Keith Ellison

Mr. ELLISON

Mr. ELLISON. Thank you. I appreciate that. Look, the fact is what you're doing is trying to say that you're going to stand up for the big-money people, as opposed to the cumulative small business people. I think if you put the number of small business people together, your big multinational mining interests that are going to pollute their business----

Mr. ELLISON. I will tell you this, about less than 1 percent of money for schools comes from trust lands. It's a very tiny percentage. I mean, so we're going to sacrifice our heritage for a multinational mining company----

Mr. ELLISON. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. ELLISON. Mr. Speaker, this final amendment to the bill, if adopted, will not kill the bill or send it back to committee. This bill will immediately be voted upon on final passage as amended. Mr. Speaker, this bill that we're arguing about right now actually is not necessary. The Minnesota State legislature has already decided that in one of the most beautiful wildernesses in our country, the Boundary Waters, that there will be about 86,000 acres transferred out of there into the Superior National Forest. The land will be moved from this wilderness area into the Superior National Forest, and the proceeds will be used to benefit Minnesota schoolchildren. What this bill actually does is it doesn't actually facilitate the transfer. The Minnesota State legislature has handled that. What it does is it allows the circumvention of the regular process so that Minnesotans who are part of the business community, the school community, the local community, who are part of the recreational community, who have a stake in this thing, that they will be cut out of the deal. They won't be able to have the transparency that is necessary. Without a doubt, the land that will be transferred will be transferred for the purpose of commercial exploitation, most likely mining. And mining, as you know, may have commercial importance and commercial benefit, but it is a dirty business. It does affect the businesses that are around it. This bill is designed to help and will help the mining and the timber industry in northern Minnesota. But as we go about this process, we can at least do what we can to make sure that as the transfer takes place, that the outdoor recreational businesses, which are about $1.6 billion in northeastern Minnesota, do not get sacrificed in the process. The Superior National Forest and Chippewa National Forest and the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness make up Minnesota's premiere outdoor recreation area. They're just beautiful. I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, there's been many a time when I've led young people up to the Boundary Waters so they can get out of the urban environment, into the natural wilderness, and experience what I believe is God's country. As we effect this change and these land swaps are taking place, and there's no real process--we're bypassing it through this bill--to have real transparency, the interests of the recreational industry, the people who fish, the people who paddle, the people who hunt, and the businesses that supply them are at stake. My amendment would simply protect the land in these forests currently used for hunting, fishing, snowmobiling, bird watching, and all sorts of other activities, and the commercial interests associated with allowing them to do that. The land that we're talking about has very high recreational value. The Chippewa and Superior National Forest provide habitat for hunting and game like grouse, deer, or waterfowl. They contain some of the Nation's best fishing lakes, filled with trout, walleye, bass, and pike. I encourage all of you to come and visit. They attract 250,000 visitors every year, Americans of all kinds, but even international visitors, but mostly Minnesotans right from the area and from the Twin Cities. The fact is the Superior National Forest is the eighth-most visited in the entire National Forest system. They drive, as I mentioned already, Mr. Speaker, $1.6 billion in tourism and recreation industry in northeastern Minnesota. Thousands of small businesses rely on the National Forest, including everything from resorts, to hunting outfitters, to local restaurants and shops. I might add, there are almost--in fact, I would say there are no-- restaurants or outfitters who name their business after the sulfide mines. No. They call themselves the Boundary Waters Cafe. They name themselves after the beauty and the natural wonder in the area. This bill puts recreation at risk and the industry that supports it. This bill provides no protection for lands with high recreational value. In fact, it explicitly says that land acquired by the State should be used first for revenue-generating activities, such as mining and logging. This is why hunting and angling groups in Minnesota oppose the bill, including the Minnesota Conservation Foundation, Minnesota Backcountry Hunters and Anglers, and the Minnesota division of the Izaac Walton League. What's more, Mr. Speaker, the bill does not even identify which lands will be exchanged. We don't even know in this map which private property interests will be affected. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. ELLISON. If the gentleman is going to let me answer, I will be happy to answer you.

Mr. ELLISON. Look. I'm not going to yield to you if you won't let me answer the question.

Mr. ELLISON. If I understand the gentleman's question correctly, I think that it will negatively impact jobs.

Mr. ELLISON. I have a motion to recommit at the desk.

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

Mr. ELLISON

Mr. ELLISON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor of Van White and to recognize his dedicated service to the great state of Minnesota. Born on August 2, 1924, Mr. White was a lifelong resident of north Minneapolis. Mr. White first learned how to lead at the age of 10 when the death of his father left him to help raise his four younger siblings. Upon graduating from Patrick Henry High School in 1943, Mr. White entered the work force as a construction worker and later construction site supervisor for the City of Minneapolis where he remained for the next 18 years. He was then appointed to be the acting assistant manager for the Northside Branch of the Minnesota Department of Economic Security, now known as the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development. Mr. White was passionate about uplifting his community. He was active in organizations that focused on economic development and crime reduction, while also advocating for the development of community centers and parks. In 1971, Mr. White founded the Willard Housing Organization, one of the first groups in Minneapolis that sought government loans to repair and rehabilitate the impoverished areas of Minneapolis. His passion, combined with experience he gained as a community activist, led Mr. White to enter the political arena, where he became the first African American elected to the city council of Minneapolis in 1979. During the ten years Mr. White served on the Minneapolis City Council where he was the chair of the Government Operations Committee and Vice Chair of the Minneapolis Community Development Agency. Mr. White continued to support his community until he passed away on July 14, 1993. Mr. White is survived by his wife of nearly forty years, Mrs. Javanese White, their daughter Javoni, son Perri and granddaughter Kapria. Mr. White dedicated over fifty years of his life to community activism. He served on the board of nearly thirty economic and community development programs, and left behind a legacy of uplifting his community. Throughout his life, Mr. White was viewed as a connector, someone who could take ideas to improve the communities of Minneapolis and put those ideas into action. It is only fitting today the Van White Memorial Bridge connects North Minneapolis to downtown Minneapolis in his honor. I urge the citizens of the United States to follow in the steps of Van White, and find ways to serve and improve their own communities. I truly appreciate everything Mr. White did for Minneapolis, and I thank him and his family for their dedication and service.

Mr. ELLISON

Mr. ELLISON. Mr. Speaker, on July 23, 2012, I was unavoidably detained and missed rollcall votes No. 499-501. Had I been present I would have voted ``nay'' on vote Nos. 499 and 500, and ``yea'' on vote No. 501.

Mr. ELLISON

Mr. ELLISON. Madam Speaker, State legislatures all across the country are passing photo ID laws that could strip millions of Americans of their right to vote. Students, communities of color, low-income individuals, and seniors are particularly at risk of being disenfranchised. As just one example, in March this year, a World War II veteran in Tennessee was denied the right to vote because he did not have an ID that matched his assisted living address. In Minnesota, which is considering a misguided constitutional amendment on photo ID, 215,000 registered voters don't have a driver's license or ID card with a current address on it; and if it passes, it will disenfranchise all of them. Why put these hundreds of thousands of voters at risk? Proponents claim fraud, but there's not any fraud. Voter fraud is already illegal, and the number of confirmed cases is insignificant statistically. There are only a tiny number of cases. For this, we're going to disfranchise literally millions of people?

Mr. ELLISON

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

Mr. ELLISON. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. ELLISON. Mr. Chairman, Representative Eshoo and I have submitted this very straightforward amendment for a very simple reason. We believe that it's simply fair and it's good for public disclosure to require defense contractors to publicly show and disclose their political contributions. Money, secret money in particular, can breed corruption. Sunlight will banish it away. When government contractors make political contributions, there's no doubt that the officeholder knows who gave the money. The only ones in the dark are the American public. This can lead to pay-to-play corruption where contractors donate to candidates they believe will benefit them, and this would misserve our democracy. We need full disclosure so that the public can ensure that contracts are awarded based on merit rather than money. Now, some have expressed a concerns in the past with disclosure pre- contract. A pre-contract disclosure requirement could be a problem because they fear that agencies would choose contractors for partisan reasons. While I think this is an overstated concern and I don't agree with it, our bill doesn't do that. Our amendment requires disclosure post-contract to avoid any fear of that. So I just want to say that we are in an era where the public needs to trust Congress and government more than it does. In order to promote real trust and real confidence, we need to implement amendments that will promote transparency and that will let the public know that we are doing the right thing with the public dollar, particularly as it relates to the defense industry. Let me close by saying I think this amendment is a first step. I'm a proud cosponsor of the DISCLOSE Act by Representative Van Hollen, which requires reporting of all corporate campaign activity. Also, we won't be able to truly tackle money in politics until we overturn Citizens United, in my opinion. The public agrees with that as a proposition by 82 percent. I yield back the balance of my time. Point of Order

Mr. ELLISON. First of all, Mr. Chairman, I'm very pleased to see that there's broad bipartisan agreement on this issue. It's always a great benefit when we can work things out--and occasionally we do, just as we've seen. So that's a good thing. But I do have an obligation to speak up for constituents of my own on this issue. Mr. Chairman, I have to say on the record that there have been more than 17,000 people killed in Syria over the last 14 months. That's when a nonviolent uprising began in response to Bashar Al-Assad's brutal torture and murder of teenage kids in the city of Dara'a. Violence against civilians has escalated rapidly in months. There have been large massacres in the villages of Houla, Qubair, and possibly Tremseh. The international community, including the Arab League, has overwhelmingly condemned Al-Assad's violent repression. One country-- Russia--has refused to stop arming Al-Assad and his murderous campaign. In fact, a Russian cargo ship could deliver military helicopters to Syria this week. Rosoboronexport is the Russian weapons dealer arming the Al-Assad regime. There's substantial evidence Al-Assad is using weapons from Rosoboronexport against innocent civilians in Syria. I was surprised to learn that our own government is buying Russian-made helicopters from Rosoboronexport. Put simply, our government is supporting Syria's arms dealer, which is enabling the Syrian regime's bloody crackdown. This should stop. That's why I urge all to support this amendment, which it looks like there's broad agreement on. American taxpayers should not be supporting Syria's arms dealer. If the military wants to buy helicopters, it should by American ones and create jobs at home, not in Russia. Our amendment does the right thing. It ends the U.S. purchases from Rosoboronexport. I'm proud that it has strong bipartisan support, and I urge all of my colleagues to support it. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. ELLISON

Mr. ELLISON. I appreciate everything everyone has said in defense of the Affordable Care Act; but rather than striking a statistical position or coming up with basically what was pretty humorous and entertaining by my good friend from Texas--I really enjoyed his presentation--I just want to talk about a person. This is the person I want to talk about. She is a young lady from my district in the prime of her youth. She is only 25. I would like to talk to you about her a little bit, Mr. Speaker. Today, we are going to vote to repeal the Affordable Care Act for the 31st time. We are wasting 2 days debating a bill that has already passed the House and that has no chance in the Senate. Rather than spending our time creating jobs, we're spending it trying to take health care away from those who need it most. One of those people, Mr. Speaker, is an individual by the name of Julie Doyle. This is Julie. Julie is 25, as I said. Her life has already been filled with numerous roadblocks. Julie had her first heart procedure at age 12; and for the last 13 years, her life has been filled with many ups and downs, including having lost her father when she was 15. Despite numerous health issues, Julie is still very active as the captain of her softball team, as the captain of her tennis team. She is a student council member and an active community volunteer. So as you can imagine, I think she is an amazing kid. Of course, she is not a kid--she is a young woman now--but she is still quite an amazing member of our community. Like many young people her age, Julie is dreaming of going to college, of having a successful career. She wants to study business. Her efforts were derailed about 3 years ago when she started having multiple system disorders and started blacking out. There were days when she only had the energy to crawl from the bathroom. Concussions, bruises, broken teeth became routine. Just as her condition was becoming severe, her insurance was due to end. However, because of the Affordable Care Act provision allowing young adults to stay on their parents' plans until the young adults are aged 26, Julie was able to get the health care that she needed. Now, for the people who think it's so clever, so smart, so funny to repeal the Affordable Care Act--I don't know what they think it is--I urge them to think about Julie. Julie is worth it.

Mr. ELLISON

Mr. ELLISON. Mr. Speaker, on July 9, 2012, I missed rollcall votes No. 452-454 due to a family obligation. Had I been present I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. ELLISON

Mr. ELLISON. Madam Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Mr. ELLISON. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. ELLISON

Mr. ELLISON. Madam Speaker, we could spend 5 hours today and tomorrow talking about jobs, and we could consider a jobs plan that the President offered before this very body; but we won't because we have to go repeal health care again for the 31st time. You would have thought the 17th time would be good or maybe the ninth time or the 29th time. With the 31st time, it's like they're going for a record or something. Of course, the Senate is not going to take this up. This is political theater at its worst because Americans are out of work, and this body isn't doing anything about it. Everyone here knows that the President can't just whip up a jobs bill out of thin air. Congress has to pass it, but Congress won't pass it because they're busy doing political stunts--and that is a shame.

Mr. ELLISON

Mr. ELLISON. You are famous for nailing the need for a greater investment in manufacturing and supporting American jobs, and I thank you for all of the great work you're doing.

Mr. ELLISON. If the gentleman would yield, I think that is a very important point to make. Sadly, as soon as the Affordable Care Act was upheld, our friends in the Republican Caucus immediately said, Well, we're going to have a repeal vote. Well, they've already had a repeal vote. What are we doing this over and over and over again for? Well, we're doing it for a very important reason: to make a political point. As they were announcing another repeal vote--another repeal vote--we haven't done anything about student loans this week, which are expiring. We haven't done anything about jobs. And we haven't done anything about the transit bill, which is due to expire. I mean, it's just really amazing how much time we have for stuff that doesn't matter, just political gamesmanship. But, you know, I must share this with you, Congressman. I'm saddened by the fact that our Republican friends won't join with us in this awesome good thing that happened to the American people today. I wish they would finally come around. It's like, look, you know, you fought the health care-- Well, first of all, between 2000 and 2006, you had the White House, the Senate, and the House of Representatives. You didn't do anything except give a bunch of money to Big Pharma. And we're trying to fix that right now. But all this stuff they talk about. Oh, we want to sell insurance across State lines. We want to do tort reform. They could have done all of that. They didn't do it because they didn't want to do it. Now they say that's what they would have done, but that's not what they did do when they could have done it. So there you go with that. So now we, the Democrats, went and took up health care. After many, many years of trying, we get it through. They fight it tooth and nail. To their credit, none of them supported the final vote on the Affordable Care Act. They were solid and unanimously against conferring the benefits that are contained in the Affordable Care Act. Well, now they got around to saying the bill was unconstitutional. It's unconstitutional. And you heard this hue and cry day and night. And they even called themselves ``constitutional conservatives.'' Well, the constitutional Court has said, This bill is constitutional. So you would think they would say, Okay, okay. We just wanted to make sure it's constitutional. Now we're ready to join hands with you and celebrate this great thing to make sure all Americans can go to the doctor. But what do they do? They schedule a repeal vote. Here's what I want people to know, Congressman: according to the Congressional Budget Office--which is a nonpartisan entity--if they repeal this bill, it will add to the deficit $230 billion. These are my friends who never tire of saying, Oh, we're conferring debt on our children and grandchildren. They always say that. I'm sure it's been tested by, you know, some high-paid individual who does that kind of stuff. They never tire of saying, Our children and grandchildren, we are piling debt on our children and grandchildren. But if they strip the Affordable Care Act, as they plan on doing on July 11, they would drop a big debt and add to the deficit.

Mr. ELLISON. Fifty-four million--wow.

Mr. ELLISON. Right.