Jared Polis

Mr. POLIS

Mr. POLIS. Madam Speaker, today I rise in support of H.R. 1709, the STEM Education Coordination Act of 2009. I would like to thank Chairman Gordon as well as my colleagues on the Committee on Science and Technology for bringing this legislation to the floor, and I urge my colleagues to join me for its passage. There is no doubt that being a leader in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics, or STEM education, is essential for our Nation to be an economic leader in the 21st century. Our Nation already has the world's premier institutions of higher education, and my district in Colorado is home to some of the most prestigious leaders in research. The climate change research done at NCAR and at NOAA and the renewable energy research done at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory have been great sources of pride for our community, as well as economic drivers for our State and our Nation. In order to build upon these achievements, we must ensure that young Americans choose to and are given the tools to build careers in science. It is vital that our young people are exposed to STEM education early on. Early exposure, particularly for underrepresented groups, including women and minorities, will help spark a life-long interest in education in these fields. STEM education, just like the arts and athletics, is critical to a broad-based education that gives students the analytical skills that will ensure that the American labor force, whether one becomes a climatologist, an architect, or even a Member of Congress, is the smartest and most productive in the world. STEM education makes communities across the Nation more self-reliant in rural and urban America alike. By removing barriers to STEM education, it will help all communities have a reliable, highly skilled workforce. We have the technology and the educators to bring knowledge to every corner of our Nation. Madam Speaker, what we have lacked is the will. Today, we have the opportunity to vote on a bill that will help every community prepare the next generation of leaders in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. The long-term economic benefits of this action are clear. But so, too, is the sense of pride when communities raise and graduate their own engineers who will design their own roadways and scientists who ensure that their next crop is healthy. I would like to once again thank Chairman Gordon and the committee and his staff for bringing this terrific bill to the floor.

Mr. POLIS

Mr. POLIS. Madam Chair, I rise in support of H.R. 626, the Federal Employees Paid Parental Leave Act of 2009. Let me thank my friend from New York, Mrs. Maloney for her continued dedication to this issue. I also applaud Chairman Towns and my colleagues on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee for championing the cause of paid parental leave for federal employees. This legislation helps families employed by the government, offering up to four weeks of paid leave for parents to care for a new child. It recognizes a fundamental and basic need of new parents, namely, the importance of caring for and spending time with their young children. As Americans workers struggle to weather the economic storms that have beset our nation, we need to ensure that our primary safety net-- the American family--remains strong and intact. In doing so, this bill establishes the federal government--as an employer--as a champion for the American family, making it a model for the rest of the country to follow. The Federal government is one of the country's largest employers, with over 1.8 million civilian employees. According to the Department of Health and Human Services 18,000 women and 24,000 men will qualify for parental leave this coming year. Under existing law, federal employees are allowed to take unpaid parental leave. Sadly, in 2000, it was reported that as many as 78 percent of these eligible employees did not take leave, simply because they could not afford it. Under present economic conditions, the desire to remain at work and forgo unpaid leave is even stronger. With the government playing such a significant role in the American workforce, we can no longer afford to punish such a large portion of our workforce for taking a few weeks leave to help raise a child. Economic loss affects not just the worker, but all those who rely on the head wage-earner for support, and oftentimes the hardest hit group is the American family. Today, in the midst of a recession, it is essential that working parents have the resources to care for and support both themselves and their families. This bill provides a necessary lifeline for new parents who must simultaneously provide round-the-clock care for their young children and keep their jobs in an increasingly competitive and shrinking economy. Too often, families are forced into a bind, having to choose between earning enough to survive and caring for a child. No parent wants to decide between a child and work, but under current conditions, many federal employees must. Families are helpless in this situation, and it is both the employer and employees that suffer for it. Federal employers have a high turnover rate, due to families searching for employers with better benefits or leaving the workforce to care for a child. Even more importantly, this bill encourages parents to provide care during a period of crucial development for children. The education of children starts from day one, and in many ways, it is the earliest experiences of a child that will set the course for the rest of their life. The care children receive in their earliest days can provide them with the necessary building blocks to succeed in school and the workforce later on. This bill also takes steps to accommodate the changing and often varied types of households that make up the American family, which current law does not take into account. Many families today don't have a stay-at-home member, making it all the more difficult for working parents to accommodate their family needs. Stay-at-home dads, friends, partners, siblings, aunts, uncles, or grandparents are all assuming the role of primary care-giver. Federal employee benefits need to take these new family dynamics into account. This legislation will provide a gain to federal employers as well as the economy. According to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), this legislation accrues no extra cost for taxpayers. Federal employers can save losses from turnover rates and improve retention of some of its most reliable and adept employees. In times of economic turmoil we must keep families strong. By strengthening the family, in turn we strengthen our workforce. Healthy families make productive employees and raise engaging and innovative children, giving an extra boost to the economy and the current and future American workforce. Madam Speaker--this legislation is needed today, more than ever before! It will create a more progressive and family-oriented benefit system for the current federal workforce, setting an example for similar positive developments within all sectors of the economy. It will help working families to care for and support their young children, during a time when economic struggles often overshadow parents' most basic duties of childcare. On behalf of all those who have spent time in creating this bill, as well as almost two million federal employees and their families, I urge my colleagues to support and vote ``yes'' on H.R. 626. Statement of Administration Policy H.R. 626--Federal Employees Paid Parental Leave Act of 2009 (Rep. Maloney, D-New York, and 55 cosponsors, June 3, 2009) The Administration supports the goal of H.R. 626, which would provide Federal employees with access to paid leave upon the birth, adoption, or fostering of a child. Being able to spend time at home with a new child is a critical part of building a strong family. The initial bonding between parents and their new child is essential to healthy child development and providing a firm foundation for the child's success in life. Measures that support these relationships strengthen our families, our communities, and our nation. The Federal government should reflect its commitment to these core values by helping Federal employees to care for their families as well as serve the public. Providing paid parental leave has been successfully employed by a number of private-sector employers, and can help to make job opportunities accessible to more workers. The Administration is currently reviewing existing Federal leave policies to determine the extent of their gaps and limitations. The Administration looks forward to working with Congress to refine the details of this legislation to make sure it meets the needs of Federal agencies and employees, as well as their families.

Mr. POLIS

Mr. POLIS. Madam Speaker, on Wednesday, May 20, I was absent from the House of Representatives due to an emergency dental procedure, and thus I missed rollcall votes Nos. 276-278. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye'' on Nos. 276, 277, 278.

Mr. POLIS

Mr. POLIS. In talking to the Boulder Small Business Development Center yesterday in my district in Colorado, they told me about the seminars that they have in gaining access to contract decision-makers, consulting, the seminars they do to help train minority-owned businesses. Our local center also offers scaling up, which teaches entrepreneurs how to gain access to capital and grants. Finally, they're working on a turnaround program for downtown Boulder businesses, helping retailers and restaurants. Like many communities across our country, our vacancy rate has increased, and many retail businesses are having trouble in this recessionary environment. Without the resources that are made available by this bill, the Boulder Small Business Development Center, along with many other centers around the country, will be forced to cut programs and training. The 21st century will demand innovative small businesses stay up to date on groundbreaking technologies. H.R. 2352 includes a green entrepreneurial development program to provide education classes and instruction in starting a business in the fields of energy efficiency and green or clean tech. This, at its core, is a training program that's important for the future of America. With the right training and access to the right resources, the sky is the limit for America's entrepreneurs. So much of our work so far in this Congress has moved us in the direction of creating more jobs, passing the budget, work on health care, clean energy, education, the Recovery Act, the green schools bills, the Water Quality Investment Act. This important bill for the Small Business Administration is another step on the road to recovery. I urge a ``yes'' vote on the previous question and on the rule.

Mr. POLIS. I yield myself such time as I may consume. If we're talking about things we can do to help small businesses that are not in this bill, let me add a number of others that we have already accomplished. I'd like to remind my colleagues on the other side of the aisle every single Republican Member voted against the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, which included $15 billion of tax cuts for American small businesses, including increasing section 179 expensing limits to let small business owners fully depreciate capital purchases for items likes trucks, computers, and other equipment in the same year it was purchased. We also extended the carryback period for net operating losses, helping many small businesses in America use their losses from years past, from 2 years to 5 years. We also delayed the 3 percent withholding tax on payments to government contractors. We also provided relief for the alternative minimum tax, which hit tens of thousands of American small business owners. We also established tax credits for small businesses that hired recently discharged veterans and out-of-work youth. In addition to those tax cuts, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act also generated $21 billion in new lending and investment for small businesses; provided direct interest-free loans of $35,000; and makes loans less expensive for small business borrowers by eliminating fees that were normally built into SBA-backed loans. In the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, we increased to 90 percent the amount of an SBA-backed loan that the government guarantees, making it easier for small businesses to get loans from local banks. We also unclogged the market for SBA-backed loans to help gain access to credit, to our markets. In every area of our country, small businesses continue to encounter the same difficulties. They're having difficulty borrowing money and face significant difficulty raising capital from equity and other sources. Until these problems are addressed, our economic recovery will be slowed. Fortunately, with this bill and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, the Congress and the President can continue to make important strides to remove these barriers to small business growth and help small business succeed in leading this recovery. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. POLIS. I yield myself such time as I may consume. Again, there are many things that our country can do for small business. When we talk about taxes, of course predictability in the inheritance tax rate would be a good thing, and I hope we work towards that end. We talk about the corporate income tax rate. There's evidence that we might be higher than many other countries in the world and, for that reason, many companies may be locating offshore. Maybe we need to reduce that. These are all very, very important discussions. We need to look at the revenue impact, we need to look at the benefit, we need to look at how it affects American business. Business needs to be a part of that. That's wonderful that my good friend on the other side of the aisle cited the interest in the inheritance tax issue for many affiliations and small businesses. That's a very important discussion to have. But none of that should stand in the way of the important work of the Small Business Administration in giving entrepreneurs the tools that they need to succeed. They're in these very difficult economic times. Yesterday, I had the chance to talk to Sharon King at the Boulder Small Business Development Center in my district. They offer a number of programs that would benefit tremendously from this legislation. They feel that the ability of the SBA to help small businesses has atrophied considerably under the Bush administration. This bill will help restore their ability to help give Americans the tools they need to start their businesses at a time when demand is higher than ever. Not only do existing small businesses need help in accessing credit, which is becoming ever more difficult, but more and more Americans are unemployed, which gives them the opportunity to maybe start their own business, to start their own ability to earn money because they lack another job. I'd like to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. POLIS. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. There are many things that this bill is not, and I fail to find those solid grounds for opposition. This bill is not a cure for cancer. This bill is not a cut in capital gains. This bill is not about abolishing the inheritance tax. There are many things that many of us would like to do that are not in this particular bill. Rather, let us discuss the merits of this bill in helping our veterans, in helping the handicapped, and in helping the unemployed to create small businesses, to create value, and to create jobs in the economy. I would like to yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from Arizona (Ms. Giffords).

Mr. POLIS. You know, I feel that the five members from the other side of the aisle and the two from our side of the aisle whose bills went into the bill would not like their efforts characterized as merely ``lip service to small business.'' This bill provides tangible tools to the Small Business Administration in helping entrepreneurs start small businesses. With regard to taxation issues, we have a Ways and Means Committee. We have a process for discussing those bills. It was the ruling of the Parliamentarian that it was not germane to this bill, in fact, quite to the contrary of what my friends on the other side of the aisle said. I recall a comment from a member on the Rules Committee that this was an important issue, one that was worthy of discussion, but of course, again, it was not germane to this particular bill that's before us today. I'm confident that this is a discussion we'll continue to have with regard to the inheritance tax and with taxation in general, but this is simply not germane to the matter of this bill. Let me put a human face on what the Small Business Administration does and how they help people. I had the opportunity to speak yesterday to the head of the Boulder Small Business Development Center in my district of Colorado. She told me this story of a young woman who had just graduated from college. She had broken her arm, and she had a cast for her arm. She decorated her cast with cast tattoos, and her friends all commented, I want some of those. Those look terrific. The word spread about these cast tattoos. This young woman approached the SBA and was given the know-how she needed to be able to start a business based on those cast tattoos. Well, she has created two jobs today directly, not to mention the indirect jobs she has created through the manufacturing process. She now sells those cast tattoos in several States and continues to grow her business amidst this time of general economic uncertainty. H.R. 2352 is the opportunity to fund efficient growth in a sector that reaches every American on Main Street. It helps us reach entrepreneurs who previously didn't have access to capital, access to information, and it provides new multilingual, online distance training and access to specialists who can help with financial literacy. By combining some of the best ideas from both sides of the aisle, in a bipartisan way, we can help move American small business forward, which will help this country recover from the recession that we're in. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. POLIS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members be given 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on House Resolution 457.

Mr. POLIS. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 457 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. POLIS. I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Mr. POLIS. Mr. Speaker, for the purposes of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to my good friend, the gentlewoman from North Carolina, Dr. Foxx. All time yielded during consideration of the rule is for debate only. General Leave

Mr. POLIS. Mr. Speaker, I believe my good friend on the other side of the aisle said that this was a closed rule. This is actually a structured rule that allows for nine amendments that have been made in order. A number of others have been withdrawn and incorporated into the manager's amendment. She also mentioned that she wished that there was more opportunity to amend this bill. I would just remind my colleagues that there were only three amendments that were offered from the other side of the aisle. Certainly, we would have encouraged and liked more. Of those three, two were nongermane and one, according to the Parliamentarian, of those was a violation of PAYGO. The other will, in fact, be ruled in order. Certainly, we always appreciate suggestions from all perspectives about how to improve these bills, and hopefully we will have many more ideas that are offered on legislation going forward. This bill expands support for veterans who are working to establish their own businesses, particularly at this time of war for our country and as we phase out of our involvement in Iraq and many men and women return home to an economy that is difficult to find a job in. Our men and women in uniform who have made immeasurable sacrifices should have the opportunity and assistance they need to start a business. Our troops need to know that when they return from harm's way, there is a network of job support and business resources waiting for them when they come home. By directing the administrator of the Small Business Administration to establish a Veterans Business Centers program, this bill will provide entrepreneurial training and counseling to veterans. This training will empower veterans who participate in the program to achieve access to capital and start their own businesses, helping to rebuild our economy. The SBA will provide small business grants through these Veterans Business Centers which alleviates a major hurdle to many new businesses, access to capital. This bill puts specific emphasis on service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses. We owe a special duty to our wounded warriors, especially those whose reentry into the work force could otherwise be difficult. This legislation presents an opportunity to fund efficient growth in a sector that reaches everyday Americans. Every dollar invested in these incentives and initiatives returns $2.87 to the economy, and in 2008 alone, the SBA's entrepreneurial development program helped generate 73,000 new jobs and infused $7.2 billion into the economy. Let me repeat that: 73,000 new jobs at a time when we're hemorrhaging 32,000 jobs a month and we all dread the release of the next unemployment report. Job creation is vital to our economic recovery. It's during these tough economic times that more and more Americans are starting small businesses. In fact, the majority of Americans' first job is at a small business. As our economy bounces back, Americans returning to work will find that it is a small business community in which they will find their next opportunities. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. POLIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 457 provides for consideration of H.R. 2352, the Job Creation Through Entrepreneurship Act of 2009, under a structured rule. The rule provides 1 hour of general debate controlled by the Committee on Small Business. The rule makes in order nine amendments which are listed in the Rules Committee report accompanying the resolution. Each amendment is debatable for 10 minutes, except the manager's amendment which is debatable for 20 minutes. The rule also provides one motion to recommit with or without instructions. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of House Resolution 457 and the underlying bill, the Job Creation Through Entrepreneurship Act of 2009. I'd like to thank Chairwoman Velazquez, as well as my friend from North Carolina (Mr. Shuler) and my colleagues on the Small Business Committee for their strong leadership in bringing this legislation to the floor. Mr. Speaker, this bill represents a giant step forward in ensuring a bright future for all Americans who are struggling to establish or grow their own businesses. It will bring hope to our veterans as they return home and encouragement to billions of Americans who haven't always had equal access to the necessary tools to start a business. Fittingly, this legislation is on the floor of the House of Representatives during National Small Business Week. It capitalizes on untapped resources in the business community by expanding access to business counseling, training and networking to small business owners everywhere, including underserved populations such as women, veterans and Native Americans to help ensure all of our prosperity. This legislation will help women gain access to jobs by requiring the women's business centers to describe their job placement strategies for the area in their annual plans. Too often women are denied access to jobs in high-paying, high-growth sectors. Promoting gender equity is critical for ensuring that all workers benefit from the job creation that our economic recovery plan spurs, as well as our other policies. This bipartisan bill, which was voice voted out of the Small Business Committee, represents what we can accomplish when Republicans and Democrats work together. While there are many ideological and political differences on how to address the economic crisis, this bill is a product of consensus. There's nothing more American than small business. This bill is a combination of seven bills approved in subcommittee, five of which were authored by my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, and I'm especially pleased to report that my friends on both sides of the aisle support this important effort. According to the Small Business Administration, small firms represent 99.7 percent of all employer firms, employing half of all private sector employees. As the unemployment rate climbs, these small businesses have managed to create 60 to 80 percent of the new jobs that were created annually over the last decade. It's our responsibility to create an environment where small business can thrive and continue to produce half of our non-farm GDP. This bill will spur job creation and economic growth by expanding resources and providing technical assistance to small businesses. Small business is the engine that drives our economy, especially during tough economic times. Unemployment continues to rise, currently at 8.6 percent nationally and 7.9 percent in my home State of Colorado. People often turn to starting their own small businesses when they become unemployed. These businesses are frequently the sole source of income for many American families. This legislation will help these entrepreneurs gain the skill required to sustain and grow their businesses and succeed. A recent report released by the Small Business Administration reveals that the economic recession continued to deepen in the first quarter of 2009. Real GDP fell by 6.1 percent. Small business owners, consumers and the public at large remain pessimistic. Poor sales and access to credit have crippled many American businesses. With this legislation we can help reverse this negative trend and give entrepreneurs the tools they need to succeed and embrace growth opportunity for all Americans in the future. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. POLIS

Mr. POLIS. Madam Speaker, I rise to address an issue that does not receive enough attention from my colleagues--the very real evil of hate crimes against Sikh Americans. This is a timely issue, considering our passage yesterday of H.R. 1913, which expands hate crimes protection to gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered Americans, among others. It is appalling that a particular group of loyal, patriotic Americans is targeted for attack and ridicule because of the peaceful observance of their faith. Sikh communities continue to live in fear of hate crimes. Since September 11, 2001, the Justice Department has investigated over 800 incidents of biased attacks against Sikh, Arab, Muslim, and South Asian Americans. More than 40 of these investigations resulted in criminal conviction. Tragically, however, the true extent of hate crimes against Sikh Americans and others may be grossly underreported. Because of the politically sensitive nature of these attacks and the intimidation in many communities, persecuted minorities often do not bring this abuse to the attention of law enforcement. If hate crimes against Sikh Americans and other post-9/11 communities do not come to light, there is a danger that the gravity of the problem will escape the attention of lawmakers and law enforcement officials and continue to leave our communities vulnerable to bias attacks in the future. We cannot let this slip through the cracks! In the days after the attacks of September 11, 2001, there was an enormous backlash against the Arab and Muslim American communities. The Sikh community was often confused for Arabs or Muslims. Identified by their conspicuous items of faith, Sikhs became easy targets for anyone wishing to take out their rage. Hundreds of incidents of intimidation and violence brought national attention to the problem. As time has passed, however, few people take note of the isolated, but still insidious hate crimes that affect Sikh Americans every year. Just this year, in Queens, New York, a 21 year-old Sikh man was viciously attacked by hooligans who pelted him with racial epithets as they pulled on his beard and hair. He survived, but not before they had stabbed him in the eye, depriving him not only of his sight, but of his dignity. His story is too common. Last year, in New Jersey, a Sikh boy's turban was set on fire and scalp and hair burned while he was participating in school activity. His attacker was expelled, but charged simply with mischief. The list goes on and on. From Sikh Americans beaten and bloodied as they go out for a jog to cab drivers being murdered in cold blood, each act of violence chips away at the freedom of every American. If we do not stand up for one another, who will? I stand up today for Sikh Americans and, indeed, all those who are singled out for who they are or what they believe. While these attacks were based on the mistaken belief that Sikhs are Muslims or Arabs, attacks on any such group are un-American and threaten the freedom we all work to protect. I urge my colleagues to keep a careful eye on attacks such as these. We must not ignore the problem. We must confront it, call it what it is, and work to make sure these kinds of attacks never happen again. When they do, we must make these bigots famous, and punish them to the fullest extent of the law.

Mr. POLIS

Mr. POLIS. If only those who object most vociferously to the government taking a dollar from my wallet to care for my brother and sister in this country would also object to the government appearing at the bedroom door, telling me who to marry, telling a woman whether or not to make the difficult decision to terminate her pregnancy. It is in fact somewhat hypocritical that while there seems to be a lot of care for the material aspects of freedom, there doesn't seem to be as much concern that I hear voiced for the equally, if not more important, personal aspects of freedom. Truly, each individual is more important than the sum of their assets or a little entry on a ledger book. That might be a part of who you are--a very small part--but that's how you put food on the table and how you live, but there's a lot more to everybody. And when we as Progressives are talking about freedom, we're talking about the rest of the realm of our lives; those important everyday decisions in how you live. And no, government shouldn't be telling people who to marry or whether or not to end a pregnancy or whether or not to use a certain kind of research that could save lives. No one is forced to engage in that research; no one is forced to even terminate a pregnancy; no one is forced to marry a gay person. But the question is: Should you have the right to do it if you wanted? And I think as Progressives, our answer is an unabashed yes.

Mr. POLIS. I just have one more thing to add. A majority of Americans agree that Iraq was a mistake--invading Iraq was a mistake. It shows that Progressives were right at the time to question that war. And if you recall, as I do, at that time there were many people saying, Oh, you're against the war; your un-American; you're unpatriotic. You're rolling over to the terrorists. That war--and this is the majority consensus now, and you have mainstream groups across the ideological spectrum, you even hear this from the other side of the aisle, looking back, saying, If we knew what we knew today, we should not have invaded the country of Iraq. Asking those tough questions, those critical questions, can be politically difficult at times. But it makes our country greater and it's how Progressive Americans across our country express their patriotism, by asking those questions that nobody else is asking, by not taking the wisdom from on high, be it from a Republican administration or a Democratic administration, that that's the way things are, but to use our own minds and rational thought to look at the information and look at it from an objective perspective and try to make our own opinion--not being pressured by outside groups or groups that might have an economic interest in a perpetual war, but rather to form our own opinions and voice our dissent where appropriate. Thank you for the time.

Mr. POLIS. Thank you. I thank my colleague from Minnesota. Just today, hours ago in this very Chamber, we had a debate--not enough debate--but a debate about American military activities overseas in Afghanistan and Iraq, and specifically around Congress's role in funding these efforts. I was proud to cast my vote against the supplemental. I think we need to fundamentally rethink the militaristic aspects of our foreign expeditions in Iraq and Afghanistan. To me, what is a Progressive? It's somebody that questions the status quo. Who always asks, What can be better? Somebody who constantly seeks something closer for humanity to the state of perfection. We know that it is patriotic to question authority rather than blindly follow authority. And that's an important distinction both in this Chamber as well as with one's friends when we're having discussions. The most patriotic thing that we can do as Americans is ask ourselves these tough questions: Why are we occupying Iraq? Why are we occupying Afghanistan? Why are we putting our men and women in harm's way and causing many more casualties on the other side as well? What is our role ongoing in these countries? Of course, Progressives want to protect America. Of course, we're concerned with the terrorist threat; of course, we want policies that protect our citizens and reduce the risk of terrorism here and abroad. But we question the conventional wisdom. Why does attacking a country that had nothing to do with 9/11 reduce the risk of terrorism here? Mr. Ellison, do you think that that had any effect on terrorism here?

Mr. POLIS

Mr. POLIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Klein).

Mr. POLIS. Mr. Speaker, just this last week I had the opportunity in Colorado to visit a number of schools in several school districts across the district that I represent. I visited Adams County, Boulder Valley, Mapleton, and Westminster. With regard to Boulder Valley School District, having recently passed a $300 million bond initiative, it was very exciting to see some of the renovations that were taking place. I had an opportunity to go on the roof of one of the schools and observe the solar panels that were being installed, as well as a device that focuses sunlight to provide natural light for the classroom. That is called a Sundolier, and what that encompasses is twofold. One, it saves the need for artificial light and saves energy for the school. Two, there are a number of studies that show that natural light can actually serve to improve learning. This was an item that Boulder Valley School District was able to purchase. There are four that are now pilot projects in Colorado. There are studies being done to document the learning impact. This is the type of activity that many school districts cannot afford to consider. Mapleton School District, just 10 miles down the road, it has been on their ballot twice with bond initiatives, but they have been unable to get them to pass. They have a much lower local tax base and it is very difficult, and many of the constituents are struggling to stay in their homes. For that reason, this Federal money will be particularly welcomed in those districts that serve the most at-risk children, which is why I applaud the efforts of Chairman Miller and the committee and the sponsors to target this money to districts that serve a high count of low-income students using the title I criteria. Mapleton School District, which serves just a few thousand kids, will receive $578,000 under this bill; Westminster School District in Colorado will receive $1.8 million; and Adams County 12 District will receive $2.36 million. Mr. Speaker, a few folks have mentioned, Oh, this shouldn't be the Federal Government's responsibility. The question I would pose is: Who, then, can repair these schools? Who can ensure that these classrooms are safe? Where can the money come from? Certainly there are many wealthy districts that can afford to do that themselves. But by allowing only wealthy districts to build classrooms for the 21st century, we are not only creating a divide on the operations side of school funding, we are actually making that considerably worse by creating an enormous gap on the capital front, leading to attrition of good teachers from dangerous and poor-quality schools in poor areas, as well as lower student outcomes because of lack of heating, lack of air-conditioning, dangerous conditions, et cetera. This bill will help reduce those disparities. We certainly have a long way to go, but this bill will help do that. In addition, there are a number of schools that actually are dangerous and represent a danger for the teachers and for the students. For instance, there was an incident last year in Massachusetts where a roof fell in and actually injured a teacher. They had a leaky roof for decades in Billerica, Massachusetts. The district was not able to afford to repair or replace the school. In fact, when it rained, the principal would announce, Heavy rains are expected; clear the counters. The water damage had caused the floor to rot and a teacher actually fell through the floor and injured herself because of that. Some of the rooms are so hazardous they are closed to students and staff. That is not an unusual phenomenon. In my district, I was at one elementary school where the gym has been closed for several years because pieces of ceiling are falling off the gymnasium and it is a danger for kids, so the school has not had a gym for those kids to use for several years. In this school in Massachusetts, they have now moved the girls' locker room to the library, and there is so little space available because of the closure of the rooms that are dangerous that special education classes now meet in what was the boys' locker room. They are trying to use every available place that they have because of the unsafe nature of some of those schools. School districts do a good job with what they have. They try their best. They approach their voters when they can, but there are districts in Colorado and, indeed, nationally that have very little local tax base from which to draw. In Colorado, we had a lawsuit a number of years ago which was ultimately settled by the State with regard to the failing state of our schools and our capital infrastructure in Colorado school districts that had very little local tax base. The decision stated that the State had in fact not lived up to its responsibility of providing a safe, thorough and uniform education to all of its citizens. Certainly every child in this country deserves the opportunity to succeed. They deserve a safe learning environment. This bill will go a long way towards doing that, along with the provisions of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act provided funding in two main areas for education, both operational. One was IDEA, special education. And my colleagues on the Rules Committee will recall we had some discussion about special ed and IDEA in committee yesterday. I am proud to say that under this Congress, we have gone further than ever as a country in meeting towards reaching that unfunded mandate of making sure that the needs of all students, including special needs students, are met and increasingly funded by the Federal Government. We had a bipartisan consensus in our Rules Committee meeting yesterday, Mr. Speaker, that our Federal Government needs to do more with regard to funding special education. I am very pleased to say that the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act was the first step. The second area of investment was in title I programs directed to schools that serve low-income families and families that face a lot of challenges that others don't. To help reduce those disparities, the opportunity disparity that exists, Colorado is a State that has a very strong equalization formula for funding schools. We are very fortunate in that regard. Our poorer districts on the operational side receive roughly the same funding, in fact, sometimes even more funding because of their at-risk criteria than the wealthy districts. That is not the case nationally. There are other States where there are large operational disparities between large and small districts. However, in Colorado, and indeed nearly every State, there continue to be large disparities on the capital front. That is why what passes for a school in one district would hardly pass for a school in another district. Schools with low tax bases, with voters that are struggling to stay in their own homes and are, therefore, unwilling or unable to pass another bond initiative, are threatening the education of their kids compared to some of the wealthier districts that are able to invest in some of things that I had the opportunity to see just last week in Boulder Valley School District due to their own $300 million bond initiative. The needs, Mr. Speaker, are great. In fact, I dare say they are greater than this investment that we, if the House passes this bill today, will be making. The rule, Mr. Speaker, is fair. Of the 34 amendments that have been offered, 14 have been ruled in order, including several from Members on the other side of the aisle, including one from Mr. Roe, who my colleague, Mr. Dreier, mentioned in his remarks. That was ruled in order, as well as an amendment from the ranking member of the Education and Labor Committee. So this is not a closed rule. This is a structured rule that allows for nearly half of the amendments that have been offered to be considered by the full House and advances in there for that purpose, including several that were also incorporated into the chairman's amendment, who has worked with Members on both sides of the aisle to improve the initial piece of legislation. Let me focus once more on the safety issue. There is an enormous backlog of capital construction--particularly in poor districts across this country--that puts the health and safety as well as the achievement of our students at risk every day. Students should be free of risk regardless of where in this country they attend school. Students have enough challenges to face. They need to be able to face the economic crisis, their family issues, preparation for college. The last thing students need to worry about are roofs falling in, ceilings collapsing, floors collapsing, or asbestos. At the same time that we can accomplish this, as my colleague from New York (Mr. Hall) mentioned, we have the great opportunity to make some progress on the front by reducing our carbon emissions and greening our schools. This has, of course, beyond the environmental benefits, which are significant, they also have economic benefits because when you save money by reducing your power needs or producing power locally, you are freeing up more operational money to actually help educate kids, meaning lower class sizes, meaning better teacher training, meaning programs that can be continued or expanded because of the energy. One of the biggest complaints that I heard from districts over the last several years were the rising costs of energy and utilities as part of what they pay as a fixed cost. By investing in the capital side--and again, many districts don't have the capability of doing that themselves--we are able to save operational money for those school districts where truly some of the modernization and green investment can become the gift that keeps on giving. Mr. Speaker, I am the last speaker for this side. I would like to urge a ``yes'' vote on the previous question and the rule.

Mr. POLIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time and move the previous question on the resolution. The previous question was ordered.

Mr. POLIS. I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 427 provides for a structured rule for consideration of H.R. 2187, the 21st Century Green High-Performing Public School Facilities Act. Mr. Speaker, I strongly support the rule and the underlying bill. I thank Congressman Chandler, Congressman Loebsack, Congressman Kildee, Chairman Miller, and the entire staff of the Education and Labor Committee for their hard work in reintroducing this bipartisan, critical legislation to modernize and green American schools. Every child in America has the right to an excellent education. This can only be achieved through the best teachers in safe schools and productive learning environments equipped with the resources required to succeed. Anything else is increasingly unacceptable in the 21st century. Unfortunately, as a Nation, we are unable to meet this basic standard. According to the American Federation of Teachers, our schools fall short of being in good condition by an estimated $255 billion. The American Society of Civil Engineers gave our Nation's schools a D on the national infrastructure report card. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, which we passed earlier this year, will go a long way towards correcting this horrifying statistic. However, we can't stop with the Recovery Act. This is too important an issue. Overcrowding and crumbling and unsafe schools and classrooms are an everyday reality for students, teachers, and staff in too many parts of our country. In Colorado, the backlog of school construction and maintenance needs that has been documented has been estimated between $6 billion and $10 billion. This backlog puts the health, safety, and achievement of our students at risk. Healthy students learn better and are better prepared to meet the high standards of the workforce. The students of today will be the professionals and citizens of tomorrow. They must be ready to meet unexpected challenges, such as today's economic crisis, and they must be empowered to bring America to the next level of innovation and discovery and the pathway to prosperity. As a former superintendent, I can tell you that modern, environmentally friendly classrooms are necessary for teachers to perform and for students to learn. Research shows that high-quality school environments contribute to higher education achievement and lower teacher attrition. Yet, States and school districts are unable to keep up with these basic needs. This is especially true during the severe recession. This $6.4 billion investment will produce direct and major economic and environmental benefits. This legislation represents a giant step forward in ensuring that school buildings are modernized, repaired, and renovated to meet students' and teachers' needs. This will be a positive impact on residential property values and economic development efforts. It creates an estimated 136,000 jobs in communities across the country at a time when we desperately need them. By making schools more energy efficient and less reliant on fossil fuels, this bill will also help reduce the emissions that contribute to global warming, as well as cut energy costs, saving operational money for schools and local governments. This bill will stimulate local economies, while protecting the environment. The added benefit of job creation in the areas hardest hit by the recession will be an important component of our economic recovery. When I think about the devastation of the Gulf Coast, where schools have been overlooked for decades and, in many cases, were washed away by flood waters of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, it really brings home the need for passing this Federal assistance program. The African America Environmentalist Association estimates that the legislation will support hundreds of thousands of new construction jobs and invest more than half a billion dollars for school facility improvements in the troubled region of the Gulf Coast. In 2006, I had the honor of cochairing a successful campaign for a $300 million bond initiative for Boulder Valley School District in my congressional district to address their school needs. But many low- income districts in Colorado don't have the capacity to finance the necessary school upgrades. That's why I'm particularly pleased that this legislation addresses income disparities by allocating funds to States and districts based on their share of students from low-income families. This way, we can ensure that the funding reaches the schools and students that need it the most. Communities in my home State of Colorado will receive over $70 million, which will enable much needed improvements in our schools. I look forward to visiting these schools as they continue to work on making their improvements. Earlier this week, I had the opportunity to visit schools in Adams County, Boulder Valley, Mapleton, and Westminster, and observed the progress that this bill will make possible for the children of Colorado. Finally, I'd like to again thank Chairman Miller and the committee for ensuring that public charter schools receive their fair share of the funding as well. On behalf of my constituents in Colorado, especially the students, parents, and educators, I'd like to urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the bill and the rule. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. POLIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Hall).

Mr. POLIS

Mr. POLIS. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. POLIS

Mr. POLIS. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of both this amendment as well as Chairman Miller's amendment to the 21st Century Green High-Performing Public School Facilities Act. I would like to thank Chairman Miller and Congressman Kildee and their staff for crafting Mr. Miller's amendment that will ensure that all public schools, regardless of their governance structure, including public charter schools, get their fair share of the funding available under this act to modernize and green our schools. Unfortunately sometimes districts have complex and difficult relationships with some of the different public charter schools or other jurisdictional entities under their mandate. I've experienced such problems firsthand and know how necessary it is to address this challenge. This amendment requires school districts to reserve funding for the public charter schools under their jurisdiction. It's equal to those schools' aggregate share of the district's student population for low- income families. This commonsense amendment clarifies the rules for the fair treatment of public charter schools and will go a long way towards avoiding litigation and in-fighting and promoting cooperation between all public schools to serve all children.