Marcy Kaptur

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Connecticut for coming down this evening. As we complete our work here this evening, I wanted to reissue our invitation to Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross to travel to Ohio to come to U.S. Steel in Lorain to really see what is happening there to the workers; and not just Lorain--we are not selfish--but all over this country where steel companies are being harmed because of imports and the fact that China, Korea, and Russia are dumping on the international market. We need to have an embargo. We need to let our industry survive and get over this hump of overcapacity. We are going to need that production in the years ahead, for example, in the natural gas industry for piping and so forth. These are modern plants. America should not lose them. We have lost so many steel plants. We can't afford to lose many more for the sake of the Nation's defense. I also wanted to invite the President to Ohio. I hope that somebody is listening. He campaigned a great deal in Ohio. I know he likes meeting people, and it certainly would be a good way to see the immediate challenge on the trade front where real lives and livelihoods are at stake in this country. I also just wanted to end by saying this: When you create a system of trade where people are exploited in our country, or in other countries, that really isn't the best face that America can put forward. And unfortunately, what happens too often in our country now, for example, in trade with Mexico, when you have undocumented workers who come here, many in desperation, many of them are being trafficked across the continent. You say: Oh, Congresswoman, what do you mean trafficked? I mean, some of them come here because they are desperate, and they end up paying sometimes as much as $8,000 to come here and work at a very low-wage job. They never get out of debt. We have to take that system and move it into the sunlight out of the doldrums, because we can't treat people like chattel. There are millions of agricultural workers, for example, who come to this country with no contract. They are completely indentured to whatever coyote brings them across the border. That is not the system I want for this country. That is not fair to those families. It is not fair to their children. It is not fair to the places to which they come in our country. They always feel uncomfortable. What kind of a system, what kind of a trade system would subject them to that? We are a different kind of country. We aspire to higher values. We aspire to treating people and elevating their worth, not diminishing their worth as human beings. We have a lot to fix in these trade agreements, and I hope that President Trump will join us. I would like to tell him about what coyotes do. I would like to tell him how they behave, how some of them have been involved in murder of individuals from my district who fight for labor rights so that no one is afraid, that people feel that they have a legal system that will defend them. We need to get to that world. Our Constitution intends it for all of the people of our country. We should behave no differently internationally. So in closing tonight, I agree with the President. We need good jobs. We need real jobs. They have to come back to this country, and we have to treat people in other countries with worth, with their worth as human beings. We need to get back to trade balances, not trade deficits. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I wanted to mention that hundreds and hundreds of steel workers in my district are getting laid off right now, as the gentlewoman from Connecticut speaks. We are facing complete closure of two plants. One has already been idled, Republic Steel; and the other, the U.S. Steel plant in Lorain, Ohio, will be by early June. If the President really wanted to do something to make a statement, what he would do is put an embargo on the products that are being dumped by China and Korea on our market that are forcing this to happen at our steel companies. There is a glut in the steel market globally. We have about 800 million metric tons of steel that are out there. What China has been doing is building a steel company in every province to put people to work. Then, what do they do with the steel? They have been storing it because there is so much that the global market can't absorb 800 million more metric tons. So companies like those I represent get hurt because they are trying to play by the rules; but the rules aren't being enforced properly, so they end up with the short end of the deal that is absolutely backwards. So what the gentlewoman says about steel is right on. I yield to the gentlewoman from Connecticut.

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, what the gentlewoman from Connecticut is saying is very important because certain States hung in the balance in this past election. Ohio was one of them. Michigan, Pennsylvania, obviously Indiana next door was constant. If you look at each one of those States, those were the ones that actually carried for President Trump in the end because of the jobs and trade issue. I yield to the gentlewoman from Connecticut.

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, does the gentlewoman from Connecticut remember when Gary Hufbauer said we would have trade surpluses? In other words, this is upside down. It should actually be like this. We would have surpluses then. Well, it is exactly the opposite he testified back then. I will never forget that. The Peterson Institute said we would have jobs, we would have rising incomes, we would have more benefits for workers. Wrong, wrong, wrong. I yield to the gentlewoman from Connecticut.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, today The Washington Post reported that the United Arab Emirates arranged a secret meeting in January between Blackwater founder and major Trump contributor Erik Prince and a Russian close to President Vladimir Putin. The meeting was an apparent effort to establish a back-channel line of communication between Moscow and President-elect Donald Trump, according to U.S., European, and Arab officials. Erik Prince, by the way, is the brother to Betsy DeVos, the Secretary of Education. The UAE's incentive to broker this meeting comes from the deteriorating relationship between them and Iran. They wanted to drive a wedge between Russia, Iran, and Syria. Agreement on that deal would need a handsome reward, like the easing of U.S. sanctions on the Russian Federation for its invasion of Ukraine. Blackwater is the private security firm that became infamous for U.S. abuses in Iraq after a series of incidents, including one in 2007 in which the company's guards were charged and criminally convicted of killing civilians. ``Officials said Zayed and his brother, the UAE's national security adviser, coordinated the Seychelles meeting with Russian Government officials with the goal of establishing an unofficial back channel between Trump and Putin.'' The UAE at one point paid Erik Prince's firm a reported half a billion dollars to consult on defensive security. An independent bipartisan commission to investigate Trump officials and Russian connections is long overdue. [From the Washington Post, Apr. 3, 2017] Blackwater Founder Held Secret Seychelles Meeting to Establish Trump- Putin Back Channel (By Adam Entous, Greg Miller, Kevin Sieff and Karen DeYoung) The United Arab Emirates arranged a secret meeting in January between Blackwater founder Erik Prince and a Russian close to President Vladimir Putin as part of an apparent effort to establish a back-channel line of communication between Moscow and President-elect Donald Trump, according to U.S., European and Arab officials. The meeting took place around Jan. 11--nine days before Trump's inauguration--in the Seychelles islands in the Indian Ocean, officials said. Though the full agenda remains unclear, the UAE agreed to broker the meeting in part to explore whether Russia could be persuaded to curtail its relationship with Iran, including in Syria, a Trump administration objective that would likely require major concessions to Moscow on U.S. sanctions. Though Prince had no formal role with the Trump campaign or transition team, he presented himself as an unofficial envoy for Trump to high-ranking Emiratis involved in setting up his meeting with the Putin confidant, according to the officials, who did not identify the Russian. Prince was an avid supporter of Trump who gave $250,000 last year to support the GOP nominee's campaign, records show. He has ties to people in Trump's circle, including Stephen K. Bannon, now serving as the president's chief strategist and senior counselor. Prince's sister Betsy DeVos serves as education secretary in the Trump administration. And Prince was seen in the Trump transition offices in New York in December. U.S. officials said the FBI has been scrutinizing the Seychelles meeting as part of a broader probe of Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election and alleged contacts between associates of Putin and Trump. The FBI declined to comment. The Seychelles encounter, which one official said spanned two days, adds to an expanding web of connections between Russia and Americans with ties to Trump--contacts that the White House has been reluctant to acknowledge or explain until they have been exposed by news organizations. ``We are not aware of any meetings and Erik Prince had no role in the transition,'' said Sean Spicer, the White House press secretary. ``Erik had no role on the transition team. This is a complete fabrication,'' said a spokesman for Prince in a statement. ``The meeting had nothing to do with President Trump. Why is the so-called underresourced intelligence community messing around with surveillance of American citizens when they should be hunting terrorists?'' Prince is best known as the founder of Blackwater, a security firm that became a symbol of U.S. abuses in Iraq after a series of incidents including one in 2007 in which the company's guards were accused--and later criminally convicted--of killing civilians in a crowded Iraqi square. Prince sold the firm, which was subsequently rebranded, but has continued building a private paramilitary empire with contracts across the Middle East and Asia. Prince would probably have been seen as too controversial to serve in any official capacity in the Trump transition or administration. But his ties to Trump advisers, experience with clandestine work and relationship with the royal leaders of the Emirates--where he moved in 2010 amid mounting legal problems for his American business--would have positioned him as an ideal go-between. The Seychelles meeting came after private discussions in New York involving high-ranking representatives of Trump, Moscow and the Emirates. The White House has acknowledged that Michael T. Flynn, Trump's original national security adviser, and Trump adviser and son-in-law Jared Kushner met with the Russian ambassador to the United States, Sergey Kislyak, in late November or early December in New York. Flynn and Kushner were joined by Bannon for a separate meeting with the crown prince of Abu Dhabi, Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed al-Nahyan, who made an undisclosed visit to New York later in December, according to the U.S., European and Arab officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive matters. In an unusual breach of protocol, the UAE did not notify the Obama administration in advance of the visit, though officials found out because Zayed's name appeared on a flight manifest. Officials said Zayed and his brother, the UAE's national security adviser, coordinated the Seychelles meeting with Russian government officials with the goal of establishing an unofficial back channel between Trump and Putin. Officials said Zayed wanted to be helpful to both leaders who had talked about working more closely together, a policy objective long advocated by the crown prince. The UAE, which sees Iran as one of its main enemies, also shared the Trump team's interest in finding ways to drive a wedge between Moscow and Tehran. Zayed met twice with Putin in 2016, according to Western officials, and urged the Russian leader to work more closely with the Emirates and Saudi Arabia--an effort to isolate Iran. At the time of the Seychelles meeting and for weeks afterward, the UAE believed that Prince had the blessing of the new administration to act as its unofficial representative. The Russian participant was a person whom Zayed knew was close to Putin from his interactions with both men, the officials said. When the Seychelles meeting took place, official contacts between members of the incoming Trump administration and the Russian government were under intense scrutiny, both from federal investigators and the press. Less than a week before the Seychelles meeting, U.S. intelligence agencies released a report accusing Russia of intervening clandestinely during the 2016 election to help Trump win the White House. The FBI was already investigating communications between Flynn and Kislyak. The Washington Post's David Ignatius first disclosed those communications on Jan. 12, around the time of the Seychelles meeting. Flynn was subsequently fired by Trump for misleading Vice President Pence and others about his discussions with Kislyak. Yousef Al Otaiba, the UAE's ambassador in Washington, declined to comment. Government officials in the Seychelles said they were not aware of any meetings between Trump and Putin associates in the country around Jan. 11. But they said luxury resorts on the island are ideal for clandestine gatherings like the one described by the U.S., European and Arab officials. ``I wouldn't be surprised at all,'' said Barry Faure, the Seychelles secretary of state for foreign affairs. ``The Seychelles is the kind of place where you can have a good time away from the eyes of the media. That's even printed in our tourism marketing. But I guess this time you smelled something.'' Trump has dismissed the investigations of Russia's role in the election as ``fake news'' and a ``witch hunt.'' The level of discretion surrounding the Seychelles meeting seems extraordinary given the frequency with which senior Trump advisers, including Flynn and Kushner, had interacted with Russian officials in the United States, including at the high-profile Trump Tower in New York. Steven Simon, a National Security Council senior director for the Middle East and North Africa in the Obama White House, said: ``The idea of using business cutouts, or individuals perceived to be close political leaders, as a tool of diplomacy is as old as the hills. These unofficial channels are desirable precisely because they are deniable; ideas can be tested without the risk of failure.'' Current and former U.S. officials said that while Prince refrained from playing a direct role in the Trump transition, his name surfaced so frequently in internal discussions that he seemed to function as an outside adviser whose opinoins were valued on a range of issues, including plans for overhauling the U.S. intelligence community. He appears to have particularly close ties to Bannon, appearing multiple times as a guest on Bannon's satellite radio program over the past year as well as in articles on the Breitbart Web site that Bannon ran before joining the Trump campaign. In a July interview with Bannon, Prince said those seeking forceful U.S. leadership should ``wait till January and hope Mr. Trump is elected.'' And he lashed out at President Barack Obama, saying that because of his policies ``the terrorists, the fascists, are winning.'' Days before the November election, Prince appeared on Bannon's program again, saying that he had ``well-placed sources'' in the New York City Police Department telling him they were preparing to make arrests in the investigation of former congressman Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.) over allegations he exchanged sexually explicit texts with a minor. Flynn tweeted a link to the Breitbart report on the claim. No arrests occurred. Prince went on to make a series of unfounded assertions that damaging material recovered from Weiner's computers would implicate Hillary Clinton and her close adviser, Huma Abedin, who was married to Weiner. He also called Abedin an ``agent of influence very sympathetic to the Muslim Brotherhood.'' Prince and his family were major GOP donors in 2016. After the Republican convention, he contributed $250,000 to Trump's campaign, the national party and a pro-Trump super PAC led by GOP mega-donor Rebekah Mercer. The Center for Responsive Politics reported that the family gave more than $2.7 million to GOP candidates and super PACs, including about $2.7 million from his sister, DeVos, and her husband. Prince's father, Edgar Prince, built his fortune through an auto-parts company. Betsy married Richard DeVos Jr., heir to the Amway fortune. Erik Prince has had lucrative contracts with the UAE government, which at one point paid his firm a reported $529 million to help bring in foreign fighters to help assemble an internal paramilitary force capable of carrying out secret operations and protecting Emirati installations from terrorist attacks. The Trump administration and the UAE appear to share a similar preoccupation with Iran. Current and former officials said that Trump advisers were focused throughout the transition period on exploring ways to get Moscow to break ranks with Tehran. ``Separating Russia from Iran was a common theme,'' said a former intelligence official in the Obama administration who met with Trump transition officials. ``It didn't seem very well thought out. It seemed a little premature. They clearly had a very specific policy position, which I found odd given that they hadn't even taken the reins and explored with experts in the U.S. government the pros and cons of that approach.'' Michael McFaul, former U.S. ambassador to Russia, said he also had discussions with people close to the Trump administration about the prospects of drawing Russia away from Iran. ``When I would hear this, I would think, `Yeah that's great for you guys, but why would Putin ever do that?' '' McFaul said. ``There is no interest in Russia ever doing that. They have a long relationship with Iran. They're allied with Iran in fighting in Syria. They sell weapons to Iran. Iran is an important strategic partner for Russia in the Middle East.'' Following the New York meeting between the Emiratis and Trump aides, Zayed was approached by Prince, who said he was authorized to act as an unofficial surrogate for the president-elect, according to the officials. He wanted Zayed to set up a meeting with a Putin associate. Zayed agreed and proposed the Seychelles as the meeting place because of the privacy it would afford both sides. ``He wanted to be helpful,'' one official said of Zayed. Wealthy Russians and Emirati royalty have a particularly large footprint on the islands. Signs advertising deep-sea fishing trips are posted in Cyrillic. Russian billionaire Mikhail Prokhorov owns North Island, where Prince William and Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge, went on their honeymoon in 2011. Sheikh Khalifa bin Zayed al-Nahyan, president of the UAE, built a hilltop palace for himself with views across the chain of islands. The Emiratis have given hundreds of millions of dollars to the Seychelles in recent years for causes including public health and affordable housing. But when the Emirati royal family visits, they are rarely seen. ``The jeep comes to their private jet on the tarmac and they disappear,'' said one Seychellois official who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he did not want to be seen as criticizing the Emiratis. Zayed, the crown prince, owns a share of the Seychelles Four Seasons, a collection of private villas scattered on a lush hillside on the main island's southern shore, overlooking the Indian Ocean, according to officials in the Seychelles. The hotel is tucked away on a private beach, far from the nearest public road. Current and former U.S. officials who have worked closely with Zayed, who is often referred to as MBZ, say it would be out of character for him to arrange the Jan. 11 meeting without getting a green light in advance from top aides to Trump and Putin, if not the leaders themselves. ``MBZ is very cautious,'' said an American businessman who knows Zayed. ``There had to be a nod.'' The Seychelles meeting was deemed productive by the UAE and Russia but the idea of arranging additional meetings between Prince and Putin's associates was dropped, officials said. Even unofficial contacts between Trump and Putin associates had become too politically risky, officials said. Sieff reported from the Seychelles. Julie Tate, Devlin Barrett, Matea Gold, Tom Hamburger and Rosalind S. Helderman contributed to this report.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce the ``Expressing the Sense of Congress that the Supreme Court Misinterpreted the First Amendment to the Constitution in the Case of Buckley v. Valeo'' Resolution, an important bill to promote and preserve free speech. The landmark Supreme Court case Buckley v. Valeo was decided over forty years ago. Justice Byron White called the decision ``a mortal danger against which effective preventive and curative steps must be taken.'' In the wake of a Presidential election where spending approached $5 billion, we see the influence of wealthy donors. They are granted an inordinate amount of influence over the politicians they elect. True to form, it appears to have endowed donors with an unusually high number of Cabinet positions in the Trump Administration. Nearly 38 percent of President Trump's high-level government posts were given to campaign donors. Congress must end the current practice of allowing elections to be bought by the highest bidder. If money equals free speech, then lack of money equals lack of free speech. We must ensure that our campaigns are reflective of the people's voices, not those of Wall Street and corporations. Buckley v. Valeo took this inviolate First Amendment right away from the people. In order to secure free speech as a right of ``we the people,'' this misinterpretation must be readdressed.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Speaker, I rise today to introduce a resolution: Expressing the sense of Congress that the Supreme Court misinterpreted the First Amendment to the Constitution in the case of Buckley v. Valeo. This resolution will restore equal footing to all Americans in our Nation's politics. The landmark Supreme Court case Buckley v. Valeo was decided over 40 years ago. Then-Justice Byron White called the decision ``a mortal danger against which effective preventive and curative steps must be taken.'' In the wake of the recent Presidential election where spending approached $5 billion, we clearly see the influence of big money. That money exerts an inordinate amount of influence over our politics. True to form, it appears to have endowed donors with an unusually high number of Cabinet positions in the Trump administration. Over one-third of President Trump's high-level government posts were awarded to megacampaign donors. Congress must end the current practice of allowing elections to be bought by the highest bidder. If money equals free speech, then lack of money equals lack of free speech. We must ensure that our campaigns are reflective of the people's voices. Buckley v. Valeo took away this inviolate First Amendment right from the people, and this resolution is the remedy to restore it.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, recently while announcing his manufacturing jobs initiative, President Trump said: ``Everything is going to be based on bringing our jobs back. The good jobs, the real jobs. They have to come back.'' Well, this month, more than 700 idled U.S. Steel workers in Lorain, Ohio, were notified they will permanently lose their jobs come this June. Lorain has lost over 1,000 steel jobs since 2015. It is ground zero on the trade and jobs front. This stalwart town and its dear people have been battered by continuing job washout in steel due to unfair trade practices and closed markets abroad, particularly with China and Russia. Through no fault of their own, workers in too many of America's steel towns are hurting because of foreign product dumped on U.S. soil undercutting our very way of life. Last week, I invited Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross to visit Lorain to witness firsthand the urgency of stabilizing our manufacturing sector and fulfilling President Trump's job promises of only a few months ago. If our Nation is going to stem the tide of job losses caused by one- sided trade deals on an uneven global playing field, there is no better place to start than Lorain, Ohio. Please, President Trump and Commerce Secretary Ross, come to Lorain, Ohio.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, over the weekend, courageous Russians took to the streets to protest the repressive Russian Government led by Vladimir Putin. All of our major newspapers report the stories of these brave souls. Their protests were met by brutal tactics of Putin's Russia, which bludgeons opposition, and, even worse, in the case of Denis Voronenkov, a former Russian member of parliament, who, on March 23, had spoken against Putin and Kremlin policies and was shot in broad daylight outside a hotel. Ukraine's President Petro Poroshenko pointed the finger at Russian authorities, calling the assassination an act of state terrorism. Political assassinations are not new to Russia. Violent tactics are what we have come to expect from Putin's Russia. As we follow the facts on the Trump administration's ties to Russia, I urge my colleagues to think of the violence and assault on our democratic values that happen daily at the hands of Putin's Russia. As we learned last week, this includes Russia's attacks on our democracy here at home. Congress must leave no stone unturned and get to the bottom of these shady connections through empowering an independent commission. America leads when it protects our basic values as the global champion for liberty and freedom throughout the world.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I have a parliamentary inquiry.

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I want to ask why the Democratic microphone is turned off. This happened to me the other day when the Republican microphone was on over there. The last two speakers we have not been able to hear as well as we heard Ms. Cheney, and I want to know why that is. I hope somebody hears my plea and that the Parliamentarian will take care of this problem. This debate is too important to have our microphones at a lower scale.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, the Affordable Care Act needs to be repaired, not repealed. In 2010, Democrats passed health care reform in an effort to move toward health insurance for all Americans. Though we have made progress and more work to do, we cannot move America backward. Tens of thousands of people in northern Ohio and millions across America will lose insurance if TrumpCare becomes law. This bill is cruel. It will take away care from some of our most vulnerable citizens like those who suffer from opioid addiction, mental illness or have disabilities. This bill will undermine Medicare and cut $28 billion from Ohio's Medicaid program, the majority of which is spent on nursing home care. If Republicans succeed in repealing the Medicaid expansion, one in four Ohio hospitals would close according to the Ohio Hospital Association. Our goal should be to make our health care system better, not worse. This merciless bill is not a health care bill. This bill is an $800 billion tax cut for corporations and the very rich. How that giveaway provides better health care to working and middle-class families is beyond me. For Lent I gave up chocolate, I recommend the Republicans try giving up tax cuts to the rich! Let me share a story about a young man in Ohio who was diagnosed with an extremely rare form of cancer one month before his 26th birthday. Once he turned 26 he lost coverage under his parent's health care policy. But after visiting an Ohio Jobs and Family Services office, he learned about his eligibility for the Ohio Medicaid expansion, which allowed him to receive the cancer treatment he needed to survive. Frankly, without the Affordable Care Act's multi-layered protections, he would be dead. The Affordable Care Act and its Medicaid expansion has allowed him to return to finish law school. This bill shifts the burden of health costs to the working and middle class, all so the rich can have a trillion dollar tax cut. A tax cut for the super rich doesn't help working people and seniors pay for health care. Astoundingly, the falsely labeled, so called ``health'' bill actually rewards billionaires and corporations with hundreds of billions in tax giveaways. This bill does nothing to control costs for health insurance. Millions will lose coverage. It will actually result in higher costs too all while undermining Medicare and slashing Medicaid. Congress ought to repair not repeal the ACA. We cannot move backward. This GOP bill is cruel and some of our most challenged citizens like the mentally ill or disabled will lose care. Premiums for those over 50 could increase by 5 fold. As the old saying goes; ``this dog won't hunt.'' Ohio embraced the ACA and 866,000 people were finally able to receive health care coverage. What will this poorly conceived Republican tax giveaway bill do to Ohio: 1. About 47,000 people will lose health insurance because they are insured through the ACA in Ohio's 9th district. 2. The district's uninsured rate has gone from 13.3% to 7.0% since the ACA was implemented. This 6.3 percentage point drop in the uninsured rate could be reversed if the ACA is entirely or partially repealed. 3. 318,900 individuals in the district who now have health insurance that covers preventive services like cancer screenings and flu shots without any co-pays, coinsurance, or deductibles stand to lose this access if the Republican Congress eliminates ACA provisions requiring health insurers to cover important preventive services without cost- sharing. 4. 370,700 individuals in the district with employer-sponsored health insurance are at risk of losing important consumer protections like the prohibition on annual and lifetime limits, protection against unfair policy rescissions, and coverage of preexisting health conditions, if the ACA is entirely or partially repealed. This Republican bill, hastily prepared, should be defeated. It is cruel, will leave millions of our fellow citizens bankrupt and destitute, and if implemented, will be responsible for more death and illness coast to coast. Vote no on TrumpCare.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, years from now, history books could well describe entrapment of a United States President by a foreign adversary. Allow me to update my colleagues on the Trump administration's foreign policy. Recently, the State Department avoided committing Secretary Rex Tillerson to a NATO meeting next month with our tried and true allies in Europe. Yet, the administration has no problem flying Secretary Tillerson to Moscow to meet with Putin in April. This is no April Fools' joke. Since when is the Kremlin more important than our NATO partners? Never. Several reports now say Trump's former campaign chair, Paul Manafort, secretly worked for a Russian billionaire to advance Putin's interests and undermine anti-Russian opposition across Europe. This contradicts assertions by the Trump administration and Manafort that he never worked for Russian interests. Congress needs to get to the bottom of these shady connections, and Paul Manafort should testify to the House Intelligence Committee, under oath. Russia has consistently and unabashedly attempted to disrupt Democratic elections and promote propaganda in order to strengthen its own strategic interests. The Trump administration is pushing our Nation to the verge of a national security crisis. How much leverage does Putin have over Trump and his associates? Our great Nation can't be their collateral damage.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. I thank the gentleman so very much for taking the time, after formal votes have occurred today, to help us enlighten the American people on what is really at stake here. I have to say, President Trump carried the State of Ohio by about 450,000 votes out of all the votes that were cast. And there was this slim hope, I think, on behalf of some of the people who voted for him, that though he was a billionaire, that there was perhaps a kind heart that would minister to the people of our country, helping them get more jobs, helping them deal with their everyday challenges, including health care. Unfortunately, this bill is cruel, and it is dangerous. It helps the billionaire class. Why in heaven's name, of the people that are drafting this bill on the Republican side of the aisle, would they be giving billions and billions and billions of tax giveaways to the wealthiest people in our country; to those that, frankly, if you take away a couple of million, they wouldn't miss it anyway. You know, when you have that much money, normal life is kind of distant from your world. But what TrumpCare is giving to the rank and file, people are going to have to pay more for less coverage, and millions and millions of people are going to lose their coverage completely. Now, you know, 75 percent of the people who go bankrupt in this country go bankrupt because of health bills that they can't pay for. And so when you start tinkering around with people's health insurance and their coverage, you are playing with wildfire, and that is what is happening on the Republican side of the aisle. Now, it used to be that most Americans received their health insurance through employment, just like in Germany. We had an employment-based health insurance system. I like that system. I like for workers to share in the profits of the companies that they help make money for. But what has been happening over the years, with so much outsourcing that Wall Street is more than happy to finance, right, companies are plucked up from Ohio and put in Mexico, put in China, put in all these other places around the world. People lose their health insurance. They lose everything. They are lucky if they can hang on to their houses. Then what happens? What happens to them? Well, if they are lucky, they might get a job that pays a third of what they earned before in a company that doesn't pay health insurance. Take Walmart, the biggest employer in the country. Go take a look at their employees and what happens. What is happening is the corporations are throwing on to the back of the public sector, the Federal Government, the responsibility to pay for health insurance. So all the profits that Walmart makes, it doesn't benefit the workers there with any health insurance. The companies have ceded their responsibility to provide health insurance as a condition of employment, and they have transferred that to, guess what, the taxpayer. So what is going on here is a big shift in responsibility. The Congressional Budget Office, which is nonpartisan, and the head of it is a Republican, I might say, but it is the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office reports that with TrumpCare, next year alone, 14 million fewer Americans will have health insurance. Some of those currently on the Affordable Care will drop off, and I am very worried about the 900,000 Ohioans who were finally able to get insurance, some of whom work for Walmart, some of whom work for small employers who couldn't afford health insurance, some of them who worked for big corporations that spit them out when they moved and outsourced their jobs, that they are going to be among these numbers. We are told by 2020, 21 million people will lose their coverage in the country; 24 million by 2026, and perhaps the total number of uninsured Americans rising to reach 52 million. That is going backwards. In this bill, they expect 70 million people who are currently on Medicaid--all right, guess what? They are in nursing homes. The Republican Party always says they are the pro-life party. Baloney. This is an anti-life bill. This is going to cost illness and death across this country. Here is a story already in my district in Ohio. A man named Joseph is self-employed, and he used to get his insurance from his wife's employer. Thank God she had employer-provided health insurance. She retired, and now the family faced a choice, forced upon them by the Republican leaders in Congress and President Trump. They faced the threat of no health coverage, so Joseph heard all this debate here. He wasn't sure what was going to happen to him in this fiscal year of 2017, so his choice was to go on the healthcare exchange and risk losing coverage if the Republicans repeal the Affordable Care Act and pull the rug out from under him; or he could opt for the guarantee of 18 months of expensive COBRA insurance. So he opted for the expensive choice of COBRA, which cost him and his family hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of dollars in additional costs per month, and he is putting off a knee replacement because of the uncertainty even consideration of this bill is causing. Don't tell me that this isn't cruel and dangerous. And this family isn't the only one in America that is facing that kind of terrible health choice. The TrumpCare proposal in States like Ohio, where we have a lot of rural counties, we are going to have hundreds of thousands of people out of work, nurses, long-term care aides. I just had people from Hospice in my office this afternoon, and we were talking about home-health care for Hospice patients versus institutional care, the rising numbers of Vietnam veterans coming into Hospice facilities. Well, guess what? Who is going to pay for all of that in the TrumpCare? These people will be dropped. They will say to the States: well, we will give you a little bit of money, but we will cap the money, you know. And then what happens after 2020? Hey, it is like dropping you out of an airplane with no parachute. Good luck. We can't do this. This is a death bill. This is a death knell for the American people. We can't allow the American people to be treated in this manner. So we ought to be repairing and fixing and looking in the windshield, not the rearview mirror of where we need to take health insurance in this country, but not put so many millions, ten and tens of millions of Americans at risk, and doling out--Congressman Garamendi, maybe you could repeat those numbers--over $600 billion in tax giveaways to the richest people in this country, many of whom caused the financial crash of 2008. They owe the Republic. They owe the people of this Republic for what they did. I have families in my district still underwater on their mortgages, if they were able to hang on to their homes at all. The wealthy of this country, starting with Wall Street, owe the American people a lot. And all those employers who abandoned their responsibilities and pushed the cost of health insurance on the public sector because they didn't have the decency to help ensure their own workers, well, shame on you. Shame on you. For all the small businesses that finally got health insurance through this program, thank you for respecting your workers. Thank you for respecting the Affordable Care Act. We can do a whole lot better than TrumpCare. And I really feel sorry that this new President, for whom many of the people in Ohio voted, doled up this kind of a flawed piece of legislation that is cruel and, honestly, will result in so many more illnesses across this country, because people worry about health insurance. They worry about the affordability of health insurance. Congressman Garamendi, thank you so very much for having this Special Order this evening and for inviting me to participate. It has been a great privilege.

Ms. KAPTUR. Congressman Garamendi, may I just inject, and I won't take up much time. But, you know, in this job, you meet everybody. I come from a working class family. We had to work for everything we ever had. I thank the people of my district for allowing me to serve and kind of learn a whole lot more about our country and the world. And one of the things I have learned is that when you are that wealthy, these billionaires, they purchase their own doctors, they purchase their own nurses. They have special houses where they put them in on their property. So, you know, it isn't just the tax cut that goes to the wealthiest among us, but the imbalance between those who have much and those who eke out a living is growing greater and greater and greater in our society. Now, I think everybody should have good health care. But, honestly, when you can do that, you are not living in the real world that the vast majority of Americans live in. I thank the gentleman for allowing me to put that on the Record.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to defend public broadcasting and honor the late Fred Rogers, whose birthday is today, March 20. Known fondly by millions simply as Mr. Rogers, his wonderful, beloved presence has reached millions of homes across our Nation captivating generations of children, and even adults. The Corporation for Public Broadcasting is a vital part of America, including cities, but small towns as well. NPR and PBS stations will be disproportionately impacted by President Trump's proposed budget zeroing out public broadcasting. It is not right. President Trump's travel bill to Mar-a-Lago and the growing security that the American people are paying for over at his Trump Tower in New York, which reports show to already be in the tens of millions of dollars, will soon swamp the $200 million America dedicates to public broadcasting annually. We have been here before. In 1969, President Richard Nixon threatened to slash funding for PBS. Mr. Rogers went before the Senate to defend public broadcasting and its value to our children, especially for learning. I know I am not alone in wishing Mr. Rogers were with us once again to make the case for America's children and public broadcasting. I hope President Trump and my colleagues will join me in supporting programming that boosts kids' confidence and helps children enjoy learning and the wonder of math, science, and books.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, the Commerce Department just announced that America's trade deficit for January 2017 was $48.5 billion, the largest monthly deficit since March 2012. That translates into more lost jobs in our country. In the campaign, President Trump criticized our trade deals. He promised to do better for American workers. And now, nearly 2 months into his Presidency, what action has he taken to stop the erosion of this deficit and the jobs that go with them? It continues to get worse. What hope can he give to the hundreds and hundreds more steelworkers in Lorain, Ohio, who just received pink slips over the weekend due to the permanent closure of another steel line, due to Chinese imports and predatory trade practice? It is going to put a lot of steelworkers back to work, President Trump said during the campaign and after as he revived the Keystone and Dakota Access pipelines. But his talk turned out to be empty and a pipe dream because the pipes have already been purchased from foreign sources. Next month, China's President, Xi Jinping, will visit President Trump at Mar-a-Lago in Florida. President Trump talked tough on China throughout the campaign, but what will he do to reform Chinese trade practices that are resulting in these increasing trade deficits? Mr. Speaker, I hope our President begins to keep the long list of campaign promises that he made to working people across this country, reverses these deficits, and starts increasing good jobs again.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak on behalf of an important bipartisan-supported vital Environmental Protection Agency program, the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative, spanning the largest body of freshwater on the face of the Earth. Many media outlets have suggested that the President intends to cut this program by 90 percent--90 percent. I would like to clarify that this proposal is not yet official, but it is more than a rumor. So I would like to believe that this President who achieved the White House by carrying the Great Lake States of Michigan, Indiana, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and my own Ohio, would not take this awful step backward. Candidate Trump traveled to Flint, Michigan, and promised that the water situation would never happen if he were President. Is he going to reverse his firm promise of clean water? The blue economy of the Great Lakes depends on clean water: a $7 billion maritime industry in Lake Erie alone; jobs related to the automotive and industrial sector of our country; recreational opportunities; and, most importantly, preserves clean drinking water for the millions and millions of people who depend on that today and in the future. Supporting the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative is not partisan; it is common sense.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I thank Ranking Member Visclosky very much. Mr. Speaker, every year, our top responsibility as appropriators is to finish the 12 spending bills that keep our government running by October 1 of the year before that fiscal year is supposed to start. But here we are today, March 8, halfway into fiscal year 2017, finally voting on a compromise bill that closely reflects the request the last administration delivered to us 1 year ago February. Our service chiefs and Secretaries present a consistent, clear message to Congress. They have pleaded for stability and predictability in the budget so they could ensure complete readiness of America's forces. Force readiness remains the defense community's top priority. Funding the capabilities to provide this responsibility must remain our top priority. We must approach Congress' appropriations responsibility from the historic bipartisan process that has broken down once too many times in recent years. This political infighting harms the stability and predictability necessary for our Armed Forces to properly plan. It left both our adversaries and allies questioning our ability to defend or support the multiple conflicts we are currently engaged with abroad. This compromise worked out by our responsible colleagues, Chairwoman Granger, Chairman Frelinghuysen, Ranking Member Visclosky, Ranking Member Lowey; and their Senate counterparts are strong glimmers of hope that we might actually finish the 2017 appropriations responsibilities. But we have ten additional subcommittee bills that are equally important and account for nearly half of our budget. When will we vote on those compromised bills? I could think of little that would be more irresponsible than to only move this defense bill and leave the remaining departments and agencies operating under a continuing resolution. I have always supported our troops and our national defense. However, we know the safety and well-being of the American people does not merely rely on defense funding. It is rooted in the stability of the Republic they are sworn to protect and defend. We have a responsibility there, equally important. Our financial commitments to energy independence, critical infrastructure, homeland security, funding for first responders, teachers, and healthcare programs are equally necessary to increase America's security at home and abroad. I hope my colleagues alleviate this concern and quickly package the remaining bills for a vote, as the American people so richly deserve.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, President Trump is a master at diverting attention, even the media's. His diversions are a perfect foil from the constitutional questions that his and his family's behavior have raised since he took the oath of office. With hotels and property developments all over America and the world, the Trump empire is dramatically expanding its domestic business, raising vital questions as to the Trumps' profiting from public service, including from foreign entanglements that violate the Constitution. Outlined in Article II of the Constitution, the clause prohibits the President from receiving, other than his salary, any compensation, gift, or other form of profit from the United States, a State government, or their instrumentalities. Congress reserves its ability to consent to foreign emoluments but not to domestic emoluments. Our Founding Fathers were clear--no exceptions. It has been heavily reported in the papers that the Trump sons have now signed at least 17 new letters of intent with potential developers, even listing specific cities. They don't have to tell their father about all this. The newspapers cover it in abundance. And the American people should never have to wonder whose interests the President serves. Today those doubts abound. America, the scales of justice need tending. [From The Washington Post, Mar. 4, 2017] Trump Sons, Planning Expansion of Family Business, Look to Leverage Campaign Experience (By Jonathan O'Connell, David A. Fahrenthold and Matea Gold) New York.--Donald Trump's adult sons, who are overseeing a nationwide expansion of the family business during their father's presidency, are envisioning ways that their experiences from the campaign trail can help them establish a footing in dozens of new markets. The idea is to move beyond a focus on luxury hotels in big metropolises and build boutique properties in a broader mix of cities, including some the Trump brothers came to know well during more than a year of intensive travel, fundraising and grass-roots networking on the road to The White House. ``I got to see a lot of those markets on the campaign,'' Donald Trump Jr., the president's eldest son, told The Washington Post in a recent interview from his office on the 25th floor of Trump Tower. ``I think I've probably been in all of them over the last 18 months.'' The initial plan is tied to the Trumps' previously announced new chain, Scion, which is being designed as a less-corporate feeling brand of high-end hotels with a more affordable per-room price point than the Trumps' five-star properties. As with many existing Trump-branded property deals, the developers would own the hotels while the Trumps would be paid licensing and management fees. The company says it has signed at least 17 letters of intent with potential developers. It is targeting an array of cities such as Austin, Dallas, St. Louis, Nashville and Seattle--and Trump Jr. said the campaign proved useful in forging relationships with potential new connections. ``I met people along the way that would be awesome partners,'' he said. The expansion plan illustrates how President Trump's political rise has the potential to affect his business even as he and his sons promise to adhere to a strict ethical boundary between the company's moves and the Trump administration. And it shows the inherent challenge in separating the family's political work from its corporate interests, with upsides and potential problems. Extending the Trump business into a greater cluster of American cities could bring political benefits for a president who has vowed to bring jobs and economic prosperity to struggling communities. But it also comes as Trump has faced criticism from Democrats and ethics officials for his decision to retain his ownership stake in the company, a decision that means he stands to personally benefit from its growth. Building new hotels, for example, could create issues--tax disputes, allegations of labor violations or environmental violations--that require federal departments to consider cases that could directly impact the president's finances. And while the Trumps have vowed to sign no new foreign deals, pursuing a raft of new domestic contracts from coast to coast means the Trumps are likely to engage in negotiations with private developers, banks and investors who see additional benefits in doing business with the president's company. ``It's just going to add fuel to the fire that is already burning . . . with him having still a foot in both the boardroom and one in the Oval Office,'' said Scott Amey, the general counsel of the nonpartisan watchdog group Project on Government Oversight. The White House did not respond to a request for comment. The president in January added a team of ethics lawyers to the White House Counsel's Office, while the company hired a longtime Republican attorney tasked with ensuring the Trump Organization minimizes conflicts of interest. In interviews, the Trump sons waved off the idea that their plans created any potential ethical problems. ``There are lines that we would never cross, and that's mixing business with anything government,'' Eric Trump said. Donald Trump Jr. said that since the inauguration, he has spoken with his father twice on the phone and once in person--when he and his brother attended the announcement of their father's Supreme Court nominee, Neil Gorsuch. Eric Trump said he may ask his father how things are in the White House but would never discuss government or business affairs. ``Will we ever talk about tax policy? Will I ever ask for anything that could otherwise benefit the business? Absolutely, emphatically not,'' Eric Trump said. ``He has no need to know what we're doing, and I certainly don't need to know what they're doing, and I don't want to.'' The Trumps' point man on the expansion is Eric Danziger, an experienced executive who was hired in 2015 after previously overseeing expansions at Carlson Hotels Worldwide, Starwood Hotels and the former Wyndham International. One of the first Scion projects is slated to open in Dallas, where a Turkish-born developer aims to open a sleek glass six-story hotel as part of a $50 million mixed-use downtown development. The Austin, Cincinnati, Denver, Detroit, Nashville, Seattle and St. Louis areas are also possible targets, according to reports by Bloomberg News and business trade publications. The Trumps declined to say what other cities they were exploring for projects but said they were actively seeking contracts in many places. Danziger, speaking last month to Skift, an industry publication, called Scion a ``four-star lifestyle brand'' with wide geographic appeal. ``That kind of brand can be in every city--tertiary, secondary,'' he said. ``So, how many is that? The opportunity is for hundreds.'' Because of the prohibition on foreign deals, Danziger said the company is ``going to have full focus--instead of some focus--on growth domestically of both Trump and Scion.'' The expansion will not be easy, according to analysts. The Trumps will be entering a crowded marketplace of new hotel lines from Marriott, Hilton and Hyatt designed to appeal to a broad cross-section of customers, said Michael J. Bellisario, a senior research analyst with the firm Robert W. Baird & Co. ``There are so many more competitors out there today,'' Bellisario said. For the Trumps to distinguish their projects from their competitors, they will need to be choosy about locations, Bellisario said. ``You've got to be on the right street comer in the right market. You can't open these hotels in Topeka, Kansas,'' he said. ``So when you think about that, how big can the new line get?'' The plan is a big test for the younger Trumps. Just as Donald Trump stepped out from his father's shadow in the 1970s to build the family real estate business into today's worldwide collection of golf courses, hotels, condo towers, branded merchandise and other commercial holdings, now Donald Trump Jr., 39, and Eric Trump, 33, have a chance to make their mark. Along with their sister, Ivanka, who departed the company when their father entered office, the brothers have long served as executive vice presidents. Before their father ran for president, the three siblings helped expand the firm from focusing on New York to including the management of luxury hotels in top U.S. cities and seven countries, plus more than a dozen golf courses. The fruits of that work are still coming, as last month the company opened a new golf club in Dubai and, last week held a grand opening for a new hotel-condominium tower in Vancouver,

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today after news that the Attorney General, Jeff Sessions, lied under oath about his multiple contacts with higher level officials from the Russian Government. The American people deserve full answers from the FBI on the ever- growing list of Trump administration officials with reckless and dangerous ties to Russia. The 2016 attack by Russia on U.S. democratic institutions, election systems, and political parties represents an international crime against liberty. We still don't know the full extent of Russia's attacks. Thus, it is essential that the FBI, which reports to the Attorney General, be absolutely free of any political pressure. Congress must empower an independent investigatory, bipartisan commission to discover the truth. And the administration must appoint a special prosecutor free of political influence by the executive branch. Any investigation must be empowered to thoroughly probe Russia's actions against our Nation's elections and must unearth any individuals who aided and abetted Russia in furtherance of its nefarious objectives. Without question, it is essential that our FBI and Justice Department be absolutely free of any political influence by the Attorney General. The American people are owed the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Toward restoring integrity, the Attorney General should resign in view of his misleading answers about Russia during his Senate confirmation hearing. Truth will out.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, before President Trump and Steve Bannon bring in a Wall Street billionaire to delve into our Nation's most classified intelligence, the American people have a right to know the facts about who he and his firm are. If you believe in the United States military, as I do, and not simply cashing it out to private guns for hire, then we would best pay attention to Stephen Feinberg, CEO of Cerberus, who is to be tasked with leading a review of our U.S. intelligence agencies. Cerberus also owns DynCorp, which is in a legal dispute over a $10 billion State Department contract for operations in foreign countries. The Director of Homeland Security, retired General Kelly, received $166,000 as an adviser to DynCorp prior to his Cabinet appointment. Simply put, Cerberus profits off the privatization of war. Handing the keys to our intelligence agencies over to Wall Street is dangerous. Privatization of our homeland security and Armed Forces jeopardizes our national security. It is critical we stand together, take action to demand transparency, prevail for the sake of future generations, and prevent the siphoning of funds intended for our military. Before any Wall Street speculator sets foot on our Nation's most precious security turf, the American people and our military need complete disclosure and divestiture of all Cerberus' and Mr. Feinberg's holdings.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, so what do Congressional Republicans have as an alternative solution? Nothing. The cost to roll this rule back is significant. It is not good for retirees or workers, and it maintains the growing burden on taxpayers who fund assistance programs. I urge all of my colleagues to reject this shortsighted action. Stand up for the American working class and oppose both H.J. Res. 66 and H.J. Res. 67.

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, America should no longer be shocked with the Republican mantra of ``no'' to everything--that is, until Wall Street and the financial services industry calls. Today's action on H.J. Res. 66 and 67 illustrates this unfortunate reality. Congressional Republicans once again are putting the financial industry ahead of average American workers. Their attempt to roll back President Obama's Department of Labor rules, which expanded working families' abilities to save their own retirement money through State- and large-city-administered retirement savings programs. The Republican proposal restricts saving options for working people. For years, Republicans have hawked a false crisis about Social Security solvency; meanwhile, now they are proposing a very real retirement security crisis for America's seniors. We are nearing a boiling point. The difference between what average Americans have saved for retirement and where their savings should be is staggering: more than $6 trillion in shortfalls. Roughly half of all U.S. families have no money set aside for retirement. Thirty-nine million Americans don't have access to a workplace retirement savings plan. Even Americans who work diligently to save for retirement are falling behind. With 10,000 American seniors reaching retirement age every day, enormous strain on the Federal budget is mounting to make up the difference. Today most workers don't have a pension. Those that do, can't be so sure it will be there throughout their golden years. There has been a dramatic decline in guaranteed retirement benefits through employer support. Without access to easy and affordable savings vehicles, far too many American workers will retire into poverty. This leads to overreliance on Social Security and other State and Federal assistance programs. It surely isn't the American Dream. President Obama identified this crisis. He spoke to Congress about trying to work together to address it through bipartisan action, but our Republican colleagues said ``no.'' Their failure to act drove President Obama to coordinate with States, eight of which have already passed laws to create State-administered retirement programs for private sector workers, which H.J. Res. 66 and 67 would roll back. More than half the States are considering similar action to improve retirement readiness, and these plans help small businesses offer savings plans for their employees without imposing financial burdens.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Veasey) for his great leadership in bringing us together in this Blue Collar Caucus. I feel very comfortable. I actually have blue on today. I thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Brendan F. Boyle) of the greater Philadelphia area, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Norcross), and myself from the Toledo to Cleveland, Ohio, part of our country to bring to the attention of the American people the fact, for example, that workers in northern Ohio, since the year 2000, earn on average $7,000 less than they did at the beginning of the century. They have taken some great hits. They are hardworking people. They are fighting back, but they need our help. In the last 3 weeks, if we take a look at President Trump's term thus far, we begin to see the real Donald at work, if I might quote one of the news media. After months of grandiose campaign promises to renegotiate NAFTA, bring back American manufacturing jobs, and make America great, we can begin to assess where he is putting his attention. I think this is really important for us, as we represent blue-collar America, what is he doing for them. I think the proof is in his actions, or lack thereof. After roughly 20 executive orders and actions, we see President Trump has a penchant for mediagenic events and moments with a hodgepodge of executive orders, but apparently not sending any legislation up here yet. And most striking is his clear motivation to assist his wealthy friends on Wall Street with appointments to the administration, such as Secretary of Treasury, rather than paying attention to average Americans who voted for him. He exhibits a great penchant for public approval rather than a focus on efforts to improve the current economic stagnation of average Americans. We are noting that he is filled his Cabinet with billionaires and multimillionaires who simply can't figure out how to walk in the shoes of blue-collar America. His actions to help the wealthiest Americans will have significant consequences. So what happened with his promise to drain the swamp? I thought in the first month we would have had something that would really resonate out in the heartland. While all of this happens just miles away at the White House, our Republican congressional colleagues remain either silent or moving the car in reverse. Why would they criticize activity that helps those who fund their elections? We need campaign finance reform to dominate their political focus and write their policy objectives, like taking away today here in the House the ability of workers to save money for their own pensions, for heaven's sake. In Trump's first days, he took action to roll back the financial reform bill called Dodd-Frank and tried to eliminate protections for seniors as they seek retirement investment advice. We know there are a lot of sharks out there in the financial waters. Why wouldn't you want to help the American people rather than hurt them more? He did nothing to address the trade issues, which were in his power to do on day one, and propelled his victory through our part of the country. I note my colleagues come from Texas, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and me being from Ohio. It was actually the Midwestern States that lifted this President to victory. He hasn't declared China as a currency manipulator. He could have done that already. He had no elimination of the Buy America waiver, which affords access to U.S. Government contracts for all firms and goods from 45 World Trade Organization nations and 16 additional U.S. Free Trade Agreements that exist. Not a word about that. No NAFTA renegotiation. He could have pulled the plug on that on day one. Nothing. Where is the negotiating team in place to take care of what NAFTA has done to the people of the heartland and our country in general? What will President Trump do for ongoing negotiations he inherited on the U.S.-China Bilateral Investment Treaty, the Trade in Services Agreement, the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership? Will he put American workers, global workers, and environmental concerns at the forefront of negotiations? Or will he continue to allow corporate and wealthy financial interests to dominate and run roughshod over workers and communities? Candidate Trump promised the 15,000 steelworkers laid off due to a flood of unfairly traded imports that he would support America's manufacturing and industrial base. He came to Ohio and said that. He promised to protect our industries from the Chinese and to keep jobs at home. But in the pipeline of executive action, he actually enforced the trade agreement Buy America waiver, negating his promises to help America's steelworkers. How about that? That was done in the first month. Just recently, the U.S. Department of Commerce released a report that showed the U.S. trade deficit hit a 4-year high as it rose to over half a billion dollars for 2016. Middle America isn't surprised this trade deficit continues to hollow out U.S. manufacturing jobs and depress incomes across our great Nation. Reducing our trade deficit should be a top priority for the new administration. I hope the President puts a big scoreboard in front of the White House on his progress on this front. It would do wonders to fix the economy for working Americans if we balanced that trade deficit. As Congressman Veasey has said, the Democratic Party has long championed issues for blue-collar America that create real life success for working class people. Lost in the political dialogue is the reality that Democrats have always stood for individual and economic rights for average Americans of all backgrounds. Each of us in our own lives represents that, and it is a privilege to serve here in this House. For blue-collar families, education remains a vital stepping-stone in upward mobility. Democrats continue to prioritize early childhood literacy and STEM education, efforts to make Americans globally competitive in advanced manufacturing, science, medicine, and research and development. Democrats continue to expand apprenticeship options to allow young people to enter the workforce trained and without the enormous burden of student loans. Meanwhile, Republicans push policies that exacerbate the ever- expanding wealth gap, even allowing it to invade our school systems. Just watch the opposition Mr. Trump and his newly minted Education Secretary Betsy DeVos have towards public schools. In closing, let me thank our esteemed leaders here in the Blue Collar Caucus, Congressman Veasey and Congressman Boyle. I don't see that this President is draining the swamp. He is actually digging deeper into it. I really thank them for being an accountability wing here in the first branch mentioned in the Constitution--the legislative branch. I congratulate both of them. It has been a great privilege to join them this evening.