Gwen Moore

Ms. MOORE

Ms. MOORE. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Ms. MOORE. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the concern that the gentleman has about maintaining the budgetary constraints, but that is the very problem that agencies like the FDIC and others have had. They have had the authority, but they have not had the independence. The appropriation process ties the hands of these agencies. The one bright star is the CFPB, which is independent, and it supports consumers. I just want to point out that changing the structure of the CFPB to a commission would add $66 million to our deficit. I look forward to my friends on the other side of the aisle's vote on my amendment since it not only preserves the independence of the CFPB, but it continues to ensure that U.S. markets are the fairest and most robust in the world, and it protects consumers from mischief in this appropriations process. I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. MOORE. Mr. Chairman, I offer amendment Nos. 5, 6, and 7 made in order under the rule.

Ms. MOORE. Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank the chair and the ranking member for agreeing to this en bloc amendment request. These three amendments, offered with Financial Services ranking member Ms. Waters, Mrs. Maloney of New York, and Mr. Ellison of Minnesota, address Republican attacks on the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the CFPB. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is one of the central pillars of the Wall Street reform, the Dodd-Frank Act. To date, the Bureau has returned more than $11.4 billion to 25 million consumers that have been harmed by predatory financial practices. Let me repeat that for you, Mr. Chairman. $11.4 billion has been returned to our constituents, 25 million of them, as a result of the work of the CFPB. Yet our colleagues on the other side of the aisle want to again side with foes of the Bureau, with the predatory and other unscrupulous lenders. Our amendment seeks to preserve the independence and efficacy of this watchdog agency. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Ellison), a member of the Financial Services Committee.

Ms. MOORE. Mr. Chairman, could the Chair inform me about how much time I have remaining?

Ms. MOORE

Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, despite the ongoing economic recovery that has seen the longest streak of private sector job growth in history, since the 2008 crash, the uneven recovery in housing markets has absolutely crushed the poor and working class and has left homeowners in poor areas underwater and has squeezed renters with a lack of units and high rents. Shamefully, the GOP-controlled House has been an absentee landlord on this issue, and now we find out that the Republican nominee for President wanted the crash because it would be a good thing for rich guys like him to make more money. Maybe that is why the now-failed Trump Mortgage pushed subprime loans. The American people deserve a Congress and a President who will keep them in their houses and in their homes.

Ms. MOORE

Ms. MOORE. Mr. Chair, I thank the chairman and ranking member for their support. My amendment would condemn the continuing attacks against and the intentional targeting of medical facilities and medical providers in Syria. I want to remind my colleagues that these facilities are entitled to protection under international law. Yet, we continue to hear about airstrikes in Syria targeting these hospitals and medical facilities. Just pick up the newspaper. In 1 week, six facilities in Aleppo were targeted. Intentional attacks against hospitals, surgeons, nurses, and other healthcare workers is not a norm that we should accept. Neither is the Syrian Government's blocking of humanitarian aid, including medical aid. Just last week, a U.N.-Red Cross aid convoy, including medical aid to a besieged Syrian city, was blocked by the Syrian Government. A former top U.N. humanitarian official tweeted his disgust that the aid had been blocked ``because it carried baby milk.''

Ms. MOORE. Mr. Chair, I commend the courageous healthcare providers and nonprofit groups that are working in the midst of these attacks to provide health care to the millions under siege in Syria. Too many have died and too many more will die if we continue to be sorry.

Ms. MOORE

Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, I was unable to make it to the April 28, 2016, vote on H.J. Res. 88. If present, I would have voted NO on H.J. Res. 88, the resolution to disapprove of the final Department of Labor fiduciary duty rule. The Department of Labor thoughtfully and carefully crafted the rule over five years with the input of thousands of written comments from academics, advocacy groups, and industry and the benefit of 4 days of field hearings and hundreds of meetings. The final rule will protect retirement savers from conflicts of interest that encourage advisors to prioritize their financial gain over that of their clients.

Ms. MOORE

Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in tribute to Reverend Tongber S. Vang who passed away on February 21, 2016 at the age of 51. Tongber S. Vang was born in Sanau, Laos and was the eldest of 7 children. Tongber Vang immigrated to the United States at the age of 12, after living in refugee camps of Thailand with his family for a number of years. He lived first in Little Rock, Arkansas and eventually moved to Milwaukee and lived with his grandmother, Mao Xiong. He graduated from Milwaukee's West Division High School and attended Milwaukee Area Technical College with the intention of following a career in dentistry. Tongber met Pa at Hmong New Year Celebration; he knew immediately she was the woman he would marry. He was touched by Pa's Christian faith and she encouraged his growth with Christ that led him to the ministry. On July 4, 1986, Tongber and Pa were married, and immersed themselves in the ministry, teaching Sunday school for children at Northwest Baptist Church. After Pa graduated from high school in 1988, they both attended and graduated from Hannibal-LaGrange College in Hannibal, Missouri. After graduation, Tongber and Pa moved to Louisville, KY where they both attended Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. They studied during the week but their weekends included a 6-hour commute to and from Lansing, MI to perform church outreach to the Hmong community and coordinate a children's Sunday school ministry. Pastor Tongber moved his family back to Milwaukee in 1997 and accepted a position working for AmeriCorps, Vista Program at the Milwaukee Public Schools. He engaged Hmong parents and students at both South Division and Washington High Schools. In the fall of 1997, Pastor Tongber made the decision to accept the offer to pastor his home church, the Hmong First Baptist Church. Pastor Tongber led his congregation with incredible grace, love, and passion for the word of God. However, his deepest passion was caring and praying with and over members of the church. He led a successful capital campaign which resulted in the construction of the current church building. The church was his second family; he believed with true conviction that if families were okay, the church would be okay, as would the community and the world. Pastor Tongber devoted countless hours to support church ministries and ensuring goals were met. In 2010, he led a mission trip to Nan, Thailand. Pastor Tongber is survived by his beloved wife Pa, their three wonderful sons--Solomon, Josiah, and Joseph, a loving daughter-in-law-- Joann, and a cheerful 13-month-old granddaughter Charity Siabzoo, and a yet-to-be-born granddaughter named Genessa Hnub Tshiab. While Pastor Tongber's time on earth was short, guided fully by his faith in God, he served his family, church and his community selflessly. I was proud to call him a friend and was inspired by his good works. Mr. Speaker, this is why I rise to pay tribute to Tongber S. Vang, a true asset to the 4th Congressional District.

Ms. MOORE

Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted: On rollcall No. 176, ``nay.''

Ms. MOORE

Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this bipartisan measure to provide a five year authorization for the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative. The Great Lakes Restoration Initiative provides federal, state, tribal, and local officials with one more tool to protect the Great Lakes. Through it, we are helping in the fight to keep the Asian Carp out of the Great Lakes. Through it, tons of contaminated sediments have been removed and will no longer pose a threat to the public or the environment. Waterways that were once closed to boaters, fishermen, and the public are being revitalized and reborn. Through it, we are working to improve habitat for wildlife. This week in my district, the Army Corps and Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District will announce the completion of an Ecosystem Restoration Project funded with GLRI funds. The project ripped out 2,900 feet of concrete channel in the Menominee River, restoring natural riverbed and opening up over 37 miles and 125 acres of upstream wetlands for spawning by various fish species. Through it, three formally designed areas of concerns--because they contain highly contaminated and toxic sediments--have been delisted in the region. Investing in protecting the Great Lakes make both economic and environmental sense. This basin is a drinking water source for tens of millions. When much of our nation and the world is fighting over water and trying to figure out how to address shortages or diminishing water resources, we would be foolish not to protect this national treasure. This investment also benefits the economy and job creation in the region and the nation. Look no further than Milwaukee where water related businesses, universities, and other stakeholders are working to take advantage of our region's proximity to the largest body of freshwater and a strong university research base, including the nation's only freshwater school of science to attract water related entrepreneurs and small businesses to the area. The Milwaukee Water Council, a nonprofit organization with over 180 members, which links water technology companies, water entrepreneurs, academic researchers and water professionals is hard at work turning our region's advantages, including our city's location on Lake Michigan, into creating jobs and economic development that will benefit the city and region. We need to protect the Great Lakes. I want to thank the leadership of the Committee for making this bill a priority. Chairman Shuster, Ranking Member DeFazio, your leadership is much appreciated. I also want to applaud my colleagues from the region, including Congresswoman Kaptur, on both sides of the aisle who keenly understand why we need to support this legislation. I support this bill and urge my colleagues to vote for it.

Ms. MOORE

Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for recognizing me. I am really pleased to join the Ranking Member, Bobby Scott, a mentor of mine and a good friend, Marcia Fudge, and others about the reauthorization of school meals and the WIC program. They are truly champions for ending hunger among children in this country. And I believe no conversation could occur about hunger without having the indomitable Mr. McGovern with us this evening. Mr. Speaker, the Child Nutrition Reauthorization is really a critical opportunity for us to talk about the importance of improving access to healthy meals in schools and for maintaining strong nutrition standards. For too many kids, Mr. Speaker, the only sure meals that they can count on on any given day are provided in school. Yet, Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, the majority on the other side of the aisle are talking about how to make it harder for children, especially low-income children who are eligible for free and reduced- price meals, breakfast and lunch, to access these programs. We should be using this reauthorization to address known gaps and to help children connect to these healthy meals. Nearly 10,000 more schools offer school lunch than offer school breakfast programs, and we should be trying to expand school breakfast rather than restricting them. The Healthy, Hunger-Free Act in the nationwide implementation of the community eligibility program was so insightful. But, yet, we need to do more. Over 162,000 kids in my State qualify for free or reduced meals for lunch, and we need to reach them. Now, what does the reauthorization that Republicans are bringing before us entail? What does it talk about? It talks about scaling back the successful and proven community eligibility provision which we just implemented nationwide last year and really haven't scaled up to what it could be. This innovative program actually works. We have proven it. We have metrics that prove that the program increases access and participation for low-income students, and it helps to reduce administrative burdens and costs for school staff. Now, Mr. Speaker, you have heard my colleagues here talk about obesity. Now, obesity is not just a cosmetic problem. It is a major health problem. We also last year put new nutrition standards in to ward off obesity. Ninety-seven percent--97 percent--of the schools have successfully met these new standards, and USDA has shown great eagerness to work with those who have not. Of course, these new requirements require more servings of fruits, vegetables, whole grains, fat-free and low-fat fluid milk in schools while cutting sodium-saturated fats and trans fats. Mr. Speaker, I can tell you that, when you introduce these foods to children at a young age, they will start to prefer them and we can really transform their lives. I want to skip over many of my comments and just add them to the Record because I just want to focus on one little disease that is associated with poor nutrition, and that is diabetes. The burden to individuals and families is gargantuan. You hear of people losing their limbs because of diabetes. But, Mr. Speaker, I want to talk about the burden to the economy and to the budget by allowing diabetes to run amok. Diabetes is a budget-busting disease. It is an epidemic that is affecting an increasing number of Americans, including more and more of our youth. Right now--right now--in 2014, 29 million people in the United States, 9.3 percent of our population, have had diabetes. That is about 1 in 11 people. According to the CDC, by 2050, that number could be as high as 100 million, or 1 in 3 persons. The time to stop this is now while we are reauthorizing the child nutrition bill. We can help our children develop healthy eating habits. I have seen kids love avocados, love grapes, and love these things that are introduced to them while they are young. Our investment in school lunch and school breakfast pales in comparison to the cost of treating diabetes. In 2012, diabetes and its related complications accounted for $245 billion in total costs. Now, that is $176 billion in direct medical costs--think Medicaid and Medicare--and lost wages and work. The CDC estimates that the growth in these--if their predictions hold, if we don't do something, just think, this will go from 1 in 11 people having diabetes to 1 in 3. So we are looking at 2050--2050, I don't think I am going to be around in 2050--this is clearly a clarion call to feed our children properly now. In the school year 2016, we spent $12.5 billion on the school lunch program and $4.3 billion on the school breakfast program. Compare that with the $245 billion that we have spent on diabetes for just 1 year. With that, I will add the rest of my comments to the Record. I would just say, Mr. Scott and Mr. Speaker, that school breakfast, school lunch, and WIC, it is a doggone good deal when you think about it. Mr. Speaker, child nutrition reauthorization is a critical time for us to talk about the importance of improving access to healthy foods in schools, and for maintaining strong nutrition standards. For too many kids, the only sure meals they can count on on a given day are the ones provided in school. Yet, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are talking about how to make it harder for children, especially low-income children who are eligible for free and reduced price meals, to access these programs. The draft Republican Child Nutrition Reauthorization bill is an assault on the programs that help to ensure that our children and get the nutrition they need to be active and engaged learners. A growling stomach does not advance educational achievement. They want to roll back programs that have been proven to help eligible children get access to school breakfast and school lunch programs. It is reportedly titled the ``Improving Child Nutrition and Education Act of 2016'' but it really should be the ``Increasing Child Hunger and Hobbling Education Act.'' We should be using child nutrition reauthorization to address know gaps and help connect more children to healthy meals. Nearly 10,000 more schools offer school lunch than offer a school breakfast program. Participation in school breakfast programs, though improving since the enactment of the Healthy Hunger Free Act and the nationwide implementation of CEP, still lags drastically behind participation in the school lunch program. Only about half of students who eat school lunch nationwide eat a school breakfast. My state of Wisconsin is at the bottom when it comes to the number of schools that participate in school breakfast nationwide. Over 162,000 kids that qualify for Free or Reduced meals are eating lunch, but miss breakfast and Wisconsin loses $22 million federal breakfast reimbursement dollars annually. We need to be discussing how to help the states and schools do better. Mr. Speaker, we just passed the Every Student Succeeds Act last year reauthorizing federal elementary and secondary education policy. Let me tell you, no child can succeed when they're hungry. Any teacher can tell you that. So can a range of experts who have conducted studies on this issue and found overwhelmingly that hunger does not promote academic achievement. So what are Republicans talking about doing in this reauthorization: Scaling back the successful and proven Community Eligiblity Provision (CEP) which just went into effect nationwide last year. This is an innovative program authorized in 2010 that makes it easier for high need schools and school districts to serve free meals to all students by eliminating traditional free/reduced priced applications. With all the rhetoric about wasteful government spending and duplicative programs, what happens when we have successful and proven federal programs and policies that work like CEP, like SNAP? Republicans want to cut them and roll them back. This program has been proven--I emphasize that word again--to increase access and participation in the school meals programs for the low-income students while helping to reduce administrative burdens and costs for school staff. School meal programs benefit from the economics of scale. The more kids who participate, the cheaper it is to serve each child. Thousands of schools have adopted CEP and are seeing benefits including the 156 schools in the Milwaukee Public School system. In its first year, MPS reported serving 22% more school breakfasts. School lunches also saw a gain. CEP means fewer kids are going hungry in Milwaukee and nationwide. Enacting the GOP bill would means that 7,000 schools that now currently participate would be dropped. That is a gigantic step backwards for the health and nutrition of tens of thousands, even hundreds of thousands, of school children who are at key stages of development, physically and academically. Not to mention the students in thousands of schools currently eligible to participate in CEP but would be kicked off under the Republican bill. We have put in place new nutrition standards for school meals--97% of schools have successful met these new standards and the USDA has shown great eagerness to work with those that have not to do so. These new requirements require more servings of fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and fat-free and low-fat fluid milk in school meals while cutting sodium, saturated fat and transfats. Now, some are trying to block the new rules and the savings to our nation both short term and long term for helping kids develop lifelong healthy eating habits. Let me just talk about the burden to individuals and taxpayers of just one disease: diabetes--a budget busting disease. This is an epidemic affecting an increasing number of Americans, including more and more of our youth. The number of Americans with diabetes is estimated to drastically in the next three decades. In 2014, 29 million people in the U.S. (9.3 percent) had diabetes (about 1 in 11). According to the CDC, by 2050 that number could be as high as 100 Million Americans (or 1 in 3). The time to stop this trend is right now when we can help our children develop healthy eating habits that will stay with them for the rest of their lives and a taste for healthy and nutritious foods through the school nutrition programs. I want to compare our investments in school lunch and breakfast programs and helping to provide nutritious meals that will support lifelong eating habits to young people with what it will cost us to treat diabetes. Diabetes is an extremely expensive condition for our healthcare system given that it is associated with a number of complicated health effects. In 2012, diabetes and its related complications accounted for $245 billion in total costs, including $176 billion in direct medical costs (think Medicaid and Medicare) and lost work and wages. If the CDC estimates about the growth in cases holds, the cost of just this one disease will grow dramatically over the next three decades. These costs will be picked up by all of us, including through Medicare and Medicaid. In contrast, in FY 2016, we will spend $12.5 billion on the school lunch program and $4.3 billion on the school breakfast program. Maintaining healthy and nutrition meals and standards and ensuring that all who are eligible can participate in these programs seems like a very wise investment to me. The GOP proposal would bar schools from including the eligibility requirements for school meals on the school meal applications. Absolutely absurd. What public policy purpose is served by such a requirement other than to make sure people don't know about a benefit to which they are entitled. I also want to emphasize the need to further strengthen WIC during this reauthorization. WIC works. That's what the research tells us. The program helps improve health and nutrition outcomes for at risk women, infants, and children. WIC breastfeeding rates are rising. We all know the benefits of breastfeeding for both mother and child. We can make WIC better by increasing the certification period for infants and women, taking steps to ensure that children a better transition by WIC eligible children from the program to the school meals programs Under current law, children that age out of WIC may not be enrolled in school (and participating the school meals programs), risking gains to their health and well-being from having participated in WIC. How about making WIC work better for our men and women in uniform? Yes, there are members of our military who receive WIC. In fact, I know of efforts in the last year to close a WIC clinic located on a military base in Washington State serving over 700 people including Navy families. There is room for bipartisanship. The Senate Agriculture Committee reported a bipartisan bill--which while not perfect and I don't support every element--reflects an honest effort to reach across the aisle that is simply nonexistent in this chamber at this point. And that is a shame. For the children who rely on the school meal programs to meet their nutritional needs. For the schools and school administrators who fight hard every day to put the students under their charge in a position to succeed. For the American taxpayer, who expect us to govern. I know the will is there on this side of the aisle to work together on things like increasing the breakfast (and lunch for that matter) reimbursement rates. To support grant programs to help increase access to school breakfast which remains woefully undersubscribed compared to the school lunch program. We can provide grants to support innovative and proven models such as Breakfast after the bell and in the Classroom as well as school equipment grants to help offset some of the costs.

Ms. MOORE

Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in tribute to Dorothy E. Johnson who passed away on April 16, 2016. Mrs. Johnson was born Dorothy Earl Haralson on April 19, 1929 in Lena, Mississippi. She was the fifth of fourteen children born to Dovie and Ollie Haralson. Mrs. Johnson received both her early and high school education in Lena, Mississippi. She married I.W. Johnson in 1946. They moved to Milwaukee, Wisconsin in 1948 following the great migration of the north after Mr. Johnson secured employment at the Patrick Cudahy Packing House. Mrs. Johnson worked for the next three decades for varied employers; she was a salad maker extraordinaire for some of Milwaukee's finest hotels and culinary establishments such as the Knickerbocker Hotel, Fleur de Lis formerly located in the Cudahy Tower and Angie's Restaurant formerly on Water Street. She also worked for Globe Union. Mrs. Johnson's last employer was Milwaukee County from which she retired in 1990 after 15 years of service as a Food Service Worker. Dorothy and I.W. Johnson raised 11 children in Milwaukee: Erma, Margie, Donna, Wayne, Barbara (deceased), Sharon, Kirk, Lynn, Vincent, David and Deon. She was a great support system for all of her children and their families. She leaves behind a wonderful legacy which includes: 30 grandchildren, 27 great-grandchildren, and 7 great, great- grandchildren. Mrs. Johnson will also be sorely missed by numerous beloved extended family members and friends. Dorothy Johnson was an avid reader. She also loved traveling, the theater and music. She was able to combine her love of family, travel, theater and music on her last big trip. She traveled to Toronto in 2012 to watch one of her granddaughters perform as a musician with Cirque du Soleil. She also enjoyed watching political programing on television with C- SPAN being one of her favorites. She kept current with local and national politics and believed in making sure her vote counted. Even when encountering an illness before her passing Mrs. Johnson was adamant about exercising her franchise. She utilized curbside voting on April 5, 2016 for the Presidential Primary and General local and statewide elections. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to recognize Mrs. Dorothy Earl Johnson. She has been a tremendous asset to the Fourth Congressional District.

Ms. MOORE

Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Kathy Hein. She retired from Marquette University on March 31, 2016 after serving eleven years. Ms. Hein was the Assistant Director of the Les Aspin Center--Milwaukee, Les Aspin Center for Government. The position oversees the Milwaukee-based state and local internship program created to complement the Washington internship program. The Les Aspin Center for Government which began in 1984 is a nationally recognized educational program that prepares young people to serve the public effectively and ethically and provides opportunities to enhance public policy awareness. Additionally, in 2005, the Kleczka Internship Program which Kathy Hein oversaw was started on Marquette's campus in Milwaukee. The Kleczka Internship Program places students in city, county and state legislative offices in Wisconsin. Like the successful academic model of the Les Aspin Center, the Kleczka internship combines hands-on internship experiences with classroom instruction to maximize students' learning opportunities. Since its inception 2,200 Les Aspin Center students have interned at many offices including: nearly 100 congressional offices, the State Department, the U.S. Secret Service, the White House, the Department of Defense, the Wisconsin Office of Federal-state Relations, and offices for Wisconsin- based corporations. The Les Aspin Center, through international exchanges, promotes mutual understanding between the United States and other countries. In fact, at any given time, there are approximately 50 Les Aspin Center alumni working as professional staff members in Congress and many have been elected to office themselves. This is Ms. Hein's second retirement. She was a distinguished public servant working for the federal government for 27 years. Kathy worked in the Washington, DC office of the late Congressman Les Aspin. Prior to retirement from federal service, she served as Chief of Staff to Congressman Kleczka, my immediate predecessor, where she worked for 20 years. Kathy Hein grew up in DePere, Wisconsin and graduated from the University of Wisconsin-Oshkosh. She worked for both Governor Pat Lucey and Governor Marty Schreiber. She continues her public service by serving as a member of the City of Milwaukee Fire and Police Commission, a member of the Sixteenth Street Community Health Center Board of Directors and serves as the Co-chair of my 4th Congressional District, Academy Nomination Board of Advisors. Kathy is especially famous for her amazing desserts and she enjoys spending time with her loving husband of thirty-four years, Gordon Werner. Kathy is a true ``public servant'' and has always fought for policies aimed at advancing equality of rights for all. Mr. Speaker, for these reasons I rise to pay tribute to an amazing woman, Kathy Hein, on her illustrious career. She is an asset to the 4th Congressional District and has made a positive impact on all of Wisconsin.

Ms. MOORE

Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, today is April 14. Tomorrow, by law, our budget resolution is due to be passed on the floor of the House. Now, we have heard a great deal from the majority about the need to return to regular order, and regular order would require us to pass this bill either today or by tomorrow. So since that bill is not before us, my motion to recommit would give us an opportunity to vote on the Republican budget resolution that was passed out of our committee just last month. Now, I just want to refresh your memory, Mr. Speaker. The GOP budget resolution ends the Medicare guarantee, makes $6.5 trillion in drastic cuts, increases poverty, and erodes the economic security of all Americans. Mr. Speaker, believe it or not, as awful as this is, there is a faction over there among the Tea Party Republicans who want the opportunity to make it even worse than it is. But they can't submit their awful, worse bill, just like Democrats can't offer their alternative bill, until we get the Republican budget on the floor. So by Republicans abandoning their promise to return us to regular order and to pass a budget, it is ridiculous for us to be passing these bills. Mr. Speaker, how can we talk about subjecting FSOC, for example, to the appropriations process? We can't really do these appropriations bills without a budget. Hardworking families deserve to see where we stand on these budgets, and Democrats want to have our say. I get it. The majority gets its way, but the minority gets its say. Let's get on to the ``gets its say'' part. Mr. Speaker, you guys can't get your act together. My motion to recommit would put that budget on the floor right now, and Republicans would have the opportunity to pass their bill, and then we have the opportunity to offer up our alternative. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time. Point of Order

Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, I appeal the ruling of the Chair.

Ms. MOORE. I am opposed.

Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.

Ms. MOORE

Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, I am opposed.

Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, I would just mention that I think it is germane because tomorrow is April 15.

Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.

Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, today is April 14, and, by law, Congress must enact a budget resolution by tomorrow, April 15. I repeat, Mr. Speaker: by law, Congress must enact a budget resolution by April 15. That is tomorrow. After months and months and months of the majority promising regular order, the Republican House leadership has failed to meet this most basic measure of responsibility of bringing a budget to the floor. So today, Mr. Speaker, my motion to recommit will help out my Republican colleagues with their responsibilities to this body. In my motion to recommit, I am offering up the Republican budget that was passed out of committee last month to allow my colleagues the ability to vote on their own budget and also to allow us to offer our alternatives. To refresh your memory, Mr. Speaker, the GOP budget resolution ends the Medicare guarantee, makes $6.5 trillion in drastic cuts, increases poverty, and erodes the economic security of all Americans. Now, Mr. Speaker, as awful as Democrats think that this budget is, the Tea Party faction of the House GOP is demanding that we make even more draconian cuts and even deeper cuts, and they ought to have the right, as well, to offer their alternative on the floor. Let me be clear, Mr. Speaker. I don't support this Republican budget, but I am offering this motion to recommit because, again, we cannot offer our alternative unless this budget is processed on this floor. The Republicans are abandoning their promise to restore regular order because they can't agree on a worse product, but hardworking families deserve a Congress that invests in their future, protects their safety, and creates a level playing field for them and their children to succeed. You know what they always say, Mr. Speaker: the majority gets its way, and the minority gets its say. Let's get to the ``have its say'' part. We are going to continue as Democrats to press for a budget that creates jobs, opportunities, and raises paychecks for the American people while reducing the deficit in a balanced and responsible way, Mr. Speaker. But, again, since the Republicans can't seem to get their act together by bringing their budget to the floor, my motion to recommit would bring that product to the floor. So that is why I am offering this motion to recommit today, and I would urge my colleagues to support it. Point of Order

Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, I appeal the ruling of the Chair.