Barbara Lee

Ms. LEE of California

Ms. LEE of California. Thank you very much. Let me yield now to Congressman Pete DeFazio from Oregon, who has some stories he would like to tell about his constituents and what they are going through.

Ms. LEE of California. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We have many Members who still would like to speak, which really let's us know the importance of this issue. I yield to Congresswoman Grace Meng from New York, a freshman from New York who has hit the ground running, is representing her constituents in a bold and brilliant way. Thank you for being with us.

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Speaker, how much time do we have remaining?

Ms. LEE of California. Thank you very much. Let me now yield to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee), my good friend who constantly throughout his life has been waging this war on poverty. Thank you for being with us.

Ms. LEE of California. I thank you so much for not only talking the talk, but walking the walk each and every day. I yield now to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Delaney) and thank you so much for your tremendous leadership.

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. LEE of California. Thank you very much. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlelady from Illinois (Ms. Duckworth), who will speak on behalf of not only her constituents but the entire country. She has come to Congress, hit the ground running, and continues to remind us of our veterans and the sacrifices that they have made, and to ensure their economic security. So many live on food stamps, unfortunately, as we speak. So thank you for being here.

Ms. LEE of California. I want to thank the gentleman for reminding us tonight of our moral obligation to the most vulnerable in our country. Thank you for being here. How much time do I have remaining?

Ms. LEE of California. Thank you very much for your leadership and for being here with us tonight, Congresswoman Davis. I would now like to yield to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel), someone who has been a fighter and a warrior for many, many years and who continues to remind us of our moral obligation, our religious obligation for many, to ensure that we continue this fight in the war on poverty.

Ms. LEE of California. Thank you. Let me now yield to the gentlelady from California, Congresswoman Susan Davis, whom I served with in the California Legislature, who continues to remind us that middle-income individuals are worried at this point now of falling into the ranks of the poor. Thank you for being here.

Ms. LEE of California. Thank you very much for that very powerful message, Mr. Hoyer. Let me now yield to Representative Danny Davis from Illinois who continues to remind us of the formerly incarcerated individuals who have families and children living below the poverty line.

Ms. LEE of California. I thank the gentleman from North Carolina. Now I would like to yield to the Democratic whip, Steny Hoyer, whose Democratic Whip's Task Force on Poverty, Income Inequality, and Opportunity I am honored and proud to chair. I thank him very much for being here and for his tremendous leadership.

Ms. LEE of California. I now yield to the gentleman from North Carolina, Congressman G.K. Butterfield.

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today with many Members to mark President Lyndon Baines Johnson's 1964 State of the Union Address. Let me first take a moment to thank Leader Pelosi; our whip, Steny Hoyer; and the chair of the Congressional Black Caucus, Congresswoman Marcia Fudge, for their tremendous leadership in leading our agenda for economic justice and for jobs. This is truly a historic day in our fight to provide every American with a pathway out of poverty. This morning, we were joined here at the Capitol by Linda Johnson Robb, President Lyndon Baines Johnson and Lady Bird Johnson's eldest daughter, to mark the 50th anniversary of her father's State of the Union speech in which he declared an unconditional war on poverty. At the time of his speech, the Nation's supplemental poverty rate was approximately 26 percent; 36 percent of low-income households struggled with food insecurity; and more than a third of American seniors were living in poverty. And let me tell you, President Johnson got it. He recognized in his speech that poverty is a national problem requiring national organization and support. He knew that in a great society it is absolutely essential that we prioritize investments that lift millions out of poverty. As a result of his vision, his daughter reminded us this morning of the bipartisan and bicameral effort that followed, benchmark antipoverty legislation passed during the Johnson administration, including--and I want to remind everyone of these major initiatives that have significantly changed the lives of millions of Americans--the Civil Rights Act, the Urban Mass Transportation Act, the Criminal Justice Act, the Food Stamp Act, the Older Americans Act, Social Security amendments, the Voting Rights Act, the Housing and Urban Development Act, the Public Works and Economic Development Act, the Department of Housing and Urban Development Act, the Amendment to the Immigration and Nationality Act, the Higher Education Act, the Child Nutrition Act, the Child Protection Act, and the National School Lunch Act, in addition to Head Start, Job Corps, of course food stamps, now known as SNAP, Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security. The result of these policies and programs are undeniable. The poverty rate was cut nearly in half by the mid-1970s. They even had a personal impact on many of us here, a personal impact on me, providing a critical bridge over troubled waters when I was a single mother in the seventies, trying to raise two boys and go to college. And I am forever grateful to the American people for being there for me when I needed them. And we know that today, 50 years later, these critical antipoverty programs continue to provide that support for vulnerable Americans and people living on the edge. Today, the Nation's supplemental poverty rate is now 16 percent, well below what it was in 1964. The programs put in place after the war on poverty, they work. They create economic security, return people to their dignity, and provide opportunities for Americans to lift themselves out of poverty. According to a report released by the Center for American Progress yesterday, without the safety net initiated as a part of the war on poverty, ``poverty rates today would be nearly double what they currently are.'' And I will now insert that report into the Record. [From americanprogress.org, Jan. 7, 2014] Key Findings From Our New National Poll One-quarter to one-third of Americans, and even higher percentages of Millennials and people of color, continue to experience direct economic hardship. Sixty-one percent of Americans say their family's income is falling behind the cost of living, compared to just 8 percent who feel they are getting ahead and 29 percent who feel they are staying even. Twenty-five percent to 34 percent of Americans report serious problems falling behind in rent, mortgage, or utilities payments or being unable to buy enough food, afford necessary medical care, or keep up with minimum credit card payments. While these numbers have somewhat retreated over the last five years, they are still shockingly high, and the disparities across demographic groups underscore how uneven the current recovery has been. A majority of Americans have a direct personal connection to poverty. Fifty-four percent of Americans say that someone in their immediate or extended families is poor, a figure that has actually increased 2 points since we conducted our first poll in. Nearly two in three African Americans (65 percent) report a direct connection to poverty, while 59 percent of Hispanics say the same. Americans vastly overestimate the annual income necessary to be officially considered poor. Perhaps expressing a more realistic understanding of the economy than official government measures currently capture, Americans on average estimate that it takes just over $30,000 in annual income for a family of four to be considered officially in poverty-- about $7,000 more than the government's poverty line. Most respondents in the focus groups were shocked to hear that the official poverty line was as low as it is; many suggested that it represents a disconnect with the reality of rising prices over the last few years. Americans on average also report that it would take more than $55,000 in annual income to be considered out of poverty and safely in the middle class. Americans now believe that nearly 40 percent of their fellow citizens are living in poverty. When we conducted our 2008 poll, 13.2 percent of Americans were living below the federal poverty line, but our survey found that Americans guessed the number to be 29 percent. Today, with unemployment at pre-financial crisis levels and a recovery ostensibly underway for several years, government statistics tell us that 15 percent of Americans live below the poverty level. The public, however, believes that number is now 39 percent-- a stunning 10-point increase that flies in the face of economic indicators such as the unemployment rate, consumer confidence, the financial markets, and gross domestic product, or GDP. Americans strongly believe that poverty is primarily the result of a failed economy rather than the result of personal decisions and lack of effort. In a forced choice test of ideas, nearly two in three Americans (64 percent) agree more with a structural argument about the causes of poverty-- ``Most people who live in poverty are poor because their jobs don't pay enough, they lack good health care and education, and things cost too much for them to save and get ahead,'' underscoring the current economy's failings in the areas of wages, health care, education, and cost of living. In contrast, only 25 percent of Americans agree more with a personal cause--``Most people who live in poverty are poor because they make bad decisions or act irresponsibly in their own lives.'' Even white conservatives and libertarians prefer the structural vision of a failed economy over personal reasons for poverty by a wide margin (63 percent to 29 percent). Retrospective evaluations of the ``war on poverty'' are mixed, but Americans across ideological and partisan lines believe the government has a responsibility to use its resources to fight poverty. Americans do not generally have a favorable impression of the term ``the war on poverty'' without additional context about the programs and goals associated with the larger project. But after introducing information to describe the war on poverty and its impact, an overwhelming percentage of Americans--86 percent--agrees that the government has a responsibility to use some of its resources to combat poverty. Moreover, a majority (61 percent) feels that the war on poverty has made a difference, albeit not a major difference, in achieving its goals (41 percent say war on poverty has made a ``minor difference''; 20 percent say it has made a ``major difference''). Retrospective evaluations of the war on poverty, however, are heavily divided by ideology, partisanship, and race. Nearly 7 in 10 (69 percent) white liberals and progressives believe the war on poverty has worked, and more than 6 in 10 (64 percent) white conservatives and libertarians believe the opposite. Despite mixed feelings about the original war on poverty, there is strong support for a more realistic goal of reducing poverty by half over the next 10 years. Asked whether they would support or oppose ``the President and Congress setting a national goal to cut poverty in the United States in half within ten years,'' 7 in 10 Americans said they would support such a goal--40 percent of the public would strongly support the goal--and only 22 percent would oppose it. This figure is quite similar to the 74 percent of support reported in the first study in 2008. Support for a national goal of cutting poverty in half is very strong among African Americans (87 percent support, 58 percent strongly) and reaches roughly 80 percent among both Millennials (79 percent) and Latinos (79 percent). Sixty-five percent of whites support this goal as do a majority of Democrats (89 percent), Independents (66 percent), and Republicans (54 percent). The public is clear about its priorities for reducing poverty--jobs, wages, and education. Asked which two areas they believe are most important for new investments, 40 percent of Americans choose ``creating jobs and increasing wages''; 30 percent choose ``job training and workplace preparation''; 25 percent choose ``elementary and secondary education''; 23 percent choose ``college access and affordability''; and 21 percent choose ``early childhood education.'' Americans also express very strong support for a number of policies to help reduce poverty rates with particular intensity around jobs, wages, and education but also on more traditional safety net items. Of the 11 policy ideas tested, five proposals received 80 percent or higher total support and 50 percent or higher strong support from Americans. These five policy proposals are: help low wage workers afford quality child care (86 percent total support, 52 percent strong support); expand nutrition assistance to provide families with healthy food and enough to eat (85 percent total support, 50 percent strong support); make universal pre-kindergarten available for all children (84 percent total support, 59 percent strong support); expand publicly funded scholarships to help more families afford college (84 percent total support, 54 percent strong support); and increase the minimum wage and make sure it rises with inflation (80 percent total support, 58 percent strong support). A second tier of anti-poverty proposals with roughly three-quarters total support and more than 40 percent strong support includes ideas for expanded tax credits like the Earned Income Tax Credit and Child Tax Credit and access to affordable health coverage, as well as proposals for a new national jobs program and more refinancing of mortgages. Policymakers should feel confident that the American public will support efforts to expand economic opportunity, increase access to good jobs and wages, and maintain a robust social safety net. Harsh negative attitudes about the poor that seemingly defined political discussions throughout the 1980s and 1990s have given way to public recognition that many Americans--poor and middle class alike--are facing many pressures trying to stay afloat and get ahead in the difficult economic environment. Supporters of anti-poverty efforts should not be complacent in their efforts, however, and should recognize that although Americans back government action to reduce poverty, questions remain about the structure and scope of these efforts and how effective they have been over time. Let me give you an example. SNAP lifted 5 million people out of poverty in 2012 alone; and according to a new report by the White House, released yesterday, unemployment benefits reduced poverty by nearly 1 percent in 2012 alone. Without Social Security, nearly half of our Nation's seniors would live in poverty; and since 2008, unemployment insurance has kept 11 million people out of poverty, including 2.5 million children and adults in 2012. We are going to talk about not only the history this evening but also about the challenges ahead. I will now yield to Congresswoman Yvette Clarke from New York to speak about many of the challenges which remain, in addition to a historical perspective on the war on poverty.

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro) whose subcommittee I serve on, the Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health, and Human Services.

Ms. LEE of California

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Speaker, as cochair of the Congressional Black Caucus' Taskforce on Poverty and the Economy and chair of the Democratic whip's Task Force on Poverty, Income Inequality, and Opportunity, I join my colleagues today in marking President Lyndon Baines Johnson's 1964 State of the Union address. Fifty years ago, President Johnson boldly declared an unconditional war on poverty. For the next 50 days, Members will be giving 50 speeches on the floor in continuing this war for economic justice. I am so pleased and honored that President and Lady Bird Johnson's eldest daughter, Mrs. Lynda Johnson Robb, accepted our invitation to join us here today. She is here in the gallery. I just want to say to her that she exemplifies President and Mrs. Johnson's commitment and the leadership required to fight poverty and build a great society. She visited Appalachia with her daddy, as she told us earlier, and reminded us today that this was a bipartisan and bicameral effort requiring leadership from the White House. President Johnson's war on poverty created critical antipoverty programs such as Head Start, Job Corps, food stamps, Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security. As President Johnson said 50 years ago: It will not be a short or easy struggle, no single weapon or strategy will suffice, but we shall not rest until the war is won.

Ms. LEE of California

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Mr. Douglas L. Bragg for his extraordinary career of public service and leadership on the occasion of his retirement. Mr. Bragg is retiring after thirty- four years of dedicated service to the United States Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), where he has served as Director of the Oakland VA Regional Office since October 2011. Mr. Bragg is a Vietnam Era veteran who served in the United States Air Force from 1970 to 1973. Mr. Bragg began his career with the VA in 1979 at the San Francisco VA Regional Office. In 1986, he took on the role as a Veterans Benefits Counselor and also served as the station's outreach coordinator. He was at the forefront of the Regional Office's response to the Loma Prieta earthquake, as he was primarily responsible for the outreach efforts to victims of the earthquake. He joined the Veterans Benefits Administration as a Supervisory Field Examiner in 1989. In 1994, he accepted a position as a Program Analyst in the Veterans Assistance Service (VAS) at the VA Central Office in Washington, DC, where he worked on the Foreign Medical Program, performed station surveys, and was a member of the VAS Business Process Reengineering team. In 1996, Mr. Bragg went on to become an analyst for the Fiduciary Program on the Policy and Regulations staff. He returned to the field in 1999 following his appointment as the Assistant Veterans Service Center Manager at the Washington, DC VA Regional Office. During his tenure in this position, he was accepted into Leadership VA through the VA Learning University, the VA's corporate university for VA employees to develop leadership and other management skills, and graduated in 2002. He became the Acting Veterans Service Center Manager at Washington Regional Office in 2003. In 2004, Mr. Bragg joined the management team of the St. Louis VA Regional Office as the Education Program Manager. He further developed his leadership credentials while serving as the Acting Assistant Director in 2007, completing the Leadership for a Democratic Society course at the Federal Executive Institute in 2007. He was accepted as a participant in the FY 2007 Assistant Director Development Program. He served as Assistant Director of the St. Louis VA Regional Office from 2008 through 2011. He was appointed to the Oakland VA Regional Office as Director in October 2011. In this capacity, Mr. Bragg has had the responsibility of overseeing California's 1.8 million veteran population. From the Oakland VA Regional Office, over 127,000 Californian veterans receive benefits with the total monthly compensation and payment benefits paid at over $146 million. Throughout his prolific career with the VA, Mr. Bragg has been praised for his strategy, strong leadership, integrity and compassion. He has worked hard to create opportunities for veterans, a critical commitment that we must continue to honor to make sure our veterans come home to good jobs and services that are necessary to help transition successfully into civilian life. On behalf of the residents of California's 13th Congressional District, Mr. Douglas Bragg, I salute you. I congratulate you on your many achievements, and I wish you and your loved ones all the very best as you transition to this exciting new chapter of life.

Ms. LEE of California

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise to express my support for H.R. 3309, the Innovation Act. While not perfect, this legislation would take significant steps toward reducing the number of costly and abusive patent lawsuits. ``Patent trolls,'' or non-practicing entities that take advantage of the legal process for their own economic gain, are a massive cost to businesses and a significant strain on our already overburdened justice system. I strongly agree that we should be addressing this critical problem especially at a time of continuing economic recovery. However, like many, I had serious concerns about specific portions of this legislation. That is why I voted in strong support of an amendment introduced by my dear friend and colleague Congressman John Conyers, the Ranking Member of the Judiciary Committee. His amendment would have improved the Innovation Act by adding provisions that protect customers targeted in infringement suits, promote transparency in patent ownership, and direct the Patent and Trademark Office to develop educational materials for small businesses. Unfortunately, while his amendment failed, I hope we will continue to work to implement many of his suggestions. As we vote on this legislation today, it is also important that we remember other issues affecting our ability to fight patent fraud. For example, the sequester cost the Patent and Trademark Office nearly $150 million this year. It also resulted in 1000 fewer patent examiners and delayed the construction of a satellite patent office in Silicon Valley. I commend this legislation's well intentioned goal to curb abusive patent litigation and look forward to continuing to work with my colleagues to end this destructive practice.

Ms. LEE of California

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the extraordinary career of Linda Crayton as we celebrate over 40 years of her dedicated service to the community and her wide reaching accomplishments. Ms. Crayton is an outstanding individual, who throughout her distinguished career has championed public private partnerships, led efforts for gender equality, advocated for justice in her community, and supported our youth. Ms. Crayton's esteemed career has spanned over four decades as an employee of Comcast, where she is currently the San Francisco Regional Senior Director of Government Relations. Along the way, she has been a staunch advocate for the advancement of women by leading efforts with Black Women Organized for Political Action, California Women Lead, EMERGE, Women In Cable and Telecommunications, and 100 Black Women of the Bay Area, Inc. Ms. Crayton has been recognized numerous times for her commitment to gender equality. The San Francisco League of Women Voters accorded Ms. Crayton ``The Woman Who Could Be President'' award in 2001. In 2006, she was named ``Woman of the Year'' for the 9th senatorial district by California State Senator and President Pro- Tempore Don Perata, as well as ``Corporate Woman of the Year'' by 100 Black Women, Inc. In 2011, Ms. Crayton was recognized by the National Women's History Month with a History Makers Award. Among her many contributions, Ms. Crayton has tirelessly served her community and church as a civil rights leader. She has worked with the NAACP, Urban League, and countless other community justice organizations. She also supports the East Oakland Youth Development Center, Oakland Boys and Girls Club, and the Spanish Speaking Citizens Foundation. For her tremendous commitment to the community, she has been recognized by the San Francisco African American Chamber with a ``Lifetime Achievement'' award and by the National Association for Multi-ethnicity in Communications (NAMIC) as a Black History Month-- Living Legend. In 2007, the Martin Luther King Jr. Civic Committee and the Bayview Hunters Point Family Resource Center further honored Ms. Crayton with a ``Distinguished Community Service Award,'' and a ``Humanitarian Award,'' respectively. Moreover, Ms. Crayton boasts an impressive commitment to local government. In 1996, San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown first appointed her to the San Francisco Airports Commission, a role that she has been appointed to by successive San Francisco mayors continuously till this day. She has worked hard to ensure that San Francisco International Airport is the best run, cleanest, and most welcoming airport in the world. Additionally, Ms. Crayton provided much needed support and leadership to the restructuring of the San Francisco Department of Health in her capacity as President of the San Francisco District V Mental Health Board. For these efforts she was recognized by the San Francisco Board of Supervisors with the prestigious Leadership Award. Throughout her prolific career, Ms. Crayton has not only been a hardworking professional, but also a compassionate and generous individual. She has been a mentor for countless men and women throughout the years, taking them under her wing to help them grow professionally and pursue job opportunities. Therefore, on behalf of California's 13th Congressional District, Ms. Linda Crayton, I salute you. Your many years of service have made an indelible mark in our community. Best wishes to you and your loved ones in the years to come.

Ms. LEE of California

Ms. LEE of California. Thank you. I want to thank Chairman Royce's and Ranking Member Engel's staffs. I want to especially thank my staff, Pablo and Jirair, and all of our staffs here for their very diligent and steadfast work. This has taken us probably about 4 years to get this bill to the floor. Thank you again, Chairman Royce, Ranking Member Engel, and all of the original cosponsors for their tremendous support.

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Speaker, first let me thank Chairman Royce for his tremendous leadership, for his continued support, and for his true efforts to create bipartisan initiatives in the legislation coming out of the committee. I have served with him on the committee for many, many years, and it has always been consistent in terms of trying to reach a bipartisan agreement on these bills. So, again, I thank him very much. And, of course, to the gentleman from New York, Ranking Member Engel, thank you, again, for your leadership and for helping to craft a bill that we could get to the floor, which is a bill that I think will really put the United States on the right side of history as it relates to Haiti, and also for your focus on the Western Hemisphere. Let me also just thank all of the original cosponsors of the Assessing Progress in Haiti Act of 2013, including Representatives Yvette Clarke, Frederica Wilson, Maxine Waters, John Conyers, Charlie Rangel, Gregory Meeks, Karen Bass, and, of course, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen. I want to thank my colleague Sheila Jackson Lee for staying strong and steady and supporting this legislation. And I thank them also for their tireless work and longstanding commitment to the well-being of Haitians and the country of Haiti. Nearly 4 years ago, I stood as chair of the Congressional Black Caucus and led a Special Order, recognizing the importance of our relationship with Haiti. A short time later, I led a delegation to Haiti where we witnessed the destruction and devastation firsthand. The Congressional Black Caucus has a long history of working with the Haitian people and the Haitian American community on a variety of issues. We share a close and longstanding relationship. This has continued under the magnificent leadership of our current chair, Chairwoman Marcia Fudge. On January 12, 2010, a devastating 7.0 earthquake struck near Haiti's capital. This terrible earthquake killed hundreds of thousands and left 1 million more homeless. Our government, the American people, and the international community responded with a tremendous outpouring of support for the Haitian people. However, what began as a swift and effective relief effort gave way to a sluggish reconstruction. A report by the Government Accountability Office, also cited by Chairman Royce, found that USAID has missed a number of its own goals and deadlines. Most importantly the GAO found that as of June, 2013, USAID had committed only 52 percent, and disbursed 35 percent, of the $651 million in funding for earthquake reconstruction. That is why passing the Assessing Progress in Haiti Act of 2013 is so important. With so much money yet to be disbursed, we have an opportunity to ensure that our assistance is as effective as possible. My bill helps us understand where our aid efforts stand, where they are going, and how USAID plans to get there. It would require the State Department to report on the progress of infrastructure projects, indicators used to measure project success, efforts to combat corruption, measures taken to strengthen Haitian capacity, and considerations of vulnerable populations. My bill would give us the information we need to make those assessments and help get the reconstruction on track. No one is saying that this will be easy. The road to recovery is a long one, and this legislation is but one small step. We must also keep in mind that USAID cannot fix the problem on its own. I commend the agency for the work it does around the world and encourage it to continue to address the challenges it faces in Haiti. Haitian citizens and their government, along with nongovernmental and intergovernmental organizations, must do their part. The Haitian Government will need to hold free, fair, and timely elections. I commend them for the steps they have already taken this week to hold long overdue elections next year. The United Nations will also need to vigorously address the cholera epidemic. There is no question that in October 2010, after nearly a century of not having cases of cholera in the country, it was introduced by U.N. peacekeepers. As I said before, I am very proud today that we are voting to increase the transparency and accountability of U.S. assistance to Haiti on a bipartisan basis. I strongly urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan legislation, and I look forward to continuing to work with them to ensure that Haiti is truly built back better and that the Haitian people once and for all have a future--and that future will be ensured by the support of the American people.

Ms. LEE of California

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Speaker, I was not present for rollcall votes 630-636. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes'' on rollcall 630, ``yes'' on rollcall 631, ``no'' on rollcall 632, ``yes'' on rollcall 633, ``yes'' on rollcall 634, ``yes'' on rollcall 635, and ``yes'' on rollcall 636.

Ms. LEE of California

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlelady for yielding and for her tremendous leadership in her capacity as our ranking member on the Rules Committee. Thank you so much for standing in strong opposition to this rule. As a member of the Budget Committee and Appropriations Committee, I want to commend all of my colleagues for putting forth a plan to replace some of the reckless sequester cuts that do continue to hurt families each and every day. Yet this budget deal is really outrageous for what it doesn't do. It does nothing--nothing--to extend emergency unemployment benefits to the millions of jobless workers in every State. As the Center on Budget and Priorities report today points out, the failure to include any extension of Federal emergency jobless benefits in the deal would likely negate any boost from sequester this deal would bring, and I will include this report for the Record. Over 170 Democrats have joined my letter calling for an extension of this critical lifeline. It is really shameful that Republicans have refused to include an extension of unemployment benefits. The least we can do for the millions of the long-term unemployed who are struggling just to get by during this holiday season is to pass this 3-month extension. This budget does nothing for the millions of jobless people and asks nothing from the people who caused our economic crisis and continue to benefit from economic inequality. Please remember, this is not about showboating or statistics. We are talking about people's lives. We are talking about people living on the edge. We are talking about 1.3 million people who will lose unemployment benefits during this holiday season. It is cruel. It is morally wrong, and it is economically stupid. So I hope that we can vote ``no'' on this rule and defeat the previous question so we can vote for a 3-month extension of unemployment compensation. Finally, let me just say, we must do better. We must protect and expand the safety net that are the pillars of our society. [From offthechartsblog.org, Dec. 11, 2013] Failure To Continue Jobless Benefits Would Undo Budget Deal's Economic Boost (By Chad Stone) The Murray-Ryan budget deal provides a stimulative boost to the economy--albeit a modest one. But here's the rub: the economic drag caused by lawmakers' failure to include an extension of federal emergency jobless benefits in the deal would likely negate that stimulus. Economist Joel Prakken of Macroeconomic Advisers says that the deal would boost economic growth by ``maybe 1/4 percentage point'' compared to the sequestration cuts scheduled under current law. The deal follows the sound principle under current circumstances of raising deficits in the near term to boost the economic recovery but reducing them by an even larger amount later, when the economy is expected to be stronger. The problem is, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that Emergency Unemployment Compensation (EUC) has a very similar impact--boosting the economy by up to 0.3 percent by the end of 2014 and adding up to 300,000 jobs. Not extending EUC would remove that potential boost from the economy. The budget deal and extending EUC have similar economic effects because their budgetary effects are roughly the same size: CBO estimates that the budget deal's increases in discretionary spending would raise federal spending by $26 billion in fiscal year 2014 and $22 billion in fiscal year 2015, while its deficit-reduction provisions would cut spending by roughly $3 billion in each fiscal year. Netting these effects and assuming that about a quarter of spending for fiscal year 2015 (which starts October 1, 2014) occurs in calendar year 2014, the budget deal would produce a net increase in spending of about $28 billion by the end of calendar year 2014. CBO estimates that extending EUC would cost about $26 billion in calendar year 2014. CBO and other analysts generally regard spending on unemployment insurance as providing more ``bang for the buck'' than most other stimulus measures. So, the economic drag in 2014 from a failure to extend EUC is likely to be at least as large as the economic boost from the budget deal.

Ms. LEE of California

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Speaker, in addition to saluting and congratulating our colleague and friend, Congressman Mel Watt, I want to rise and salute our friend Nikki Mayes tonight. Nikki, I just have to say to you first of all, I was a staffer for Ron Dellums when I first met Nikki, and I know tonight Ron would want to salute you, congratulate you, and thank you so much for your 36 years of service. So on behalf of Ron Dellums and myself, let me just say what a great role model you have been for all of us. I also want to thank you for helping us navigate this great institution. We will always remember you. We will cherish your friendship. And I want to say to you that, as you start this new chapter of your life, I hope you get some rest and I hope you have a lot of fun. Thank you, again, Nikki.

Ms. LEE of California

Ms. LEE of California. Thank you very much. Let me thank you, Congressman Fattah, first of all, for yielding and for your tremendous leadership on so many fronts. And thank you so much for this Special Order tonight and for reminding us in many ways of the history of this great movement that took place in this country. Let me also just thank our chair of the Congressional Black Caucus, Congresswoman Marcia Fudge, for her tremendous leadership and her tireless work and for the real humbling honor to be part of her delegation to South Africa to honor President Mandela. Also to Leader Pelosi and to our assistant leader, Mr. Clyburn. Let me just take a moment to extend my thoughts and prayers on behalf of my district to President Mandela's family, for South Africa. We all have lost a warrior. South Africa has lost a warrior. The world has lost a freedom fighter and a great statesman. The Congressional Black Caucus stood alongside the ANC and Nelson Mandela in the fight for equality and justice. And I am so proud of this contribution. Even throughout his 27 years of incarceration and brutal treatment, his spirit was never broken, and this stands, really, as a testament to the power of resistance and determination. Not only is Nelson Mandela the father of the liberation movement in South Africa, but he also laid the framework for modern liberation movements throughout the world. With a dignified defiance, Nelson Mandela never compromised his political principles or the mission of the anti-apartheid movement, and he took up the mantle of fighting HIV and AIDS. Like many of my colleagues, I was first inspired by Mr. Mandela in the early seventies. I was arrested in Berkeley, California, during the time when our brave brothers and sisters in the labor movement refused to unload ships carrying cargo from South Africa that arrived in Oakland's port. My predecessor, former Congressman Ron Dellums, lead the effort with Congressman--our beloved Bill Gray--over and over and over again introducing legislation calling for divestment against this racist apartheid regime. But they finally put the United States on the right side of history when the Congress overrode President Reagan's veto. And I vividly remember that the ANC was designated a terrorist organization by the United States Government, and it was illegal to meet with the freedom fighters, but many of us did anyway. I remember meeting with ANC members at the United Nations in Switzerland and Austria to help map out our solidarity work here in the United States. So you can imagine how I personally felt when I joined some of you as an election observer, seeing lines and lines of people waiting to vote for the first time for Nelson Mandela as the first Black President of a free South Africa. One of my proudest moments as a Member of Congress was when I led the effort to remove President Mandela, a Nobel Peace Prize, and the ANC from the U.S. Terrorist Watch List in time for his 90th birthday, just 5 years ago. What now lives is Madiba's legacy of sacrifice, fighting for what is right and as an example of the power of healing and reconciliation. And I just have to say that legacy was shown briefly in the handshake of President Obama when he extended it to President Raoul Castro of Cuba. I was proud of that handshake for what it means for diplomacy and the possibility of opening lines of communication. That handshake stands with the legacy of Nelson Mandela, of working and negotiating with those with whom you may not agree. As Madiba said, and I quote, ``Reconciliation means working together to correct a legacy of past injustice.'' He was a peacemaker. President Mandela taught us so many lessons, from reconciliation and personal perseverance to the true meaning of public service. What he taught us was never to give up the fight for justice. I had the privilege to meet Mr. Mandela many times. His serenity and his strength really were larger than life. His legacy will live on forever in how we live our lives in the fight for freedom and for justice in a multiracial society. Finally, let me just say that I hope, in his honor, that we live his legacy and continue our fight to end racism and to defend voting rights right here in the United States. May his soul rest in peace.