Sheila Jackson Lee

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, when I think of most Americans, I know that one of the major components of our work ethic is that we believe in working hard. We are not standing in line for government subsidies or handouts. We simply want to be able to have an opportunity. Last evening, I was on the floor speaking of the unfortunate circumstances of this past week, such as the mischaracterization of what affirmative action really means, which is an opportunity for all of our students to go to institutions of higher learning with a diverse student body that embodies and reflects America, responding to the decrease in numbers of African Americans since the dismantling of affirmative action at schools like the University of Michigan, Berkeley, and others. We then follow that decision with untimely and unfortunate comments, first by an owner of a national basketball team. It baffles me when the owner indicates that he does not want to see Black people at his stadium. It amazes me because if he looks out onto the playing floor, he might see a lot of them. We find that sports is something that brings us all together, from all walks of life. Then we have an individual that represents himself as one of the true traditions of America, a rancher--and much of that is done in Texas-- who wants to suggest that African Americans would be better off picking cotton and having gardens and chickens. The reason I raise these issues today is because we have parts of our society that reflect those injustices. We have parts of society that ignore the ills that befall those who are more impoverished than others. Many people don't realize that even though slavery ended in the 1800s, the 20th century found itself with individuals or segments of the population being treated unequally for more than half a century. Even when those laws changed, like with the 1964 Civil Rights Act, minds and hearts did not change. And so the inequities followed people of color: language minorities, like Hispanics, and African Americans in particular. I have a document that reflects that inequity right in the city of Houston and the district that I represent. Yesterday, we came out with the Children at Risk research on the level of high schools that were not functioning. They list North Forest High School, Madison High School, Jones High School, Wheatley High School, Sterling High School, Kashmere High School, and Worthing High School at the bottom of the list. Why? They are all in inner city areas. The investment in people is not there. And so this wealth inequality is not about someone who wants to get a handout; it is to reflect what is happening. The highest unemployment is among Latinos and African Americans, which are the red and purple bars. Because of the barriers to access to credit, the lowest number of business ownership in this country is with African Americans. It has the lowest number of business owners. When we faced the recession and mortgage collapse, the highest number of bankruptcy filings were among Latinos and African Americans. No, they are not looking for a handout. We are looking for policies that in fact will invest in education and make sure that when we invest in people, we overcome the barriers that deal with race and racism. When we lost all of the home equity, which was one of the greatest assets of African Americans, the decline in home equity and ownership fell upon many of us in a high number, from Asians to Whites to Latinos and African Americans. And when I say this, I speak of those who are White and equally face obstacles. Many know that one of the major movements of Senator Robert F. Kennedy was his visit to Appalachia and other places. So my question to my colleagues today is how we can come together to look at a way of empowering those impoverished and making sure that the educational system, regardless of your level of income, has the ability to treat you equally so that the school that you attend every day--your parents pay taxes and send you there--is not giving you the bottom rank in opportunity and that your family is not in the category with no assets or retirement, no ability to help you go to college. Highest number, 62 percent for African Americans; Latinos, 69 percent, which is partly due to the fact that many Latinos live in a ``shadow society,'' many of them because we have not passed comprehensive immigration reform. So, Mr. Speaker, rather than to accuse individuals and call people names and use racist categories, it is time for us to come together and be united to lift the boats of all Americans.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise to express my disagreement with last week's Supreme Court decision and at the same time I wish to condemn in the strongest terms, the inappropriate comments by NBA owner Donald Sterling and Cliven Bundy, the Nevada rancher who owes the federal government more than $1 million in grazing fees that he has not paid in 20 years. America is a nation moving into a future and our diversity makes us better and stronger; and comments and attitudes like those expressed by Donald Sterling and Cliven Bundy have no place in our civic life and are a tragic illustration of why the Supreme Court reached the wrong decision at a most inopportune time in upholding Michigan's anti- affirmative action initiative. With its decision in Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, the Court has weakened the precedents that protected minorities from ballot initiatives that suppress minority civic participation. This decision flies in the face of prior rulings of the Supreme Court that struck down laws and ballot initiatives that place extra burdens on the ability of minorities to participate on equal footing in the political process. Also Mr. Speaker, let me add my voice to that of the President and so many other persons of goodwill in denouncing the racist and offensive comments of Clippers owner Donald Sterling. His remarks have no place in our society and are beneath contempt. It is particularly unfortunate that these despicable remarks were made by an owner of an NBA franchise because the NBA has been leading the way in showing the world that America's diversity is its greatest strength and asset. NBA teams are comprised of athletes from every race and background who work hard and in common purpose to achieve the shared goal of winning championship and thrilling their fans, who can be found on every continent of the globe. As an economic engine, the NBA generates billions of dollars to the national and local economy. Americans do not disrespect or disparage African, Asian, South American, or European basketball stars because of their ethnicity or country of origin. They welcome them. Nigeria's Akeem Olajuwon, China's Yao Ming, Dkembe Mutombo from the Democratic Republic of the Congo are still revered in my home city of Houston. I am encouraged by the announcement of NBA Commissioner Silver that the league and its owners take this matter very seriously and I am confident will take appropriate action to make it clear that when it comes to racism, the NBA has a zero-tolerance policy. But last week we are unfortunately reminded that 50 years after the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 there is still much work to be done in perfecting our union. It is perhaps not a coincidence that the offensive comments of Donald Sterling and Cliven Bundy were made by persons who came of age during the pre-Civil Rights era and that their views are not shared by the vast majority of their children's and grandchildren's generation. Diversity in education has been indispensable in this transformation. That is why the decision in Schuette by the Supreme Court upholding Michigan's anti-affirmative action initiative is so unfortunate. The Court's decision perpetuates the direct harm to African-American, Hispanic, and Native American students and inflicts indirect harm to all other students, including those admitted as alumni legatees, which is just a disguised affirmative action program for the affluent. They are all harmed is because as Justice Sotomayor pointed out in her powerful dissent, the Court's ruling handicaps Michigan's public colleges and universities in providing the campus diversity that ``ensures the next generation moves beyond the stereotypes, the assumptions, and the superficial perceptions that students coming from less-heterogeneous communities may harbor, consciously or not, about people who do not look like them.'' Mr. Speaker, America is a nation moving into the future. Our diversity gives us the unique opportunity to compete and win in a globalized economy. But to realize that future, we must leave behind the long discredited beliefs and attitudes of the Donald Sterlings and Cliven Bundys of this world.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Let me thank the gentleman from New York for convening this dialogue with our colleagues and, through our colleagues, the American people and Mr. Horsford as well as the Congressional Black Caucus and the passionate words of our colleague, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel), and others who have come on this floor to challenge our colleagues. I think the backdrop of this whole discussion is the Ryan budget, which we debated before we left for the work recess. And I think it is important that we not allow that budget to just pass with a vote and let it not represent the moral document that now the Republicans have tied themselves to. Interestingly enough, while we were away, it seems that America caught on fire. For some reason, the season generated a number of unfortunate and sad incidents that really reinforce this wealth gap that is so very important. I have 10 points that I would like to succinctly mention in the backdrop of the Ryan budget, which cuts drastically the social network of America which really makes America great. Some of us had the opportunity to be in countries outside, countries as we were, during the recess, South and Central America, Europe and other places. You come back to this country and you thank God for its greatness, and I still do that. But I also know that it is great, or it was great, because people pull together and realize there is no shame in a social safety network because it was people of all backgrounds--Caucasians, Hispanics, African Americans and others--who were in this country who celebrated the creation of Social Security under Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Medicare and Medicaid back in the 1960s. This is the 50th year of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, and so it is tragic that we still have to look at numbers that show the wealth inequality. It is more tragic that we compound this discrimination with ugly words that really suggest that there is a lack of understanding for why these numbers exist. I might say to Mr. Bundy, who suggested that government subsidies is all that African Americans receive, and that we would be better off as slaves with a garden and picking cotton: maybe if there had been a fair distribution of wealth at the end of slavery, as it was supposed to be, there would have been the investment in that now-free population where you could look at them and say, Why didn't you succeed? Well, if you read your history books, you know that we lived under a discriminatory society for much of the 20th century. And in actuality, there was not an equalizing or trying to equalize rights until the 1960s. Even today, the decision that was just rendered on affirmative action, some people would shout for joy, but in actuality it undermines America's great quality, and that is diversity. It takes away from Hispanic and White students and African Americans students and Asian students an opportunity to go to school together, a very unfortunate decision in affirmative action, compounded, of course, by the atmosphere and the attitudes of the likes of the owner of the Clippers, who today, in 2014, suggests I don't want to be sitting next to, taking a picture with, don't promote it, whatever his heartbroken situation might have been with an ex-girlfriend, it still sets a tone that speaks, if you will, to the discrimination that exists in wealth. Some would say, how do you tie that together? We have to change our attitudes about all of us. And frankly, unemployment rates emphasize the discrimination in employment: African Americans, 12.4 percent and higher among young African American men; Hispanics 7.9 percent. I don't want unemployment in any group. I fight for full employment for everyone because I know that is what America is about, giving opportunity and creating the working middle class. That is what we should fight for, and I hope our discussion focuses on the fact that we want that to occur. Decline in wealth. We can clearly see that the decline in wealth has gone to some 53 percent in the African American community. And then of course bankruptcy filings; likewise, you can show that the highest amount is in African Americans. Let me conclude by simply saying the budget that Mr. Ryan has will never answer the question of solving the problem of lifting the boats of all Americans. I thank the gentleman for having yielded to me. The challenge tonight is clearly to find a solution that ends the evilness of racism, but more importantly lifts the boats of all of our fellow Americans because they deserve the kind of equality and wealth opportunity that goes for poor Whites, Hispanics, African Americans, and Asians. A solution must be found. key messages The median wealth of White households is 20 times that of African American households. Put differently, African Americans own just five cents for every dollar of wealth whites own. Buying a home is the single largest investment most families can make. Asset accumulation is the foundation to economic mobility for low- and middle-income families. Public--such as Social Security, Medicare, and Unemployment Insurance--and private assets are important for the economic security of communities of color. Investing in assets and limiting debt can help families build wealth and improve their financial security. Families of color lack the necessary savings and assets to climb up the economic ladder. This wide gap in wealth between families of color and White families is a reflection of systemic and social barriers that have limited economic mobility. Along with a history of discrimination, communities of color face obstacles getting a good job or using banks to save for future investments. Public policy--rooted in historical discrimination--created the racial wealth gap and it will take public policy to overcome economic inequities. The national budget is a primary vehicle through which public assets are protected and strengthened.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my deepest sorrow for the family members of those that were lost in the terrible tragedy that occurred on April 2, 2014, at Fort Hood, in my home State of Texas. Three soldiers were killed, with an additional sixteen injured, before the gunman turned the gun on himself. Our brave American soldiers are all too aware of the dangers and turmoil of war. When they return from war, we can only hope that they would return to the peace and security that they have sacrificed so much to create and protect. Mr. Speaker, I want to honor the fallen soldiers: Sergeant First Class Daniel M. Ferguson, age 39, of Mulberry, Florida; Sergeant Timothy W. Owens, age 37, of Effingham, Illinois; and Staff Sergeant Carlos A. Lazaney- Rodriguez, age 38, of Aguadilla, Puerto Rico. These three brave soldiers were laid to rest entirely too soon. These three soldiers will be remembered for their achievements and their dedication to our country. Americans are becoming all too familiar with tragedy of this magnitude, but it does not change the immense heartache and pain that comes with the loss of some of our nation's finest. A horrible tragedy such as this highlights the importance of serving our soldiers both while at war and during the difficult transition back into normal life. Worse is that it comes in the wake of another terrible incident at Fort Hood that occurred just five years prior. We must be able to wholly understand the challenges that our soldiers face in a time of such stringent and demanding operational tempos. I extend my thoughts and prayers to the families of those that were lost on April 2, and offer my deepest condolences and hopes for the sixteen others that were injured in the shooting. The men and women of Fort Hood are true American heroes. They deserve our greatest honors for the sacrifices they make every single day, within and beyond our borders. It must be our duty to always remember those that we have lost and we must be forever dedicated to preventing tragedies like these from ever happening again. Mr. Speaker, I ask the House to observe a moment of silence in honor of the three fallen soldiers, Sergeant First Class Ferguson, Sergeant Owens, and Staff Sergeant Lazaney-Rodriguez.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, as Members of Congress we know well, perhaps better than most, how blessed our Nation is to have in reserve such exceptional young men and women who will go on to become leaders in their local communities, states, and the nation in the areas of business, education, government, philanthropy, the arts and culture, and the military. We know this because we see them and benefit from their contributions every day. Many of them work for us in our offices as junior staff members, congressional fellows, or interns and they do amazing work for and on behalf of the constituents we are privileged to represent. Mr. Speaker, I believe there is no higher calling than the call to serve a cause larger than ourselves. That is why I ran for public office. I was inspired to serve by President Kennedy who said, ``Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country,'' and by the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. who said: Everybody can be great because anybody can serve. . . . You only need a heart full of grace. A soul generated by love. By this measure, there are several other great young men and women who served as volunteers this year in my offices. They may toil in obscurity but their contributions to the constituents we serve are deeply appreciated and that is why today I rise to pay tribute to four extraordinary young persons for their service to my constituents in the 18th Congressional District of Texas and to the American people. They are: Aidee Meza, Josh Crook, Katherine Welbeck, and Ayanna Costley. I wish to thank Aidee Meza, who graduated with honors from the University of Houston, for numerous and substantial contributions, including her work on H.R. 4108, ``Breath of Fresh Air Act of 2014,'' and the highly successful ``When Women Succeed, America Succeeds'' leadership summit held in Houston in March of this year. Josh Crook, a student at the University of North Texas, provided invaluable assistance to me and my legislative team in the areas of national defense and veterans affairs. In doing so, Josh continued his record of providing distinguished service to his country first begun with his enlistment in the Armed Services as an airman in the U.S. Air Force. Josh's experience and understanding of the challenges faced by veterans transitioning from active duty to the civilian sector was critical to the development of legislation I introduced earlier this year, H.R. 4110, ``Helping to Encourage Real Opportunity for Veterans Transitioning from Battlespace to Workplace Act of 2014,'' also known as the ``Heroes Transitioning from Battlespace to Workplace Act of 2014.'' Katherine Welbeck came to my office from the University of Pennsylvania Law School, from which she will graduate next month and go on to a highly successful career in law and public policy. A graduate of Princeton University and former teacher in the Teach for America Corps, Katherine brought to my office a commitment to educational opportunity for all persons, especially girls and young women, and a passion for justice and fairness. Because of Katherine's initiative and skill, I was able to introduce H.R. 4112, Equal Rights and Access for the Women of South Sudan Act,'' legislation requiring that activities of the United States in South Sudan relating to governance, reconstruction and development, and refugee assistance support human rights and promote the active participation of women in government and civil society. Ayanna Costley is completing her junior year at the Madeira School in McLean, Virginia and judging by the work ethic and appetite for knowledge she displayed, can look forward to a bright future as she begins her college studies next year. Mr. Speaker, the energy, intelligence, and idealism these wonderful young people brought to my office and those interning in the offices of my colleagues help keep our democracy vibrant. The insights, skills, and knowledge of the governmental process they gain from their experiences will last a lifetime and prove invaluable to them as they go about making their mark in this world. Because of persons like them the future of our country is bright and its best days lie ahead. I wish them all well. Mr. Speaker, I am grateful that such thoughtful committed young men and women can be found working in my office, those of my colleagues, and in every community in America. Their good works will keep America great, good, and forever young.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commemorate the 20th anniversary of the terrible tragedies that began on April 7, 1994, and endured for 100 days after, in which Hutu militias ordered the country's Hutu majority to exterminate the Tutsi ethnic group. Neighbors attacked neighbors, teachers killed students, and in mixed- ethnicity marriages, husbands handed over wives to be killed. In total, 800,000 people, mostly ethnic Tutsis and moderate Hutus, died at the hands of Hutu extremists during a 100-day period. 10,00 victims were killed each day--7 per minute on average. To make matters even worse, hundreds of thousands of victims were infected with HIV as Hutu extremists used rape as a tool of violence. The terrible violence only ended when Tutsi rebel forces attacked and retook the country. Even now, the international tribunal created in the wake of these atrocities has delivered only 49 total convictions out of 95 indictments since 1995. We must remember the victims of this horrific event in world history, honor those that survived the tragedy, and vow to never allow something like this to ever happen again. We must look to the progress that Rwanda has made 20 years later. Life expectancy has almost doubled and economic growth continues to flourish and improve every year. We can see hope in Rwanda now where before there was torment. To keep on this path of prosperity, we must dedicate ourselves to peace and work to actively eliminate violent extremism. This event will forever stand as a testament to the horror that can result when human beings give in to the dark side of their nature, and we must learn from this very tragic lesson in history so that it never happens again.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, on April 9 and 10, 2014, I was unavoidably detained attending to representational activities in my congressional district, including attendance at the memorial services for the victims of the tragic shooting at Fort Hood, and thus unable to return in time for rollcall votes 171 through 177. Had I been present I would have voted as follows: 1. On rollcall No. 171 I would have voted ``no'' (April 9) (H. Con. Res. 96, Mulvaney of South Carolina Substitute Amendment No. 1). 2. On rollcall No. 172 I would have voted ``yes'' (April 9) (H. Con. Res. 96, Congressional Black Caucus Budget (Rep. Moore of Wisconsin Substitute Amendment No. 2). 3. On rollcall No. 173 I would have voted ``yes'' (April 9) (H. Con. Res. 96, Progressive Caucus Budget (Grijalva of Arizona Substitute Amendment No. 3). 4. On rollcall No. 174 I would have voted ``no'' (April 9) (H.R. 4414, Expatriate Health Coverage Clarification Act of 2014). 5. On rollcall No. 175 I would have voted ``no'' (April 10) (H. Con. Res. 96, Woodall of Georgia Substitute Amendment No. 4). 6. On rollcall No. 176 I would have voted ``yes'' (April 10) (H. Con. Res. 96, Democratic Alternative Budget (Rep. Van Hollen--Budget)). 7. On rollcall No. 177 I would have voted ``no'' (April 10) (H. Con. Res. 96, Republican Fiscal Year 2015 Budget Resolution (Rep. Ryan-- Budget)).

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, there were a number of votes that I missed because I was unavoidably detained for the memorial services at Fort Hood, Texas, on April 9, 2014, and for honoring President Lyndon Baines Johnson on April 10, 2014. Had I been present, I would have voted as follows: On rollcall vote No. 171, the substitute amendment of Mulvaney, I would have voted ``no.'' On rollcall vote No. 172, which involved the budget resolution on the Congressional Black Caucus budget, I would have voted ``yes.'' On rollcall vote No. 173 on the Progressive Caucus budget, I would have voted ``yes.'' On rollcall vote No. 174 on the Expatriate Health Coverage Clarification Act, I would have voted ``no.'' On rollcall vote No. 175 on the Woodall of Georgia substitute budget amendment, I would have voted ``no.'' On rollcall vote No. 176, the Democratic alternative for Mr. Van Hollen, I would have voted ``yes.'' On rollcall vote No. 177, the Republican fiscal year 2015 budget resolution of Mr. Ryan, I would have voted ``no.'' This concludes the votes that I missed due to the memorial at Fort Hood and the honoring of President Lyndon Baines Johnson.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, over the last week there was an unseemly, sad connection between a Supreme Court decision, the comments of Mr. Bundy, and the comments of the Los Angeles owner in the NBA. Justice Sonia Sotomayer had it right with respect to the affirmative action decision: the Court's decision perpetrated harm to African American, Hispanic, and Native American students, but it also provided a harm to Michigan's public schools when they were trying to ensure the next generation of diverse persons who could in fact be part of a new America. Mr. Bundy's comments about government subsidies and wouldn't we be better off as slaves and picking cotton were outrageous, disgraceful, and disgusting. Sadly, sports groups, the National Basketball Association that brings people together, the owner decided to talk about not putting Black people and others together in a public setting. America must move beyond that, and we as Members of Congress and others must stand against it and denounce it. This was a sad week. I hope we will move beyond it. I hope we will get better, and I hope we will denounce those ugly, racist, outrageous comments.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, on April 9 and 10, 2014, I was unavoidably detained attending to representational activities in my congressional district, including attendance at the memorial services for the victims of the tragic shooting at Fort Hood and thus unable to return in time for rollcall votes 171 through 177. Had I been present I would have voted as follows: 1. On rollcall No. 171 I would have voted ``no'' (April 9)--(H. Con. Res. 96, Rep. Mulvaney of South Carolina Substitute Amendment No. 1). 2. On rollcall No. 172 I would have voted ``yes'' (April 9)--(H. Con. Res. 96, Congressional Black Caucus Budget, Rep. Moore of Wisconsin Substitute Amendment No. 2). 3. On rollcall No. 173 I would have voted ``yes'' (April 9)--(H. Con. Res. 96, Progressive Caucus Budget, Grijalva of Arizona Substitute Amendment No. 3). 4. On rollcall No. 174 I would have voted ``no'' (April 9)--(H.R. 4414, Expatriate Health Coverage Clarification Act of 2014). 5. On rollcall No. 175 I would have voted ``no'' (April 9)--(H. Con. Res. 96, Rep. Woodall of Georgia Substitute Amendment No. 4). 6. On rollcall No. 176 I would have voted ``yes''(April 9)--(H. Con. Res. 96, Democratic Alternative Budget (Rep. Van Hollen--Budget)). 7. On rollcall No. 177 I would have voted ``no'' (April 9)--(H. Con. Res. 96, Republican Fiscal Year 2015 Budget Resolution (Rep. Ryan-- Budget)).

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to the late Rev. Dr. Albert Louis Patterson, Jr., an amazing leader who touched and changed the lives of thousands for the better through his pastorship of the Mount Corinth Missionary Baptist Church in Houston, which he led for 36 years. This beloved man of God was requested to join our Lord on Wednesday, April 9, 2014. The Rev. Dr. Albert Louis Patterson, Jr., or ``Dr. Pat'' as he was affectionately known by many, trained and mentored hundreds of preachers of the gospel. Among his peers, he was regarded as the acknowledged master and `Godfather of Expository Preaching.' One of his proteges, the Rev. Robert Earl Houston, put it best: He wasn't just an expository preacher. He was a preaching lyricist of the highest order. To hear Dr. Patterson was to hear gumbo-listic preaching--he hit you with the text, oratory, poetry, interrogative statements, engagement, tenacity for the truths of the text, humor and truth. You would leave a preaching moment with Dr. Patterson in awe. Mr. Speaker, I would like to share just a few of the highlights of the remarkable career of this extraordinary preacher, pastor, theologian, husband and a father of three children. His traveling companion was his beloved wife, Melba and he had three children--Anthony, Albert III, Alan, and Alette. Rev. Patterson was recognized three times by his peers as a ``Living Legend.'' He taught and preached at the National Baptist Convention, USA, Inc. and lectured for the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association, for the Promise Keepers, and the Preachers Division, National Baptist Congress. Rev. Patterson was named by Ebony Magazine as one of America's greatest black preachers and was inducted into the Morehouse College Hall of Preachers. Rev. Patterson pastored congregations in California and Texas and was the author of three books: ``Joy For the Journey''; ``Wisdom in Strange Places''; and ``Prerequisites for a Good Journey.'' Mr. Speaker, the Rev. Dr. Albert Louis Patterson lectured at the Morehouse College of Religion, the American Baptist College in Nashville, Tennessee and the Mid-American Theological Seminary. He conducted revivals in more than 25 cities and preached more than 100 sermons and lectures in the National Baptist Convention. The Rev. Dr. Albert Louis Patterson lived a consequential life in the service of his community, his family, and our country. He has gone on to receive his great reward, a place in the Lord's loving arms. My thoughts and prayers are with his family and loved ones. I ask that a moment of silence be observed in memory of the Rev. Dr. Albert Louis Patterson, Jr., of Houston, Texas.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong support of the Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC) Budget because it would replace H. Con. Res. 96, the ``Budget Resolution for Fiscal Year 2015,'' with a rational approach for budgetary reform and address the needs of real people. I oppose H. Con. Res. 96, in its current form because it is irresponsible and a reckless approach to fiscal policy that the House majority has championed for years, with disastrous results. The CPC's ``Better Off Budget'' would raise enough new revenue to provide $3.7 trillion for major new investments in education, infrastructure, state and local aid, nutrition, housing and research. It is estimated to create 8.8 million new jobs and to reduce the deficit by $4 trillion. The CPC budget asks the wealthy to contribute their fair share of taxes. Millions of American adults remain under- or unemployed, while millions more youth are desperately seeking their first work experience. We have millions of people living in our Nation, paying taxes and contributing to the success of this nation, but are denied an opportunity to earn citizenship. The CPC's budget reflects the reality of everyday working America-- but it sees working people as worthy of dignity and recognition for what they do every day to keep this nation strong. The CPC's Budget is pro-worker, pro-family, pro-women, pro-education, pro-healthcare, and pro-senior which are the values that are missing in the current language of H. Con. Res. 96. Members of the Progressive Caucus understand that the devastating cuts to federal budgets by House Republicans coupled with Sequestration have significantly hampered our Nation's economic recovery. The country was under the control of Republicans when the economy crashed in 1929 and then they wholeheartedly embraced austerity measures which pushed the nation into the ``Great Depression.'' Eighty years later the House Republicans still have not learned the lessons regarding austerity during dire economic times. The nation continues to struggle after the collapse in 2008 as the results of the Great Recession continue. In 2013, on December 28, three days after Christmas, 1.3 million people nationwide lost their federal unemployment insurance due to House Republicans refusing to extend unemployment benefits. Connecting the dots on the economic damage done to the nation by that decision is easy. Nationally 72,000 unemployment insurance recipients will lose their benefits each week during the first half of 2014. According to the White House Council of Economic Advisers and the Department of Labor-3.6 million additional people will lose their unemployment insurance benefits by the end of 2014 if nothing is done to restore benefits.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. I thank the gentleman from Oregon, and I thank all of the Members for a thoughtful and important debate. Mr. Chairman, that is what this is all about. It is about gripping-- taking hold--of the heart and soul of America. As I said in the Rules Committee, the budget is actually a moral document, a moral compass, of where we want to take this country. I think what needs to be explained to the American public is that, in actuality, we have been making progress. The deficit has gone down from $1 trillion from the past administration, from the Bush administration, to now $680 billion. We are making progress, from losing 800,000 jobs a month to gaining close to 200,000; yet the document that is on the floor today, the Ryan budget--the Republican budget--chooses not to have the morality and the affection for the American people that is desired. When you look at their budget, you will see that $3.3 trillion of their budget--69 percent--is cut from programs for people with low or moderate incomes, from the very people who need a stairstep of opportunity, and they give $200,000 in tax cuts to the top 1 percent. None of us have any challenge to prosperity and opportunity, but how can you have a budget that hits low-income programs or programs that give opportunity? How many have gone to school because of Pell grants? $175 million in cuts. How many people have gotten their health care from Medicaid and still do, like children? How many people have needed to have the SNAP program? I believe that we should have budgets that work for all people. I intend to vote for the CBC budget and for the Democratic budget and ``no'' on this underlying Republican budget. We need to have a standard that respects all people in this country, and this budget does not. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong opposition to H. Con. Res. 96, the House Republicans' ``Budget Resolution for Fiscal Year 2015.'' I oppose this irresponsible budget resolution because it continues the reckless approach to fiscal policy that the House majority has championed for years, with disastrous results. Mr. Chair, the budgeteers on the majority side have a very poor track record when it comes to economic forecasts and projections. For years, they have based their entire legislative agenda and strategy on their belief that the Affordable Care Act or ``Obamacare'' would be a failure. The wish was father to the thought. But they were wrong. Because of Obamacare more than 10 million Americans now know the peace of mind that comes from affordable, quality health insurance that is there when you need it. (7 million through the exchange and 3 million through Medicaid). House Republicans oppose increasing the minimum wage, claiming that it costs jobs. Wrong again. Every increase in the minimum wage has been accompanied by an expanding economy, especially during the Clinton Administration. House Republicans opposing comprehensive immigration reform claim that it will lead to lower incomes and lost jobs. Wrong again. Studies conducted by groups as far apart as the Chamber of Commerce and the AFL-CIO consistently show that comprehensive immigration reform will grow the Gross Domestic Product by $1.5 trillion over 10 years. Given this sorry track record of economic forecasting, I strongly oppose the Republican budget because it favors the wealthy over middle class families and those struggling to enter or remain in the middle class. I oppose this Republican budget because it asks major sacrifices of seniors who can barely make ends meet, and fundamentally alters the social contract by turning Medicaid and SNAP programs into a block grant and Medicare into a voucher. I cannot and will not support a resolution that attempts to balance the budget on the backs of working families, seniors, children, the poor, or mortgages the future by failing to make the investments needed to sustain economic growth and opportunity for all Americans. Mr. Chair, we Democrats have a better way. We understand that we are all in this together and that our current economic situation calls for a balanced approach between increased revenues and responsible reduction in expenditures. Our plan will protect and strengthen our recovering economy, reduce the deficit in a responsible way, while continuing to invest in the things that make our country strong like education, health care, innovation, and clean energy. Mr. Chair, this Republican budget is bad for America but it is disastrous for the people from my home state of Texas who sent me here to advocate for their interests. Let me highlight a few examples. 1. If the Republican budget resolution were to become the basis of federal fiscal policy, 3,435,336 Texas seniors would be forced out of traditional Medicare and into a voucher program. Under the Republican plan to end Medicare as we know it, Texas seniors will receive a voucher instead of guaranteed benefits under traditional Medicare. 2. For the 3,435,336 Texans aged 45-54, the value of their vouchers would be capped at growth levels that are lower than the projected increases in health care costs. Previous analyses showed that this type of plan would cut future spending by $5,900 per senior, forcing them to spend more out of pocket and diminishing their access to quality care. 3. Additionally, private insurance plans will aggressively pursue the healthiest, least expensive enrollees, thereby allowing Medicare-- currently the lifeline for 3,187,332 Texas seniors--to ``wither on the vine.'' 4. If the Republican budget resolution were to be adopted by Congress, 206,304 Texas seniors would pay more for prescription drugs next year. 5. The Republican plan would re-open the ``donut hole,'' forcing seniors to pay the full cost of their prescription drugs if their yearly drug expenses are more than $2,970 for the year. 6. Seniors reaching the prescription drug ``donut hole'' would pay an average of $828 more in prescription drug costs in 2014 and approximately $13,000 more from now through 2022. 7. Under the Republican budget, the 2,445,462 Texas seniors who utilized free preventive services currently covered by Medicare in 2012 will face increased costs in the form of higher deductibles, co- insurance, and copayments for certain services, including even cancer screenings and annual wellness visits. 8. The Republican budget slashes $31.71 billion in nursing home care and other health care services for 754,500 Texas seniors and disabled who currently rely on Medicaid for their long-term care needs. 9. The draconian cuts included in the Republican budget would have a devastating impact on the 1,191 certified nursing homes in Texas that serve 91,717 seniors, with more than half relying on Medicaid as their primary payer. As a result, nursing homes would be forced to slash services, turn away seniors, or close their doors. Mr. Chair, this budget could have invested in programs that help strengthen the middle class, reduce poverty, and strengthen our economic recovery. Instead, the Republican budget makes deep cuts to the area of the budget helping low-income families put food on the table and make ends meet. These are families who are already struggling with unemployment, lower wages, and just simply trying to make ends meet. The House Republican budget will push millions more Americans into poverty and put a large number of low-income children, seniors, and people with disabilities at risk. It guts Medicare and Medicaid and calls for massive cuts to food assistance, all in order to protect tax breaks for special interests and for multimillionaires who are not even asking for them. The Republican budget may be characterized in many ways--cruel, irresponsible, short-sighted, reckless--but ``fair and balanced'' is not one of them. In contrast, the alternative budgets proposed by the Democratic Caucus, Congressional Black Caucus, and Congressional Progressive Caucus, which were made in order by the Rules Committee, are each worthy of support because they fairly balance the need for increased revenues and responsible reductions in expenditures with the imperative of making the necessary investments in human capital required to move our country forward. Specifically, the Alternative Budgets proposed by the Democratic Caucus, CBC, and CPC: help create more jobs now; replace the sequester; make key education investments; invest in research and development and clean energy; invest in long-term infrastructure; preserve Medicare as we know it; protect health reform's benefits for seniors; protect Medicaid for seniors in nursing homes; preserve Supplemental Nutrition Assistance (SNAP); reduce the deficit through a smart, targeted, and steady approach provides tax relief for working families and ends tax breaks for the wealthy; take a balanced approach to reducing the long-term deficits and debt; and put the budget on a sustainable path Mr. Chair, under the Democratic budget, the deficit would fall from 7 percent of GDP in 2014 to 2.3 percent of GDP in 2024. The Democratic Budget Alternative will generate at least a million more jobs this year compared to the Republicans' ``austerity first'' plan by making the investments needed to create jobs, strengthen the middle class, create greater upward mobility, and ensure opportunity for our children and future generations. The Democratic alternative budgets extend Emergency Unemployment Compensation for the long-term unemployed, which provides a lifeline to the 2.37 million jobless workers who have already lost their benefits and the 72,000 persons who stand to lose there benefits each week if Congress does not act. Additionally, the Democratic budget immediately ends the Sequester, which would otherwise cost the economy 750,000 jobs by the end of the year, and replaces it with deficit reduction resulting from a balanced approach combining responsible spending cuts with increased revenues by cutting tax breaks for special interests and wealthy individuals without increasing the tax burden on middle-income Americans. Mr. Chair, the Democratic alternative budget maintains our commitment to Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security; expands the EITC for childless workers; extends the tax credits from the American Taxpayer Relief Act due to expire at the end of 2017, and provides $7.6 billion annually for early childhood education. It is said often, Mr. Chair, but is no less true, that the federal budget is more than a financial document; it is an expression of the nation's most cherished values. As the late and great former senator and Vice-President Hubert Humphrey said: ``The moral test of government is how that government treats those who are in the dawn of life, the children; those who are in the twilight of life, the elderly; and those who are in shadows of life, the sick, the needy, and the handicapped.'' For that reason that in evaluating the merits of a budget resolution, it is not enough to subject it only to the test of fiscal responsibility. To keep faith with the nation's past, to be fair to the nation's present, and to safeguard the nation's future, the budget must also pass a ``moral test.'' The Republican budget resolution fails both of these standards. The Democratic alternatives do not. For these compelling reasons, I stand in strong opposition to H. Con. Res. 96 and urge my colleagues to join me in voting against this ill-conceived and unwise measure.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I have always viewed the budget document that is produced by this House and the Senate and the President as a moral compass of America's commitment to her people. That is why I rise with such great disappointment on the Republican Ryan budget in that today, as we speak in the Rules Committee, we are gutting investments in education, scientific research, advanced manufacturing. We are cutting from those vital transportation investments by over $52 billion when we have crumbling highways and crumbling dams and crumbling infrastructure. We are slashing $145 billion from the very heart of our children's opportunity for education out of the Pell grants, providing millionaires with over $200,000 in a tax break, ending Medicare as we know it by vouchering it--almost like the privatization of Social Security--and cutting Medicaid by $732 billion, then ending the opportunity for Americans to have access to affordable health care, preventative health care, so as to be able to allow those who need health care to have it--to avoid being a third world country. There are 25 million Americans who need access to health care. Let's get a better moral document and reject this present Republican budget.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise to extend my sympathies to the families and loved ones of the 239 passengers and crew members of Malaysia Airlines Flight 370, which departed Kuala Lumpur enroute to Beijing on March 8, 2014, but disappeared somewhere over the Indian Ocean and has yet to be found. In an age where powerful technology is capable of interconnecting the expanses of our world and able to provide real-time information globally, the haunting question must be asked: How can a sophisticated commercial airliner carrying 12 highly trained crew members and 227 passengers disappear without a trace? Mr. Speaker, we owe it to families of those who appear to have perished on Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 to find answers and to take all necessary measures and make all necessary improvements to ensure that a tragedy like this never happens again. Modern aircraft are technological marvels, capable of unrivaled aeronautical feats. The advances in aircraft technology have helped make possible many of the smart devices we use daily. But a disaster involving the disappearance of Malaysia Flight 370 has revealed glaring weaknesses in aviation technology areas of flight safety, information monitoring, and recovery. The modern commercial airliner is among the safest machines ever built. Fail-safes, system redundancies, automated controls, and sophisticated radar systems ensure that almost any crisis can be prevented if the best practices of flight are observed. However, if the technology was perfected, disasters like that of Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 could be eliminated. In the case of Malaysia Airlines Flight 370, the transponders-- devices important to tracking the aircraft via radar--were disabled, effectively eliminating most modern methods for tracking the aircraft. Whether the tracking technology was powered down or disabled as a result of a catastrophic failure is irrelevant to the question of safety. The fact that tracking technology important to the recovery of an aircraft can be manually disabled in the air is a technological flaw that must be corrected. Design processes that do not adequately exploit engineering technology or that prevent life-saving recovery efforts and lower safety standards need to be fixed immediately. In addition to critical safety measures, advanced methods of aircraft systems information monitoring need to be employed. Radar and tracking systems are as important to aircraft in the air as they are to monitoring systems on the ground. During the search for Malaysia Airlines Flight 370, experts were required to rely on unreliable ``pings'' from satellites that were only able to provide poor insight as to the location of the aircraft. Mr. Speaker, monitoring information regarding the status of aircraft systems is vital in understanding whether operator error or system failure is responsible for aircraft disasters. Unfortunately, the majority of this monitoring information is stored internal to the aircraft, in flight data recorders. In the case of a disappearance like that of Malaysia Airlines Flight 370, system status information is essentially lost with the loss of the aircraft, or depends entirely on the recoverability of the aircraft. Advanced technology can be employed to send real-time information on airborne aircraft to monitoring stations on the ground. If ground operators were able to monitor the system information normally contained in the flight data recorder, recovery operations would be streamlined and yield much more information, greatly improving future tracking and recovery efforts. The importance of aircraft recovery is impossible to overstate. Beyond the technological aspect is the human factor. Hundreds of concerned and anxious persons were left in the dark concerning the fate of their friends, family, and loved ones aboard Malaysia Airlines Flight 370, with little hope offered under the current safety, monitoring, and recovery standards. Additionally, the majority of flight status information, telling to an aircraft's fate, is directly linked to the ability to recover an aircraft. Recovery hinges on a tight timeline--the longer it takes to establish information concerning the route and aircraft system configuration, the longer it will take to recover the aircraft. The family and loved ones of airline passengers are entitled to receive frequent and reliable status updates just as soon as the information is available. The availability of that information today is unduly dependent on technology that is in turn dependent upon the recovery of the aircraft but at the same time makes recovery efforts more difficult. Mr. Speaker, as a senior member of the House Homeland Security Committee, and a former Chair of its Transportation Security Subcommittee, I will continue to work with my colleagues, the Administration, and responsible officials in the aviation industry to ensure that technological weaknesses are corrected and to do all I can to ensure a terrible tragedy like that of Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 never happens again. We owe the families and loved ones of the missing passengers and crew members at least that much.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Let me thank the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Crime, the chairman and ranking member of the full committee, and Mrs. Maloney for their leadership. I was on the Crime Subcommittee as this bill was introduced. I was eager to see it work its will in that early timeframe in the backdrop of the courage of Debbie Smith. I also recognize Natasha Alexenko, who I understand is a constituent of Mr. Scott. Those were the early days in 2001 when we were finding out all over the Nation that rape kits were actually lost. My city was no different. This is an important reauthorization because of the grant programs that are provided. In particular, the Debbie Smith Reauthorization Act authorizes $151 million in grants for State and local DNA labs to address DNA backlogs. As I indicated, in my own hometown, we were faced with backlogs and lost kits as well. The DNA training and technical assistance is extremely important, helping law enforcement, courts, and forensic scientists. For DNA training and technical assistance, $30 million is directed to Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner programs. There is nothing more lonely than to be raped and then, on top of it, not see your case pursued. I want to thank the Houston Area Women's Center, which involves itself in sexual violence against women, as well as Kathryn Griffin, who has worked with prostitutes and others who have actually been raped. In Houston, decades-old rape kits that sat untested have identified at least one-third of potential offenders in cases where there was sufficient DNA, according to the Houston Police Department. And I congratulate the city of Houston. Combined with dollars from the Debbie Smith Reauthorization and the city's own investment, we now have a new DNA lab that is open and ready for business to ensure that the victims of crime and sexual assault are not left along the highway of despair. In my district alone, 6,600 rape kits have been cleared as of August 2013. That is an important step forward. I also look forward to continuing to work on issues dealing with DNA of those who involve themselves in human trafficking in a national database. I also want to give another reason why this is extremely important. As I left Houston, in my own congressional district, we found that, unfortunately, the State of Texas decided to put 23 violent sexual offenders in a neighborhood in what is called a halfway house. Those individuals are at the back side of their incarceration. Mr. Speaker, I would say that it is a dangerous set of circumstances when these individuals will be among children and women and be without the necessary security in a neighborhood. And so this DNA for rape kits is one aspect of the need that is being addressed in helping women, again, not feel lonely and left without refuge and the ability to access justice. I support H.R. 4323. I ask my colleagues to support it, and remember there is a larger and broader picture we must look at in order to address the violence against women. Mr. Speaker, as a senior member of both the Judiciary Committee and a co-sponsor, I rise in strong support of H.R. 4323, the ``Debbie Smith Reauthorization Act of 2014,'' which reauthorizes three grant programs to address DNA backlogs and provide DNA training and technical assistance on local, state, and federal levels. It is essential that these programs be reauthorized so that the backlog of unprocessed rape kits can be reduced and then eliminated and perpetrators of sexual assault crimes can be prosecuted and convicted. There is an ever-present need to continue robust funding for programs such as the Debbie Smith DNA Backlog Grant Program in order to make sure victims do not fall through the cracks of the system. Women who have been raped have a right to expect police to thoroughly investigate the case and prosecute the offenders; however, many rape kits across the country are never even tested, and the perpetrators never face justice. Mr. Speaker, the number of backlogged DNA samples was in excess of 100,000 nationwide as recently as January 2010. H.R. 4323 reauthorizes for four years (until the end of fiscal year 2019) the following programs: 1. ``Debbie Smith Reauthorization'' ($151 million/fiscal year): grants for state and local DNA crime laboratories to address DNA backlogs and enhance their capacity. 2. DNA training and technical assistance ($12.5 million/fiscal year): directed to law enforcement, courts, forensic scientists, and corrections. 3. DNA training and technical assistance ($30 million/fiscal year): directed to sexual assault nurse examiner (``SANE'') programs. In my congressional district, these grant programs have resulted in forensic laboratories being hired to clear much of the Houston Police Department's backlog of untested DNA benefit from this type of legislation. Just within the past year, decades-old rape kits that sat untested in Houston have identified at least one-third of potential offenders in cases where there was sufficient DNA, according to the Houston Police Department. In my district more than 6,600 rape kits have been cleared as of August 2013 because of the funding made possible by the grant programs that H.R. 4323 will reauthorize. This record of success highlights the importance and continuing need to provide adequate funding so law enforcement agencies can conduct necessary DNA testing and training. Mr. Speaker, the DNA Initiative is an invaluable tool for law enforcement today, and it will continue to be a legislative priority of mine. That is why I am pleased to co-sponsor H.R. 4323 and urge my colleagues to join me in voting to approve this critically important legislation.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. I thank the gentleman for his astute comments and build on the comments made by the ranking member. Let me put into the record that the Congressional Research Service, in FY2010, the Federal Government awarded contracts valued at $12.7 billion to HUBZone certified businesses, with about $3.6 billion of that amount awarded through the HUBZone program. That is an investment in small business. That is the creation of jobs. Mr. Chairman, the gist of my amendment is jobs and what will be the impact of this type of budget structuring on the HUBZones. Why wouldn't we want that information? Let me quote former Budget chairman Jim Nussle, a Republican witness who testified: It may not be that the budget process is broken. It may not be, in other words, that tools are broken, but it may be the fact that the tools are not even being used. If you are going to add more responsibilities to the CBO, give them additional tools to assess who the job-creating small businesses are going to be impacted by this bill. Dr. Philip Joyce, former CBO staff member, said: My main message is that most of the tools that you need to solve the budget problems faced by the country are already in your toolbox. Therefore, I am saying if we are putting another tool in the toolbox, if this bill passes, then give them the ability to make sure that we are not killing small businesses that are impacted by the HUBZone funding and assistance. We already see that small businesses create jobs. I would make the argument to my colleagues, and I thank Dr. Price for his earlier kind words about the gist of this legislation, and I would ask for his reconsideration. This is a good amendment, and I ask my colleagues to support it. I ask my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the Jackson Lee amendment. I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Van Hollen), the ranking member of the full Budget Committee and thank him again for his leadership.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, how much time is remaining?

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, I rise with the spirit of cooperation and recognition that there are definitive distinctions and differences of opinion on the underlying legislation. I am trying to make this bill better. My amendment requires the Congressional Budget Office to include as part of their macroeconomic analysis, if this bill passes, estimates of the potential impact, if any, on HUBZone areas as defined by the Small Business Act. My amendment only seeks to look at the effects, should this measure pass, on HUBZones as defined in the Small Business Act. In all actuality, Mr. Chairman, this bill could be entitled the ``Revenge of Dynamic Scoring Act.'' If that is the essence of the bill, we need to find the impact of it. Dynamic scoring is an attempt measure that macroeconomic effects of policy changes before they happen. We want to know in the defined areas that deal with underserved areas all around America, in everyone's State, whether or not there is an impact on these important areas. I believe that dynamic scoring has an impact on the outreach and the funding that we have to support the concept of a HUBZone, and therefore, my amendment is clear in its effort to make sure that those particular areas are in fact impacted. The Small Business Administration administers several programs that support small businesses, including the Historically Underutilized Business Zone Empowerment Contracting, better known as the HUBZone. I recall that the Bush administration tried to use dynamic scoring to estimate the cost their tax cuts--asserting that tax cuts would increase revenue in sort of a trickle-down budgeting, but the question is, these smaller businesses that are attempting to thrive and impacted by Small Business Administration programs, how would this type of structure impact them. The HUBZone program is a small business Federal contracting assistance program whose primary objective is job creation and increasing capital investment in distressed communities. That is an important responsibility, and it is an important goal for this Nation because we know that small businesses can help generate any number of jobs; and the assistance, I know, personally, to small business has been effective and productive. With that, I ask my colleagues to support my amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. Chair, I appreciate the opportunity to explain my amendment to H.R. 1874, The Pro-Growth Budget Act of 2013. My amendment requires the Congressional Budget Office to include as part of their macroeconomic analysis, estimates of the potential impact, if any, on HUBZone areas as defined by the Small Business Act. My amendment only seeks to look at the effect, should this measure pass, on HUB Zones, as defined in the Small Business Act. In all actuality, Mr. Chair, this bill could very well be entitled the, Revenge of Dynamic Scoring Champions Act, because that's in essence what's going on here. Dynamic scoring is an attempt to measure the macroeconomic effects of policy changes before they happen, and continues to pop up everywhere; in fact, even in negotiations of the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction, also known as the Super Committee. Dynamic scoring finds its roots in the anti-tax movement. Dynamic scoring is problematic for the agencies that score and estimate the cost of legislation, and has been soundly rejected. It is clear from the bill's language and approach that it is designed to make it easier to enact deficit-increasing tax cuts. The bill requires CBO to produce supplementary estimates of the economic impact of major bills using dynamic scoring, an approach that involves more uncertainty and subjectivity than current scoring rules. None other than Former Republican Budget Committee Chairman Jim Nussle opposed moving to dynamic scoring, noting that CBO ``generally have done a better job than some of the dynamic score-keeping. That has been part of the challenge of moving to something called dynamic scoring is that we have not found anything that was any more accurate than the current way.'' Believers in dynamic scoring argue that tax cuts pay for themselves, generally by spurring so much economic growth, to the extent that revenues will actually increase. If I didn't know any better Mr. Chair, I'd think they were talking to us about trickle-down economics. Mr. Chair, where have we heard that before? I recall that the Bush administration attempted to impose the use of dynamic scoring to estimate the cost of its tax cuts, asserting that tax cuts would increase revenue enough to pay for themselves, sort of a trickle-down form of budgeting. Unfortunately Mr. Chair, the Bush tax cuts did no such thing, but instead caused our national debt to explode. My amendment only seeks to look at the effect, should this measure pass, on HUBZones, as defined in the Small Business Act. The Small Business Administration (SBA) administers several programs to support small businesses, including the Historically Underutilized Business Zone Empowerment Contracting, better known as the HUBZone program. The HUBZone program is a small business federal contracting assistance program ``whose primary objective is job creation and increasing capital investment in distressed communities.'' It provides participating small businesses located in areas with low income, high poverty rates, or high unemployment rates with contracting opportunities in the form of ``set-asides,'' sole-source awards, and price-evaluation preferences. According to the Congressional Research Service, in FY2010, the Federal Government awarded contracts valued at $12.7 billion to HUBZone certified businesses, with about $3.6 billion of that amount awarded through the HUBZone program. Mr. Chair, that's the gist of my amendment--job creation--because that's what we should be talking about in this Committee today. The Budget Committee has held hearings on the general topic of budget process reform and the recommendations crossed party lines. Former Budget Committee Chairman Jim Nussle, a Republican witness, testified that, ``It may not be that the budget process is broken. It may not be, in other words, that tools are broken, but it may be the fact that the tools are not even being used.'' Similarly, Dr. Philip Joyce, former Congressional Budget Office (CBO) staff member and a Democratic witness, testified that, ``My main message is that most of the tools that you need to solve the budget problems faced by the country are already in your toolbox. If the goal is to deal with the larger fiscal imbalance that faces us, the most important thing to do is to make use of them, not search for more tools.'' Mr. Chair, dynamic scoring is the wrong tool at the wrong time-- though--in the interest of fairness to the small businesses in distressed communities around this country, I ask my colleagues to support my amendment, even though I have serious reservations about dynamic scoring.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. In the context of this particular legislation, a budget bill led by Mr. Ryan has now given a $200,000 tax cut already to those who hold most of the wealth, but yet cutting Medicaid and cutting food stamps to give an opportunity for soldiers' families to be able to eat. I am against this bill because I think CBO has an effective structure to give us the information we need, and cutting taxes is not going to move America forward to be the greatest Nation in the world with research, with infrastructure rebuild, education, and good health care. I ask my colleagues to oppose this bill. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to explain my amendment to H.R. 1874, The Pro-Growth Budget Act of 2013. My amendment requires the Congressional Budget Office to include as part of their macroeconomic analysis, estimates of the potential impact, if any, on HUBZone areas as defined by the Small Business Act. My amendment only seeks to look at the effect, should this measure pass, on HUBZones, as defined in the Small Business Act. In all actuality, Mr. Chairman, this bill could very well be entitled the Revenge of Dynamic Scoring Champions Act, because that's in essence what's going on here. Dynamic scoring is an attempt to measure the macroeconomic effects of policy changes before they happen, and continues to pop up everywhere; in fact, even in negotiations of the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction, also known as the Super Committee. Dynamic scoring finds its roots in the anti-tax movement. Dynamic scoring is problematic for the agencies that score and estimate the cost of legislation, and has been soundly rejected. It is clear from the bill's language and approach that it is designed to make it easier to enact deficit-increasing tax cuts. The bill requires CBO to produce supplementary estimates of the economic impact of major bills using dynamic scoring, an approach that involves more uncertainty and subjectivity than current scoring rules. None other than Former Republican Budget Committee Chairman Jim Nussle opposed moving to dynamic scoring, noting that CBO ``generally have done a better job than some of the dynamic score-keeping. That has been part of the challenge of moving to something called dynamic scoring is that we have not found anything that was any more accurate than the current way.'' Believers in dynamic scoring argue that tax cuts pay for themselves, generally by spurring so much economic growth, to the extent that revenues will actually increase. If I didn't know any better, Mr. Chairman, I'd think they were talking to us about trickle-down economics. Mr. Chairman, where have we heard that before? I recall that the Bush administration attempted to impose the use of dynamic scoring to estimate the cost of its tax cuts, asserting that tax cuts would increase revenue enough to pay for themselves, sort of a trickle-down form of budgeting. Unfortunately Mr. Chairman, the Bush tax cuts did no such thing, but instead caused our national debt to explode. My amendment only seeks to look at the effect, should this measure pass, on HUBZones, as defined in the Small Business Act. The Small Business Administration (SBA) administers several programs to support small businesses, including the Historically Underutilized Business Zone Empowerment Contracting, better known as the HUBZone program. The HUBZone program is a small business federal contracting assistance program ``whose primary objective is job creation and increasing capital investment in distressed communities.'' It provides participating small businesses located in areas with low income, high poverty rates, or high unemployment rates with contracting opportunities in the form of ``set-asides,'' sole-source awards, and price-evaluation preferences. According to the Congressional Research Service, in FY2010, the federal government awarded contracts valued at $12.7 billion to HUBZone certified businesses, with about $3.6 billion of that amount awarded through the HUBZone program. Mr. Chairman, that's the gist of my amendment--job creation--because that's what we should be talking about in this Committee today. The Budget Committee has held hearings on the general topic of budget process reform and the recommendations crossed party lines. Former Budget Committee Chairman Jim Nussle, a Republican witness, testified that, ``It may not be that the budget process is broken. It may not be, in other words, that tools are broken, but it may be the fact that the tools are not even being used.'' Similarly, Dr. Philip Joyce, former Congressional Budget Office (CBO) staff member and a Democratic witness, testified that ``My main message is that most of the tools that you need to solve the budget problems faced by the country are already in your toolbox. If the goal is to deal with the larger fiscal imbalance that faces us, the most important thing to do is to make use of them, not search for more tools.'' Mr. Chairman, dynamic scoring is the wrong tool at the wrong time-- though--in the interest of fairness to the small businesses in distressed communities around this country, I ask my colleagues to support my amendment, even though I have serious reservations about dynamic scoring.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Let me thank the distinguished ranking member and the manager of this bill. I want to associate myself with Mr. Van Hollen's analysis and add some other thoughts. We are on the floor today, April 4, and might I make mention of two points that are not particularly related, but I do want to, again, acknowledge the men and women at Fort Hood, Texas. I was there in 2009 to mourn with those families. Today, I mourn as well with those families whose loved ones have lost their lives and those who suffer. It is important for us as a Nation to be responsive to their needs. I know that we will do so in a bipartisan manner. I also want to make mention that today is the date of the assassination of one of the greatest peacemakers in the world, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Besides his concern for those who did not have equal rights, he was also an economist, to the extent that his advocacy was to extinguish poverty. The last days of his life were spent planning the Poor People's March in 1968 to raise incomes and the quality of life of men and women across America. So I raise the question of where we are in 2014. This is not a conversation that we easily engage with our friends on the other side of the aisle. As you are passing the budget resolution, the process that you are in, to my knowledge, there was no effort to include an increase to the minimum wage. There was no effort to ensure that 164,000 persons in the State of Texas would get an unemployment insurance extension, thereby ceasing them from losing their homes or being evicted from their rental properties or literally not being able to support their families. Now, we have on the floor of the House legislation that simply exacerbates the circumstance of those who are aspiring to be in the middle class. It is a push toward dynamic scoring. Dynamic scoring is an attempt to measure the microeconomic effects of policy changes before they happen and continue to pop up everywhere. In fact, it was even in negotiations of the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction, also known as the supercommittee, which, by the way, with no condemnation, did not work. It could not get a common ground. You would wonder why Republicans are pushing this dynamic scoring bill. It is because they claim the traditional cost estimates prepared by the CBO are not enough, when we have used the Congressional Budget Office for decades, and it has been an effective tool to balance between revenue and tax. So you wonder why the dynamic scoring comes in because it breaks the backs of poor people and the middle class. We believe that it is simply an attempt to force Congress and the CBO to accept this concept of dynamic scoring and promote the efforts of the Republicans to, again, give more tax cuts. We know that tax cuts did not work. In the good intentions of the Bush administration, those tax cuts put us in the predicament we are in, after leaving the Clinton administration with a billion-dollar surplus and the ability to invest in infrastructure. I remember the smiles on those citizens during that timeframe that the economy was turning.