Jahana Hayes

Mrs. HAYES

Mrs. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Ohio, Representative Brown.

Mrs. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, I thank Representative Brown. I think she knows I will always fight for RJ and all the kids like him. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Arizona and the newest member of our committee, Representative Grijalva.

Mrs. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from California, another member of the Committee on Education and Workforce, Representative Takano.

Mrs. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, I would just like to say as a teacher, when students with disabilities enter public schools, they can't be turned away. You have to figure out what their needs are. You have to meet with parents and the team to come up with a plan and teach those students. Unlike charter schools, for-profit schools, or even some private schools, which can decide that a student doesn't belong in their environment, at public schools, all kids belong there. We just have to figure out how to teach them. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Moore).

Mrs. HAYES. It has been floated, but we haven't seen any concrete plans, which is part of the problem.

Mrs. HAYES. Yes. Many employees were RIF'd at the Department of Education. I think even more concerning is the Office of Civil Rights in the Department of Education, the number of staff who were fired.

Mrs. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for her remarks. I will say that I am uniquely positioned to speak about some of the things that were brought up about what happened to children before IDEA was passed. Before becoming a teacher, and, actually, while I was a teacher, I worked at the Southbury Training School in Connecticut, which is a facility, an institution, that was established in the 1930s for children with developmental and mental disabilities. Many of those people, who are now adults, became institutionalized because they were placed in this facility. With their disabilities, had a law like this been in place, they could have been able to thrive and live in their community, but we put them behind walls in institutions. We can never go back to a time when that happens again. I thank Ms. Moore for joining us tonight. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from New Jersey (Mrs. McIver).

Mrs. HAYES

Mrs. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to celebrate the life of Joyce Reid-Coleman, who passed away on December 15 after a courageous battle with cancer. Poochie, as she was affectionately known, was beloved by the community. After overcoming many challenges in life, she decided to channel all of her energy to giving back. While employed at the Siemon Company, she spearheaded many annual events and programs for employees, including the Haunted Cafe for the children of employees, a Thanksgiving feast, and a Christmas extravaganza. Joyce created Big, Bold and Beautiful Productions to expand her service work to the Waterbury community. As an entrepreneur, she opened New York Handbags Plus Dresses in downtown Waterbury. Through her organization, Joyce provided the means to send children to prom. She worked closely with all of the high schools to select students to receive services. These services included gowns, tuxedos, shoes, haircuts, hairstyling, manicures, pedicures, all accessories, flowers, pictures, and even transportation. Her love for children inspired her to create The Back to School Kids Day, an all-day event providing food, games, activities, and free haircuts for all of the children. Her love for her community was unprecedented. During the holiday season, her organization would provide Thanksgiving dinner to the homeless and those in need, toys for children, and blankets for the sick and shut in. Even as she was in hospice, she hosted a large Thanksgiving dinner this last Thanksgiving. Joyce dedicated her life to God and was a faithful servant at Grace Baptist Church in Waterbury, Connecticut. Her generous, giving, and loving spirit made her a unique blessing to so many. Her work was celebrated in the city of Waterbury and throughout the State of Connecticut. To say that her living spirit will be missed by all who knew her is an understatement. I pray for her husband, Gene, and the family. Joyce will surely be missed. May Poochie rest well. She has earned it.

Mrs. HAYES

Mrs. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, I rise to defeat the previous question and bring up H.R. 6074, which provides for a clean 3-year extension of the Affordable Care Act enhanced tax credits. Congress has 3 legislative days left to extend the ACA tax credits, or they will expire at the end of the year. The impact of the tax credits expiring is devastating. Expiration of the tax credits will result in health premiums increasing by an average of 114 percent for individuals who rely on the marketplace, forcing 4.2 million people to lose their health insurance. I hear the fear in the voices of my constituents, Republicans and Democrats, and Americans across the country who talk about healthcare and the looming crisis. Small business owners, independent contractors, retirees, farmers, and constituents in my district continue to call my office or stop me to share how they will be unable to afford healthcare as they continue to experience rising costs for essentials like groceries, insurance, utilities, and housing. If Republicans can find a way to provide tax cuts for billionaires, Congress can find a way to provide relief for individuals to access healthcare. As I have said, we are under the pressure of time. We have a discharge petition, but that will take 7 days for a ripening through the House procedures. What we can do today is vote to defeat this previous question. Mr. Speaker, I thank the four Republicans who have joined us, but time is of the essence. They need to go one step further and vote to defeat the previous question, alongside Democrats, so that we can have a vote today in this House before we go on break. Congress must protect healthcare and lower the costs for all Americans by extending the ACA tax credits. As my colleague, Mr. McGovern, said, this isn't about Democrats. This is all of our constituents who benefit from the Affordable Care Act. This is all of our constituents who face rising deductibles and premiums. This is all of our constituents who fear that they will lose their healthcare. No reasonable proposal has been introduced. This is what we have today. Help us defeat the previous question.

Mrs. HAYES

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

Mrs. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, I rise today as a member of the Committee on Education and Workforce, a teacher, and a parent to lead this Special Order hour on the systemic dismantling of the Department of Education. From the beginning, the Trump administration and Secretary Linda McMahon have been ruthless in attacking the Department that is dedicated to ensuring equal access to quality education, promoting student achievement, preparing students for global competitiveness, administering Federal funds, enforcing civil rights, collecting data, conducting research, and supporting educational programs from early childhood to higher education. On March 11, the Department of Education initiated a reduction in force affecting nearly 50 percent of its workforce. Only 2,200 employees of the 4,000 employees that used to work at the Department remain to protect the civil rights of students, to support students from low-income backgrounds, to develop and prepare educators, and to provide resources for English language learners. President Trump also signed an executive order directing the Secretary of Education to facilitate the closure of the Department of Education. This action by the President is illegal. The Department of Education was created by an act of Congress, and only Congress has the authority to close that agency or any other Federal agency it creates. Yet, the executive order was one of many attacks by the President to collapse Federal agencies and end necessary services to the American people. Last month, the Department of Education announced six new interagency agreements to shift the day-to-day functions to four other agencies. This, I have to say, is one of the most devastating actions yet. This agreement sends the American Indian and Tribal colleges to the Department of the Interior. It sends TRIO programs to the Department of Labor. It sends the Child Care Access Means Parents in School program to the Department of Health and Human Services and International Education and Foreign Language Studies to the Department of State. These Departments do not have the expertise or appropriate staff to administer these programs, and our students will eventually suffer. Since its creation in 1979, the Department of Education has been committed to ensuring high-quality education for the 49 million children who attend public schools across the country. The Department of Education also collects and publishes data on student enrollment, school staffing, and crime in schools, and distributes Federal funds to support programs for 7.5 million students with special needs. We haven't heard any examples or any information on how these programs will run when being administered across several different agencies. When my Republican colleagues say they want to dismantle the Department, what they are really saying is they want to eliminate the sole Federal agency that protects the civil rights of students, the sole Federal agency that supports students from low-income backgrounds and develops and prepares educators. For postsecondary students, the Department administers Pell grants and $1.6 million in Federal student aid programs to support those trying to afford college. This Department has long been a target of Republican lawmakers who make the false claims about the role of the Department of Education. I know with fidelity that the Department of Education does not handle school curriculum, instruction, or instructional materials. Those decisions have been and will remain at the local level. What the Department does is support title I districts and low-income communities that rely on Federal funding. Abolishing the Department of Education would place the burden for continuing vital services on States and local communities that would either be forced to cut programs or raise their local taxes. Every student deserves access to a free and appropriate public education. As a teacher serving in Congress, this issue is deeply personal to me. I introduced the Department of Education Protection Act to shield the Department of Education from efforts by the Trump administration to dismantle the agency without the consent of Congress. Specifically, my legislation would prohibit the use of appropriated funds to decentralize, reduce staffing levels, or alter the responsibilities, structure, authority, or functionality of the Department of Education. If this administration wants to make a proposal that the Department of Education should be abolished, they must come before Congress and lay out a plan for how that looks, how it will work, and how it will impact students and families. I will continue to advocate for the Department of Education to work to find commonsense solutions to address education issues, not just tear it down with no plan to support students. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Virginia (Ms. McClellan).

Mrs. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott), the ranking member of the full Committee on Education and Workforce.

Mrs. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott), the ranking member of the full committee, for that history lesson. It is really important to understand what all of this means. He is right that I have been relentless on this issue. Not only was I a high schoolteacher but I have benefited from a high-quality public education. I understand what it means for a child in a low-income community who has one shot at getting a good education. If we don't protect that for every child in every community, it is to the detriment of our Nation. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. Takano).

Mrs. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from California and comment that the gentleman is exactly right. If this administration or Secretary McMahon have a different vision for the Department of Education, then they need to come before Congress and lay that out. We need to have hearings. That needs to be done in the light of day for the public to truly understand how this will impact their children. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Oregon (Ms. Bonamici).

Ms. HAYES

Ms. HAYES. Yes.

Mrs. HAYES

Mrs. HAYES. I will. Well, for many school districts, as the student population gets larger and they are dealing with all of the issues that kids come to school with, we have to make sure that kids are on green and ready to learn. However, the Department of Education provides for some of those wraparound services, some of those summer programs and meal programs that kids have at school. These are all of the things that help kids to learn. We have to make sure that we fill the gap from decades of disinvestment. We can't just never have schools adequately resourced and expect different results, never have teachers properly prepared and expect different results. We need to, as a nation, make educating our children a priority, which has not happened.

Mrs. HAYES. In many districts, they are always struggling just to catch up. In title I low-income districts, they are always--they are always at a disadvantage. So the answer is not to disinvest. We need to figure out what is working and amplify those programs. If there are places where we can become more efficient, then we address those things.

Mrs. HAYES. Well, I just think about my district, and while my State of Connecticut got approximately $170 billion from the Federal Government for special education services for students, there is no way a State can backfill those gaps without support from the Federal Government. When communities start to look at the programs that they will have to cut because they lack funding and understand what those supports mean, I think we will see an uproar from parents, from educators, from elected officials, and from leaders around the country because our children are the ones who will suffer. I think what is most egregious is that this is all happening, to your point, against the background of increasing defense budgets, against the background of cutting healthcare and nutrition assistance programs for families. While all the programs that are meant to support the most vulnerable people are stripped and cut, tax breaks to the wealthiest individuals, and even more than the Department of Defense asks for, is allocated. At some point, we have to prioritize the education of our children.

Mrs. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire how much time is remaining.

Mrs. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleagues who joined me. In a statement from my colleague from Connecticut, Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro, she talks about her support for the Department of Education and really reminds us that this administration has empowered Russ Vought, the author of the anti-education, anti-American, pro- billionaire Project 2025, this manifesto that lays out literally firing thousands of Federal employees and decimating the Department of Education. Congresswoman DeLauro talks about her family, growing up in New Haven, her parents who immigrated here, working in a garment factory, and education really being the catalyst for a better life. That story has not changed in all of these years. There are so many families and so many students that I taught, and so many kids that just need accommodations, with parents who are left wondering what will happen next. If this is the path that we are to take, I implore my Republican colleagues to not usurp our Article I authorities, to demand that we have some transparency and clarity for what this looks like, to demand that the Secretary of Education come before the Congress and assure parents about what the future of public education looks like and make sure they know that their children will not be left behind. This is something that, again, is near and dear to me, not just because of the profession that I chose in my adult life, but because education saved my life. Without public schools, an education, community college, and teachers who cared about me, my life would have taken a very different direction. I know that there are so many kids who are in that situation right now. I will continue my work to protect the Department of Education and to protect public education for our children, to make sure that they at least have a shot at an education to change the trajectory of their future and their families. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. HAYES

Mrs. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, I rise today as this Sunday marks the 13th anniversary of the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. On December 14, 2012, a senseless act of gun violence claimed the lives of 20 innocent children and 6 selfless educators. This day continues to be one of grave reflection and sadness for the people of Connecticut. There are no words to describe the heartbreak I felt on that day. After all these years, the hurt is still raw, and I still feel that same heaviness. Communities across the State and the Nation remember the stories of those children in that kindergarten class. We honor their memories and reaffirm a shared commitment to end the epidemic of gun violence. Mr. Speaker, today we remember, reflect, and honor the lives of those we lost and hold the Newtown and Sandy Hook community up in prayer.

Mrs. HAYES

Mrs. HAYES. We object.

Mrs. HAYES

Mrs. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, I was unavailable to vote because I was stuck on the tarmac at DCA. Had I been present, I would have voted YEA on Roll Call No. 191; YEA on Roll Call No. 192; and YEA on Roll Call No. 193.

Mrs. HAYES

Mrs. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, I rise today against the Republican reconciliation bill, which would put 42 million Americans at risk of losing their SNAP benefits. These policies are untested, dangerous, and arbitrary. Congress did not engage in a thoughtful process to make these changes to SNAP. The majority has not held a single hearing on the Nutrition, Foreign, Agriculture, and Horticulture Subcommittee on the cost-sharing provisions or the impact of this legislation. They have not solicited feedback from stakeholders or experts on what these changes would mean to States and hungry families who rely on SNAP. The Republicans did not examine these policies closely because they knew it would take food away from hungry families and they didn't care. They have chosen to provide tax cuts for the wealthiest individuals. They know these changes will devastate State budgets. In my home State of Connecticut, we could have to pay up to an additional $221 million per year for SNAP benefits and an additional $39 million for administrative costs. Connecticut, like most States, will have to come up with these funds or deny basic services that they need for other things, like education, public safety, healthcare, and providing for our roads and bridges in our States. Notably, not every State will be subject to this change. Late into the night, the Republican majority jumped through hoops to exempt noncontiguous States from these policies to pass cruel legislation. That is why we are up here writing legislation on the fly to protect some Americans while going after others. No one should go hungry, whether they live in Connecticut, Alaska, Hawaii, or anywhere. It should not matter where you live or what kind of deal your Senator made. Everybody deserves to eat. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to reject this irresponsible legislation.

Mrs. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to amend the rule to make in order the amendment at the desk that protects against any cuts to Medicaid and SNAP.