Daniel Kildee

Mr. KILDEE

Mr. KILDEE. I have an amendment at the desk, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, much like the VA, the Department of Defense is confronting significant challenges regarding its care and transition of wounded warriors. In fact, following the recent death of two individuals at the Army's Fort Bragg hospital, the Secretary of Defense ordered his own comprehensive review of DOD health care. Simply, it is obvious and is becoming increasingly more obvious that wounded warriors are still failing to receive the care that they need and that they clearly deserve. We know that the DOD has undertaken countless studies and has appointed numerous working groups to identify ways to improve wounded warrior care. Moreover, Congress has rightfully engaged and has held a multitude of hearings and initiatives. There has been a lot of review internally and a lot of conversation. I believe, though, that we need to engage some of the brightest minds in our country to gain a new and objective perspective on improving care for wounded warriors. So this amendment appropriates $20 million to fund an amendment that, again, was passed in the FY15 NDAA to provide for an outside, independent study to identify challenges confronting the DOD's care of wounded warriors and offer specific recommendations to improve that. This study, passed in the NDAA, will only be awarded to an entity that has received a small percentage--at the very most--of its revenue from contracts with the DOD, essentially an outside organization with little or no contact or relationship with the DOD or the VA. We are really trying to get a fresh set of eyes on this question. This study of the Department of Defense's health care for wounded warriors is almost identical to the independent study of the VA, mandated by H.R. 4810, Chairman Miller's Veteran Access to Care Act, which just passed the House last week; so the same set of fresh eyes that will be looking at VA care, I believe, need to be focused on the Department of Defense care as well. This amendment is funded by allocating $20 million from the Navy's $14 billion aircraft procurement account, which includes nearly $1 billion in funding over the Navy's request to purchase 12 EA-18G Growler aircraft. The Navy requested none of these aircraft in its budget request, and it would seem to me that, out of the $14 billion in that procurement, with nearly $1 billion in new money for something that wasn't requested, we could find $20 million to make sure that the billions of dollars that we are spending in DOD health care--particularly for our wounded warriors--is spent in the most efficient way and provides the absolute best care in the timeliest fashion available. That is what this amendment would do. I urge its passage. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. KILDEE. I thank the chairman and the ranking member for their comments. I will say that, when I speak of a set of fresh eyes--I understand the studies that have been done by the GAO and other internal studies, and I will acknowledge a certain irony in making the comment because it is so often that we hear that we can't be continually looking for answers to these difficult questions only from those of us in government, that we ought to be taking a look at it from a fresh set of eyes that come from outside, from the private sector. I think that that would be a great advantage in this case. Regarding the offset, I understand and wholly support all of the work that we need to do and the investments that we need to make to ensure that our military is fully capable. I just believe that the same commitment that we have to our own protection ought to extend to protecting those who put on the uniform of the country and suffer as a result. They ought to get the best care. Out of the $970 million increase from what was requested, it would seem to me that finding $20 million from that would not be a bridge too far. I appreciate the comments, and I hope that we can work together on finding solutions on this. I think Chairman Miller was right in his approach with the VA, and I think the same could be said for the DOD, and that is what my amendment would do. With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. KILDEE

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I would like to join my colleagues in support of this important NAHASDA program within this appropriations bill. As has been stated, our country--this Nation, this government--has an important trust responsibility that it is obligated to live up to, and the full funding of NAHASDA is an important way to manifest that obligation. Just as in any community, housing is an essential component of a civil society. What NAHASDA provides is to not only deal with the backlog of housing needs, which are many--certainly, the dollars that are presently available are not keeping up with the need that is out there in these tribal communities, for sure--but to also allow for the maintenance of the housing that is currently in place. The difficulty, of course, with a funding level which is the same as it was a decade ago and with a backlog of housing needs is that, as the housing that has been developed ages, more and more of the dollars are necessarily placed into maintaining and improving existing housing, which further increases the backlog of available housing. I would just suggest to my colleagues--and I know many of my colleagues have done this--to visit the communities. Talk to them about their housing needs, and take a look at the conditions that many are left to live in. You will find that, while this program has been quite successful, as has been said, in providing 110,000 housing units since its inception, there is so much more that needs to be done. We have an obligation as Members of Congress to make sure that we live up to the commitments that we have made, to the trust obligation that we have. It is more than words. In this case, it actually means putting our money where our mouth is and putting the resources behind this program as it should be. This is an important program. It is one that we are obligated to fund. Obviously, I would prefer that we meet the full obligation that we have committed to. This appropriation does not go as far as it should in doing that. We really need to make sure that, in the future, we do. With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. KILDEE

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Speaker, I ask the House of Representatives to join me in recognizing Mr. Lewis Driskell, Sr., a community leader in the City of Flint with more than 50 years of experience in the printing profession. Mr. Driskell graduated from Tuskegee Institute in 1955 with many awards to his credit, including the ``Most Outstanding Student in Graphic Arts'' from the Mercantile Paper Company. Following gradation he relocated to Flint and worked with three major printing establishments before forming his own company, Union Printing. Mr. Driskell is driven by a strong belief of giving service to his community. In 1969 he was elected president of Flint Printers Local 282. In 1989, he received the State of Michigan's ``Outstanding Minority Business Entrepreneur'' Award and the ``Sydney B. Melet Humanitarian Award''. In addition, in 1990, he received the Charles Stewart Mott ``Citizen of the Year'' Award from the Flint Chamber of Commerce and the Paul Harris Award from the Rotary Club of Flint. His caring is further exemplified in the number of organizations for which he served as a policy maker. These organizations include: The Urban League of Flint, Greater Flint Opportunities Industrialization Center, Hurley Hospital Authority, Uptown Reinvestment, Planned Parenthood, Career Alliance, Food Bank of Eastern Michigan, and as founder of the Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce. Moreover, his lifetime commitments, national and international are to: Alpha Phi Alpha Fraternity, Inc., Rotary International, National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), and the Tuskegee University Alumni Club--Flint Chapter. Now retired, Lewis enjoys spending time with his wife, Lois, their children and grandchildren. Mr. Speaker, I applaud Mr. Lewis Driskell for his strong leadership and unwavering commitment to our community.

Mr. KILDEE

Mr. KILDEE. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chair, first I would like to register my concern and support over the issues raised by Mr. Polis. The question on the amendment that he offers has not to do with much of the policy, but the fact that we have to make budget decisions that are based on priorities. I think he is correct to raise the question as to whether a $35 million plus-up is the proper priority when compared to the other competing interests that we are all trying to facilitate. With that, I yield to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Polis).

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I offer this amendment. I represent Flint, Michigan, and Saginaw, Michigan, two cities that have dealt with significant violence. There are cities across the country that are plagued with extreme violence and are unable themselves, these communities, to deal with the challenges, simply having the resources to deal with the sorts of crime that they are seeing every day. On occasion, the ATF has been able to provide support to these communities through their Violent Crime Reduction Partnership program, so-called ``surge.'' What my amendment would do would be to provide an additional $15 million to the ATF's budget to conduct additional surge operations in America's most violent communities. As I said, there is a high correlation between communities experiencing serious violence, high rates of murder and other violent crime, and cities that are experiencing enormous problems, significant financial stress, such that they simply don't have the resources to deal with the tidal wave of violence and in fact, in many cases, see the loss of police and prosecutorial capacity. This amendment would address that by allowing ATF to utilize the additional funding to support those communities, those most violent communities. It makes a difference. It pays off. In 2012, when a surge was executed in my hometown of Flint, the murder rate, the homicide rate, was cut in half for that period. In Oakland, California, we saw violent crime go down, in just a 4-month period, by 14 percent. These programs do work, because what they do is that they support those local law enforcement officials, local prosecutors to make cases against the most violent offenders. It is really an important thing. The offset--and I know this will rankle some. I know the chairman is particularly concerned about this, as is the ranking member. I completely understand it. The offset comes from the NASA exploration fund. I understand and I support the work--don't get me wrong--and the important priority that this Congress places on the work that NASA is doing in this regard. From my perspective, I think it is important that we keep, for this conversation, a sense of priority and proportion. In the case of NASA's budget for exploration, we see a $191 million increase over what was requested. I understand if we could do that, and if we could do that and still deal with the other priorities I would be all for it. But when I see my hometown and other cities like it literally seeing their kids die because we don't have adequate resources to deal with the violence, it seems to me reasonable to take a small portion of a very large increase in funding to an important program--don't get me wrong, a very important program--but to take a small portion of an increase in order to support this kind of work that the ATF is doing when, if I could turn to the ATF and say: use your increased budget to fund this, I would certainly be willing to say that. But in this case, what we see is the ATF with a modest reduction over what was being proposed, what was requested, and the budget within NASA that I am addressing seeing $191 million added. It is a question of competing important priorities, I understand. Where I live and where I come from, it is very difficult for me to find a higher priority than getting resources to help make cases against the bad guys who are killing kids on the streets of America's most violent cities. With that, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chair, I move to strike the requisite number of words.

Mr. KILDEE

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Speaker, it has been nearly 2 months since the Senate acted to extend unemployment compensation to millions of Americans. It is a bill that was passed in a bipartisan fashion, the way folks back home want us to do things; a bill that was paid for, as was requested; a bill that will not increase the deficit one penny; and a bill that would extend unemployment benefits and help preserve the American way of life for 2.8 million Americans who are at risk of losing everything that they have worked for. And so what the American public asks me--I know what the folks back home ask--is, Why won't the House act? We know that there is bipartisan support for this legislation even in this body. The bill that I introduced, H.R. 4415, right after the Senate acted with the precise same language, has bipartisan cosponsorship. So the question is, Why? Why won't Congress act? Is it because this question is too complex? No. This one is really simple. We have a bill that would extend unemployment compensation that is paid for, and it would prevent families from losing their house. Every day that passes that we don't act, a family loses their home. Every day that passes, a family loses hope. It is on our watch that we are allowing this to happen. I call upon Congress to act.

Mr. KILDEE

Mr. KILDEE. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. KILDEE. Madam Chair, my amendment would ensure that the Interagency Trade Enforcement Center under the International Trade Administration's budget is funded at this President's requested level of $15 million by moving $10 million from NASA's $4.2 billion exploration fund, which is funded $191 million above the President's request. Here is the problem: Mr. Peters and I, who offer this amendment, represent the State of Michigan, but I assume this problem, the problem of access to markets across the globe for American products, is one that other Members in this body experience on a regular basis and hear about all the time. We may disagree, and I suspect that we would disagree on the elements of our trade policy and particularly the elements in form that many of the trade agreements that this country enters into with other Nations. In fact, there is a debate brewing now over the extent to which we continue to expand those international trade agreements, but the one thing we ought not to disagree on is whether or not we enforce the existing structures that are in place and ensure that American-made products have access to markets that should be open to us and, under existing agreements, would be open to us if we had the strength and the resources to enforce those agreements the way they ought to be enforced, and this is having a real effect. I represent Michigan, as I said, and the auto sector particularly has suffered greatly as a result of trade practices. Just recently, as a matter of fact, the WTO sided with the U.S. in a dispute with China on duties it imposes on imported American vehicles, duties ranging from 2 percent to 21.5 percent, affecting two-thirds of the $8.5 billion worth of American vehicles that are sold into that market. This amendment would ensure that there are adequate resources to ensure that we enforce existing trade policy. American workers and companies are harmed when other countries are allowed to use unfair trade policies unfettered. This amendment would ensure that the Interagency Trade Enforcement Center has the necessary resources to go after unfair trade barriers. It sends a strong message to the world that: If you violate global trade laws, the rules will be enforced and that there will be consequences for bad behavior. American workers deserve this. American companies deserve this. We should stand strong. This amendment would make sure that the resources are available to do just that. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. KILDEE

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Speaker, although I ultimately voted in favor of this bill, H.R. 361, the USA Freedom Act, like all legislation, it is not perfect. I, however, recognize that that without the reforms in H.R. 3361, the government's bulk collection of phone metadata and other records would continue absent necessary modifications. More reforms to these programs are necessary, and I am looking forward to continuing to implement them to protect individual liberties as well as national security.

Mr. KILDEE

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Speaker, this week, I and many others were in Lafayette Park joining the family of Amir Hekmati, my constituent, to commemorate a very sad anniversary. For 1,000 days, Amir Hekmati, a young man born in the United States, grew up in my hometown of Flint, Michigan. His parents emigrated to the United States long before Amir was born, in the late 1970s, from Iran. Amir Hekmati has been sitting in a prison--in Evin Prison in Tehran, for 1,000 days. He traveled to Iran for the first time in August of 2011 because, like many other young men and young women, he wanted to explore his own roots. He had served in the United States Marine Corps, came home; and, before enrolling in school, he wanted to go visit family that he had never met and, in fact, wanted to meet his grandmother whom he had never seen before. He was there for about 2 weeks before he was arrested. For months, nobody knew where he was, and then soon it was revealed that he had been arrested, tried, and convicted of espionage. Because he was an American who had served in the Marine Corps, he was convicted of espionage. That death sentence that was initially executed on him was set aside, and that death sentence was suspended. Apparently, there had been a new trial, and he is now, according to a New York Times report, serving a 10-year sentence. This is a young man who simply went to visit his family, traveled with permission, in a transparent fashion, and is now caught up in the geopolitical struggle as Iran, apparently, seeks to rejoin the international community. One thousand days in prison--holidays have passed; we experience every one of these days, the changing of seasons. For all of us, we take these moments, these passages for granted. For Amir Hekmati, every day is the same. Every day, he is in a cell, for many, many months, in a 3 by 3 cell, unable to even sit down for all but 10 minutes of every day. If Iran truly seeks to rejoin the international community--of course, there are the P5+1 negotiations taking place right now. If Iran seeks to join the global community, and if this Congress is to take any agreement that might be struck seriously, Iran must now free Amir Hekmati. If they expect to be taken seriously, they cannot hold political prisoners. Now, for most of us, we don't think there is much that we can do about this, but I think every American citizen, every Member of Congress--especially those who have joined me in a bipartisan fashion in calling upon Iran to release Amir Hekmati--can do something. We all can. For those of you that use Twitter, #FreeAmir. Believe me, it sends a message. It sends a message across the globe. It sends a message to the Iranian people, to the Iranian Government. It sends a message to the friends and the family of Amir Hekmati that our country stands with him. During those 1,000 days, Amir Hekmati's father has fallen ill. He has brain cancer. It is time, even if for just humanitarian purposes, it is time, long past time, for Iran to do what is right and to release Amir Hekmati, so he can come home and be with his family.

Mr. KILDEE

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Speaker, it is just wrong. It is wrong that we have 2.8 million hardworking Americans who have lost their jobs and are looking every day for their next job. They stand to lose everything that they have worked for, and this Congress has within its power the ability to act to save them from losing decades of hard work, losing their house, losing their car, losing the roof over their head; but this Congress fails to bring up a bill that has passed the Senate, that the President would sign, that would extend unemployment benefits to 2.8 million Americans who work hard every day. There is one reason that this Congress has failed to act, and it is because the Speaker and the Republican leadership will not bring this bill to the floor. This bill would not increase the deficit. It is paid for, but it would end the misery and the suffering of so many hardworking people who get up every day, wondering if today is the day that the foreclosure notice will come, if today is the day that the car will be repossessed. We are all Americans. We have always stood together. We have always helped one another when times are tough. For 2.8 million people, times are tough. Congress needs to act. I call on this House to bring up H.R. 4415. Let's do this now.

Mr. KILDEE

Mr. KILDEE. Madam Chairman, I thank my good friend for yielding. Madam Chairman, I would like to address two amendments that I offered that are included in the en bloc amendment, one that deals with expanding financial resources and tools for servicemembers and one that funds an independent study to improve wounded warrior care. For too long, unscrupulous lenders have targeted servicemembers on military bases with financial products that could have long-term negative impacts on their family's financial security. Inadequate financial understanding or literacy training on some of these financial products can lead to financial difficulty for servicemembers. Many servicemembers often require security clearances to perform their duties, and financial difficulties and the loss of a clearance can have an enormous impact on military combat readiness. This first amendment that I offer would allocate $10 million to expand financial literacy resources for incoming and transitioning servicemembers to ensure that they are not unfairly targeted by predatory lenders. The other amendment that is included is an important one to fund an independent study to improve wounded warrior care. While the DOD is still confronting significant challenges and issues regarding its care and transition of wounded warriors, and while improvements have been made, it is obvious that wounded warriors are still failing to receive the care that they need and that they deserve. Caring for these individuals who have served honorably should--and I know always will be--one of our most solemn duties. For this reason, a review, a comprehensive review, an independent and comprehensive review and study of this type should be awarded to an entity that is free of any current obligation; 20 percent of its revenues in the last several years should not have come from contracts from the DOD or the VA, ensuring independence. It is really important that we take a close look at how we are providing services to these servicemembers, and this independent study would do so.

Mr. KILDEE

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Speaker, I ask the House of Representatives to join me in recognizing Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States Commander-in-Chief William A. Thien as he visits the State of Michigan and our Fifth Congressional District on Monday, May 12, 2014. William A. ``Bill'' Thien was elected Commander-in-Chief of the Veterans of Foreign Wars on July 24, 2013, at the VFW's 114th National Convention, held in Louisville, KY. Having served in the U.S. Navy from 1969-1974 as well as five years in the Indiana National Guard, Commander Thien holds decorations that include the Vietnam Service Medal with 3 stars, Vietnam Campaign Medal with 1960 Bar, Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal (Korea), National Defense Service Medal and several from the National Guard. He joined the VFW in 1971 at Post 3281 in New Albany, IN, where he maintains his Gold Legacy Life Membership. He has served the VFW in many leadership positions including All American Post Commander, All State District Commander and All American State Commander. He has also held positions on numerous National committees, including Vice Chairman of Citizenship Education and Community Service and as Chairman of National Scholarship and Recognition. Now retired, Commander Thien is a member of the American Legion, Veterans of Vietnam War Post 1, National Rifle Association, Patriot Guard Riders, Military Order of the Cootie Pup Tent 51 and VFW National Home. Mr. Speaker, I applaud Commander William Thien for his strong leadership and unwavering commitment to our country.

Mr. KILDEE

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Speaker, it has been 1 month since the Senate acted in a bipartisan fashion to pass emergency unemployment extension. Just hours after the Senate acted, I introduced a bill, H.R. 4415, the same language passed by the Senate. It is fully paid for, would not increase the deficit, unlike the hundreds of billions of dollars in permanent tax breaks that the Republican leadership intends to bring to the floor this week. A month later, we still have no vote scheduled for extending unemployment insurance for millions of Americans--no vote, despite the fact that over 150 Members of Congress, Democrats and Republicans, have cosponsored H.R. 4415; no vote, despite the fact that 2.6 million Americans have already lost this important benefit and 2.8 million will have lost that benefit by the end of the month, almost 3 million Americans; no vote, with 72,000 individuals, hardworking Americans, every week at risk of losing their unemployment insurance if we don't act. Helping jobless Americans who are actively looking for work is not only the right thing to do, but we have done this before. We have done this under Democratic administrations and Republican administrations. It is not a handout. It is simply a lifeline to help those folks who have lost their job stay above ground, above water, before they get their next job. This should not be a partisan issue; yet, yesterday, the Republican leadership said no to letting some of these jobless Americans testify at a Capitol Hill hearing. We were locked out of the room that we had requested. 2.8 million jobless Americans, they may be invisible to the House Republican leadership, but they will not be silenced. While they were locked out of the hearing room at the Rayburn House Office Building, I and other Members joined these unemployed Americans yesterday, went to the steps of the Capitol, and listened to them as they told their stories. This is their Capitol; it is not ours. It belongs to them, and their voices deserve to be heard. I also asked hardworking Americans who are unemployed to tweet and email me their stories. My newsfeed and inbox was flooded with stories of people just trying to get by, struggling to pay their rent, struggling to feed their families as they continue to be denied a vote in the House of Representatives to renew unemployment insurance. They have continued to be denied their voice in the House of Representatives, and this is the people's House. So what I would like to do with my remaining time is just tell a few of the stories that have come in. Lynette B. says: We just received our foreclosure letter on our home. I am 49 years old, and this is certainly not where I see myself at this age. I am educated, and I have been applying to no less than three jobs per day, only to not get a reply to most of them, or else I am overqualified. Jennifer S., this is Jennifer and her family: I never thought I would be in this position, unemployed and worrying about feeding my two growing boys, 14 and 9. I have had to go to food pantries to keep food on the table. I am behind in my car payment and the utilities since my unemployment benefits stopped December 28. Laura B. writes: I need the extension, so I can afford to keep the Internet on to look for jobs and afford the gas to go to interviews. It's very hard out there, and there are so many unemployed people looking for each job, that the chances are slim. Angela M. writes: Please help with UI. I have lost almost everything, sold my car, pawned my wedding rings, selling furniture to keep a rented roof over my kids' heads. Elaine G. writes: I live with my 27-year-old daughter and sleep on an air mattress. I have no phone. I complete job applications now and ask employers to contact me through email. I expect, any day, that my car will be repossessed, as soon as the finance company is able to locate the car. Carol C. writes: Come June 1, I will have to leave my apartment. My car, phone, Internet will be gone. I have no money for essentials like good toilet paper and soap. How does somebody find a job? Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for allowing me to raise these voices. These are real Americans. They are real stories. Some of the questions we face in this Congress are complicated. This one is simple. Take up H.R. 4415, and we can take away the pain that so many Americans--almost 3 million Americans--are facing.

Mr. KILDEE

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Massachusetts for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to defeat the previous question so that we can immediately bring up H.R. 4415, which would restore unemployment benefits to 2.8 million Americans, people who have lost their job and are simply trying to find their next job and want to prevent their families from losing everything they have worked for in that period. I heard the gentleman on the other side say that folks on this side are trying to change the subject to something else. You have got almost 3 million Americans who stand to lose everything they have worked for, everything that they have built over their lifetime, and this Congress has the power to act. We could do it today. The Senate passed an unemployment extension. The President will sign it. On the other side, we heard that we don't want to take up UI because it is not paid for. So, we have a bill that the Senate passed in a bipartisan fashion that is paid for. It does not increase the deficit. You have got the bill you want. You have got the bill you asked for. It would save almost 3 million people from losing everything they have fought for. Do we bring that to the floor? No vote on unemployment extension. We can talk about everything else, we can bring political messaging bills to the floor, but for the 2.8 million people who are losing everything, no vote for them, not in the House of Representatives today. For the 72,000 people every week that are losing their unemployment benefits--hardworking Americans--some on the other side say they want to be unemployed. Yesterday, we had a group of unemployed citizens. We intended to have a hearing. We couldn't get a room. The Republican leadership wouldn't allow it. We went to the steps of the Capitol, and we heard these stories. I suggest we take a look at the people in your own district, in your own districts back home who are unemployed, trying to find their next job, have lost their unemployment benefits, and look them in the face and tell them that the political messaging bills that are coming to this House are more important than preserving the life that these people have worked hard to create for themselves and their kids. Some of the issues that we deal with in this House are really complex questions. Some of them are not so complicated. This is one that is simple: 2.8 million people could be helped only if this Congress will act. Set aside this nonsense. Bring up H.R. 4415, and let's get back to the business of the American people.

Mr. KILDEE

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Speaker, today there are 2 million Americans that stand to lose everything they have worked for, through no fault of their own--2 million Americans that are working Americans that get up every day and work hard to find their next job. They are America's unemployed who have lost their extended unemployment benefits. They stand to lose everything. Rather than taking up H.R. 4415, which I introduced right after the Senate acted on a bipartisan basis to deal with this problem of the unemployed in our country, to make sure that that unemployment compensation is there for them when they need it, rather than take that up, the House Budget Committee has sent to this floor for its consideration a budget that would slash essential programs to provide a safety net for those hardworking Americans who stand to lose everything in order to fund tax cuts--big tax cuts--for America's wealthiest people. That is policy that we just can't tolerate. Rather than taking up the needs of those 2 million, we have taken on the challenge of trying to provide more tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans. If this had happened because of a storm, we would act overnight. We need to take up H.R. 4415 right away.

Mr. KILDEE

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the ranking member for yielding. I think we can agree at least on the rhetoric that the best thing we can do to balance our budget in the long-term is to grow the economy, but it is pretty clear we have a different vision as to how that will actually happen. We believe that a Tax Code that is fair, that equally distributes the obligation to all Americans, is one of the ways we get there. We don't believe that simply cutting taxes for the wealthiest Americans and passing the obligation on to working people is the way to do it. We believe that we grow the economy by investing in infrastructure so that we can grow jobs and deliver products across the country and across the planet. We don't think we get there by cutting infrastructure and continuing to challenge our businesses. We believe we grow the economy by investing in the skills of our workforce so that they can become more productive, not by cutting those necessary programs.

Mr. KILDEE

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Speaker, on Monday night, I introduced legislation to provide an extension of emergency unemployment benefits that would extend the important safety net of unemployment benefits, unemployment insurance to over 2 million Americans who lost their benefits on December 28 and thereafter as a result of the failure of this body to act to protect those benefits. Many of us, particularly on the Democratic side--and I know some on the other side as well because they have expressed it--would have preferred that we had dealt with this question as we were dealing with the budget issues and the budget question that we faced at the end of last year, but we did not, so we are left now with the fact that we have some unfinished business. On Monday evening, in a bipartisan fashion, the U.S. Senate enacted similar legislation. In fact, the bill that I introduced on Monday night was the precise language enacted on a bipartisan basis by the U.S. Senate. Two million Americans are living right now with the fear of losing their homes, losing their cars, having their families split up because they don't have that basic need being met of a roof over a head and food on the table between their last jobs and their next jobs. For typical workers in America, when they lose their jobs, it takes an average of 37 weeks. I know, in my home State, it is probably longer before they find their next opportunities. In Michigan, once one loses one's job, one has got 20 weeks of unemployment insurance. What happens to one after that is what we are dealing with today. The fact that people go from one week to the next not knowing if they are going to be able to keep their families together and keep roofs over their heads is something that this Congress can do something about if it chooses to. I know there are Members of the Republican Conference who are anxious to see this enacted because several put together a letter to the Speaker, asking that this issue be brought up immediately, and that is what I hope my colleagues will do--bring extended unemployment compensation, unemployment insurance to the floor, so that we can protect those workers who are trying to get from their last jobs to their next jobs without starting a cycle of poverty that could last generations. There are some who say we don't need this because, number one, workers who are on unemployment don't want to work. I suppose there may be an exception or a myth that we could conjure up about an individual who is receiving unemployment compensation who doesn't want to work, but for those of you who believe that, come to my district or, better yet, go to your home district. Talk to people in the unemployment lines and ask them if they would trade their situations today for meaningful work. I assure you that the vast majority, if not all of the people in that situation, would trade, in a minute, their situations for a real job with a decent wage. There are some also who say that we shouldn't do this because it is not an emergency, that these are supposed to be emergency benefits. As far as I can see, it is not only an emergency here in Washington, but if you are about to lose your house or if you are about to lose your car or if you don't have enough food on the table to feed your kids, for you, it is an emergency. We represent those folks, and we ought to be thinking about them, and we ought to take this up. So why is it that we need to do this in the first place? I think the Republicans and Democrats could agree that the economy is not growing at a rate to put all Americans back to work. We will acknowledge that. We will stipulate that, while there has been growth and while there has been private sector job creation, it is not enough. We will probably disagree on the reasons behind that, but we can agree that the current economy is not enough to put these folks back to work. We should help them, but we should also do the things that it will take to get America back to work again. Unfortunately, what we will deal with in the next couple of days is a budget that undermines economic growth, that undermines the kind of investments in the skills of our workforce by cutting job training, by cutting Pell grants, by cutting early childhood education--programs like Head Start--that actually change the trajectory for those individuals, that make them more capable and more able to get into the workforce in this competitive economy that we are in. Rather than investing in our people, what this proposed Ryan budget would do is to cut those essential programs and not contribute to economic growth. It also would cut important investments in infrastructure. Democrats and Republicans alike agree that we need to rebuild our infrastructure--our roads, our bridges, our rail systems, and our ports. This budget takes us in the wrong direction. Mr. Speaker, I hope that the Congress can come together around this question and realize that if, in the short term, we are going to deal with the crisis that families are facing, we will pass an unemployment extension, and, in the long term, we take the kind of steps that we need to rebuild our economy. The budget proposed by Mr. Ryan that will be coming to the floor will take us in the wrong direction.

Mr. KILDEE

Mr. KILDEE. Cuts infrastructure, which we have to address. If our companies, if our manufacturers are going to be competitive, we are going to have to make those sorts of investment. This budget does none of those things. All it does is protect those who continue to be sheltered by a system that allows for this kind of inequality in this country and doesn't address the fundamental questions facing us. I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I hope that my colleagues will join me in opposing this budget.