Colleen Hanabusa

Ms. HANABUSA

Ms. HANABUSA. Madam Speaker, let's not forget. We talk about the Great Depression and how close we've come to it. Let's recognize and realize what we as a country did then. We passed the Social Security Act of 1935. And let's also not forget that part of that is the protection of not only our seniors, but also of those who are unemployed through no fault of their own. That is what we're looking at. Madam Speaker, we must recognize that it is time to extend the unemployment insurance, or we're going to cost our economy $30 billion, and we're going to also affect 1 million people. Madam Speaker, let's also recognize what makes us a great country. It is not our military might. What makes us a great country is compassion; it is the fact that we have defined ourselves by how we treat our people. Let's never forget that. It is time to be compassionate, Madam Speaker. It is time for us to extend the unemployment insurance.

Ms. HANABUSA

Ms. HANABUSA. Madam Speaker, my home State of Hawaii just hosted an APEC, and I'd like to thank the people of the State for their patience and understanding. There were 21 Asian Pacific countries represented at this event. Our President was there, as was the Presidents of China, Russia and the Prime Minister of Japan, to name a few. It's important to note that what was dominating the conversations was the rising dominance of China. The President, our President asked China to end the policies of keeping the yuan artificially low, and it is artificially low at 28 to 30 percent. Think about what it would mean to us, our economy, if they would just reevaluate. It would support 1.6 billion jobs. It would increase our GDP by $285 billion in just 18 months, and our deficit would be reduced between 670 to $800 billion in just 10 years. Madam Speaker, why haven't we taken up the issue of the reevaluation of the yuan? Our Senate passed it in October, the Currency Exchange Rate Oversight Act. It is time for us to act. The United States must maintain its dominance and its position. Please, bring that bill up to our floor.

Ms. HANABUSA

Ms. HANABUSA. Mr. Speaker, Mabuhay. We take time this month to recognize the contributions of Filipino Americans to the growth of our Nation. The first wave of migrants came from the Philippines to Hawaii when we were still a territory. Today, they number the largest ethnic group in the State, and they total almost 1.5 million in the State of California. Now, Mr. Speaker, we have not kept our promises to the Filipino Americans. In World War II, we drafted about 200,000 of them with the promise--the promise--that they will have citizenship and benefits. And in 1946, the Congress rescinded that promise. Today, with the stimulus package in 2009, we finally authorized the payment of some of the benefits to 30,000 who are remaining--30,000-- but we have still failed to do what they wanted the most, which is the reunification of their families. Their stories and others' we will hear through this month. Mr. Speaker, please join with me in saying to them, ``Salamat po,'' thank you for what you have done for this Nation.

Ms. HANABUSA

Ms. HANABUSA. Mr. Speaker, the trade agreements are front and center for us right now. But I have to ask you: What are you waiting for? We talk about deficits; we talk about debt; we talk about trade agreements; but what is it that really would have an impact, and that is if you would set for hearing the whole concept of currency manipulation. We have got to address China's manipulation of its yuan. I just came running over from HASC, the House Armed Services Committee, and one of the issues that was raised there was we've got to do something about the yuan. China is outbuilding us. China is going to try to take over the Pacific. China is building ships. China is doing all of these things that put our defense and our people at risk. So, Mr. Speaker, I ask you again: What are you waiting for? Let's hear that currency manipulation bill that has 226 of us, bipartisan support. Let's hear it. It's time to really come to grips with what is truly our problem, how this bill will then affect issues such as the deficit and the debt and increase our GDP. Think about it, Mr. Speaker.

Ms. HANABUSA

Ms. HANABUSA. Mr. Speaker, we speak of jobs, both sides of the aisle speak of jobs. And we wonder, why is it that jobs are not being created? It is because the public has no confidence in any of us. So let's start to look seriously at the jobs bill that we have before us, and that is the President's American Jobs Act. And let's look at specifics within that. We speak generically, but let's see how it really affects people, and let's look at how it affects the one group of people that we all say we want to help: the veterans. When I was home, we went to the opening for the U.S.VETS. It was to implement the President's plan that we will end veteran homelessness by the year 2015. But we also know an integral part of that is the jobs. Look at what his act produces: Returning Heroes tax credits of up to $5,600 if you hire an unemployed vet; a Wounded Warriors tax credit of up to $9,600 if you hire a disabled veteran. Isn't it time for us to just stop all of this and start to focus on what we need to do to create the jobs for the people who need it?

Ms. HANABUSA

Ms. HANABUSA. Mr. Speaker, there are now about 11 of us who are considered freshmen to the Democratic side, and we are here today to share with everyone what we have learned. We hope, because we are freshmen, that we bring a different perspective on matters, that everyone might be able to see it from our eyes. And for that reason, we would like to share what we've learned in this last district work week and talking to our constituents about jobs, small business problems, and issues that face all of us. With that, Mr. Speaker, I would like to begin first by asking the gentlewoman from District 36 of California to share with us what she has heard. And I would like to say that the gentlewoman from District 36 of California is the most recent addition to what was originally the noble nine, but we are now the exquisite 11. I yield to the gentlewoman.

Ms. HANABUSA. I thank the gentlewoman very much. Mr. Speaker, my colleagues will be coming in as they return from their respective offices, but I'd like to share part of what I found when I was in district this past week. You know, I think the problem we all have is we are all creatures of the media, so we tend to think in 30-second sound bites. And I'm sure we all got trained by the best of them: When you run for office, keep it short, and you tell everybody what they want to hear so they can pick it up on the 6 o'clock news. You know, Mr. Speaker, when we do that, we fail to recognize that people are not covered by one broad brush. The gentlewoman from California, District 36, said it best when she said when she talked to small business, they want certain things because small businesses are not all alike. But there are things that they do want. They want, for example, the finances. What about Main Street? What about the tax credits? How will that affect their respective businesses? That's what we all have to step back and think about. That's why this time when we can go on and not have to worry about whether there is a camera there to get a 30-second sound bite gives us the opportunity to tell our constituents that we hear them and we know what they're saying. When I was in district, I met with one type of small business, and they were the construction industry. Quite honestly, when you talk about the construction industry, even that we just tend to say we need to rebuild construction. But construction isn't as simple as just simply saying they all build roads or they all build airports. That's not true. When we do construction, we talk about construction, you have people, for example, who specialize in homes, and that's a definite kind of need. Their needs, for example, are regarding finances. Their need is how healthy is FHA going to be? What are you going to do with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac? What are you going to do to help foreclosures? They have very specific concerns. Where we may think what they're just concerned about is the ability to be able to build again, that's not it. They understand that in order for us to have a healthy economy, in order for us to have the environment in which they can then create the jobs and they can then be able to build those homes and people who have jobs can buy those homes, that we need to look at the total picture. And that's what we're referring to. So when we talk to our constituents and we report back to other Members of Congress, we have to be very clear as to what we are hearing. They don't talk to us in general sound bites to get on the 6 o'clock news. What they talk to us about is to say, you know, in our specific industry, we have this problem, and what can you do to help us on this particular problem? They want to know, even to the point of saying, will, for example, credit unions be able to issue different kinds of loans? We think of banks, we think of loans, but how many of us have stopped to listen to our constituencies and said, hey, why are you interested in what credit unions are allowed to do? Because to them, especially those who are in smaller businesses, that is their lifeline. So they want to be sure that they can affect them and they can help them. So they want to know what we are doing in that process. And so when we talk to our constituencies and we listen to them, we must understand that they are not simply ones that we do with a broad brush. So in the construction group that I spoke to, many of them, of course, specialized in home building, and they were, of course, concerned about the whole gamut, the ability of people to buy a home, the ability of people to finance that home, the ability of people to then say, hey, we are going to have the jobs to qualify for the respective mortgages. Because very few people are out there who can actually buy a home for cash. Anymore than we, as government, can buy things for cash. People are borrowing. And in order for them to borrow, we must have a healthy financial institution that can lend that money out. So, Mr. Speaker, let's also look at where we are in terms of the constituencies. Like I said, small business isn't just small business. You can't just say ``small business'' and cover everyone. You need to understand what kind of small business. I sit on a panel that was created in HASC, and it's on acquisitions, and the focus there is small business. I am very honored to be part of that, and I am very proud of the fact that we, as a House, are looking at how, when military spending gets cut, we are able to preserve the small businesses. And the question was, how do we ensure them into the future? And we also have to recognize that the definition of small business differs for many of us. It's like a company that grosses no more than $7 million or $8 million a year. To some they probably hear that and say, wow, that's not a small business, that's a big business. But every segment of what creates businesses in our economy we have got to look at very seriously and understand what their respective needs are, because if we fail to do that, if we fail to look at that, we are not going to be able to address this crisis. So as tempting as it is for all of us to ignore, ignore what it is that we are looking to or speaking to, and when we vote on these bills that are before us, we have to understand that simply because one segment of a business community says it's good, it doesn't mean that it's good for everyone. And that is what makes the challenge of what we respectively do. So back to construction. We said there are those who build homes, for example. There are also those who build commercial buildings, and they have a different challenge, because their financing is also tied to how healthy the economy is. It's also tied to the financial institutions and whether the financial institutions are out there lending the money, and that's all going to be tied to the whole issue of whether or not the economy is healthy. Many of those who build ``commercial buildings,'' for example, they too are small businesses. In addition to that, you have those major construction companies that do major infrastructure. And if you're going to talk about being able to get people back to work in large numbers, of course, of course, we need to talk about that level of construction. But what does that level of construction normally need? To do large infrastructure projects, it needs government. It is government that is able to build or contribute to a State's ability to build roads, to build airport modernization, to improve harbors or to basically look at highways and what we're going to do. You need government's role in that. And that is what the President has said, and that is what the President has emphasized: That he, in fact, is looking to infrastructure to be built and to say that will put people back to work. In the long run, we as a country benefit the most from that. And you may say, well, what does that have to do with small business? It has a lot to do with small business because no one company can do it all. When you look at how construction, for example, is done, you have a general contractor, who usually serves in an administrative capacity, but all the respective work that may go into building whatever it may be--a freeway, a huge hotel or homes, the other company components of it are subcontractors who are small businesses, and each one of them hires a specific number of people, whether it be two or three or 20 or 30. If you have a huge port of some sort, they are there. And we need to recognize that, and we need to understand that it is through them, through the hiring of the respective subcontractors that are small businesses, that we are then able to move this economy along. So it's like a situation of, we start on the top and to a large extent, government has that role, and it filters down to the bottom line, which is to get people back to work. So when we start to talk about the Jobs Act, or how we're going to move our economy along and what are we going to do, we need to think about that. We need to think about how do we move forward. It is on that note that I see my colleague from Detroit whom I would like to call upon, because he has a bill that I want him to speak about because he knows what it is going to take to get his people in Detroit back to work. And let's not forget, we are a great country built on manufacturing. That is what made us big. And do you know, it is also the city of Detroit that I believe really epitomizes what manufacturing is about. So on that note, I would like to yield to my colleague, the Congressman from Detroit (Mr. Clarke), to talk to us and share what he has learned from his district.

Ms. HANABUSA. Before you leave, I just wanted to extend this discussion because I think that we tend to think about things like, when we talk about Detroit and we think about manufacturing, which of course is what we are all focusing on, we tend to forget how that one industry then multiplies out and how it creates other jobs. The Congressman from Detroit is absolutely correct, that is what made our country great. And let me share with you, I grew up working in my family's service station, which later became a situation where we sold auto parts. And one of the things that I will never, never forget is the fact that, when you think about the ability to build a car, many of those parts are not manufactured in Detroit. They come from other places in the United States, and they all are put together to make the car. But the subsidiary industry is what my family was in, which is, with wear and tear, it breaks down. So you have a whole secondary market of used auto parts being remanufactured or original-equipment auto parts are being remanufactured that then creates yet another industry. And when we, unfortunately, get careless and sometimes, through no fault of our own, the flagpole or the streetlight jumps in front of our car and we hit it, there is that whole other industry of repair. So with the good Congressman from Detroit, I want to elaborate that just investing in Detroit isn't only for Detroit, but I'm sure within Michigan and within all the neighboring States we probably have great examples of how small industries are going to just start to kick-start.

Ms. HANABUSA. That is why I am a proud cosponsor of your bill because I think that you've hit it, that we start with someplace like Detroit where people clearly know that work ethic--that work ethic started in places like Detroit--and then from there we're going to build and we're going to rebuild this country because it has such a great impact all the way through. So thank you very much.

Ms. HANABUSA. We are going to make it in America. Mr. Speaker, I also note that we have a person who probably all the small business guys would love to get their hands on. And I know for my constituents, they would love to have the ability to talk to someone from the great State of Delaware because, of course, when we think of Delaware, we think of financial institutions, we think about how they control our money. But he also is a proud member of the original Noble Nine. And I'm asking him to speak to us and share with us what he knows from his great State. So the Congressman from Delaware--who I would like to add is the only person who, while there may be others, he is the only person dear to me who actually has fewer people in his congressional delegation than me.

Ms. HANABUSA. Thank you. And before the Congressman from Delaware sits, I just wanted to explore one thing, because when I was in district, one of the comments I got was about the dysfunctional Congress. But one of the things that I asked them to really sit back and look at--and this is really our friends in the media, and they have to do something about the way they report. I told them that when they ask about our votes, they should really look at it seriously and say, okay, how many votes are really that controversial? How many times are we just adversaries, and how many times is it that there are just a handful of votes, relative to how many we pass in the House, that rise to the level that people would say that we are just cutting down partisan lines? Because I don't really think that that's the case. It's a minority of votes, but it's that which is played up. And when I tell my constituents that, they're sort of amazed. They think every single bill that we practically pass up here is controversial. Did you get that sense from talking to your constituents?

Ms. HANABUSA. That's a great message. The whole is greater than the parts. Thank you. With that, I would also like to call on another colleague of ours, the Congressman from Rhode Island, who is actually my cosponsor of this time.

Ms. HANABUSA. I thank the gentleman from Rhode Island. Before he leaves, I'd like to say this: We have an opportunity as freshmen. We came here as a small number originally--the Noble Nine--and we have maintained our relationships. We hear each other all the time. Some of us sit right in front of where the Congressman from Rhode Island is, and we shift in and out of those seats because we hear what each other has done and what our constituents are saying. I can't tell you--and I'm sure he shares this with me--how great it is to hear, for example, the Congressman from Detroit talk about the Detroit plan and to hear the Congressman from Rhode Island speak about a type of block grant for his Make It in America part. Each and every one of them has done something where they're looking at and hearing their constituents. That's what we want to impress upon everyone, that we hear what our constituents are saying. I think it was said very well by the Congressman from Delaware that we all have to put everything aside and build on the public's confidence. In Congress, we're just another body. The public has got to feel that confidence, not just in Congress, but in the United States of America, the greatest country in the world. They've got to feel that confidence. They've got to understand that other economies depend upon us. When we look like we're quibbling over things that are irrelevant to international matters, that's when their stock markets go crashing-- based on how we act. So wouldn't you say, Congressman Cicilline, that what we need to do is set things aside and, as to anything we've got to do within the next 14 months, work together so that people begin to have confidence in us and then, by that, have confidence in this great Nation?

Ms. HANABUSA. The one message that resonated at home is that people think we're going to do this time and time again--in other words, that we're going to have the CR issues, that we're going to have the debt ceiling issues. So I've impressed upon them, if the supercommittee does what it's supposed to do, that it's a plan for 10 years, and hopefully, it will give us stability. The gentleman from Delaware said Steny Hoyer, our minority whip, stated it's going to be the most critical vote we all take and one of the most critical votes that this Congress will take because, in this difficult time, that's what is going to render us stable if we're able to do it correctly. So I hope that on both sides of the aisle we're able to do that. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. HANABUSA

Ms. HANABUSA. Mr. Speaker, let's talk about things that we can agree on. We can agree that the greatest challenge that faces all of us today is to stop the erosion of public confidence. We can also agree that public confidence is critical because that's what is really going to kick-start our economy. We can also agree that when you talk to the people in our various districts, what are they most concerned about? They're concerned about jobs. Because what do jobs represent? They represent the security that they need to provide for the most important part of their life, their families. We can also agree that if there is a plan out there that can add to GDP 2 percent, add at least 2 million jobs, cut unemployment by 1 percent, that that's a plan we should consider. We can also agree that we want to put teachers, firefighters, and first responders back to work, and that we want to build infrastructure so we can be the greatest country that we've always been. And we can also agree that we want tax cuts for employees and employers. So what's the problem, Mr. Speaker? Is the problem that this is the President's plan? That shouldn't be the problem. Let's get it together and let's work for the people of this great Nation.

Ms. HANABUSA

Ms. HANABUSA. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 2587 should be really called the ``Death of the Workers Rights Act.'' This amends the National Labor Relations Act of 1935. And remember why that act was created. We were in the Great Depression. So why was it then passed? Because workers could join unions even back then, but they could be fired for joining the union and for striking. Does that sound familiar? This caused great labor unrest in this country, a country that was struggling to get back on its feet. Remember, we are a country of workers. Workers made this country, and workers will continue to make us the great country that we are. What the NLRA said was workers could organize to act in a concerted manner for mutual aid and protection. This act basically eliminates the remedies if that right is violated. Now, remember, the NLRB must prove that these protected rights were violated. They just simply can't go in and act willy-nilly. They have to prove these allegations. There will be no rights for these workers if this bill is allowed to pass.

Ms. HANABUSA

Ms. HANABUSA. Mr. Speaker, let us be very clear that this is a final amendment to the bill, which will not kill the bill and, if adopted, will still allow the bill to go to final passage. This is an attempt to make a bill better. Regardless of how we may feel about the underlying bill, we can all agree that there is nothing we wouldn't do to protect our children. Again, this is not an attempt to the kill the bill. The bill will not be killed, and if this amendment is adopted, it will allow the bill to go forward to final passage. This just makes a statement that we should all be able to agree with, and that is that we wish to protect our children from sexual predators and abductors. What this amendment does is to say anyone who receives a grant in support of the high quality charter schools requires that each State entity that receives a grant under this section shall require a criminal background check to be conducted of such school employees. It also prohibits the employment of any individual for a position in such school, whether it's a nonprofit that does contracts with the school or the school, itself, until the criminal background check is done; and if you refuse to do so, you cannot be employed. And if you're convicted of a felony--now, these are important points that we're protecting them from: homicide, child abuse and neglect, a crime against children, spousal abuse, sexual abuse, kidnapping, arson, physical assault or battery, drug-related offenses, or crimes against a minor--this is what this bill requires. Now, in 2010 the GAO said we don't have any Federal bills that protect our children. Here we are. We're going to allow for grants to be given to charter schools. Why not just support this amendment which, in fact, will make this a better bill? What it will do is it will say no one, no one shall work with our children until such time that they have done a criminal background check. The bill also permits that, if you believe somehow you've been wrongfully accused, you can appeal. But during the period of time of that appeal, we're also protecting the children because you're not going to be able to work with them until such time as your appeal is done. Think about this. This is a statement that we are saying we're going to make the schools better. We're going to make charter schools safe for the children. How can we not support such a measure? That is why, Mr. Speaker, I ask that Members here support this motion to recommit. And be very clear: this does not stop the bill. This is like a final amendment. Regardless of how it votes, we vote for it--and I think we should all vote for it--it will go to final passage. This is not going to, in essence kill, the bill. It will let it go forward. So with that in mind, I can't imagine how anyone who sits in this Chamber can't be in support of this amendment. I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. HANABUSA. I object, Mr. Speaker.

Ms. HANABUSA. Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.

Ms. HANABUSA. I am opposed to it in its current form.

Ms. HANABUSA. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Ms. HANABUSA

Ms. HANABUSA. Mr. Speaker, we've been talking about jobs, and we've been talking about our economy and how jobs relate to that. We must remember one thing: We are all workers. So, Mr. Speaker, one of the things that's very troubling is the fact that we don't seem to have a grasp on what the role of the National Labor Relations Board is. That's evidenced by H.R. 2587. What the National Labor Relations Board does is simply enforces the rights of workers. We are a great economy and we are a great country because we recognize that we are all workers and that as workers we have rights to be protected. One of the rights is to act in a concerted manner. And that's what this is all about. It protects people's rights to act together if they so wish. Now what is wrong with that? That's what makes us the United States of America. That's what makes us the greatest economy of the world. And that's what makes us a country that understands that in order to be a great economy, we must never forget the workers. We must never forget their rights. And we must always protect them.

Ms. HANABUSA

Ms. HANABUSA. Mr. Speaker, last night the President stood here to speak to us. He came to talk about his proposed American Jobs Act. I'm sure each and every one of us heard what we wanted to, didn't hear what we wanted to, and we took away different things after that speech. But what we all should have heard is that we were hired--I think those words were great--we were hired to do a job. And we must do that job. People are not going to wait 14 months for us to get our act together, especially those who are unemployed. We should also have heard the cry for the future of our Nation. The President said we must invest in our future. We must become the number one nation again. We cannot let China outbuild us, and neither can we have China and Europe take over manufacturing. Those are things that we, the United States, have been known for. We must do that. We must invest in ourselves again. We must invest in becoming the number one nation in the world. And we can do that if we are all committed to ``Make It In America.'' Mr. Speaker, if we cannot put the pride of our Nation before all of us, we will never come together. Let us invest in America.

Ms. HANABUSA

Ms. HANABUSA. Mr. Speaker, at what price your vote last night? People have the right to know. I can tell you what it wasn't for. It wasn't for our seniors. It wasn't to protect their Medicare. And it wasn't to protect those who need help the most, those on Medicaid. So I ask you again, at what price? You've heard speeches today about cut, cap, and balance, and we all know that amendment that came in at the 11th hour was on the balanced budget amendment. So what is this balanced budget amendment that you have put so much faith in? It is not what the people think it is. Mr. Speaker, I believe you have an obligation to tell people that the balanced budget amendment doesn't mean you simply can spend only what you take in. It means you might be able to spend what you take in unless three-fifths of us say you can spend more. That's not what the people think it is. You've got to stop this facade. As we say in Hawaii: Stop the ``shibai,'' Mr. Speaker. Tell people what they want to know. Tell them at what price you are holding this all up.

Ms. HANABUSA

Ms. HANABUSA. Mr. Speaker, we must not forget we're here to represent the people of this great Nation. In a recent poll, 2-1 people said that the reason why we are in this crisis is because of the policies of President Bush. So let's look at those policies because that's the best way to understand why we're in this crisis. You cannot wage two wars and give tax cuts at the same time. Let's not also forget that President Clinton, by many reports, left a $5 trillion surplus and President Bush left a $5 trillion deficit--$10 trillion. I ask you, if you believe that these tax cuts are so necessary for the economic growth of this Nation, then what happened for these 10 years? Why aren't we facing a booming economy versus just avoiding another Great Depression? Mr. Speaker, it seems like you're dreaming while the rest of us are living one of the worst nightmares we can possibly imagine. Mr. Speaker, wake up. Please, wake up.