Raúl Grijalva

Mr. GRIJALVA

Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Speaker, I am honored to recognize former United States Army Combat Medic and current University of Arizona student Matt Randle. Over the course of his career in the Army, Matt received two Army Commendation Medals, three Army Achievement Medals and two Good Conduct Medals for his service. Following his distinguished service to our country Matt returned to his hometown of Tucson, Arizona and enrolled at the University of Arizona. Once on the UA campus, Matt began working with UA President Robert Shelton and his staff to develop and implement a program to support returning veterans attending the University. I am proud to say that today the University of Arizona, located in my Congressional district, has one of the most progressive and impressive veteran education and service models in the country including a student run veteran's office. Matt's leadership has also played an integral role in the prosperity of the UA Veterans club. This club received numerous awards on the University of Arizona's campus including the Club of the Year and Philanthropic Group of the Year for the 2009-2010 academic school year. The Student Veterans of America also recognized the club nationally, awarding it the ``Club of the Year Award.'' This year Matt will receive the UA's 2011 Robie Award. The award is issued to students who show personal integrity, initiative, cooperativeness, enthusiasm, humility, patriotism, well-rounded interests, active participation in student affairs and a commitment to service. Matt Randle is a model candidate for this award. Matt Randle's ambition and leadership both at the UA and nationally will certainly be of great benefit to our returning veterans. Every day more veterans return home from the Middle East conflicts. The programs that Matt built on the University of Arizona campus support these men and women as they transition back to civilian life. Upon graduation Matt will be attending the University Of Arizona Rogers College of Law in the fall of 2011. I am pleased to acknowledge my constituent and friend, Matt Randle. I thank him for his leadership, service and outstanding contributions to the University and our community.

Mr. GRIJALVA

Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Speaker, I am honored to recognize former United States Army Combat Medic and current University of Arizona student Matt Randle. Over the course of his career in the Army, Matt received two Army Commendation Medals, three Army Achievement Medals and two Good Conduct Medals for his service. Following his distinguished service to our country Matt returned to his hometown of Tucson, Arizona and enrolled at the University of Arizona. Once on the UA campus, Matt began working with UA President Robert Shelton and his staff to develop and implement an initiative for returning veterans. I am proud to say that today the University of Arizona, located in my congressional district, has one of the most progressive and impressive veteran education and service models in the country including a student run veteran's office. Matt's leadership has also played an integral role in the prosperity of the UA Veterans club. This club has received numerous awards including the ``club'' and ``Philanthropic Group'' of the year awards for the 2009-2010 academic school year on the UA campus and the Student Veterans of America ``club of the year award.'' Additionally, Matt will receive the UA's 2011 Robie Award which is issued to students who show personal integrity, initiative, cooperativeness, enthusiasm, humility, well-rounded interests, active participation in student affairs, service to the university and willingness to give more than required, and show a love of God and country. Thankfully, upon graduation Matt will not be leaving Tucson; he will be attending the University of Arizona Rogers College Of Law in the fall of 2011. Each day more veterans return home from the Middle East conflicts. Matt Randle's ambition and leadership both at the UA and nationally will certainly be of great benefit to our returning veterans. I am pleased to acknowledge and thank my constituent and friend, Matt Randle of the University of Arizona for his leadership, service and outstanding contributions to our community.

Mr. GRIJALVA

Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment in the nature of a substitute at the desk.

Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Chairman, the amendment, the budget substitute that we have before you, the people's budget, is an honest document consistent with our country's values and our country's desires. The people's budget does not tell the American people what they want to hear; it gives the American people what they want: Fairness, protection of our social net for Americans in retirement and at the beginning of their lives, jobs, an immediate infusion of job creation to put people back to work, investments in education. And this budget is balanced by 2021, the deficit is eliminated. It is the only budget that accomplishes that that is before you today. It does not balance the budget on the backs of the middle class, those who aspire to be in the middle class, and those that are vulnerable in our society. It reverses a practice and it taxes those corporations and the very, very 2 percent rich in this country so they pay their just sacrifice to keeping this country healthy and turning our country around. We end the wars that are draining our national Treasury and our people. The Progressive Caucus listened to the American people, and the people's budget is what they want. I urge approval of this budget. It is a document that represents the very best of what the people need, and it represents a departure from a practice that has brought us to the brink of a deep recession, to a practice that has brought us to joblessness across this country and to a practice that has given the privileged all they want and transferred that responsibility to working Americans in this country. Our budget is a document that is honest, it is straightforward and merits your support. I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlelady from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).

Mr. GRIJALVA. I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from California (Mr. Honda).

Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Chairman, I yield for the purpose of making a unanimous consent request to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Fattah). (Mr. FATTAH asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. GRIJALVA. I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Ellison).

Mr. GRIJALVA. I yield 1 minute to the gentlelady from Hawaii (Ms. Hirono).

Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlelady from California (Ms. Chu).

Mr. GRIJALVA. I yield myself 10 seconds. If I may, I have a simple inquiry for the gentleman from Wisconsin. As part of the fairness in our Tax Code, I would like to ask, is it fair that, let's say, Warren Buffett should pay a lower income tax rate than his receptionist? Is that fairness in our Tax Code?

Mr. GRIJALVA. I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin.

Mr. GRIJALVA. I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New York, Congressman Rangel.

Mr. GRIJALVA. I again yield 15 seconds to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Ellison).

Mr. GRIJALVA

Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the Nogales Apaches on winning the Arizona State High School Division 4A-1 basketball championship. The Apaches' victory over Scottsdale Saguaro to win the title on Saturday came after their upset victory of the top-ranked Glendale Kellis team on Thursday. This win marked the first time in 28 years that a Nogales school has reached a championship game in any sport. So this is a particularly gratifying victory. Coach Ricardo De La Riva deserves a great deal of credit for leading his team through the season, through the upset victories, and through the long process of building a successful and cohesive team. This is a group that truly plays with heart. It represents the best of the community, as shown by the seven busloads of fans who traveled for several hours from Nogales to Glendale for the championship game. As Coach De La Riva told the Arizona Daily Star after the game: ``This is a true team. We don't have stars. We don't have egos. We just play.'' His team reminds us of what scholastic sport is all about. I join with everyone else in congratulating the school, the team, and the community of Nogales in Santa Cruz. Congratulations.

Mr. GRIJALVA

Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Laurie Ann Melrood. For more than 40 years, Laurie Melrood has dedicated her life to social justice, speaking as a voice for people with no voice in the United States and other countries. Her initiative and persistence have changed the lives of countless individuals and communities. The oldest of three children of Paul Melrood and Gitel Kastrul, Laurie Melrood is a second generation American. Her Jewish relatives survived pogroms in the Ukraine from which her father fled as an infant. Her life has been characterized by service since her earliest days. As a young person in the 1960's, she advocated with African American and Jewish youth for desegregation of Milwaukee Public Schools. She lived, worked, and studied in Israel during the late 1960's. She was a member of the International Association of Yiddish Clubs. In 1971, for her undergraduate internship at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, she started Pathfinders, a shelter for runaway teens. In 1972-1973, Laurie served as a community mental health worker in the ``Back of the Yards'' neighborhood in South Chicago. In 1975, she graduated with a Master's Degree in Community Social Work from the University of Wisconsin, Madison. For her graduate internship she started a community service project for high school seniors who received credit for their service. In 1974-1982, Laurie served as the Program Director of Jewish Social Services in Madison, Wisconsin. She established the culturally-based and ground breaking model L'Chaim Program for seniors at Madison Jewish Social Services, breaking the social isolation of Jewish and non-Jewish seniors. From 1981-1982, Laurie was the Director for Community Action on Latin America in Madison, WI. From 1982-1986, she was a principle organizer in South Texas and Wisconsin for the Underground Railroad and Public Sanctuary of the National Sanctuary Movement helping refugees from Central America to find shelter in the United States. She also assisted numerous refugees immigrate from Russia and Iran to the United States through HIAS, a Jewish Refugee Aid Agency. From 1986-1990, Ms. Melrood assisted Central American refugee minor children who were detained in Texas by placing them with sponsoring families. In 1992, Laurie became a staff member for the Pima County Juvenile Court's Court Appointed Special Advocate Program, she recruited volunteers to accompany and advocate for youth in the juvenile justice system. At Pima County Juvenile Court she also served as the Adoptions Examiner, specializing in foreign adoptions. In 1994, she was one of three co-founders of a health training project in northern Guatemala, specializing in acupuncture and medical aid. The program is unique in training rural health promoters in acupuncture for curative medicine. In 2000, Laurie was a principle program organizer and collaborator; starting the Kinship and Adoptions Resource Center KA.R.E. Family Center (KARE) in Tucson, Arizona in 2002. KARE is a full service family program helping grandparents and relatives who are raising grandchildren. This center has become a model of social services of its kind for the nation. Laurie has presented this model at child welfare conferences, written about the unmet need of this growing national population of Americans, and strongly advocated for their empowerment. Mr. Speaker, Laurie Ann Melrood is a true leader of social justice. Her lifetime work of social service and advocacy in the United States and Latin America profoundly affected the lives of innumerable individuals. I want to thank her for her service to this country and to the international community.

Mr. GRIJALVA

Mr. GRIJALVA. Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. GRIJALVA. My strong opposition to this amendment is because it would bar the Department of Justice or any other Federal agency from challenging the constitutionality of this law in Arizona or any other law. The precedent being set by the Poe amendment, if it were to be adopted, would establish a dangerous new standard. It opens the door to congressional restraints on active pending Department of Justice litigation in a potentially endless variety of cases through backdoor de-funding moves. The precedent is being set here, and I appreciate the gentleman's point about Arizona working its will; but there are also people that believe in the Constitution, as we all do, who would want to know that the law in Arizona passes constitutional muster. This is what this lawsuit is about. This is why we have separation of powers. This is why we have a Constitution, to protect the interests of all people. SB 1070, you can support it; I can oppose it. The point being that there is a third part of our government that will decide whether or not this law is constitutional. I believe all of us would like to uphold constitutional laws. I yield back the balance of my time. Point of Order

Mr. GRIJALVA

Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Chair, a strong definition for gainful employment is vital to protect vulnerable borrowers from unmanageable debts incurred from heavily overpriced programs. The failure of the regulatory agency to define gainful employment up to this point has left open an avenue by which bad actors have taken advantage of the lack of regulation and created a number of overpriced programs of dubious academic quality targeted at underserved communities, people of color, and low-income students who have not been adequately prepared for a form of employment that will make it possible for those students to pay their loans back. This amendment stops this process in its tracks. A student who borrows large amounts of money to pay for a higher education should have a reasonable expectation that the degree or certificate she is working for will qualify her for employment at a job that will allow her to repay those loans at a manageable rate. The vast majority of programs around the country subject to this definition, whether public or private, for-profit or not-for-profit, are doing a good job of providing quality education and training at a reasonable price. Those schools and programs that are doing an effective job have every reason to distance themselves from the ones taking advantage of a lack of oversight, who make the entire industry look bad. This definition will not impede access to federal aid for any of these programs. In fact, if the rule were to be implemented in its current form, it would affect very few programs and many bad actors who are not concerned about the debts their students will be saddled with will continue to qualify. It's incredible to me that this amendment is being sold as a move to protect minority students. I, myself, cannot fathom how low-income people of color are protected by being tied to unmanageable and unforgiveable debts from federal loans that don't require a shred of evidence that the program will lead to any form of gainful employment for the borrower.

Mr. GRIJALVA

Mr. GRIJALVA. The legislation before us, the continuing resolution, I believe is a full-throttled extremist assault on the environment, on the public health of the American people, and on the jobs and economic well-being of our Nation as a whole. In these difficult times that we are in, it is the economy and jobs that should be the top priorities for this Congress and for the Republican majority. Mr. Chairman, this CR does irreparable harm to the environment, including to the air, water, our public lands, and to wildlife. The virtual elimination of public health protection by the reckless dismantling of the jurisdiction of the EPA and of the funding of the EPA will bring health crises to the American people and will endanger families and children. Today, the President is announcing his great outdoors initiative, and at a time when he is asking for private, State, local, and Federal cooperation in the protection of public places in the enhancement of recreation and outdoor activities for the American people, this CR talks about the elimination of State and tribal wildlife grants which are essential in that coordination. It talks about reducing by 90 percent the land water conservation fund, which is essential to promoting that cooperation and promoting the joint planning and joint jurisdiction of many of our special places in this country. And the upcoming punitive attempt to eliminate the national landscape conservation system will leave 800 public units abandoned without coordination and without the ability to plan for the future and to be coordinated in such a fashion that they save money and serve the American people the best. This CR places our special public places and lands on the endangered list, with irrational cuts in ending the shared responsibility to protect and conserve. Big Oil and gas and mining do not own these public places and lands--the American people do--and to turn to extraction as the only goal for these public lands denies history, ignores science, and welcomes the exploitation of a shared resource by the American people. If deficit reduction is the item on the agenda--and we all agree that we must confront that and be prudent, be pragmatic, and be realistic in cutting programs--then we also should put everything on the table because if it is indeed an issue of deficit reduction, then let's talk about some items that the majority did not put in their CR, some of the subsidies, some of the giveaways to industries that are part of the public land agenda and part of what happens within the Interior Department: Expensing reforestation expenditures, $600 million under public land; excessive percentage over cost depletion for nonfuel minerals, $500 million; expensing exploration for nonfuel minerals, $400 million; intangible drilling costs, $8.9 billion; oil and gas royalty relief, $6.9 billion; domestic manufacturing and tax deduction for oil and gas companies, $6.2 billion. And if you keep going down that list with coal subsidies, nuclear industry subsidies, oil and gas subsidies, public land subsidies, you end up with a figure of $100 billion to $200 billion. I'm not saying that all those cuts should be eliminated. I don't think we should take an axe to those areas. Some are productive and needed; but if we are going to scrutinize this budget, let's do it in a fair way that shares and balances what we're going through while we protect important things in our public lands and in our public health. I urge all my colleagues to balance public health of families and children, the public lands we love, the shared responsibility we have to clean air, water, public health, and our national resources, balance that with the narrow agenda that is confronting us today, an agenda that punishes taxpayers and the American people at the expense and for the profit of private oil and gas interests in this country. As we confront this issue, I would suggest to my colleagues that the legacy of our public lands and our environment, the legacy of our clean air and water, the public health of our people should be the priority. And if cuts need to be made, then all cuts should be placed on the table, all cuts should be looked at, including subsidies and including giveaways and deductions that are not part of the norm with our public dollars. That would be good for the taxpayer, and it would be good for the environment, and it would be good in reducing the deficit.

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

Mr. GRIJALVA

Mr. GRIJALVA. I rise in support of the amendment that Mr. Flake has proposed, and I rise in strong opposition to the underlying CR. Mr. Chairman, the consequence of this whole discussion about dealing with the deficit and the budget reduction that is being recommended by the Republicans is going to be jobs. If you look at what is being proposed, the other side has had nearly 2 months but has brought zero bills that create jobs. These cuts amount to 1 million jobs that will be lost. There will be no jobs for nurses. $51 million will be cut from the National Park Service; that is a loss of jobs. $256 million will be cut from State and Federal law enforcement; that is the local police that will be cut. $889 million will be cut from renewable energy programs; those are jobs creating solar panels and outfitting and retrofitting homes so they will be energy-efficient. $1 billion will be cut from the National Institutes of Health, which will be a loss of jobs in research and in providing direct public health care to the American citizens. $1.3 billion will be cut from community health centers; that means no jobs and increased costs in the emergency rooms, where people with very acute illnesses will be--people who will not be able to find health care because they will have nowhere else to go. There will be cuts in rural development--a loss of jobs. There will be a $1.6 billion cut for the Environmental Protection Agency--a loss of jobs. There will be a $96 million cut for substance abuse and mental health services--a loss of jobs. One of the realities is that we must invest. It has been said over and over again that the point of dealing with this deficit that we have in this country has to be a pragmatic, measured process. It has taken us 10 years to get into the hole that we are in, and we need to plan to get out of that with the same amount of time, if not more. We also need to talk about revenue generation. We are not going to cut our way out of this deficit, and you are certainly not going to cut your way out of this deficit when you are only concentrating on 14 or 15 percent of the Federal budget, which is why I support this amendment as it is an attempt to deal with defense. We must create revenues. We must quit giving huge subsidies to Big Oil and Big Gas. We must ask mining companies, for once, to begin to pay royalties on the extractions provided them by the public lands. We must close the corporate loopholes that exist that created the financial collapse of housing in this country, and we must ask Wall Street to pay its fair share through a transaction fee, which will generate billions and billions of dollars for the taxpayers of this country. In order to deal with this deficit, there must be a corresponding generation of revenue so we can continue to invest in the things that are important to the American people: their families, their lives, their education, their health care, their futures. That is an investment, and with additional revenue we will be able to begin to cut the deficit. The continuing resolution is not an effort to deal with the deficit. It is a calculation to deal with programs and projects that have helped the middle class succeed, poor people survive, the disabled endure. They are programs and projects that have made this country stronger with their support for education and health care. I urge all of my colleagues to vote against the continuing resolution. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. GRIJALVA

Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Speaker, let me thank our ranking member, Mr. Markey, for the opportunity. This resolution is, quite frankly, an unfortunate use of our time. Rather than discussing jobs proposals, we are discussing a resolution that is telling ourselves to do something we are already doing, which is the regulatory review. The majority is intent on talking about what they perceive the unemployment problem to be while spending no time at all attempting to work on some real solutions. In the New West--and the chairman of our subcommittee, Mr. Bishop, mentioned that--there is high unemployment. I would suggest that we need to look deeper than the regulatory issues that he pointed out. The West leads the country in foreclosures. Those were the manipulations of banks and mortgage companies and shenanigans that Mr. Markey called. And as a consequence of that, we lead the Nation in unemployed construction workers. We lead the Nation in unemployed labor. And that is a deregulated industry. So I would suggest that if we are going to use unemployment as an example, we look at the root problem of where our unemployment is in the West. The Republican majority on the Natural Resources Committee seems to think that American people have to choose between healthy, vibrant national parks, forests, and public lands or jobs. If you ask them for their ideas regarding job creation, what you hear is that we have got to roll back existing environmental protections and open up the ever- expanding areas of public lands to unregulated, destructive resource extraction. This is a horribly false choice created by those who care more about increasing the profits for oil, timber, and mining companies than really about creating jobs. This is a false choice because with a little bit of forward thinking, we can create jobs that will not only provide people with paychecks but will actually improve our environment and the economy and at the same time take care of our public lands. We have heard many examples from Members on this side of the aisle, and we will continue to hear that today, and I am proud to try to do my part as well. Yesterday I reintroduced, with the senior member of our committee, Mr. Markey, the Public Lands Service Corps legislation, H.R. 587. This legislation passed the House last Congress, and I am pleased to reintroduce it. At the same time that we are facing high unemployment, we also face huge backlogs of labor-intensive work needed on national park lands, forests, wildlife areas, historic sites, and Indian lands. Years of inadequate funding have put land management agencies far behind on the vital maintenance work while infrastructure continues to crumble. Our legislation would provide opportunity through three Departments: Interior, Agriculture, and Commerce; provide service learning opportunities on public lands; help restore our natural, cultural, and historic resources; train a whole new generation of public land managers; and promote the value of public lands. This legislation will modernize the scope of the corps projects to reflect the new challenges, such as climate change and adding incentives to attract new participants, especially from underrepresented populations. By providing job training, by providing opportunity, we are providing people with a chance to succeed. I would suggest that as we talk about legislation and we talk about jobs, that we talk about job creation and not merely talk about the need for jobs but talk about the specificity, what are going to be the mechanisms and the techniques to put people back to work. To use the misery of unemployment in this community as a reason to give away our natural resources is cynical at best. It doesn't create jobs; it doesn't protect Americans; and it doesn't empower our communities or protect our very valuable and cherished public lands. And to do so, this bill begs the question. It does not talk. It does not specify what we need to do. It merely reiterates an ideology that says, no regulation. We've seen that history. We have seen its consequences, and I urge a ``no'' vote on this.