Steven Horsford

Mr. HORSFORD

Mr. HORSFORD. I thank the gentleman from New York. I know we are coming down to the end of our time. I yield to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee).

Mr. HORSFORD. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. At this time, I yield to my good friend from Texas (Mr. Veasey).

Mr. HORSFORD. I thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Veasey) for his very constructive remarks. And as he said, the fact that some on the other side want to close down government and keep it closed and now potentially threaten our ability to meet our obligations on October 17 with the debt ceiling over the Affordable Care Act, something that is now the law of the land that's been passed by this Congress, signed by the President, upheld by the Supreme Court, and that's simply not going to happen, it's time for them to come to the table to negotiate without holding the Affordable Care Act as a precondition. And that is what we are here to say, to ask the Speaker to bring to the floor a clean funding bill that's supported by an overwhelming number of Democrats and Republicans, to reopen government and to allow our American workers to go back to work. I'd like to now yield to the cochair of this Special Order hour, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Jeffries), my good friend.

Mr. HORSFORD. Thank you to the gentlelady from California. I will just conclude, Mr. Speaker, by saying that we demand a vote. We demand a vote on a clean funding resolution, one that's supported by 198 Democrats, 23 Republicans, 221 Members. A majority of the Members of this body are prepared to vote on a clean resolution, and we're asking--demanding--the Speaker bring that clean resolution to the floor so that we can reopen government and allow all of our American workers, those in government and those in the private sector, to get back to work and to meet our obligations as a country. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HORSFORD. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks.

Mr. HORSFORD. Mr. Speaker, the Congressional Black Caucus comes to the floor now entering the second week of the House Republican-led government shutdown. Instead of allowing a simple ``yes'' or ``no'' vote on a bill that funds the government, Republicans continue to play irresponsible games that are hurting our country. The shutdown's impact on our already fragile economy, as previously predicted, is already beginning to take shape and is negatively affecting millions of Americans. There is a simple solution to this, however, and that is to bring a clean continuing resolution to the House floor for a vote. The Senate has passed it; and if Speaker Boehner scheduled a vote, it would pass the House as well. But the House GOP is more concerned with catering to a fringe group of their caucus than leading for the American people. There are serious costs to that inaction for my constituents and constituents throughout our country. In Nevada, an estimated 11,000 Nevadans may be furloughed or directly impacted by the furloughs. At one of our Air Force bases in my congressional district, 1,100 Nevadans are affected by furloughs, processing of claims at the VA and Social Security have slowed for new applicants, and the Head Start program is feeling the pinch of the shutdown. Tonight, we come to this floor to raise these issues and others to call on our colleagues on the other side and the Speaker to allow a clean continuing resolution to be brought to the floor. At this time, I yield to the gentlelady from Ohio, Congresswoman Fudge, the chair of the Congressional Black Caucus, a leader who has been fighting for equality and fairness for all Americans.

Mr. HORSFORD. Mr. Speaker, at this time, I would like to yield to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Butterfield), the vice chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus.

Mr. HORSFORD. I thank the vice chairman, Mr. Butterfield, for his constructive remarks and calling once again for the Speaker to bring a clean resolution to the floor. We know that the votes are here to pass a clean continuing resolution, one that would reopen government, one that would be supported by Republicans and Democrats; and so the Congressional Black Caucus comes to this floor at this hour to ask the Speaker of this House to do the will of the people and the will of this body. At this time, I yield to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Lewis), a civil rights icon, a man who speaks truth to power.

Mr. HORSFORD. I thank the gentleman very much for his comments and for pricking the conscience of this body for doing what's right at a time when the country expects that of our elected leadership. I would like to yield, at this time, to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott).

Mr. HORSFORD. I thank the gentleman from Virginia for his comments and for bringing up a number of key points. The main one that, I think, gets lost is the fact that the President and Democrats in both the House and the Senate have compromised. They've compromised on the lower budget number to get to a 6-week agreement on funding the budget in order for us to have a longer term negotiation for the budget in subsequent years. That is a major point that I think the Speaker and those on the other side tend to forget. That was a number that the Speaker himself offered up in July and said that he would bring a clean continuing resolution to the floor in July at the very number that Democrats are prepared to say ``yes'' to. What we're here to say, Mr. Speaker, and Members on the other side, is take ``yes'' for an answer. We're ready. There are 195 Democrats who are ready in this House, some 20 Republicans who publicly said that they're ready to support a clean continuing resolution, and there are probably more that would vote for it once it's brought to the floor. I now yield to the gentlelady from Maryland, Congresswoman Edwards.

Mr. HORSFORD. I thank the gentlelady for her remarks and for bringing the real-life names and stories about who this furlough impacts and how government shutdown is really affecting them. Those are the individuals, the public servants who provide critical services each and every day, who deserve to go back to work. Again, we're asking that the Speaker bring a clean continuing resolution to the floor so the government can be reopened; and like the gentlewoman from Maryland, I, myself, have heard from my constituents who are affected by this. Many have sent emails and called my office. There is one by the name of Alex, a Department of Defense employee, who got married a week before the shutdown and was furloughed a week ago today. Now, is that the Republican Party's idea of a honeymoon gift? This has to end, and it has to end now. I got some letters today from a fifth grade class of students from Sandy Miller Elementary School in Nevada. They wrote to me because they're planning a trip to the Grand Canyon, but now it looks like that trip may be in jeopardy because the government shutdown is threatening access to the Grand Canyon. They wrote to provide me with some advice on how to solve these problems and to suggest that if Congress could start acting a little more like fifth graders, maybe we could get something done around here. I would like to share some of the remarks from the letters that they wrote. Stefany writes: You should be respectful of each other. Be communicators. But most of all, be balanced and open-minded. Rossie said: You should be reflective about how you are affecting other people, not just yourselves. If my class can compromise and get along, you and your colleagues in Congress should too. George wrote: Congress should start cooperating and working as a team, like we do here in school. ``The message is pretty clear,'' as one of the writers, Bailen, put it, ``if fifth graders can get along, you can too.'' Well, I sure hope that's the case, Mr. Speaker. Because if we can't work together to do the people's business, then we shouldn't be here; and maybe we should turn the gavel over to them. I yield the floor to my friend, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Payne).

Mr. HORSFORD. I thank the gentleman. May I inquire as to the time I have remaining, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. HORSFORD

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

Mr. HORSFORD

Mr. HORSFORD. Mr. Speaker, I rise to discuss a portion of our community in Nevada's Fourth Congressional District that is being negatively affected under the sequestration and would be under a government shutdown. I am proud to speak on behalf of the Nellis Air Force Base in my district. Nellis Air Force Base employs over 3,000 civilian employees. They work as engineers, physicians, nurses, and administrators. I recently spoke with the Commander about the negative effects that sequestration has already had on Nellis Air Force Base. For the past 3 years, the salaries of these civilian employees has been frozen. Positions are being eliminated, leaving remaining employees to pick up the slack. The civilian employees of Nellis Air Force Base are undergoing increasingly heavy responsibilities at work, without any increase in pay, and for Nellis Air Force Base, sequestration has already meant a decrease of over 40,000 flights, which affects their readiness at a time of combat. It is time for this Congress to reach a deal on the budget. A clean continuing resolution does not jeopardize personnel, a deal that I hope we will work together to accomplish on behalf of Nellis Air Force Base and all of our civilians. I urge Members of Congress to end the legacy of deadlock in Congress and begin the legacy of doing what we must to help the dedicated and hardworking men and women of the United States.

Mr. HORSFORD

Mr. HORSFORD. Mr. Speaker, I come to the floor today opposed to the potential cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, an important food program that lifts families, children, and seniors out of poverty and provides an important safety net for those in need. SNAP is our Nation's most important antihunger program. It provides food assistance to approximately 46 million Americans, and it kept 4.7 million people out of poverty in 2011, including over 2 million children. This food program has cut the number of children living in extreme poverty in America in half. Now, earlier this year, my colleagues on the other side approved a farm bill, but left the food for America's families behind. They passed special subsidies for Big Ag but, for the first time in decades, excluded funding for food assistance for America's families in need. And now, months after providing special subsidies for Big Ag, House Republicans are bringing forward a bill to cut food assistance by $40 billion. Apparently, the first attempt at $20 billion was not deep enough. So they pass a farm bill that provides corporate subsidies, but they leave food for America's families behind. In my district and in the State of Nevada, more than 71 percent of SNAP participants are families with children. Almost 26 percent of all SNAP participants are in families with elderly and disabled members, and nearly 42 percent of all SNAP families are in working families. So House Republicans support corporate welfare for Big Ag and big business, but cut food assistance for the elderly, for disabled, and, yes, even our veterans. We should not be cutting the safety net for our most vulnerable while maintaining costly government subsidies for the well-off junk food, oil, and gas industries. SNAP benefits, Mr. Speaker, average less than $1.50 per person per meal. That amount is set to drop to about $1.40 this fall, when the 2009 Recovery Act's temporary benefit boost ends. Now, the person who receives $1.50 per meal in Nevada is not the problem with the budget. The problem is corporate welfare and the special interest giveaways that litter our Tax Code. I recently held a telephone town hall the last time the Republicans tried to gut food assistance for America's families and my constituents. I heard from families who are doing everything they can to provide for their families. I heard from seniors who are doing their best to keep their heads above water and moms who are doing their best to escape poverty. If we cut SNAP even further, we are cutting a lifeline for these families. Now, another important constituency that is affected by this cut is our veterans. Census data indicate that nationwide, approximately 900,000 veterans receive SNAP assistance each month. An estimated 170,000 of those 900,000 veterans could be affected by the House Republican proposal to cut $40 billion from SNAP. In my State, studies estimate that 72,184 veterans receive assistance from this important food assistance program. That means roughly one in three veterans in Nevada--one in three--receive assistance from SNAP. Well, my question to the House Republicans is: Is this how we repay our veterans--is their sacrifice not enough?--by trying to ram through $40 billion in cuts to programs that people rely on, and then when that doesn't work, doubling down and trying to make those cuts even worse? Military families are on a pace this year to redeem more than $100 million in food aid on military bases, and the House Republican reaction is to tell them that they need to live with less? I can't do that. I can't tell those families, Sorry, but you haven't sacrificed enough. I urge my colleagues to do the responsible thing, do the right thing. Avoid these draconian cuts to programs that combat hunger effectively. This isn't waste. This is a critical social safety net program that families and children and veterans rely on. I urge this body to oppose the House Republican plan.

Mr. HORSFORD

Mr. HORSFORD. Mr. Speaker, on consideration H.R. 1911, I am not recorded because I was absent due to medically mandated recovery. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye'' on final passage of the bill (rollcall No. 426). On rollcall No. 353 on final passage of H.R. 850, I would have voted ``aye'' on final passage of the bill.

Mr. HORSFORD

Mr. HORSFORD. Mr. Speaker, on consideration of H.R. 2397, I am not recorded because I was absent due to medically mandated recovery. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye'' on final passage of the bill (rollcall No. 414), and ``aye'' on the Amash Amendment to the bill (rollcall No. 412).

Mr. HORSFORD

Mr. HORSFORD. Mr. Speaker, on consideration of H.R. 5, I am not recorded because I was absent due to medically mandated recovery. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay'' on final passage of the bill.

Mr. HORSFORD

Mr. HORSFORD. Mr. Speaker, on consideration H.R. 2609, I am not recorded because I was absent due to medically mandated recovery. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye'' on final passage of the bill rollcall No. 345, ``aye'' on the Titus Amendment of the bill (rollcall No. 337), and ``aye'' on the Heck Amendment to the bill (rollcall No. 337), and ``aye'' on the Heck Amendment to the bill (rollcall No. 325). On rollcall No. 353 on final passage H.R. 2642, I am not recorded because I was absent due to medically mandated recovery. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay'' on final passage of this bill.

Mr. HORSFORD

Mr. HORSFORD. Let me just say it's good to see the freshman class president from the other side at the Speaker's podium this evening. Mr. Speaker, on Tuesday, the Supreme Court struck down critical parts of the Voting Rights Act, and I, like my colleagues, am deeply disappointed in this decision. Justice Scalia said the Voting Rights Act is a ``racial entitlement.'' Voting is not a racial entitlement. It is a right for every eligible voting age citizen. It is an American entitlement. Voter suppression tactics have become more sophisticated, but they have not disappeared. The Voting Rights Act blocked more than 1,000 voting law changes between 1982 and 2006, and last year alone, the Voting Rights Act stopped a voter ID law in Texas and a Florida law that eliminated early voting days. Now it has fallen to Congress to safeguard our most sacred right, and I will work with anyone from either party who understands the need to protect this fundamental right. I urge this body to work together to fix the Voting Rights Act.

Mr. HORSFORD

Mr. HORSFORD. Yet we are talking about cutting these benefits even further while we continue subsidies to big industries that are well- off. Those priorities are backwards. For the mother in my district who is expecting another child and who counts on SNAP, for the disabled family that stands in line for hours at the food bank, and for the elderly who rely on SNAP to get the food that they need, for everyone who made their voice heard by calling my office, I refuse to accept that we should cut $20.5 billion in vital food assistance programs, and I will continue to work with Mr. McGovern and my colleagues until we can restore these funds. Today's rule will allow for a number of amendments to be considered. I urge all of my colleagues to support an amendment offered by Mr. McGovern, myself, and other members. Our amendment will prevent cuts to SNAP funding. The Federal Agriculture Reform and Risk Management Act of 2013 includes $20.5 billion in cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (or SNAP). That will come on top of an expiration of a benefits boost from the Recovery Act in 2009. Without the Recovery Act's boost, SNAP benefits will average about $1.40 per person per meal. If the Farm Bill passes the House as it is currently written, the average benefit may drop even lower. SNAP provides food assistance to approximately 46 million Americans in need and it is estimated that at least 353,000 Nevadans will feel the impact of the upcoming double whammy of SNAP cuts from the Farm Bill and expiration of the Recovery Act boost. The bottom line is that SNAP is our nation's most important anti- hunger program. It kept 4.7 million people out of poverty in 2011, including 2.1 million children. And SNAP has cut the number of children living in extreme poverty in half. I had a community conference call with families in my district who count on SNAP. They live in food deserts. The benefits they receive right now are not enough for a healthy meal. And yet, we are talking about cutting these benefits even further while we continue subsidies to industries that are well-off. Those priorities are backwards. So for the mother in my district who is expecting another child who counts on this program, for the family that stands in line for hours at the food bank, and for elderly who rely on SNAP to get the food they need, for everyone who made their voice heard by calling my office, I refuse to accept that we should cut $20.5 billion in vital food assistance. Extra points: According to the USDA's Economic Research Service: Each $1 billion of retail generated by SNAP creates $340 million in farm production, and 3,300 farm jobs; every $1 billion of SNAP benefits also creates 8,900-17,900 full-time jobs; an additional $5 of SNAP benefits generates $9 in total economic activity. These programs are not handouts. They are a hand up. And they help stimulate the economy.

Mr. HORSFORD. Mr. Speaker, first let me commend the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern) and his leadership for 18 years on fighting for the needs of SNAP assistance for our most vulnerable citizens. I rise and stand with Mr. McGovern against this procedural rule and in support of the underlying amendment that Mr. McGovern, myself, and other Members have. This amendment will prevent cuts to the SNAP funding program. The Federal Agriculture Reform and Risk Management Act of 2013 includes $20.5 billion in cuts to the SNAP program. That will come on top of an expiration of a benefits boost from the Recovery Act of 2009. SNAP provides food assistance to approximately 46 million Americans in need, and it is estimated that at least 353,000 Nevadans will feel the impact of the upcoming double whammy of SNAP cuts from the FARRM Bill and the expiration of the Recovery Act boost. The bottom line is that the SNAP program is our Nation's most important antihunger program. It kept 4.7 million people out of poverty in 2011, including 2.1 million children. I had a community conference call with my constituents and families in my district who count on SNAP. Many of them live in food deserts. The benefits they receive right now aren't enough for a healthy meal.

Mr. HORSFORD

Mr. HORSFORD. Good evening. Let me first thank my good friend, the gentleman from the Empire State, my coanchor, Mr. Jeffries. It has been a pleasure now, for the first six months of our term in this 113th Congress, to work with you to bring these issues to the floor each week on behalf of the Congressional Black Caucus. I really have appreciated your friendship, your perspective, and your intelligence on so many issues, and I look forward to continuing to work with you. And to my other colleagues, the dynamic freshman class, it is so great to have colleagues who work together, who have like mindedness to represent our communities and to do it in a way that addresses the needs of all people. The gentlewoman from Ohio (Mrs. Beatty) has so many experiences from the private sector, to her role working as an administrator in the university, Ohio State University. It has been great to get to know her, as well as my good friend and colleague, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Payne). These are individuals who have great perspective and experience and whose voice on these issues are incredibly important. I'm just pleased to be among such a dynamic group that is trying to make a difference here in this 113th Congress. So today, we are here to bring attention and focus to celebrating the 50th anniversary of National Small Business Week. It is fitting that tonight's Special Order hour will focus on how small businesses are critical to the growth of our economy. As we do during these normal hours, people can follow us on #CBCTalks. If you have a question or you have an idea, if you have a perspective that you want heard, this is your opportunity because it's not just about us coming here, but it is about us listening to what it is our constituents want us to bring to the floor. As my colleagues have already said, small businesses are the backbone of our economy. The CBC has fought and continues to fight to strengthen programs that create economic opportunity and foster entrepreneurship. Over the last year, small businesses in our country have created 700,000 jobs, accounting for 40 percent of employment gains, across companies of all sizes. More than half of all Americans either own or work for a small business. So when we talk about increasing access to capital, enhancing business partnerships, and providing important technical assistance, the CBC is talking about the small businesses who are the engines of our economy. And we have solutions, and they are solutions that we hope our colleagues on the other side of the aisle will work with us to pass because they are the right solutions for America--solutions like Representative Rush's expanding opportunities for Main Street. So much focus is always on Wall Street, but we want to bring the issues of Main Street and small businesses to this body. Whether it is Representative Richmond's Microenterprise and Youth Entrepreneurship Development Act, making sure we are helping new businesses and young entrepreneurs have the resources they need to start and grow their business, or whether it is Representative Clarke's Expanding Opportunities for Small Businesses Act, the CBC is working on solutions. And these are the types of real policies that are before this body, and we would urge our colleagues on both sides of the aisle to work with us to make these bills law. These bills, if enacted, would greatly enhance the small business landscape for minority entrepreneurs. You know, I had an opportunity recently to visit the American History Museum. When you're there and you reflect on our history as a Nation and you see the important contributions that African Americans have made to the establishment and growth of our great Nation, whether it be in politics or government, civil rights or social justice, and, yes, entrepreneurship, it's African Americans who have helped build our country, and it is African American businesses that need to be part of our plan for economic growth. Three issues that I hear most from my constituents, small business owners that I believe have to be at the center of our discussion as we celebrate the 50th anniversary of Small Business Week, is, number one, access to capital, whether it be on the need for lines of credit to help with the day-to-day operations of a business or capital loans to help a business buy new equipment so that they can expand or grow. The second issue is equal opportunity to bid on and win contracts both in the private sphere but, most importantly in our role, the Federal contracting opportunities. When I look at the amount of money that is being spent by these Federal agencies and to know that there are not the types of efforts to really provide outreach or support to our minority- and women-owned and veteran-owned businesses is something that the Congressional Black Caucus believes has to be a priority. And third is the need to ensure compliance with minority participation in Federal contracting. This is an area, to my good friend from New York, I hope that we will be able to work on. I know the ranking member over Small Business, this is a priority of hers as well, and I want to see what we can do to hold accountable every agency to do their part to ensure that there's ample participation from all communities. You know, in April I held my first small business forum with my constituents that focused on creating good-paying jobs through Federal contracting opportunities. We held another one recently on access to capital. It was the Small Business Administration which was there that talked about the fact that they deliver millions of dollars of loans, contracts, counseling sessions, and other forms of assistance to small businesses. Well, we sought to replicate that type of support in our district with our small business owners. We had representatives from various agencies attend, and they mapped out strategies for local businesses who are looking to grow and add more workers. We had representatives from agencies, including the Department of Defense, the General Services Administration, the Department of Energy, the Department of Veterans Affairs, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the Small Business Administration, as well as our Governor's Office of Economic Development. The forum provided a great opportunity to discuss our plan to create jobs in our local community. Over 60 local small business owners attended the event, along with representatives from Federal agencies. Other business owners helped local residents and aspiring entrepreneurs figure out how to position themselves to compete for Federal contracts and grants. Those grants create jobs in our local community, and job creation and economic growth is what we should be about as we talk about celebrating National Small Business Owners Week. What was most rewarding, to my friend from New York, was a panel of young entrepreneurs. We had young people who are still in high school who have a business plan for how they can create everything from backpacks to marketing to social marketing opportunities. These are young people with ideas, with passion, with vision; but we want to make sure that they have the right support as well. So listening to these young people makes me appreciate just how important these resources are and why we need to continue to work to make them a reality. Let me finish my remarks at this point by talking about the need for business-to-business partnerships and making sure that we have these face-to-face meetings with those who know the ins and outs of securing grants, those who know how to go about contracting, and also the need for access to capital and how to secure the loans that small businesses need to grow their business. We want to encourage those who are listening, or following us on #CBCtalks, to attend one of the Small Business Administration's matchmaking events during Small Business Week--there are several. There's one in Seattle, there's one in Dallas, St. Louis, Pittsburgh, and even here in the Nation's Capital in Washington, D.C.--and to reach out to resources like Black Enterprise. They have a very successful Young Entrepreneurs Conference that they hold annually that helps young people learn about the opportunities of starting their small business and what it means to develop a plan to do marketing, to have all of their plans in place so that their business, once launched, is successful. And, finally, I want to encourage people to reach out and join the U.S. Black Chamber of Commerce and their local urban and Black chambers of commerce because these are opportunities where they can connect to resources, get the support that they need, and help to grow their businesses. So I yield back to the gentleman from New York at this time and thank him and the other Members for this spotlight on Small Business Week.

Mr. HORSFORD

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

Mr. HORSFORD. Mr. Chairman, this bipartisan amendment that I am offering along with Congressman Heck would help address some of our concerns about the calculations in the Urban Area Security Initiative funding formula. UASI provides critical funding to cities that are at risk for a terrorist attack. As a member of the authorizing committee for the Department of Homeland Security, I want to work with the appropriators on this concern. I have become deeply concerned about how the formula currently being used by the Department of Homeland Security will determine eligibility for this funding. The formula sometimes counts multiple buildings as a single site, something that shortchanges the Las Vegas Strip. It also punishes cities for successfully implementing anti-terror programs. Well, we should not be the victims of our own success. As it stands now, critical anti-terror programs for major tourist destinations around the country are being defunded, including for Las Vegas, New Orleans, and Orlando, to name a few. That's the Las Vegas Strip, the site of Mardi Gras, and Disney World. This is not an issue of budget cuts. It's an issue of prioritization. It's an issue of a faulty policy that completely ignores some major international tourist destinations and the threat posed to them. During a recent House Homeland Security Committee hearing, I asked Boston Police Commissioner Edward Davis about the value of the UASI program in responding to the tragic events of the Boston Marathon attack. Commissioner Davis told the committee that if it were not for UASI ``there would have been more people who would have died in these attacks. It is critical that we maintain that funding to urban areas.'' He stressed that this is not a frivolous expenditure. It's something that works. It's something that our sheriff is asking for, it's something that our mayor of Las Vegas is asking for, and it's something the people on the ground, the first responders, desperately need. I visited the Southern Nevada Counter-Terrorism Center recently. They do incredible work in keeping the 2 million residents and the 40 million tourists who come to southern Nevada safe. In studies on terrorist targets, however, the RAND Corporation has stated that Las Vegas ``stands out in having a high proportion of high- likelihood targets compared to the Nation as a whole.'' The same study also reports that the unique composition of hotels, casinos, and skyscrapers ``increases the overall attack probability in Las Vegas relative to other cities in the same likelihood tier.'' Yet, in my home State of Nevada, Mr. Chairman, we face reduced UASI funding because of flaws in the Relative Risk Profile model that has inappropriately dropped Las Vegas' ranking as a likely terrorist target. We need a serious reevaluation of the funding formula for UASI. It is wrong that Las Vegas has dropped in ranking, and it is wrong that we will face reduced funds because of faulty calculations. I urge adoption of this amendment, and I look forward to continuing to work with the appropriators on addressing this very important concern to the safety of our domestic homefront. I yield back the balance of my time.