Jared Polis

Mr. POLIS

Mr. POLIS. Madam Speaker, we have no remaining speakers on our side. I would like to inquire if the gentleman has any remaining speakers.

Mr. POLIS. I yield myself such time as I may consume, Madam Speaker. We get it and the American people get it. Just because you repeat something enough times doesn't make it true. What businesses need in this country is long-term certainty and predictability, a fair playing field with clear rules for all. And yet here we are with a bill like this creating more uncertainty by introducing ambiguously drafted bills and new ambiguously drafted standards that skew the rules in favor of some and against others, making it tougher and tougher for small business, entrepreneurs, and innovators who don't have teams of lobbyists in Washington, D.C., monitoring every bit of legislation to get by and succeed. The American people understand it wasn't the Environmental Protection Agency that caused this recession, that caused this economic mess we're in, and the economic recovery won't come through creating loopholes in public health laws. If we are serious about helping farmers, there's plenty that we could be doing. But increasing industrial pollution for mining and coal processing isn't something that farmers in my district and across Colorado have asked me to do. Farmers are concerned about many real-life challenges. Farmers are concerned that their kids can't get financing to go carry on the family business because the startup and liability costs are too high. Farmers are concerned about the estate tax. Farmers are concerned about getting sued by Monsanto because their crops were contaminated by Roundup Ready pollen. Farmers are concerned about rapid swings in commodity prices because of instability in the market. Political brinksmanship and gridlock create market instability, and bills that create corporate handouts, loopholes, and more uncertainty like this one aren't helping farmers, they're hurting farmers, and they aren't helping the rest of the country either. In addition to ignoring the needs of farmers, this bill ignores our national debt. In fact, it ignores our own House protocols to pay for things. Oddly enough, not regulating this nonexistent regulation isn't cheap. Because of the bureaucratic changes that would ensue from this bill, the nonpartisan CBO has scored this bill as costing the Federal Government $10 million. So this bill violates the Republican rule for discretionary authorizations. In fact, while the majority has pledged to adhere to spending limits on all indirect spending bills by including offsetting language, this bill includes no offsetting language, which is particularly grating because this bill doesn't actually do anything besides create more Federal bureaucrats. Madam Speaker, with only one committee hearing and a quick vote, this bill shouldn't be before us on the floor today. We have real work to do. We need a good-faith effort to get to the bottom of the real issues that affect this country and caused the recession, and help the middle class. This bill is not aimed at doing anything for farmers. It's not even aimed at a real problem. I urge my colleagues to follow the House CutGo guidelines, to table this bill and focus on the real problems we should be working on. We all must stop pretending the answer to this country's problems is giving handouts and loopholes to those with the most lobbyists here in Washington, D.C. As I mentioned earlier, Madam Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to the rule. I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of the amendment in the Record along with extraneous material immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.

Mr. POLIS. Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' and defeat the previous question so that we can do the right thing for working families and the millions of people looking for a job and vote on an unemployment extension and a payroll tax holiday and extension before we leave for next year, 3 more weeks. I urge a ``no'' vote on the rule, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. POLIS

Mr. POLIS. Madam Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. POLIS

Mr. POLIS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the Native American Code Talkers for their selfless contributions to America's defense during World Wars I and II. During these times of worldwide turmoil, hundreds of American Indians joined the United States' Armed Forces with the goal of protecting freedom and human rights around the world. The Code Talkers, as these brave soldiers became known, used their ancient tribal languages to develop a military communications code that no enemy was ever able to crack. American Indians served bravely in both World Wars, though the most well-known code group, the Navajo Code Talkers, was not formed by the Marine Corps until the 1940s. The Navajo Code Talkers came up with a code that enabled them to send and receive messages that were unintelligible to eavesdroppers. The Navajo language had no alphabet, and only an extraordinarily few individuals outside of the Navajo community were fluent in it, making it the ideal foundation for updating the U.S. military's slow-to- decipher and easily broken codes. Over 400 Navajo Code talkers served bravely in World War II, and their code was considered so secretive that they were prohibited from writing it down. It was not until the declassification of the code in 1968 that Americans were truly able to appreciate the contributions of the Code Talkers. Mr. Speaker, it is fitting that as we remember the brave Americans whose lives were lost at Pearl Harbor 70 years ago this week, we also honor all of America's veterans who have committed their time and risked their lives to protect our nation. It is with great honor and respect that I offer my appreciation to the Code Talkers for exemplifying the spirit and commitment of public service and duty to country. Indeed, both their code and their commitment to America remain unbreakable, and to this day we remain in awe of their achievements.

Mr. POLIS

Mr. POLIS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to call attention to a change in the Capitol Visitors Center. Two paintings by the prominent 19th century painter Albert Bierstadt have recently been returned to the Capitol Complex by the Architect of the Capitol. Originally purchased after the Civil War, ``Discovery of the Hudson River'' and ``Entrance into Monterey,'' are part of the first indigenous American school of painting, called the Hudson River School. This movement was not just restricted to beautiful landscapes--it also had an important influence on American culture, recreation, and conservation. Though the Hudson River School originated in upstate New York, painters soon began traveling widely to study and capture new scenes. These travels took the painters to Europe, the Middle East, North Africa, South America, and the American West. Bierstadt is one of the most prominent artists of the Western United States, and has a strong connection to my district in Colorado. In 1859, Bierstadt traveled to my home State of Colorado and to Wyoming, then territories, with a government surveyor. The large-scale landscapes he painted from his notes and sketches from this trip prompted the creation of many more paintings back in his studio. Bierstadt's depiction of the craggy peaks of the Rockies, the Sierra Nevada, and in Yosemite, among others, resulted in the christening of Mount Bierstadt in my district. In the 1870s, Congress purchased several of Bierstadt's works, including the two that hang today in the CVC. These same paintings, and other Western landscapes by Hudson River School painters, coupled with a growing environmental conservation movement, inspired Congress to protect this natural beauty through the creation of Yellowstone and Yosemite National Parks. Later, these paintings were used again to prompt the formation of the National Park Service. This is just one example of the Hudson River School of Painters' legacy. The School emphasized realistic, highly detailed scenes that were very popular over the 19th century. These works captured the beauty and variety of the American landscape. Painters from the Hudson River School also had a hand in the foundation of the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York City. Inspired by the artistic culture of the capitals of Europe, School painters joined other area businessmen and academics to form the Met in 1870. Bierstadt met with the President, and other painters of the School served as trustees or as members of the executive committee. Today, many of Bierstadt's works hang in the Met alongside works by many other Hudson River School painters, as well as other institutions like the Smithsonian American Art Museum, and the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston. Mr. Speaker, I encourage Americans of all ages to take the time to view these paintings and consider the beauty and greatness of these landscapes, both on canvas and in the wilderness.

Mr. POLIS

Mr. POLIS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Res. 364, a bill designating room HVC-215 of the Capitol Visitor Center as the ``Gabriel Zimmerman Room.'' Almost one year ago, a gunman ruthlessly opened fire on a crowd attending one of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords' ``Congresswoman on the Corner'' events at a local supermarket. That day is one of this body's greatest tragedies, and we will forever remember the 13 wounded, including Congresswoman Giffords and the 6 individuals that lost their lives. Today, we have the opportunity to remember one of those individuals who was taken from us, Gabriel Zimmerman, the Director of Community Outreach for Congresswoman Giffords. Gabriel's position was to enable the Congresswoman to interact closely with constituents, organizations and citizens throughout southern Arizona. Indeed, he had devoted his life to public service. By dedicating HVC-215 as the ``Gabriel Zimmerman Room,'' we are not only commemorating the first congressional staffer in history to be killed in the performance of his official duties, but we also are memorializing the value of civic participation which Gabriel Zimmerman exemplified in his life. Gabriel, at the age of thirty was engaged to be married. He was known to be a kind, hardworking person respected throughout Congresswoman Giffords' Eighth Congressional District. He graduated from the University of California at Santa Cruz in 2002 with a degree in sociology and then went on to graduate from Arizona State University in 2006 with a Masters in social work. Gabriel continued his passion for civic service as a social worker assisting troubled youth prior to joining Congresswoman Giffords' staff. None of us in this body will forget Gabriel and all those who were brutally and senselessly murdered that day. The naming of a room in the Capitol Visitor Center will forever memorialize this young man whose commitment to public service and idealism we should all hope to emulate each and every day. We must continue to fulfill our promise of improving and supporting our communities and our country, as Gabriel so honestly believed we, the Congress, should.

Mr. POLIS

Mr. POLIS. A huge tax increase is looming unless this House takes action immediately. Unless this House takes action in the next few weeks, a typical American household earning $50,000, $60,000 a year will see a tax increase of $1,000 a year on payroll taxes--yes, Madam Speaker, a $1,000 tax increase for middle class families, many of whom have not seen any raises or increases for several years due to the recession. People who are struggling to support their families will see a $1,000 tax increase if this body does not act in the next several weeks. This is a tax increase that most families haven't budgeted for and haven't prepared for. They haven't assumed that this Congress is as dysfunctional as it potentially is if we fail to renew this tax increase. We shouldn't let our dysfunction in this body harm the middle class and the American people. I call upon my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support renewing the payroll tax extension to make sure that middle class families are not slapped with a $1,000-plus tax increase next year.

Mr. POLIS

Mr. POLIS. Madam Speaker, I rise today to speak in support of Computer Science Education Week, which started this past Sunday, December 4, 2011, and runs through Saturday, December 10. This week- long celebration of the teaching and learning of computer science is a call to share information and host activities that will elevate computer science education for students at all levels. In my district in Colorado, the computing achievements of 20 young women will be celebrated at an awards event for the Colorado affiliate of the Aspirations in Computing Award on the campus of the University of Colorado at Boulder. On Friday, representatives of Computer Science Education Week and the Computer Science Teachers Association will be honored at the White House as Champions of Change, which is part of President Obama's Winning the Future initiative. Today in Harlem, New York, a company is launching a new national initiative, Tech Girls Rock, in collaboration with the Boys and Girls Clubs of America. On Thursday, 200 third-graders will learn hands-on programing and Web site development at Techie Club. I'm marking this occasion by talking to you about computer science education and urging all my colleagues in the House to support legislation I introduced earlier this year, the Computer Science Education Act, H.R. 3014. Computing and information technology is transforming our world-- driving innovation, driving job creation, leading to entirely new multimillion-dollar industries, and transforming how we live and work for the better. Computer science education prepares students for the jobs of the future by engaging and preparing them for careers in high-paying occupations. But our education system is not currently producing enough graduates in computing sciences and IT fields to meet the growing needs of the industry. In fact, the current pipeline of computing graduates will only fill 52 percent of the projected jobs. The other 48 percent will either have to be filled elsewhere in the world or go unfilled. If the U.S. is to continue to discover and develop the innovations that have created new industries and transformed others, we need to ensure a healthy computer science workforce that's skilled and large enough to meet our growing needs. Women and many minority groups are currently underrepresented among computing and IT professionals as well as students, depriving the Nation of a potential skilled workforce and of the innovation that results from diverse teams. If we don't address the issues causing too few students to take computer science education classes in kindergarten through 12th grade, as well as college, our pipeline and our Nation's future will be compromised. That's why I've introduced the Computer Science Education Act, which will help ensure that American students not only use technology, but also learn the computing skills to invent technology needed to grow and drive our economy. I look forward to working with my colleagues to include this piece of legislation in the Elementary and Secondary Education Act reauthorization. Computer Science Education Week was established in 2009 by the Computing in the Core Coalition to honor Grace Murray Hopper, a pioneer in computer science who engineered a new programing language and developed standards for computer systems to lay the foundation for many advances in computer science from the late 1940s through the 1970s. The U.S. House of Representatives has recognized Computer Science Education Week in the second week of December over the past 2 years. Computer Science Education Week is a collaborative activity of Computing in the Core, a nonpartisan advocacy coalition. Its core partners are: the Association for Computing Machinery, Microsoft, Google, Computer Science Teachers Association, the National Center for Women and Information Technology--which is based in my district in Colorado--IEEE Computer Society, the Computing Research Association, the College Board, and many, many others. I encourage my colleagues to join me in acknowledging the importance of computer science for our future by recognizing Computer Science Education Week this week.

Mr. POLIS

Mr. POLIS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlelady for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise today in opposition to the rule and the underlying bill. Mr. Speaker, with this rule and underlying bill, Congress continues months of inaction on job growth, months of ignoring real solutions, choosing instead to use our economic struggles as an excuse to push partisan and ideological legislation. The American people deserve jobs now rather than bills aimed only at stoking the rhetorical fires and antagonizing political opponents. It's time to stop the games and seek compromise for the betterment of our Nation. A middle class tax increase is looming. With the extension of the payroll tax, many middle class families earning $70,000 to $80,000 a year will be forced to pay over a $1,000 a year more in taxes. Apparently, the Republicans believe that the government knows how to spend their money better than American families. As a businessman and an entrepreneur, I'm proud to have created many jobs and many businesses. I meet with the businesses in my district on a regular basis. Not a single business has raised this issue as any kind of impediment to job growth, any kind of impediment to getting the economy growing again. This is simply a non-related subject that pursues a longtime agenda to destroy the ability of workers to organize. This bill represents the Ohio-ization of America. Just as Republicans attempted in the State of Ohio, House Republicans are simply union busting. But we saw what happened in Ohio, where Ohioans across the ideological spectrum overwhelmingly said ``no'' to this kind of anti- worker agenda. And the American people reject it as well. This bill's singular goal is to shut down workplace elections. It would overturn the proposed National Labor Relations Board rule, it would modernize the union election process and avoid delays. But instead of creating efficiency in government, the workplace election prevention actually mandates inefficiency; it makes inefficiency the norm rather than the exception. The bill puts in place 35-day delays in holding elections after filing petitions. The bill includes no limit on how long the elections can be delayed. In the case of workplace elections, delay is a critical issue. The intent of delaying an election is to give anti-union employers a chance to prevent workers from organizing. Despite Republicans' professed outrage over frivolous lawsuits and tort reform and many other areas, H.R. 3094 incentivizes a mountain of litigation for the sole purpose of stalling workplace elections. This creates a massive backlog of cases, including frivolous ones, all on the taxpayers' dime. Republicans don't seem to have a problem with trial lawyers as long as they're suing unions. This bill even allows managers to stuff the ballot boxes of employer elections. Now, Mr. Speaker, I'm sure many of us in this body here are following our State redistricting processes to see how various districts across the country are gerrymandered. What this bill would allow employers to do is effectively gerrymander what the negotiating unit is at the company. If there's a group of employees that's interested in forming a union, it would give the employer the ability to say, no, that's actually not a valid group; it needs to include this other group or this other group, and decide on what the electoral body is, what is the electorate, choosing their own electorate, as too many Members of Congress attempt to do through the redistricting process, choosing their electorate to try to rig the election against the workers. This bill is just the latest assault on workers' rights and it's, again, typical of this do-nothing Congress. The Republicans have been fixated on attacking the National Labor Relations Board, the board that is in place to strike a balance between labor and employers by cutting the agency's funding, by holding up new appointments and, now, by reversing a rule on notice-posting to inform employees of their rights. Mr. Speaker, the people are wise to see what's going on here in Congress. Every week we're in session, we see a parade of special interest bills paraded on the House floor, while taxes for middle class families risk going up because the Republicans believe that government knows how to spend their money better than the American people. The big energy companies have got numerous exemptions from the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts. The rest of us got pollution, asthma, and other illness. Look, is it possible to create jobs by lowering standards? It is. If you want to remove workplace safety standards you can create jobs, unsafe jobs. If you want to reduce the minimum wage to $2 an hour, you can create jobs, $2-an-hour jobs. Is that the America we want? Is that the America we want for our children and grandchildren? We can do better, and we must do better. Why are we here? When will Americans get the jobs bill that we desperately need to the floor of the House of Representatives? If you've got some ideas to create jobs, let's get them out, put them in front of us and discuss them. Let's start by preventing the payroll taxes from going up for middle class Americans. It's obvious why this body has an approval rating that's actually lower than communism now, and even lower than President Nixon when he resigned. It's time for this Congress to get to work to provide solutions to help get this economy going, or it's going to be time to get a new Congress. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. POLIS. I did yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentleman from California.

Mr. POLIS. I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

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

Mr. POLIS. Very well. I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, the middle class of this country doesn't need a higher payroll tax, more dirty air, dirty water, fewer workers' rights; and they certainly don't need more partisan gridlock in this do-nothing Congress. Yet that is what is being offered here today. The American people and the American economy need jobs, need optimism. Our Nation needs to know that we're working to ensure American competitiveness and access to hope and opportunity, to work to ensure that kids get the best education in the world so we can drive the economic engine of today and tomorrow, invent new technologies, propel future generations of American ingenuity and leadership. This kind of political gridlock in this do-nothing Congress does not help America move forward. This bill's singular goal is to delay and ultimately prevent workers from voting in workplace elections. These rights have helped to create the American middle class in the last century. In recent decades, the erosion of these rights has lowered paychecks for families, led to jobs outsourcing overseas, and widened the income disparities in our society. Are environmental and workplace laws, which have been around for decades, the reason the economy is lagging? Of course not. Yet these are the types of so-called solutions that are being put forward in bill after bill after bill. Let's talk about preventing a looming increase on taxes in the middle class. I encourage the supercommittee and, if it need be, standalone legislation to ensure that we can keep payroll taxes at their current level. It's time for Congress to take up the President's Jobs Act, which includes extending the middle class tax cut. The American Jobs Act, which Republicans still refuse to consider, includes job-creating proposals, including rebuilding our schools, tax breaks for small businesses to create jobs, and modernizing our air traffic control system. It's time for this Congress to stand up for the American people, to offer solutions, to get serious about getting our economy back on track instead of just scoring political points that appeal to the base. I urge a ``no'' vote on this rule and the underlying bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. POLIS. I will inquire of the gentlelady if she has any additional speakers.

Mr. POLIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Lynch).

Mr. POLIS. I yield 1 additional minute to the gentleman from New Jersey.

Mr. POLIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews). (Mr. ANDREWS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. POLIS. I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

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

Mr. POLIS. Mr. Speaker, it is my honor to yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from California, the ranking member of the Education and Workforce Committee, Mr. Miller. (Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. POLIS. I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. POLIS

Mr. POLIS. I thank the gentlelady from New York. Mr. Speaker, I have to voice my opposition to an insidious provision that has been added to this bill at the last minute by agribusiness and the frozen food industry, and that is a change that allows pizza to be counted as a vegetable. They started with French fries; now they've moved on to pizza. This language equates pizza with vegetables and weakens otherwise good school nutrition standards. This false equivalency harkens back to the ludicrous labeling of ketchup as a vegetable made infamous 30 years ago by President Ronald Reagan. Again, this bill's actual language requires crediting of tomato paste--again, crediting of tomato paste from page 90 of this bill--as a vegetable under the school lunch program to be subsidized by taxpayers as a vegetable. I had a family from my district, from Eagle County, Colorado, in my office earlier this morning and I asked the mom, I said, When your kid is eating, do you count pizza as his vegetable? And she said, No. And parents across the Nation agree. Pizza can be incorporated into a healthy diet. I eat pizza. Most of my constituents eat pizza. But when we're talking about taxpayer subsidies for healthy vegetables, to make sure that they're available for kids on the side of pizza, making sure there's some broccoli, making sure there's some spinach, making sure there's something healthy for them to eat at the school lunch counter, pizza alone--particularly pizza with no vegetables on it, just tomato paste--it's common sense that it's not a vegetable. What's next? Are Twinkies going to be considered a vegetable? Rather than having a deliberative effort, we have special interests inserting these provisions into these bills, contrary to the public health. And we wonder why Congress is so unpopular nationally. No one can help but to look at us and scratch their heads when we say that french fries count as a healthy, nutritious vegetable, that pizza counts as a healthy, nutritional element. You know, poor children's health is something we all have a stake in. Not only are the kids and the families affected, but we're all affected. The costs of Medicaid and Medicare, government spending, rising obesity rates. The empty calories in french fries are not equal to truly nutritious vegetables like carrots, spinach, lettuce, broccoli, cucumbers. I know it's hard to get kids to eat vegetables. I have a 9-week-old. He hasn't been weaned yet, so we haven't had to deal with that yet. But you know what? You don't define vegetables down. You don't call a Twinkie a vegetable. You don't call pizza a vegetable. What you do is you have to make sure that kids know how to incorporate healthy food into their diet so they can grow up strong and keep all of our costs down and make sure to keep America healthy. Mr. Speaker, this bill has many important provisions, but I feel it's critical to highlight the ludicrous definition that Congress is giving by redefining nutrition down and providing taxpayer subsidies for unhealthy food in our schools.

Mr. POLIS

Mr. POLIS. I thank the gentleman from Massachusetts. In hearing the story of my friend from Florida and my colleague on the Rules Committee, again I think it just emphasizes that my State, Colorado, also has a concealed-carry process. We have a must-issue provision. Some of our county sheriffs were not issuing and were denying issuance unreasonably. Again, it highlights that this entire bill is a dangerous solution in search of a problem. Colorado has reciprocal concealed-carry arrangements with over 30 States, including all of our neighboring States. So you can drive from Colorado to Wyoming in the north, to the south to New Mexico, and east or west, and you're in no danger about your concealed weapon permit not being recognized. And, yes, there are some States that we don't have a reciprocal agreement from. For instance, the State of Nevada. I fail to be convinced that the proper venue for that is not for the people of the sovereign State of Nevada and the sovereign State of Colorado to elect leadership that will work on a reciprocal carry arrangement if that's what they want to do. If there is a real issue there, and my constituents are hampered by their ability not to have their Colorado concealed weapons permit recognized let's say in the State of California, that's a matter between the States. Opening the door for Federal intervention in this very sensitive area opens the door to a Federal gun owner registry, which a number of gun rights advocates in my district have expressed a great deal of worry over, as well as opening the door for a whole host of other problems that can come from Washington, D.C., bureaucrats deciding where you can and can't take your guns rather than protecting our Second Amendment in the States. Some other concerns have been articulated to me from some of the gun owner rights groups in the State of Colorado. They're worried about more onerous standards to acquire a permit. They're worried about a national database of permit holders. They're also worried about this particular provision nullifying the constitutional carry provisions that are on the books in Arizona, Alaska, Vermont, and Wyoming. And that States that have a popular election method of amending the Constitution are able to do so. So again, what's the problem? I have not had any constituents contact me worried that they can't use their concealed weapons permit in a particular State. I think they are generally, and I have many concealed-carry license holders in my district. I don't happen to be one myself, but they are able to, again, in all the bordering States drive across State borders and not have to worry about relicensing or notifying authorities in those States. I think the gentleman from Florida articulated an example in Colorado where our concealed-carry permit holder helped save some lives, and I think that is a fine and good thing. Again, it is an area of State sovereignty. I asked the chair of the Judiciary Committee yesterday in Rules whether he thought this provision was constitutionally required to protect the Second Amendment. He responded that no, the State does not have to have a concealed weapons system, a concealed-carry system under the Second Amendment. It is a matter of discretion or policy in that State. I think this bill runs contrary to State sovereignty and to the privacy of individuals. That's why I encourage my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this bill.