, too. Yet, by almost every measure, except perception, California is doing fine--not just fine-- California is doing fabulously. It has grown 27 percent more than the rest of the country, and the agricultural industry has also grown. He goes on to write that more than half of the fruits and vegetables that are grown in the United States come from California farms and that last year, 2014, in the third growing season of the drought, both farm employment and farm revenue increased slightly. I ask my colleagues to oppose the bill because it jeopardizes not just the delta, but California's economy.

Mr. DeSAULNIER

Mr. DeSAULNIER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, my amendment simply strikes a controversial provision that is irrelevant to the underlying bill. Section 111 of the bill explicitly prohibits the Secretary of the Army from preventing someone from bringing a loaded weapon onto Federal Army Corps property. This divisive gun policy is nothing more than another attempt by the majority, unfortunately, to promote the interests of the gun lobby. It chips away at the safety and well-being of the Army Corps personnel and surrounding communities. Not only is this gun rider widely considered bad policy, the Energy and Water Appropriations bill is an inappropriate mechanism for debating the pros and cons of gun possession on Federal lands, and is inconsistent with the majority's promotion of regular order. Last week, the House debated the National Defense Authorization Act, which is certainly a more appropriate legislative vehicle for a discussion about guns. I offered an amendment to that bill to improve smart gun technology, and the majority didn't even allow it to be debated on the floor. In fact, not a single gun bill has been considered by the House in the 114th Congress. If the majority is eager to debate the merits of carrying loaded weapons on Federal properties, I am certain that many of us on this side of the aisle would be more than willing to participate in that debate. By virtue of attaching this policy rider to an appropriations bill, and by virtue of the majority dismissing requests to debate gun research and smart gun technology, it seems that the majority would rather force a contentious issue through Congress with no debate at all. This approach is at odds with the purpose for which we are all here: to debate issues important to our constituents and this country and, by virtue of that debate, advance policies to improve our country. Mr. Chairman, this policy rider is misplaced and misguided. I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. DeSAULNIER. Mr. Chairman, while I respect that perspective, I appreciate the gentleman from Idaho's perspective, and hope that we can work together in the future to make sure that public safety is protected on Army Corps of Engineers property. Mr. Chairman, it is clear today that this is not a day for a breakthrough on gun debate, in my view. I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment.

Mr. DeSAULNIER

Mr. DeSAULNIER. Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize the 50th anniversary of the founding of Carondelet High School located in my congressional district in Concord, California. Carondelet High School has served thousands of Contra Costa County's brightest young women during its long and successful run. Since its founding in 1965 by three Sisters of St. Joseph and three lay women, it has been the only all-women's high school in Contra Costa County and one of just a handful in the San Francisco Bay Area. As such, it is an important part of the East Bay community. Carondelet High School's mission statement--To inspire excellence by preparing young women to live with heart, faith and courage in the Catholic tradition and spirit of the Sisters of St. Joseph--reflects their longstanding tradition of providing young women with a 21st Century education grounded in values that are critical to our community. Congratulations to the Carondelet High School family on a successful first 50 years of service to your students and the community.

Mr. DeSAULNIER

Mr. DeSAULNIER. Mr. Chairman, let me say how happy I am to be here in a bipartisan spirit on this important issue of the opioid epidemic in this country. I rise, obviously, to support this particular amendment, and I thank my colleague from Georgia (Mr. Carter) for being a partner in this effort. Our amendment simply clarifies that grants authorized under this bill may be used to develop multi-State interoperable Prescription Drug Monitoring Programs. PDMPs are one of the most important tools in the fight against prescription drug abuse. All of us come here today from separate starting points. For me, like many others, it was because of parents of children who were lost to this epidemic. Bob and Carmen Pack were constituents in an affluent suburb of San Francisco, which is in my district and is formerly in my State legislative district, who took their two young children, Troy and Alana Pack, out for a walk to the local ice cream shop for a treat on a beautiful Sunday afternoon. Unfortunately, a woman, who was later convicted of abusing and doctor shopping for opioids and also of using alcohol, swerved across the street, killing Troy and Alana and almost killing Carmen Pack, who was expecting at the time. Fortunately, she survived and had a child. Bob, a software engineer, proceeded to put his energies into updating the California PDMP to make it electronic, to make usable in realtime, and to make it effective in trying to control opioid addictions. He partnered with multiple attorneys general in California to see this effected. As a State senator, I was able to partner with them to institute a program and fully fund CURES, the California PDMP that allows for the realtime monitoring of prescriptions. It went from 13,000 users in the course of a year to over 200,000 users, and it is now fully implemented. One of the weak points of the CURE system in California is its inability to communicate with other systems as they are developed around the country and the ability for people who abuse these products, including organized crimes, to go to other States. So it is important at this point, as States start to develop these sophisticated but very cost- effective systems, that we establish them in such a way that they are interoperable. While doctors and pharmacies work hard to prevent anyone from filling unneeded orders, it is more difficult to stop doctor shopping by individuals who visit multiple doctors and pharmacists in an attempt to obtain more opioids. Some individuals who are addicted will cross State lines--and, obviously, organized crime will do so--to avoid their States' prescription drug monitoring systems. Unfortunately, many State programs are not interoperable with neighboring States and do not coordinate and share this information effectively. To improve the success of these programs, our amendment explicitly states that these funds can be used to promote interoperability and data sharing between States. Our amendment is a small step towards improving existing systems, and it will help States better understand patterns of interstate drug trafficking. I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. DeSAULNIER. I thank Mr. Carter and my colleagues on the other side of the aisle for supporting this commonsense amendment. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. DeSAULNIER. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Carter).

Mr. DeSAULNIER

Mr. DeSAULNIER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the Scholarships for Opportunity and Results Reauthorization Act. Plenty of members have raised legitimate concerns with this bill, not the least of which is that students, teachers, parents, administrators, and the community in D.C. did not ask for this system to be forced on them. A specific concern: The lack of protections for students with disabilities, arguably those who need protections the most. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act--colloquially known as IDEA--has ensured for decades that children with disabilities throughout the nation receive the services and accommodations they need. IDEA governs how states and public agencies provide early intervention, special education and related services to more than 6.5 million eligible infants, toddlers, children and youth with disabilities. Voucher schools should not get a free pass because of accounting gimmicks allowed under the voucher program. When IDEA was passed, it did not have a clause that said ``protect all students with disabilities except those students who choose to go to voucher schools.'' I urge my colleagues to reject this bill and stand up for the civil rights that we all agreed every student deserves.

Mr. DeSAULNIER

Mr. DeSAULNIER. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from California. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro).

Mr. DeSAULNIER. Mr. Speaker, it is past time for Congress to raise the Federal minimum wage. We learned yesterday that, of the people who would most be impacted by raising the minimum wage, only 10 percent are teens, as opposed to a popular misconception. In fact, the average age affected is 35, and 56 percent are women. In addition, nearly one-third of all Hispanics and one-third of all African Americans would get a raise by enacting this act, and 30 percent of working mothers would get a raise. It is time that we stand up for hardworking people all across America and give them a well-deserved and long-overdue raise. I yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. Takano).

Mr. DeSAULNIER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the subject of my Special Order.

Mr. DeSAULNIER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to support the Raise the Wage Act that was introduced almost exactly 1 year ago today. Raising the minimum wage is critical to addressing income inequality in the United States, one of the most pressing issues facing our Nation. But the majority has not even called a hearing on this issue. Yesterday, the Committee on Education and the Workforce Democrats held our own forum on this issue, during which we considered the evidence in support of raising the minimum wage. We heard from business leaders and economists that raising the wage will reduce workforce turnover, stimulate consumer spending, and grow jobs. The evidence is absolutely clear that raising the minimum wage will give 35 million workers a raise and lift 4.5 million Americans out of poverty. It is also abundantly clear that raising the minimum wage will benefit businesses in the U.S. economy. That may be why in a recent poll from Republican pollster Frank Luntz, 80 percent of business executives supported raising the minimum wage. The record could not be more clear: raising the minimum wage is good for workers, businesses, and the American economy. That is why today I include in the Record testimony from yesterday's Member forum on the Business Case for Raising the Federal Minimum Wage, presented by David Cooper of the Economic Policy Institute; Sherry Deutschmann of LetterLogic, Inc.; Scott Nash of MOM's Organic; and Carmen Ortiz Larsen of AQUAS, Inc. Written Remarks from Carmen Ortiz Larsen, President of AQUAS Inc. and Chair of the Board of the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, Montgomery County, MD Submitted to the House Education & the Workforce Committee--Minority Panel on the Business and Economic Case for Raising the Minimum Wage, April 27, 2016 My name is Carmen Ortiz Larsen, and I support an increase in the Federal minimum wage to at least $12 by 2020; I support the Raise the Wage Act. I am the owner and President of an Engineering and Information Technology firm called AQUAS Incorporated. I am also the Chair of the Board of the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce of Montgomery County, Maryland. AQUAS Inc. staff includes professionals, administrative personnel, and field technicians. Our lowest wage is $14 an hour. Our plan is to have the minimum wage in our workplace at $16/hour within the next 18 months. Being a small business owner is hard work. Small business owners have to be frugal, prudent, smart and alert to opportunities, navigating cash flow ups and downs, and managing cost increases and price competitiveness. Controlling costs is essential to ensure sufficient margins for funding growth, long-term success and customer satisfaction. If I don't control costs wisely, though, the dollars I save in one area of the business could cost me more in other areas. Some years ago we sought to keep costs down by using the lowest legal minimum wage as compensation for clerical and field staff. We found that these workers had a greater incidence of health issues, absenteeism and turnover. The cost of replacing and retraining staff outweighed any savings in keeping their pay rate low. We found that it was a smarter business policy to raise the hourly rate for the lower paid jobs. The results were better staff morale, increased loyalty and better service to the customer. We gained a more stable workforce and improved performance. Markets are competitive, and every year costs go up. We have to face yearly increases in cost of insurance, supplies, advertising, facilities, services. We take this for granted as the cost of doing business. It should be no different to expect wage increases, especially for the lowest paid workers. All employees deserve a wage that is sufficient to live without the anxiety of being left without food or shelter. AQUAS does not believe that the answer to cost management or competitive challenges lies in paying our staff poverty wages; this simply diminishes the quality and ongoing success of our enterprise. Instead, we remain competitive through efficiencies and quality improvements, through innovative ways to maintain reasonable profitability and improve the customer's experience. Our staff is part of who we are as a company, and they deserve to make ends meet. We look to you as elected officials to set boundaries that cut across special interest areas, to make those tough decisions that create a delicate balance between an unrestrained commercial interest and a level playing field for businesses and acceptable conditions for individual sustainability. The current minimum wage adjusted for inflation is lower than it was in 1950. This is simply untenable and should be unacceptable in our country. The current $7.25 an hour does not provide minimum wage workers with a wage with which they can live with dignity, have a decent home, nutritious food, and a reliable way to get back and forth from work, without worrying about whether or not they will lose their job or their family if they can't. The minimum wage is so low that workers have to seek a second job or public assistance of one kind or another. I want to contribute to my community--not burden it by paying wages my employees can't live on. Raising the federal minimum wage is long overdue. In my community engagement as a business owner and as the Chair of the Board of the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, I see an awful lot of the consequences of poverty wages in the community; I see families that fall apart and struggle to stay healthy, with each adult working more than one job, and still having a hard time making ends meet. These people are our consumer base, they are our neighbors, they buy from us, they vote for you. I don't want my government supporting policies like an inadequate minimum wage that promote poverty, weaken consumer demand, and ultimately hurt my business and other businesses. We have to set a reasonable wage floor. I am here today to testify on behalf of a decent minimum wage that will reinforce employee productivity and ensure that when an employee goes home after work, they have the time, energy and enthusiasm to give to their families and community without fear, without anxiety and without hunger. Thank you.

Mr. DeSAULNIER. Mr. Speaker, I stand here as a fervent believer in what we have advocated for and as someone who has spent 35 years owning and managing restaurants in an area of the country in which the economy is growing more rapidly than anywhere else in the country right now, which is the San Francisco Bay Area. With that background, I also speak to this as somebody who has a good deal of empathy for small-business owners, particularly restaurant owners, who are looking at monthly and quarterly business reports and are wondering how they would accommodate the increase in the minimum wage. In California, of course, we are much higher than in the U.S., and many cities, including San Francisco, have gone to $15 with an indexed minimum wage. I believe firmly in the research that shows that one of the biggest challenges to small businesses, particularly in the restaurant field, is not the challenge of minimum wage workers, but the fact that there is less disposable income in middle-income households to be able to have the discretion to go out and spend that disposable income in restaurants and on hospitality events. While I understand the angst, these are the kinds of things, once we take that step--from my experience and the experience in California and in high-cost areas like New York and San Francisco, which have gone ahead with raising the minimum wage--that would indicate the overall benefit to the economy and to everyone. Lastly, I think the challenge of this time for us domestically is, as I said, the inequality in the country. In a country in which the economy is based on 70 percent consumer investments, having more disposable income is a good thing. As President Lincoln once famously said: In order for this democracy to thrive, there must always be a balance between capital and labor; and if there is ever an imbalance towards capital, we have, in effect, lost democracy. There is no question that, at this point in time, capital investment is doing many great things, including in the bay area and in our venture capital community and in our innovation community. In having said that, one does not have to read Thomas Piketty to understand that we have a huge imbalance between wages and labor and capital, which Lincoln warned about. I ask the majority party to work with us to raise the minimum wage in order to help the economy. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. DeSAULNIER. My pleasure. I thank my colleague from Connecticut for her passionate advocacy on this issue and on others around wage inequality. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a letter sent to President Obama and signed by over 600 economists, including seven Nobel Prize winners, stating that the most recent economic research shows that increases in the minimum wage have little or no negative effect on the employment of minimum wage workers. In fact, the letter goes on to read that a minimum wage increase could have a stimulative effect on the economy as low-wage workers spend their additional earnings, thus increasing consumer demand and leading companies to hire additional workers. Over 600 Economists Sign Letter In Support of $10.10 Minimum Wage: Economist Statement on the Federal Minimum Wage Dear Mr. President, Speaker Boehner, Majority Leader Reid, Congressman Cantor, Senator McConnell, and Congresswoman Pelosi: July will mark five years since the federal minimum wage was last raised. We urge you to act now and enact a three-step raise of 95 cents a year for three years--which would mean a minimum wage of $10.10 by 2016--and then index it to protect against inflation. Senator Tom Harkin and Representative George Miller have introduced legislation to accomplish this. The increase to $10.10 would mean that minimum-wage workers who work full time, full year would see a raise from their current salary of roughly $15,000 to roughly $21,000. These proposals also usefully raise the tipped minimum wage to 70% of the regular minimum. This policy would directly provide higher wages for close to 17 million workers by 2016. Furthermore, another 11 million workers whose wages are just above the new minimum would likely see a wage increase through ``spillover'' effects, as employers adjust their internal wage ladders. The vast majority of employees who would benefit are adults in working families, disproportionately women, who work at least 20 hours a week and depend on these earnings to make ends meet. At a time when persistent high unemployment is putting enormous downward pressure on wages, such a minimum-wage increase would provide a much-needed boost to the earnings of low-wage workers. In recent years there have been important developments in the academic literature on the effect of increases in the minimum wage on employment, with the weight of evidence now showing that increases in the minimum wage have had little or no negative effect on the employment of minimum-wage workers, even during times of weakness in the labor market. Research suggests that a minimum-wage increase could have a small stimulative effect on the economy as low-wage workers spend their additional earnings, raising demand and job growth, and providing some help on the jobs front.

Mr. DeSAULNIER

Mr. DeSAULNIER. Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise in support of my colleagues in urging the reauthorization of this act based on nutritional value and investment in this country's future and our young people. Specifically, I want to take a minute to talk about the simultaneous issues of extreme hunger and obesity in this country and in my home State of California, which are nothing short of staggering. Fourteen percent of people in California are food insecure. Twenty- three percent of California's children are food insecure. In my district, 14 percent of the total population is food insecure. In the United States, three out of four public school teachers tell us that students regularly come to class hungry. Eighty-one percent say it happens at least once a week. Over 15 million American kids struggle with hunger. On the other hand, American kids who eat school breakfast miss less school, get better grades, and are more likely to graduate from high school. At the same time, there is a childhood obesity epidemic in this country. Childhood obesity has more than doubled in children and quadrupled in adolescents in the past 30 years, according to the Centers for Disease Control. In 2012, more than one-third of children and adolescents were overweight or obese. One in three children in California are currently overweight or obese, according to the Pew Endowment Foundation. Research shows that children living in States with strong school nutrition standards are more likely to maintain healthier weights. The estimated annual health costs of obesity-related illness in the U.S. is a staggering $190.2 billion, or nearly 21 percent of annual medical spending in the United States. Childhood obesity alone is responsible for $14 billion in direct medical costs. Ironically, the Federal Government spends $15 billion every year on school food. The work that we began with the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act in 2010 is having an important and positive effect on both of these problems at once. School meal participants are less likely to have nutrient inadequacies and are more likely to consume fruit, vegetables, and milk at breakfast and lunch. Low-income students who eat both school breakfast and lunch have significantly better overall diet quality than low-income students who do not eat school meals. The school meal nutrition standards are having a positive impact on student food selection and consumption, especially for fruits and vegetables. Few packed lunches and snacks brought from home meet National School Lunch Program standards and Child and Adult Care Food Program standards. Children in after-school programs consume more calories, more salty foods, and sugary foods on days that they bring their own snacks than on days they only eat the afterschool snack provided by the National School Lunch Program. In California, I am pleased to say that we have figured it out for the kids, for their parents, for the purveyors who provide all of this healthy product, and for the students, the school administrators, and rank-and-file staff who distribute these foods. Over 93 percent of school districts nationwide have met the improved lunch and breakfast standards, certifying them to receive Federally authorized school lunch reimbursement rate increases. In California, we exceed the national compliance rates with 100 percent of our schools currently in compliance. These standards are going a long way toward decreasing the health costs associated with malnutrition for both hungry and obese children. We must double down on these efforts, not turn away from them. Our children deserve at least this much from us. I look forward to working with my colleagues on this effort.