Donald Payne

Mr. PAYNE

Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, our national unemployment rate is 9.1 percent. Yet for 42 weeks, the Republican leadership has ignored the need for a strong jobs agenda and has instead pushed an agenda to reduce workplace protections, and they have gone to weaken our economy. Unfortunately, the only jobs that will result from the Republican agenda are those vacated by victims of workplace injuries and possible deaths due to watered-down regulations. This is not responsible and only hampers our economic growth. Democrats acknowledge that small businesses are responsible for nearly 70 percent of job creation. As a result, we have proposed the American Jobs Act and the Make it in America Act to support small businesses, create jobs, and strengthen our economy. The American Jobs Act proposal would create nearly 300,000 education jobs, keep thousands of police and firemen on the job, cut the payroll tax in half, and put more money in the pockets of Americans immediately without adding a dime to the deficit. The Make It In America proposal would close tax loopholes that encourage outsourcing of U.S. jobs overseas and establish incentives for creating American clean energy jobs. I ask my colleagues to abandon their misguided agenda and support those measures that will strengthen our country for all.

Mr. PAYNE

Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor of the Mediterranean Quarterly, a journal of global issues published by Duke University Press in the late in 1980s. Mediterranean Quarterly is edited by Dr. Nikolaos A. Stavrou (Professor Emeritus of International Affairs, Howard University), a true believer in intellectual honesty, professional integrity, and fair play. The Journal is unique in many ways, and has made its mark in the policymaking world and global academy. Dr. Stavrou ensured that thinkers from all littoral states as well as academic experts in the U.S. have an open and uncensored forum to present and debate ideas. Mediterranean Quarterly has no agenda to promote other than the search for truth without fear or favor. But more importantly, it has made a point to open its pages to prominent African leaders to address issues in true Mediterranean spirit of respect for human dignity. Over the years, I had the privilege of joining a stellar list of contributors, among them former President Jimmy Carter, former UN Secretary General Boutros Boutros-Ghalli, the Presidents of Turkey and Croatia, President Salva Kiir of South Sudan, and a long list of academics, foreign ministers, prime ministers and prominent diplomats. I consider it my distinct honor to have published on a wide range of issues, including Africa, the Cyprus crisis and other issues. The Mediterranean Quarterly is a forum for thinkers and not a place for waging an ideological campaign.

Mr. PAYNE

Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, due to unforeseen circumstances I was absent on September 21, 2011 for the vote on H.R. 2608, The Continuing Appropriations Act of 2012. However, had I been present I would have voted no for H.R. 2608.

Mr. PAYNE

Mr. PAYNE. I was voted into this position not by Wall Street, not by corporate America, not by those people who reside in high-rise skyscrapers, but by hardworking Americans who want to raise their families the way that we had an opportunity to raise ours rather than ratchet it down to the bottom. I believe that this bill is foolish, hazardous to the well-being of our Nation's workers, and our economic development. It is time for the Republicans to abandon this pledge to corporate America. I urge my colleagues to vote against this outsourcing bill.

Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, in September 2010, my Republican colleagues issued A Pledge to America, stating that it is time to do away with old agendas. That much is clear. However, what is also clear is that this pledge is not to the majority of the American people but to corporate America. To make matters worse, Republicans are taking up legislation that will encourage the shipping of jobs overseas and weaken the rights of middle class workers. Furthermore, my Republican colleagues have fast-tracked what is more appropriately called the ``Job Outsourcers' Bill of Rights'' in the interest of their cronies in corporate America. Proponents of this bill claim that it will protect jobs by prohibiting the government from interfering with a company's ability to move its operation. However, the law that Republicans are trying to amend to do so, the National Labor Relations Act, does not restrict the location of company operations at all unless the company's location effort is an act to retaliate against workers exercising their right to organize, to demand better benefits, safer working conditions, and ensure a full day's pay for an honest day's work. This is obviously a response to the case against Boeing, and I find it inappropriate. Change in the law in the middle of trial is irresponsible and dangerous. The United States Chamber of Commerce wrote a letter in support of this bill. But as noted in the letter, they represent the interests of business. Well, I represent the interests of the American people.

Mr. PAYNE

Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to extend my congratulations to Dr. Edythe M. Abdullah on her investiture as the sixth president of Essex County College. As the first female to lead this 13,000 student institution, Dr. Abdullah has already demonstrated her strong competency in leadership and her knowledge of academia. Clearly, these attributes contributed to her selection as president following the college's nationwide search for a replacement for President Emeritus, Dr. A. Zachary Yamba. Dr. Abdullah's impressive background as a college administrator which includes her presidency at Florida State College has allowed her to easily transition to the Essex County College Campus. That experience coupled with her undergraduate degree from Valparaiso University, her Juris Doctorate from the University of Florida and her Leadership Certificate from Harvard University make her very qualified to add her distinctive branding to Essex County College. Fortunately, for the community at large, Dr. Abdullah understands the unique challenges faced by students with potential but who lack the resources needed to obtain a higher education. Accordingly, she has launched multiple initiatives that will allow Essex County College to address the economic requirements of students while preparing them for the future. In fact, the underlying theme: Changing Lives . . . Building Futures includes actionable processes that are measurable and comprehensive in their scope. Since her arrival in Newark, Dr. Abdullah has impressed me with her willingness to make tough but necessary decisions. This investiture is a fitting culmination of her obvious dedication to excellence. I am pleased to join her family, faculty, colleagues, students and the Greater Newark community in feting her on this wonderful occasion.

Mr. PAYNE

Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues here in the House of Representatives to join me as I rise to pay tribute to Robert (Bob) Meehan as he retires from Horizon Blue Cross Blue Shield of New Jersey, Inc. It is my distinct pleasure to add my congratulations to that of his family, friends and colleagues as they celebrate in honor of a man who has been involved in every aspect of Horizon's business markets for 20 years. For all the leadership he has shown and the contributions he has made over the years, Bob Meehan is a worthy recipient of the accolades he will receive on July 26, 2011. I consider it an honor to have served on the Board of Directors of the YMCA of Newark and Vicinity with Bob Meehan for a number of years. Not only has Bob been an asset to the Board with his business savvy and creativity but he also served in several leadership positions including Board President. Bob was instrumental in revitalizing key Y programs and steering the organization through a difficult financial period. He has been a mentor to new Board members and I have been advised that Bob has also been a mentor to many Horizon employees including my New Jersey Chief of Staff. Bob and I have two other things in common; we both graduated from Seton Hall University and we both spent a number of years with Prudential Insurance Company. Prudential's loss was definitely Horizon's gain as Bob made his mark in a variety of marketing and customer service related areas. His efforts on behalf of the customers and employees of Horizon will long be remembered and Bob's incredible style will be greatly missed by all those who had the pleasure of knowing him. Mr. Speaker, I know my fellow members of the House of Representatives agree that Bob Meehan has been an integral part of Horizon. Bob's retirement is the culmination of a stellar career and we wish him well in this new and exciting phase of his life.

Mr. PAYNE

Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, today we are witnessing a tragic humanitarian crisis in Somalia and the Horn of Africa, which is currently experiencing its worst drought in over 60 years. According to USAID, crops have failed; livestock has died, and prices in the local markets are too high for most people to buy what they need to feed their families. On July 20, 2011, the United Nations announced that famine exists in two regions of Somalia. This crisis is affecting over 11 million people throughout the region, and USAID estimates that over 3.2 million people are in life-threatening situations and are in dire need of food, water and medical attention. Additionally, over 80 percent of those fleeing Somalia are believed to be women and children. At Kenyan and Ethiopian refugee camps, Somali children under the age of 5 are dying at an alarming rate. I visited a camp in Kenya 2 years ago, the Dadaab camp, where many of the refugees from Somalia are going. There are five times as many people in that camp as the camp can handle. It was overcrowded 2 years ago, and with the drought, it is just becoming almost impossible to sustain life. An alarming 60 percent of the people at risk are still in al-Shabaab- held territory. Al-Shabaab is supported by al Qaeda. They initially said there was no drought--a denial. Yet, in the part of the country of which they are in charge, the drought is very serious, especially in southern Sudan. Then they did agree that the drought was occurring and said they would allow humanitarian organizations to go to that area to distribute food and medicine. However, just last week, they changed their position again. As we saw in the nineties with Aidid and Ali Mahdi in the original drought during which the United States became involved in Somalia, we cannot have the political warlords and that situation happen again. The World Food Programme and the United Nations are desperately trying to get the food, water and medical assistance into that area, and we are going to continue to ask the al-Shabaab people to allow the food to come in. During a similar drought in Ethiopia during the early eighties, the international community was slow to respond, resulting in more than 1 million deaths. Then world leaders said, Never again. Now we are facing a worsening humanitarian disaster that threatens to take even more lives. We must act and support those in need. I have to commend USAID and the work that they're doing. Yesterday, at a hearing we had on this situation, Ms. Cromer, from the USAID, talked about the fact that they had an early warning system and that they had pre-positioned food, which shows that planning has resulted in less loss of life than there would have been had it not been pre- positioned, but we still have a serious problem. Last week I introduced H. Res. 361, calling attention to this crisis, and we have already over 50 cosponsors. Indeed, Congress is taking notice. My colleagues, Jim McGovern, Jo Ann Emerson, members of the Hunger Caucus, along with myself and Barbara Lee and Maxine Waters and Gwen Moore and others have been very vocal on this issue. Ms. McCollum also has added her voice, from Minnesota. The crisis is worsening, though. The Famine Early Warning Systems Network believes that within the next 1 or 2 months, the famine will spread throughout all of southern Somalia. As the situation has grown more dire, over 600,000 Somalis have fled to neighboring countries, some walking hundreds of miles to refugee camps. The roads to these camps in northern Kenya and eastern Ethiopia have been described by The Washington Post just yesterday and others as ``roads of death.'' Thousands of women, children, and elderly are left on the side of the road weak from malnutrition, unable to continue. They are resting on those who have already died. So I ask all of you to respond to this very serious situation.

Mr. PAYNE

Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask my colleagues here in the U.S. House of Representatives to join me in honoring Deputy Chief of Mission at the Embassy of Ireland, Orla O'Hanrahan, for her outstanding service here in Washington, DC. Building on her years of experience in the Irish Foreign Service, Orla has brought to her position here tremendous skill, knowledge, diplomacy and enthusiasm. Her past accomplishments include serving as a popular Consul General in Boston and Joint Director General of the International Fund for Ireland. She held the position of Press Officer for the Irish Embassy in Paris, and also was stationed in London during a time of great conflict and violence between Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Having visited Northern Ireland myself during that period, and as a member of the Congressional Friends of Ireland Caucus, I appreciate the important role that diplomats like Orla played during that difficult time which culminated in the successful Good Friday Accord. Orla is a wonderful public servant and I know my colleagues join me in wishing her continued success and happiness as she returns to Ireland with her family.

Mr. PAYNE

Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to join my colleagues today to address H.R. 2560, the Cut, Cap, and Balance Act. House Republicans are bringing to the floor H.R. 2560, which is another attempt to enact the policies embedded in their budget resolution. However, this act is even more extreme because it mandates that the House and Senate approve a constitutional amendment imposing their political philosophy. While House Democrats have pushed for a balanced approach to minimize the deficit, Republican Members have pushed forward with a plan to end Medicare in order to preserve tax breaks for special interests, Big Oil, and corporations that transport jobs abroad. Throughout the process of negotiations, House Democrats have focused on protecting Medicare, strengthening the middle class, and creating jobs. America's middle class and seniors will suffer the most as the GOP continues to stand in the way of a reasonable, balanced deficit reduction agreement. The national unemployment rate is down to 9.1 percent; however, 8.8 million jobs were lost. So I ask that we reject this bill coming up.

Mr. PAYNE

Mr. PAYNE. Madam Speaker, I rise today to join my colleagues in our efforts to protect senior citizens and Social Security. Over the past few weeks, I have received hundreds of phone calls and letters from my constituents, urging me to protect Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. I have a question: What will happen to the millions of senior citizens and people living in poverty who rely on these programs? It seems like the Republicans are focusing on giving tax breaks to those who need them the least. Currently, approximately 52 million Americans benefit from the Social Security program. According to the most recent statistics published by the AARP, one in six residents in New Jersey receives Social Security. In addition, statistics show that women rely more on Social Security than any other segment of our population. Therefore, I urge my Republican colleagues to put aside their contempt for entitlement programs and to submit to doing what is best for the interests of the American people.

Mr. PAYNE

Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues here in the U.S. House of Representatives to join me as I rise to offer this tribute to Ms. Joyce Reilly as she is honored on April 3, 2011 by Drew University's Center for Holocaust/Genocide Studies. This is a well deserved honor for a woman who has had an incredible interest in and compassion for her fellow human beings who have been victims of various atrocities throughout our world. The empathy that Joyce Reilly demonstrates towards all people in general, and victims of genocide, in particular manifested itself when she was a young child. She knew at a tender age that she would want to spend her life promoting activities and serving in capacities that would be meaningful to the survivors and would honor the memories of the deceased. Joyce Reilly's passion to increase awareness of past and on-going acts of genocide led her to pursue multiple ventures to achieve her goals. Fortunately, for Drew University, Joyce began her studies in psychology there in 1970. She would subsequently work in various residential communities serving emotionally and mentally challenged individuals. These communities included Great Britain, Germany and the United States. A life-long learner, Joyce continued her studies at Mercy College (now Sunbridge College) in Detroit, Michigan and served for a time on its faculty. In 1982, Joyce would move to Kimberton, Pennsylvania where she founded Gheel House, a therapeutic community for the mentally and emotionally challenged. She serves as the Executive Director of Logos Foundation, a foundation for young children endangered by war, poverty and their effects on modern life. Through Joyce's many interactions with victims and visits to sites of conflicts, she has been able to meet some incredible people including Dr. Joseph Seberenzi, former Speaker of the House in Rwanda who is a survivor of that genocide and a conflict transformation specialist. Mr. Speaker, I know that the family, friends and associates of the Ms. Reilly are proud of what she has accomplished so far in her life. My office has been fortunate to work with her on Darfur through a collaboration of organizations working to assist those victims who struggle daily to overcome the tragedies visited on its people in recent years. I ask my fellow members to join me in this tribute to excellence. It is a proud moment for me to acknowledge her today and to let her know how much all of us appreciate the work she continues to do.

Mr. PAYNE

Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues here in the House of Representatives to join me as I rise to pay tribute to the wonderful accomplishments of George E. Shinhoster as he retires from the YMCA of Newark and Vicinity. It is indeed a pleasure for me to add my congratulations to that of his family, friends and colleagues of the YMCA of Newark and Vicinity as they celebrate in honor of a man who has been a Y professional for 42 years. George Shinhoster's retirement caps a career that saw him lead YMCA's in multiple states, with his last five years in the great State of New Jersey. For all the contributions he has made over the years, Mr. Shinhoster deserves to be feted on this marvelous albeit melancholy occasion. The YMCA of Newark and Vicinity was fortunate to have the wise counsel of Mr. Shinhoster who came to serve on an interim basis but chose to stay for an extended period. During his tenure, he was able to accomplish multiple goals including a positive financial bottom line. Rarely has an individual been such an integral part of an organization where strength, integrity and determination have been the driving forces of the outcomes. Clearly, George Shinhoster could have taken his talents elsewhere but the Y is extremely grateful that he chose to follow in the footsteps of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King whom he credits with much of his accomplishments. In fact, George Shinhoster worked with Dr. King during the 1960's and participated in many of the civil rights initiatives occurring during that time period. Based on George's background, it is no wonder that he chose to serve and he has served well. As a strong supporter of the YMCA and its programs for youth, it has been my personal honor to work with George Shinhoster and to encourage his efforts. These efforts have led to some dynamic improvements and image boosting for the YMCA of Newark and Vicinity. His sphere of influence in the community and the synergy he helped to create through the Y will always be remembered by the many employees, program participants and residents of the Greater Newark area. Mr. Speaker, I know my fellow members of the House of Representatives agree that George Shinhoster has been a part of the fabric of the Y and that his departure will leave a void that will not easily be filled. We wish him well in this new phase of his life.

Mr. PAYNE

Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize June 21 as National Summer Learning Day and draw attention to the importance of high- quality summer learning opportunities in the lives of young people. This day is an opportunity for schools, nonprofit organizations, public agencies, resident camps, sports clubs, businesses, museums and libraries to showcase the contributions they make to the lives of young people during the summer. The effort to keep kids learning during summer is based on research that shows that without effective summer learning opportunities: most students fall more than two months behind in math over the summer; low- income children fall behind two to three months in reading each summer, while their middle and upper-income peers make slight gains; and by the end of fifth grade, lower-income children can be nearly three years behind their higher-income peers in reading. Last year, nearly 500 events were held nationwide that highlighted how summer learning programs advance academic growth, support working families, keep children safe and send students back to school ready to learn. I am proud to recognize National Summer Learning Day and encourage communities across the country to celebrate and acknowledge the importance of providing all young people with high-quality learning opportunities during the summer months.

Mr. PAYNE

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

Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Chairman, I ask my colleagues to vote against any language in the Agriculture appropriations bill that would seek to cut funding for the WIC program. As you know, the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children, WIC, makes it possible for vulnerable children to have a healthy start. The Republican cuts will deny many children a chance to receive nutritious food by cutting WIC funding from $6.73 billion this year to $6.05 billion in 2012. This cut is a cut of more than $650 million below the fiscal level of 2011. And this is much less than the continuing cost of the high-end Bush tax cuts, oil company tax breaks, and various other write-offs for well-to-do taxpayers or powerful corporations. If we allow these cuts to take place, approximately 200,000 to 300,000 women and children nationwide will lose WIC benefits next year. In fact, in the State of New Jersey, approximately 4,000 to 6,000 low-income families will be turned away by WIC. This is very alarming to me because these cuts will negatively impact a substantial number of low- income women and children in my district. As a former public school teacher in the inner city of Newark, New Jersey, I witnessed firsthand the effects of hunger and malnutrition on children trying to learn. When they came to school to take tests, they couldn't concentrate. They were unable to really focus on what they had before them. The reality is this: If a child is hungry, he simply cannot learn. If a child is hungry, he is unable to focus in class. What are his chances of thriving academically? If we are serious about closing the achievement gap and ensuring that students are career and college ready, cutting WIC will be in direct contradiction. In light of rising food prices and current unemployment rates, it would be catastrophic to strip funding from this vital program. I strongly believe that by cutting WIC funding, we risk neglecting and preventing children from getting a head start in recognizing the excellence of their human potential. We, as a nation, are still a great nation. We are the wealthiest nation in the world. We have the greatest ideals and opportunities for people. But I think that we are being shortsighted. We have a problem and we will deal with it, as we have done for all other problems. In World War II, we had no navy. We had no army that was significant. However, we built ships that floated. We trained people in 20 and 30 days to rivet and to make our powerful defense mechanism work, and we won the war for the world. We can win this war of the deficit in this country. I think that even the constituents of my good friends on the other side of the aisle, my tea party friends, my Republican friends--go back home and ask people, Do you want to pull the food out of the mouths of babes? Because from the mouths of babes ofttimes come gems. And if our Nation is going to be a great nation in the world, as we are today, we're not going to do it by starving the children and harming the women. It's unconscionable, it's disgraceful, and it's a mark on the House of Representatives. It's really something that shouldn't be. Therefore, I urge my colleagues to vote against any provisions cutting funding for the WIC program. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. PAYNE

Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, the Republican leadership has ignored the need for a strong jobs agenda and, worse, they have pushed budget plans that would only further depress the economy and harm the unemployed. My constituents need a real job agenda in Washington now. Yet my Republican colleagues continue to promote efforts to do the opposite. On May 11, the Committee on Ways and Means approved a Republican bill that would end employment as we know it, deceivingly calling it the JOBS Act. This act would eliminate the guarantee of Federal payment for temporary extended unemployment benefits on July 6. This plan would take $32 billion now in the Federal unemployment trust funds intended for extended unemployment benefits and ship the money to the States in block grants. It would also set unreasonable qualifying requirements to receive benefits and allow for the permanent diversion of regular unemployment funds with waivers. More than 4 million Americans could lose extended benefits under this plan? This is unacceptable. I assume that the floor vote on this was postponed because my colleagues on the other side of the aisle received a message of disapproval from the American people. But more than abandoning this misguided bill, we need a stronger effort to increase jobs and improve our economy. The American taxpayers want and deserve more now.

Mr. PAYNE

Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 372, I was absent due to unforeseen circumstances. Had I been present, I would have voted``no.'' Rollcall No. 372 was a vote on the Cravaack of Minnesota Amendment No. 152 to H.R. 1540, National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012. This amendment will completely eliminate the United States Institute of Peace (USIP). While I believe spending cuts within our defense budget are necessary, I also believe that those cuts must be smart and targeted. The United States Institute of Peace--created by Congress and signed into law by President Ronald Reagan--is the only independent U.S. government actor that is dedicated solely to conflict prevention and resolution. USIP produces timely expert analysis on issues critical to policymakers and conflict prevention practitioners. In early February 2011, USIP published a ``PEACE Report'' on the political stalemate in Cote d'Ivoire following the November 28, 2010 election and the broader issue of preventing electoral violence in Africa. The elimination of USIP will have strong, adverse impact on America's security interests. USIP is an important national security actor. The U.S. government must have options for resolving international conflict other than military action. USIP is the critical bridge between governmental and non-governmental actors to promote peace in volatile conflicts. USIP's Center for Mediation and Conflict Resolution conducts work in a number of critical conflict zones in Africa, Middle East, and across the globe. In the Arab-Israeli conflict, USIP is addressing a series of challenges and opportunities facing the parties. USIP has been focusing on the capacity of the Israeli and Palestinian publics to build consensus and support for a negotiated agreement, and the role of U.S. policymakers in encouraging and supporting these efforts toward a peaceful resolution. USIP is also dealing with several issues in Nigeria, a country rife with conflicts over petroleum resources and religion. Amidst this situation, USIP is working on peace efforts for the Niger Delta region, including working collaboratively with local governments, oil companies, and Nigerian NGOs. For nearly two decades, the USIP has been working in Sudan on peace processes. Its knowledge and expertise has helped shape the environment that has contributed, so far, to a relatively peaceful outcome of the referendum. USIP's work on prevention, power-sharing, constitutional reform and natural resources has made a critical difference in the country's local capacity. In addition, USIP has been able to contribute to the successful mitigation of violence in Kenya, due to its longstanding relationships with influential and highly skilled civil society activists and its reputation as an independent and unbiased party. USIP has the ability to act fast, responding, for example, to the unforeseen electoral violence crisis in 2007 with targeted assistance to a local group in time to make a difference. USIP is now working toward contributing to a peaceful election in 2012. USIP is a small, agile center of innovation in support of America's national security interests in supporting peace and democracy in Africa and across the globe. USIP has been a very useful resource to policymakers for decades. Therefore, eliminating this critical institution abolishes a cost-effective alternative to military forces.

Mr. PAYNE

Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, this upcoming September 11 will mark the 10th anniversary of the most horrific act of terrorism, executed under the leadership of the now deceased Osama bin Laden. We will never forget the images of burning buildings, crashing planes, and Americans running for their lives. Three thousand people never came back home that Tuesday, and families will again remember the last time they hugged their loved ones good-bye. What will be different this September 11 is that Osama bin Laden will no longer be able to celebrate the destruction he caused and the lives he destroyed. President Obama, we thank you for a superb operation. Thank you for having the courage to make the decision so many would have backed away from. Because of President Obama's team of experts, this risky mission was backed by sound information, solid facts, and accurate calculations. His goal was clear: Get Osama bin Laden. And that is exactly what happened. This is truly a mission accomplished. I commend our Commander in Chief, Barack Obama, for his intelligent execution. This is not a celebration of death; this is a celebration of justice, courage, sacrifice, and democracy. And this is a celebration of leadership. Mr. President, your 40-minute operation has helped bring closure to so many Americans for a lifetime.

Mr. PAYNE

Mr. PAYNE. Let me begin by commending our Commander in Chief, President Barack Obama, and his team of experts who debated and discussed the exercise that eliminated Osama bin Laden. On an issue like this, there are many different points of view, and it takes a person who has the ability to evaluate to take charge. And he made a decision. We certainly would like to commend the Navy SEALs who did another extraordinary job, just as they did in Somalia when I was there. I was in Somalia the day after the Navy SEALs eliminated the pirates who had hijacked a ship. And I was at a press conference in Mogadishu where I said that when you tread on Americans, this is the result. In the middle of Mogadishu as I left, as you may recall, my plane was fired on by persons who are related to al Qaeda. Well, let me once again comment that New Jersey, who lost so many people in 9/11 going to the World Trade Center where many of them work, we hope that they will have some peace.

Mr. PAYNE

Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, today I rise not to debate the economic crisis. Our national debt recently reached $14 trillion and our deficit continues to rise annually. So we know that we have a crisis, and that is really not the debate here today. However, I want to remind my colleagues that our economic deficit is dependent on our job deficit and our ever-growing education deficit. While we must work to rein in spending, we must not indiscriminately cut funding in areas like education, health, and employment that will hamper our immediate and future economic growth. As we remain vigilant in cutting the debt and reducing deficits, we must remember that the most powerful driver of both is a growing economy, which includes an increase in revenue. During this recession, unemployment has impeded economic growth. One of the challenges in addressing unemployment has been the rapid decline in certain occupations and industries and our labor market's inability to meet the demand of new occupations and industries. More than two-thirds of workers in occupations and industries that are growing have at least some postsecondary education compared to one- third of the workers in occupations and industries that are declining. The demand for a post-secondary education, as well as the increase in baby boomer retirement, is predicted to result in a shortage of more than 14 million college-educated workers by the year 2020. This is the deficit that should garner our national attention and we should work together on. We can only address this through our continued focus on education, training, employment, and social services, which make up a total of 2 percent of our Federal budget. To build sustainable economic growth, we must continue our investment in employment and training programs, which have experienced an increase in demand of support for displaced and unemployed workers. We must continue our investment in higher education by maintaining Pell Grant funding, as well as support for programs such as TRIO, which sends the largest amount of low-income students to and through college, which helps the economic prowess of this country. We must continue our investment in title I programs, which are intended to supplement local resources of underserved schools, which bring our economy down. We must continue our investment in School Improvement Grants, which provide important resources for States to turn around their lowest- performing schools and significantly reduce the high school dropout rate, which causes our country a great deal of deficit. We must continue our investment in programs that address the 17,000 word gap between low-income 6-year-olds and their more advantaged peers. We must support programs such as Head Start that work to dismantle the cradle-to-prison pipeline and replace it with a cradle- to-career pipeline by providing early childhood education to low-income children. These supports, in tandem, produce a higher number of taxpaying citizens and add growth to our economy. Yet, my colleagues continually try to attack these efforts by cutting these programs. Further, my colleagues--who made a ``pledge to America'' to develop a plan to create jobs, end economic uncertainty, and make America more competitive--continuously introduce and support measures to undermine this pledge and devastate our economic growth as a Nation. In March, unemployment fell to 8.8 percent, a 2-year low. Payrolls grew to 216,000 for the month, following 194,000 in February. Private hiring rose by 230,000 people in March, following a 240,000 growth in February. Manufacturing expanded to a 7-year high in March. Incomes and consumer spending increased in February, helping to expand the economy. Yet, ignoring economic facts, the experts, the political reality, and the best interests of the American people, the Republicans continue to embrace an ideological spending plan that would destroy 700,000 jobs and derail the economic recovery just as it is beginning to gain momentum. The current Republican spending plan would: Give away tax breaks to companies that shift jobs overseas; give away tens of billions of dollars in tax subsidies to Big Oil companies; and make tax cuts for the wealthy permanent, which adds $1 trillion to the deficit. This plan would kick almost 1 million college students out of the Pell Grant program. 218,000 low income children and families would be removed from the Head Start program. 170,000 families trying to find or retain employment would lose childcare. 2,400 schools serving nearly a million low-income students would lose funding. Job training programs for those out of work or attaining new skills would be dramatically cut. Guaranteed coverage for seniors under Medicare would be eliminated. Cuts will be made to Medicaid for seniors in nursing homes, health care for children and Americans with disabilities. This spending plan that my colleagues have proposed only highlights the misplaced priorities. The Republican budget is the wrong choice for the American people: it is unfair; it doesn't create jobs; and it doesn't grow the economy. This proposal attempts to cut the deficit on the backs of working families, seniors, children, and our middle class. But I contend: We cannot build this country's economy on the backs of the vulnerable. The public wants Democrats and Republicans to negotiate and compromise. My Democratic colleagues and I are willing to make responsible budget cuts that don't cost jobs, don't hurt the economy and that reduce the deficit responsibly. Yet, our Republican colleagues continue to waste precious time with draconian spending proposals filled with divisive ``policy riders'' that are unacceptable to the American people. This is irresponsible. Working families deserve more. Our children deserve more. Our future as a Nation deserves more.

Mr. PAYNE

Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, my Republican colleagues made a ``pledge to America'' to develop a plan to ``create jobs, end economic uncertainty, and make America more competitive.'' Yet, to date, Republicans have not produced a single job-creating measure. In fact, they have done just the opposite. First-time jobless claims increased by 5,000 last week, and the total number of people receiving benefits fell to its lowest level in 3 years. The February job report showed gains of 192,000 jobs and a drop in the unemployment rate to 8.9 percent. Still ignoring the facts that the experts have said, the needs of their constituents, and basic logic, Republicans continue to embrace a plan that would hamper our economic progress, depress our growth and development. This misguided job-killing spending plan is estimated to eliminate 800,000 jobs and reduce economic growth by 2 percent. This is irresponsible, unacceptable, and I urge my Republican colleagues to abandon this job-killing spending campaign and adopt a reasonable agenda to support economic development and job growth.

Mr. PAYNE

Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, I rise with great excitement. My Republican colleagues have made a vow to offset new spending, but they found a cause worthy enough to bypass this promise. My Republican colleagues have rallied behind the SOAR Act, a $300 million bill without an offset. Reportedly, the goal of the bill is to give ``all students a shot to win the future'' by ``restoring hope'' and ``building stronger public schools.'' This is truly encouraging as it matches my goals as well as those of many of my Democratic colleagues. However, I strongly disagree with the proposed solution. The $300 million bill will continue the D.C. Opportunities Scholarship Program, which was ineffective. Department of Education reports show the voucher program had no statistically significant impact on overall student achievement, aspirations for the future, the frequency of doing homework, or attendance or tardiness rates. Further, although built on the premise of choice, voucher schools can and do reject students based on prior academic achievement, economic background, English language ability, or disciplinary history, which significantly limits choice. This $300 million program, which has proven ineffective, is not the solution for the intended goal. To reach this goal, we can begin by repealing the H.R. 1 cuts to programs that remove barriers for low- income students, such as title I programs, Head Start and TRIO. I urge my colleagues who are truly invested in the goal to reject these cuts to key education programs and to oppose the SOAR Act. Earlier, I heard one of the persons on the other side talk about persons who support vouchers in D.C. Most of the political persons who support it either were defeated or have left and have no more say.

Mr. PAYNE

Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today on the 1-year anniversary of the passage of the Affordable Health Care Act to voice my disappointment with my Republican colleagues' continued assault on the historic law that has already begun to provide aid and relief for countless Americans. One year ago, my colleagues and I came together to enact a law because of the call to action from our constituents. We heard from seniors who could not afford their prescriptions and were in the Medicaid doughnut hole, parents whose children were being denied coverage due to preexisting conditions, individuals who were being denied treatment due to lifetime limits, and taxpayers who are bearing the costs of uncompensated health care. We answered the clarion call from our constituents who asked us to protect them. Yet the Republican colleagues continue to assault the law. Siding the special interests, particularly the health care insurance companies that stand to lose from health care reform, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle continue to assault our program. With that, I say let's keep the law in force and let's move forward with progress.

Mr. PAYNE

Mr. PAYNE. I rise today to oppose the Barletta amendments and the Weiner-Chaffetz-Cravaack amendment to eliminate funding for the U.S. Institute of Peace (USIP), should they be offered during floor consideration of H.R. 1. The elimination of USIP would have strong, adverse impact on America's security interests. USIP is an important national security actor. The U.S. Government must have options for resolving international conflict other than military action. USIP--created by Congress and signed into law by President Ronald Reagan--is the only independent U.S. Government actor that is dedicated solely to conflict prevention and resolution. USIP is the critical bridge between governmental and non-governmental actors to promote peace in volatile conflicts. Their Center for Mediation and Conflict Resolution conducts work in a number of critical conflict zones in Africa, Middle East, and across the globe: USIP is addressing a series of challenges and opportunities facing the parties to the Arab-Israeli conflict, with a focus on institutional capacity to make compromises, the capacity of the Israeli and Palestinian publics to build consensus and support for a negotiated agreement, and the role of U.S. policymakers in encouraging and supporting these efforts toward a peaceful resolution. USIP is addressing several issues in Nigeria, a country rife with conflicts over petroleum resources and religion. Amidst this situation, the Center is working on peace efforts for the Niger Delta region, including working collaboratively with local governments, oil companies, and Nigerian NGOs. For nearly two decades, the United States Institute of Peace has been working in Sudan on peace processes. Its knowledge and expertise has helped shape the environment that has contributed, so far, to a relatively peaceful outcome of the referendum. USIP's work on prevention, power-sharing, constitutional reform and natural resources has made a critical difference in the country's local capacity. USIP produces timely expert analysis on issues critical to policymakers and conflict prevention practitioners. Just last week USIP published the attached PEACE Brief report on the political stalemate in Cote d'Ivoire following the November 28, 2010 election and the broader issue of preventing electoral violence in Africa. USIP is a small, agile center of innovation in support of America's national security interests in supporting peace and democracy in Africa and across the globe. USIP has been a very useful resource to policymakers for decades, we can not eliminate this critical institution. I urge my colleagues to join me in voting ``no'' on these amendments. [From the PeaceBrief--United States Institute of Peace, Feb. 7, 2011] Cote d'Ivoire's Political Stalemate: A Symptom of Africa's Weak Electoral Institutions (By Dorina Bekoe) Summary The political stalemate in Cote d'Ivoire following the November 28, 2010, presidential election continues. The majority of the international community recognizes Alassane Ouattara as the winner, but Laurent Gbagbo, the sitting president, insists he won. Financial and diplomatic sanctions imposed on the Gbagbo administration have thus far not forced Gbagbo from power. Maintaining international pressure and focus is critical to resolving the Ivorian crisis, but African states are increasingly divided on how to proceed. The power-sharing arrangement settled on by five African nations in recent elections sets a dangerous precedent. Losers with a strong militia may find it easier to use threats of violence or actual violence to retain a critical power role, thus subverting the intent of the election. African states will continue to experience violence during elections until the security sector is reformed, states refrain from holding elections while militias remain mobilized and armed, elections can be clearly and independently verified, institutions are politically independent, and policies exist to discourage the violent acquisition of power. Following the November 28, 2010, presidential runoff election, the United Nations, charged with validating the electoral process, along with the Independent Electoral Commission, proclaimed Alassane Ouattara the winner, with 54.1 percent of the vote, over Laurent Gbagbo, the sitting president, who had received 45.9 percent of the vote. However, the Constitutional Council, headed by a Gbagbo supporter, annulled results in 13 departments, alleging fraud, and proclaimed Gbagbo the winner, with 51.4 percent of the vote; Ouattara was given 48.5 percent.\1\ Both Ouattara and Gbagbo were sworn in as president by their supporters. Most in the international and regional communities recognized Ouattara as the winner, and the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) and the African Union (AU) suspended Cote d'Ivoire from membership. Gbagbo's calls to investigate election fraud, recount the ballots, and craft a power-sharing arrangement have been rejected by the international and regional institutions. Instead, ECOWAS and AU envoys have urged Gbagbo to step down, financial and travel sanctions have been placed on him and his associates, and ECOWAS threatened military intervention.\2\ With the military and the Young Patriots militia supporting Gbagbo and the Forces Nouvelles rebels supporting Ouattara, many fear that the failure of diplomacy and sanctions will reignite the 2002 civil war. While the central conundrum is how to convince Gbagbo to leave office, larger questions loom about the role of elections, the state of democratization, and the strength of institutions in Africa. Power sharing in response to electoral violence In 2010, opposition candidates claimed electoral fraud and irregularities in every presidential election in Africa--in Guinea, Togo, Sudan, Burundi, Burkina Faso, Egypt, Comoros, Tanzania, and Rwanda. Historically, in many cases of electoral fraud, the challenger urges demonstrations or refuses to recognize the results. In prolonged and violent standoffs mediators have been dispatched, as occurred in Guinea 2010, or a power-sharing agreement has been negotiated, as occurred in Kenya and Zimbabwe in 2008, in Togo in 2005, in Madagascar in 2002, and in Zanzibar in 2001. While the power-sharing arrangements in those five cases aimed to stop the violence and address some of its underlying causes, such arrangements could have longlasting implications, and shorter, transitional measures might be considered instead. Granted, an electorate can vote for a power-sharing or proportionally representative government. The problems arise when power sharing is imposed as a solution when there is a clear winner (it weakens the purpose of an election), when the winner cannot be determined (it can encourage fraud and other obfuscation), or when there is postelection violence (it may demonstrate that violence pays). In this sense, Gbagbo's power-sharing proposal is troubling and presents a critical philosophical decision for Africa's institutions: how to react to candidates who respond violently to election results. More broadly, how can leaders be encouraged to accept defeat? How should the international community respond to leaders who use violence to hold on to power? For the remainder of 2011, Africa faces nearly 40 elections and referenda in 23 countries, including some that have a history of violence and weak democratic institutions, such as Nigeria, Zimbabwe, and the Democratic Republic of Congo. A power-sharing norm, in the event of violently contested election results, will be a dangerous precedent. lessons from madagascar and togo In 2003, a disputed first-run election left Madagascar divided between the supporters of incumbent president Didier Ratsiraka and challenger Marc Ravalomanana. The Organization of African Unity brokered the Dakar Agreement to pave the way for a resolution .\3\ But when Ratsiraka refused to concede, confrontations between the two escalated, and Ratsiraka fled to France. \4\ Six years later the mayor of Antananarivo, Andry Rajoelina, accused Ravalomanana's administration of corruption and mismanagement and, with the military's backing, assumed the presidency. Ravalomanana fled to South Africa. Despite the absence of both Ratsiraka and Ravalomanana, the political situation in Madagascar remains unresolved. Efforts at resolution have floundered as the international community, once united in bringing Rajoelina and the former presidents together, has splintered, with different countries considering their own national and regional interests. Resolving the crisis is made more difficult as the efforts of mediators are uncoordinated and therefore weakened.\5\ The response in Togo differed markedly. After long-serving Gnassingbe Eyadema died in 2005, the parliament swore in his son, Faure Gnassingbe, contravening the constitution. ECOWAS and the International Organization of the Francophonie suspended Togo. After an enormous amount of international pressure and mediation, Gnassingbe stepped aside to allow elections, as required by the constitution. In this case, the concerted pressure of the international and regional communities provided space for the resolution of the crisis. The Ivorian situation must not slip from international attention. The financial and travel sanctions have begun to constrain Gbagbo and his administration, but he remains in place. Only resolute diplomatic pressure and adherence to sanctions will eventually dislodge Gbagbo and avert conflict. Yet the AU's reversal on military intervention, the refusal by Ghana and South Africa to take a stance for one candidate or the other, and Uganda's Yoweri Museveni's statement that the votes should be investigated show a divided region. Furthermore, other African countries are receiving Gbagbo's representatives, in a break with the initial practice of recognizing only Ouat-tara's representatives; they were recently in Kenya to explain their reasons for rejecting Ouattara's victory claims. These developments threaten a swift resolution to this stalemate and portend a long period of instability. the role of ivorian civil society in reducing tension Political and geographic divisions make it difficult for Ivoirian civil society to act as a joint force for peace. Moderate voices, willing to bridge regional and political divides, are not being heard.\6\ It is important to note that Ouattara did not obtain a landslide victory. A substantial number of voters, nearly 46 percent, supported Gbagbo. Their reasons for supporting Gbagbo reflect the existing regional, ethnic, and religious divisions in Cote d'Ivoire. Whether Gbagbo or Ouattara emerges as winner from the current stalemate, the next president will face a sharply divided electorate that challenges his rule. Thus, this election, which was meant to repair the divisions between the north and the south, will have failed to do so. At the very least, a key ingredient for avoiding war in Cote d'Ivoire is to reconcile these divided communities. Civil society's moderate voices can play a critical role in starting the reconciliation process.\7\ Moderates can also make joint statements and appearances and participate in the current mediation process between Gbagbo and Ouattara. The international community should help by emphasizing the importance of moderates and building their capacity and infrastructure to succeed. preventing violence in electoral disputes Cote d'Ivoire's crisis, as well as others, could have been avoided if the militias had demobilized and if clear rules for the security services had existed, methods for verifying elections were clear and disputes could have been credibly resolved, and Africa's institutions had implementable tools for discouraging electoral violence. the role of the security forces In many countries, security services remain politicized and are used to crush demonstrations and intimidate the opposition. This was clearly seen in the postelection demonstrations in Ethiopia in 2005, where approximately 30,000 opposition members were arrested.\8\ In Cote d'Ivoire as many as 30 demonstrators died at the hands of state security services during a public demonstration.\9\ Reform and depoliticization of the security forces would reduce the chances of violence. disarmament and demobilization of militias Repeated attempts to disarm the militia ahead of the elections in Cote d'Ivoire failed. The program was poorly funded, and there were identifiable security, financial, and political benefits for the militia to remain intact. Removing those incentives would have spurred demobilization. Now, with Ouattara and Gbagbo in control of arms, the prospect of violence increases dramatically should diplomacy fail. A similar outcome occurred in the Republic of Congo after the 1993 parliamentary elections when the three political party leaders each claimed victory while still in charge of their respective militias. The clashes in the ensuing several months left 2,000 dead.\10\ Elections should not proceed while candidates remain in control of militias. clear, independent verification of results The UN Mission in Cote d'Ivoire (ONUCI) was charged with certifying the electoral process. It was to ``ensure that all stages of the electoral process are carried out in accordance with recognized standards . . . [and] not allow the results to be contested in a non-democratic way or to be compromised.''\11\ This language left room for contestation, which is exactly what happened, when the electoral commission, which is charged with announcing the provisional results, and the Constitutional Council, which is charged with verifying the electoral commission's results, disagreed. ONUCI's role as certifier does not explicitly state that its judgment is final. This ambiguity has been exploited in the Ivorian crisis. Similarly, in Kenya the procedures in place could not determine which candidate had won or whether the electoral process had been fair, fueling the tension. Strengthening and clarifying the processes and institutions that verify an election will greatly reduce the chances and claims of fraud. fair hearings for grievances Credible means of assessing an election should be buttressed by independent institutions for addressing grievances. Cote d'Ivoire's politically biased institutions do not foster this confidence. In Kenya's 2007 elections and Togo's 2010 elections, opposition leaders refused to use existing institutions, which they deemed biased, to resolve their grievances, opting instead for street protests. Without independent institutions, public protests will increase the chances of violence, especially when security forces are politicized. sanctions for violence in electoral disputes There is currently no continental stance or policy on discouraging electoral violence. Politicians in Kenya, Zimbabwe, Togo, and Zanzibar were all rewarded with power- sharing agreements when they contested elections violently. Elsewhere, violent perpetrators were not prosecuted when the country returned to political normalcy. This sends a message that violence is costless and sometimes pays. Africa's institutions must develop clear and implementable sanctions against politicians who use violence to secure elections. conclusion Other, country-specific ways to increase an election's credibility and transparency certainly exist. However, basic measures such as depoliticizing the security services, disarming militias, clearly and independently verifying elections, establishing independent institutions for redressing grievances, and discouraging the use of violence in elections can help prevent violent responses to electoral results. Cote d'Ivoire had none of these measures in place. Now, with the threat of violence looming, the international and regional communities must remain unified in their approach and push for the inclusion of moderate civil society voices to ensure the resolution of the crisis. endnotes \1\ West Africa Network for Peacebuilding--Cote d'Ivoire, ``Troisieme Rapport de l'Observatoire de la Vie Politique et des Medias en Periode Electorale'' (Abidjan: WANEP--Cote d'Ivoire, January 8, 2011). \2\ This threat was reversed at the African Union's summit on January 28-31, 2011. \3\ Dakar Agreement, http://www.afrol.com/Countries/ Madagascar/documents/accord_ dakar.htm. \4\ Ofeibea Quist-Arcton, ``Africa: OAU Stands Aloof on Madagascar, Despite Departure of Ratsiraka,'' Allafrica.com, July 5, 2002, http://allafrica.com/stories/200207050825.html. \5\ International Crisis Group, ``Madagascar: Le Crise a un Tournant Critique?,'' Africa Report 166, November 18, 2010, 4-6. \6\ ``Cote d'Ivoire: Voices of Reason Sidelined in the Crisis,'' IRINNews.org, January 26, 2011, http:// www.irinnews.org/report.spx?ReportID=91733. \7\ Ibid. \8\ Lahra Smith, ``Political Violence and Uncertainty In Ethiopia,'' U.S. Institute of Peace Special Report no. 192 (Washington, DC: U.S. Institute of Peace, August 2007), 7. \9\ Amnesty International, ``Cote d'Ivoire: Injured Protestors Denied Medical Care,'' Allafrica.com, December 20, 2010, http://allafrica.com/stories/201012200899.html. \10\ U.S. Department of State, ``Congo Human Rights Practices, 1994'' (Washington, DC: U.S. Department of State, February 1995), sect. 1(a), http://dosfan.lib.uic.edu/erc/ democracy/1994_hrp_report/94hrp_report_africa/Congo.html. \11\ UN Mission in Cote d'Ivoire (ONUCI), ``The Certification of Elections in Cote d'Ivoire,'' Resolution 1765, adopted by the UN Security Council on July 16, 2007, http://www.onuci.org/pdf/faqcertificationen.pdf.