Katie Porter

Ms. PORTER

Ms. PORTER. Mr. Speaker, this weekend, college students around the country will cross the graduation stage, accept their diplomas, and get ready to begin their careers. It will be a weekend of well-deserved celebration. Their hard work and years of study have paid off. Yet, for too many of these students, they will soon face the reality of paying the high price of their diplomas. Too many of these students will soon come face-to-face with a mountain of debt that will take them years, often decades to pay. Today, nearly 43 million Americans, that is one in six adults, have Federal student loan debt. The Federal student loan portfolio has risen to over $1.4 trillion. Tomorrow's graduates will face an average of $30,000 in debt, a crippling amount for any young person to shoulder before they have even entered the workforce. That amount of debt increases every single year. How can we expect young people in this country to choose the course of their careers, to contribute to their communities, and to plan and start their families while simultaneously allowing lenders to saddle them with loan burdens on decades-long repayment timelines? Among borrowers of all ages with outstanding student loan debt, the median self-reported amount owed among those with less than a bachelor's degree was $10,000. Bachelor's degree holders owe a median of $25,000, and those with a postgraduate degree owe a median of $45,000. I have heard stories from students at colleges and universities throughout California's 45th Congressional District. Merhpad and her family immigrated to the United States in 2014. After they settled in Orange County, earning a college degree became her primary goal. But without Federal financial aid programs, such as the Pell grant, she would not have been able to afford and pursue an education. Her commitment and dedication to her education inspired her parents to also attend Irvine Valley College to pursue degrees. She uses her financial aid to afford transportation, food, healthcare, and school supplies. Because she lives with her parents, she doesn't need to spend financial aid on housing. But other students aren't so lucky. Community colleges typically don't offer housing for their students, and with an average rent of $1,000 to $2,000 in Orange County, it is almost impossible to afford to live near our colleges' campuses. Jose, a student at Saddleback College in Orange County is studying psychology and playing football. He is the eighth of 11 kids. He received a scholarship to cover his tuition and meals, but it isn't enough to help him afford housing. Jose was homeless for two semesters, sleeping in his car and at his football teammates' houses. Despite these challenges, Jose has a 3.8 GPA and he hopes to graduate from Saddleback to go on to pursue a degree in clinical psychology. He explained, ``I move forward towards graduation, believing that if I can overcome the adversities I have faced in my life, anyone can.'' His persistence and dedication are inspiring. But no student should ever have to choose between getting an education and being homeless. Unfortunately, these stories are all too common. Too many students are struggling just to keep a roof over their heads. Recently, I met with students from the University of California Irvine to discuss the challenges they are facing. One of those students was Stephanie, a first-generation student studying public health. She completed the full college application process on her own, including applying for financial aid. She received both a Pell grant and a Cal grant, but she still has to work three part-time jobs throughout the year to afford housing and food. She spends more than 12 hours most days in class and at her part-time jobs, fighting to ensure that she doesn't have to take on student loans, so she can go on to pursue a masters in global public health. Stephanie is not the only one facing challenges affording living expenses while in college. Another one of those students was Deshay, a junior at UC Irvine who will soon become the first person in his family to graduate from college. Deshay left home at 17, so when he applied for financial aid a year later, he did so on his own, declaring himself as an independent. His expected family contribution was zero. While he got the funding necessary to attend UC Irvine, the aid didn't cover all of his living needs, including groceries. Deshay had a goal when he started college. He wanted to graduate loan free. He didn't want to take out loans to pay for his living expenses and so he took on two part-time jobs. But the reality of the cost of living in Orange County soon set in. After nearly 2 months of eating only one meal a day, Deshay was left with few choices. When he finishes college next year, he will graduate with nearly $30,000 of debt. Still, he is excited to graduate and to start giving back to our community. He plans to move home to Sacramento and he hopes to open a youth center modeled after Boys & Girls Clubs across the country. But Deshay is worried that he may not be able to successfully apply for the loan that he will need to start his business, in large part because of the student loan debt he carries. College students who have fought to pursue an education, who work tirelessly toward their dreams, are being forced to put these dreams on hold. Why? Because the education necessary to achieve their dreams has left them buried in debt. This Congress, as we work on the reauthorization of key legislation for students across this country, we need to ensure that students graduating this weekend and in coming weeks don't have to choose between a job serving their communities or financial security or choose between putting food on the table and attending classes. That is why I will be introducing the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Student Loan Integrity and Transparency Act, along with Senators Warren, Brown, and Udall. The bill does just what it says. It mandates that the Department of Education and student loan servicers share information and cooperate with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's student loan education ombudsman. That ombudsman is the number one Federal official tasked with advocating for our students who are struggling to repay loans. It also requires the ombudsman's office be fully staffed at all times so the office can conduct the level of oversight necessary to protect student borrowers. This is just the first step of many needed to improve student loan oversight and improve college affordability. I look forward to opportunities to work with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to ensure that our students have the opportunity to access an affordable college education.

Ms. PORTER

Ms. PORTER. Madam Speaker, while there are many beneficial provisions in H.R. 1957, Section 1102 should be stripped from the legislation. This section would prohibit the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) from ever establishing a free file system for taxpayers by codifying an existing contract between the IRS and private taxpayer preparation software companies (e.g. TurboTax, H&R Block, Intuit). The National Consumer Law Center has previously written an opposition letter on this provision in the bill. Such a free filing system could save American taxpayers billions of dollars per year otherwise spent on taxpayer preparation services. While individuals earning less than $66,000 are currently eligible for free federal filing via private software companies due to the contract with the IRS, only 3 percent of such individuals take advantage of free filing, and millions more households outside the very modest income limit could benefit from an IRS-built system. An IRS free file system could also have the benefit of ending a current, predatory practice: low-income taxpayers are upsold by taxpayer preparation services into costly add-on products like refund anticipation loans, which are essentially payday loans backed by future tax refunds. Finally, even if the IRS does not have the capacity to build their own free file system, H.R. 1957 would preclude renegotiation of the current contract with private software developers in order to get better terms for taxpayers in a future, Democratically-controlled IRS.

Ms. PORTER

Ms. PORTER. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Ms. PORTER. Madam Chair, the Save the Internet Act of 2019 empowers the Federal Communications Commission, the FCC, to enforce net neutrality, protect consumers, and assist them with complaints against their internet service providers. The FCC can fine internet service providers when they break the rules. However, simply issuing fines to a bad actor isn't enough to change the behavior of those bad actors. Those fines need to be collected. Corporations that break the law must pay. My amendment would require the FCC to report to Congress within 1 year on the number of enforcement actions it has taken against internet service providers that violate net neutrality. Importantly, that report must include both the fines imposed and the amounts collected. The FCC must act as a cop on the beat when internet service providers misbehave, protecting consumers and keeping the internet free and open to all. When the FCC finds a bad actor, that fine should be paid by the company. If the FCC is not following through on protecting consumers, Congress should know so it can take oversight action, if necessary. The FCC failing to collect fines is a real concern. Recently, The Wall Street Journal has highlighted the extent of the problem. While the FCC has imposed record fines on robocallers--$208 million-- it has collected less than $7,000 since 2015. That is 0.003 percent of the fines imposed. When everyday Americans get a parking ticket or a traffic violation, the government makes sure that they pay their fines. Corporations must be held accountable as well. As we vote to restore a free and open internet, we should also vote to provide oversight of the agency tasked to protect consumers. Madam Chair, I urge my colleagues to support my amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. PORTER. Madam Chair, I just want to clarify that this amendment doesn't define the power that the FCC would have to regulate, but would merely make sure that, when it does take action, the companies are held accountable for the fines that are imposed. I appreciate that my colleague from the other side of the aisle does not oppose the amendment. Madam Chair, I yield 1 minute to my colleague from Pennsylvania (Mr. Michael F. Doyle).

Ms. PORTER. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. PORTER

Ms. PORTER. I have an amendment at the desk, Mr. Chairman.

Ms. PORTER. Mr. Chairman, I am honored to be here today to introduce my amendment to the Violence Against Women Act, which integrates the term ``economic abuse'' throughout the legislation. I wrote this amendment to ensure that this largely invisible abuse is recognized federally, and victims are afforded all of the protections offered under VAWA. Over one-quarter of women and 11 percent of men have experienced sexual violence, physical violence, or stalking by an intimate partner in their lifetimes. I am one of them. I suffered domestic violence, and every year, millions suffer in silence for many reasons, but one of the most prominent among those reasons is economic necessity. According to a study conducted in 2012, 74 percent of survivors stayed with their abuser for financial reasons. Financial abuse through consumer credit still has not been appropriately recognized under the law. Using debt to exercise coercive control is one of the most prevalent and nefarious forms of domestic violence. In a Michigan State study, 99 percent of domestic violence victims reported some form of economic abuse. Economic abuse takes many forms, ranging from employment sabotage to malicious attempts to restrict survivor's access to funds. Threats of violence cause women to take time off from school or work and interfere with their abilities to maintain employment or complete their educations. Abusers obstruct childcare and transportation options to disrupt job and academic performance, stealing victim's keys, and leaving children intentionally unattended. They cut off access to financial information to keep their partner in a state of financial dependence and unable to leave. They commit identity theft to run up credit card debt and ruin their partner's credit scores, taking out loans in their partner's name that the victim knows nothing about and cannot pay off. In intimate partner relationships, on average, physical violence victims lose 7 days of paid employment, rape victims lose 8, and stalking victims lose 10 per year. For the rest of their lives, these survivors are less financially secure because they endured an abusive relationship. Abusers often take advantage of their heightened degree of financial sophistication relative to their partner's. They don't tell their partners about the assets the couple owns, and they force their partners to sign quitclaim deeds and give up ownership in major assets like homes without knowing it. Coerced debt follows victims of domestic violence for the rest of their lives, long after they have left the relationship. It is particularly destructive in the weeks after these women leave, when they try to rent an apartment or otherwise provide for themselves financially. Burdening a woman with economic obligations that she did not take on as she is trying to escape an abusive relationship can be as crippling to her long-term well-being as violence. Credit repair is an almost impossible process. Expunging coerced debt from a victim's credit report, even with extensive evidence of fraud, is an intractable task, which is why I will be introducing legislation to provide a way forward for women whose credit scores are ruined as a result of domestic violence. I endured an abusive relationship, and my three children and I were able to move forward with our lives, staying in our community and in our home. I had a good job; I had a strong credit history; and I was extremely engaged with our family's financial decisions, which allowed me to leave when I needed to. However, without a substantial safety net, many women can't and don't leave. When they do leave, almost 40 percent of survivors become homeless. This is wholly unacceptable. Until we address the full spectrum of abuse that survivors face, we won't significantly reduce rates of domestic violence. And for so long as domestic violence is a glaringly prevalent problem in our society, we will not see gender equality. Incorporating economic abuse into the definition of domestic violence in this landmark Federal legislation is a huge step. I am honored to have the opportunity to carry the voices of Orange County families and survivors to the Halls of Congress. I found help to let my family rebuild our lives. A police officer who had been trained in DV because of VAWA helped create the amazing, healthy children I have. I will count the passage of VAWA among my proudest achievements. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. PORTER

Ms. PORTER. Madam Speaker, I was unable to be present for votes on Monday, March 25, 2019. Had I been present, I would have vote YES on Roll Call vote 126.

Ms. PORTER

Ms. PORTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise to talk about an important issue affecting families across our country, including in my home State of California. I am a single mom, and I know firsthand that we have a childcare crisis in this country. Two years ago, I spent $16,000 on childcare for my daughter Betsy to attend the U.C. Irvine-Verano Preschool. That is more than it would have been for an entire year of tuition for her to be an undergraduate at U.C. Irvine. I was able to keep $5,000 of the money that I earned pretax to go toward those childcare expenses in a flexible spending account, but that didn't go very far to cover childcare for Betsy, never mind my other two children. The $5,000 doesn't even get me to tax day. This is the reality of raising a family in Orange County and in so many places across the country. In only one State is childcare considered affordable. Let that sink in. In every State but one, the majority of families have to spend more than 7 percent of their income on childcare. My constituents in the 45th Congressional District have asked me to help them make childcare affordable. Jennifer, who works in my district, has two children under the age of 3. She and her husband will spend 23 percent of their gross income on childcare next year. That is not affordable. In Irvine, Erica and her husband spend $1,350 each month for childcare for their 3-year-old son. They have access to a flexible spending account through their employer, but the $5,000 that current law allows only covers 31 percent of their annual childcare cost. Even for those with school-age children, the most affordable city- sponsored camps so parents can work during the summer and spring break, exceed $5,000. And the cost of eldercare is equally out of proportion to the current $5,000 limit on the Dependent Care Flexible Spending Account. That is why I am introducing the bipartisan Family Savings for Kids and Seniors Act. This bill will allow families to keep more of their own paychecks, pretax, to use for the care for kids, grandparents, and other family members that they incur so that they can work. The bill does this by adjusting the limit that Americans can put into their Dependent Care Flexible Spending Accounts, or FSAs. Families use this pretax benefit to help pay for preschool, camps, adult daycare, and childcare. The $5,000 limit under current law has not changed since it was enacted in 1986, but childcare costs have certainly risen with the cost of inflation. There is no reason why a family's ability to save for dependent care shouldn't have increased with time as well. If my bill were in effect now, families would be able to put $11,300 in their flexible savings accounts. That is about the average cost of childcare for one child in this country. The Family Savings for Kids and Seniors Act offers families a way to keep more of what they earn to pay for the childcare and eldercare that allows them to work. The work that parents do adds to the vitality and the strength of our economy. Mr. Speaker, I hope my colleagues will join me in supporting America's working families.

Ms. PORTER

Ms. PORTER. Mr. Speaker, I am a single mom. When I ran for Congress last year, I spent thousands and thousands of dollars on childcare. Running for Federal office requires 60- to 90-hour workweeks, and I worked every single day, including every single weekend. I also worked challenging hours, normally starting my day at 6:45 a.m. and ending with campaign events stretching late into the evenings. I juggled dozens and dozens of childcare providers for nearly 2 years, without whom I would never have made it to Congress. I have three children, Betsy, who is 7; Paul, who is 10; and Luke, who is 13. Leaving them alone while I was on the campaign trail was not an option. Bringing them along on the campaign trail was often impossible or inappropriate and sometimes could even have been dangerous for them. For the past two centuries, Congress has written many, many laws about what women may and may not do. But until this year, women's representation in Congress was less than 20 percent. With the election of my historic class, we hit 23.4 percent--102 women. But, Mr. Speaker, that number is still very low. There are even fewer moms in Congress and even fewer single moms, as in nobody but me. A major barrier to women running for elected office is their inability to afford the amount or type of childcare needed in a campaign. That is why I worked to include language in H.R. 1, the For the People Act, and introduced an identical standalone bill, the Help America Run Act. It explicitly allows candidates for Federal office to use campaign contributions to pay for childcare. Right now, candidates can use campaign funds for a whole range of expenses, from pizza for exhausted staff to cybersecurity for digital devices, but the law does not make it clear that childcare is among those allowed expenses. Like so many laws, there is an assumption of a female caregiver behind every male elected official. In part because of that, moms who continue to shoulder the majority of childcare responsibilities also struggle to run for Congress. Until women are fully and equally present in Congress, women's perspectives will continue to be underrepresented. The result is a weaker democracy for the people. Mr. Speaker, I very much look forward to the enactment of H.R. 1 and the Help America Run Act.

Ms. PORTER

Ms. PORTER. Mr. Speaker, I am a single mom. When I ran for Congress last year, I spent thousands and thousands of dollars on childcare. Running for Federal office requires 60- to 90-hour workweeks. I worked every single day, every single weekend, and I also worked challenging hours, most days starting at 6:45 in the morning and ending with campaign events stretching well into the night. I juggled dozens of childcare providers for nearly two years, without whom I would never have made it to Congress. I have three children: Betsy, who is 7; Paul, who is 10; and Luke, who is 13. Leaving them alone was not an option and bringing them on the campaign trail was often impossible, inappropriate, and could have even been dangerous. For the past two centuries, Congress has written many, many laws about what women may and may not do, but until this year, women's representation in Congress was less than 20 percent. Even with the election of my historic class, we are only 102 women. There are even fewer moms in Congress and even fewer single moms, as in, nobody but me. I have introduced language today as a standalone bill I will introduce.

Ms. PORTER

Ms. PORTER. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Ms. PORTER. Madam Chair, I yield myself 3 minutes. Madam Chair, when we discuss the epidemic of gun violence in our country, we must confront the issues of domestic violence, domestic abuse, dating partner violence, sexual assault, and stalking. According to the National Task Force to End Sexual and Domestic Violence, firearms pose a significant danger to victims of domestic violence, and this is true no matter who owns the firearm. Research shows that a male abuser's access to a firearm increases the risk of intimate partner femicide fivefold and does not support the contention that firearm possession is a protective factor for the victim. The fact is, prohibited buyers who obtain a firearm through the Charleston loophole are disproportionately likely to be prohibited because of domestic violence. Indeed, in 2017, 23 percent of cases where a gun was transferred to a prohibited purchaser through a default proceed sale involved a person prohibited due to a conviction for domestic violence, or prohibited due to a domestic violence restraining order. Denials related to domestic violence often require more investigation than denials based on other factors. I am offering this amendment so that this bill's background check process, before it goes into effect, Congress can hear from experts in the Justice Department and at the National Resource Center on Domestic Violence and Firearms on whether any changes could be made to better protect victims of domestic violence. This amendment requires the study on domestic violence to be completed within 150 days. If the Van Drew amendment passes, this bill will have an effective date of 210 days after enactment. If the study finds that further changes would be advisable to better protect domestic violence victims, Congress will have enough time to make those changes. Madam Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Moore).

Ms. PORTER. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. PORTER

Ms. PORTER. Madam Speaker, I was unable to be present for votes on Monday, January 28, 2019 due to a delayed flight. Had I been present, I would have voted on ``YES'' on roll call votes 52, 53, and 54.

Ms. PORTER

Ms. PORTER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the subject of my Special Order.

Ms. PORTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Cicilline), my friend and a member of the Judiciary Committee, a leader in responding to the American people who broadly support gun violence prevention.

Ms. PORTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank Mr. Cicilline for his words and his passion and his leadership on this issue. As he said, one of the most basic functions of our government doing our jobs is to keep American families safe and secure. For too long, Congress has put fealty to the special interest of the gun lobby ahead of our safety. Mr. Speaker, the prevalence of gun violence in our country is horrifying. For 15- to 24-year-olds, the gun murder rate here in America is 49 times higher than our peer nations. Our children and my children go to school with the fear that their school, that their classroom, could be the next mass shooting site. Guns are the second leading cause of death for our American children and teens. Nearly 1,700 children are killed by guns each year. Our country's gun violence epidemic is not normal. While we have about 5 percent of the world's population, we have about 15 percent of noncombat-related gun violence. The fact is that no other country on this planet even remotely comes close to ours on the problem of gun violence. It has been almost a year since the Parkland school shooting and more than 6 years since the Sandy Hook shooting. And until this Congress, there has not been any change coming out of Washington. Yesterday, we took an important first step. As my colleague, Mr. Cicilline, recognized, the House held its first hearing in 8 years on taking action to prevent gun violence in America. It is a shame, Mr. Speaker, that it took 8 years to hold that hearing. Next week will be the markup of historic legislation, H.R. 8, the bipartisan background check bill. Now more than ever, we need to insist that our colleagues on the other side of the aisle stand up to the gun lobby and stand up to join in the fight to end gun violence. Six of the deadliest mass shootings in our Nation's entire history happened in the last decade, a decade in which Congress did nothing to reduce preventable gun deaths. We cannot continue, we should not continue, to ignore the demands of mothers, of grandmothers, of grandparents, of teachers, of nurses, of emergency room physicians who are concerned, like all of us, about violent gun deaths and about children being killed in their schools and in their communities. We need to be leaders, not shills for the gun lobby, not cowards afraid of losing an A rating. Our children deserve courage. They deserve the courage of this Congress. Our children deserve leaders who will fight to ensure that families are safe at school, at movie theaters, at concerts. I will not be bought, and I will not be silenced by the gun lobby or by the President. The midterm elections made clear that voters want lawmakers to put the safety of our children and our families first. We must end the insidious buying off of politicians by the gun lobby. Americans overwhelmingly support commonsense gun safety reforms like H.R. 8, which implements mandatory background checks on all gun sales and transfers. Ninety-seven percent of Americans want laws like this implemented. Since the Brady Bill was passed 25 years ago, over 3 million attempts to purchase firearms have been blocked because of background checks. Yet, one out of five guns is still sold without a background check. We also need commitment and action by Congress to reinstate CDC, Centers for Disease Control, funding to study how best to prevent gun violence. More than three-quarters of Americans support the CDC conducting research on gun violence as a public health issue. Yet, for decades, Republicans in Congress have prevented us from studying the factors that contribute to accidental deaths, suicides, and homicide by firearms. And without that information, without that research, we cannot have a full understanding of how to exercise our duty to keep American families safe and to prevent unnecessary loss of life. These are not radical ideas. They are commonsense American solutions that are being held hostage by the gun lobby. My home, Orange County, has made its feelings heard time and again, that it wants to strengthen gun violence prevention laws. Keeping our families safe is at the heart of our values. I am particularly inspired by the advocacy of those in our community who have experienced loss and suffering from gun violence and, yet, found the strength to dedicate their lives to making sure that others don't experience similar tragedies. I would like to highlight the story of one such couple, Mary Leigh and Charlie Blek, from Orange County, California. These loving parents led the fight in my district and in California, for commonsense gun legislation. Mary Leigh and Charlie's son, Matthew, was only 21 years old when he was shot and killed. He was a victim of an armed robbery by teens using a small handgun, also known as a ``Saturday Night Special'' or a ``junk gun.'' In memory of their son, the Bleks founded the Orange County Citizens for the Prevention of Gun Violence in 1995. For five long, hard-fought years, they advocated for safety regulations that would rid California of the type of gun that killed their son, and they succeeded. California used to produce 80 percent of the junk guns for the Nation. California no longer produces these junk guns, and has enacted safety standards for handguns that are working to reduce gun violence deaths. Still today, the Bleks are vigilant in preventing the gun lobby from finding new ways to sell dangerous handguns in California. They now lead the Orange County Chapter of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, and I am personally very grateful for their efforts, their leadership, and their courage. No family should ever have to go through what the Bleks suffered, but too many in our own communities have. Since the beginning of 2014, in California, over 14,000 people, 14,000 people, including 120 law enforcement officers, have been injured or killed from gun violence. Forty-seven of those people hurt or killed were in my district, the 45th district. We have lost 34 members of our communities in just 4 years, all to gun violence. This is a public safety problem, and, Mr. Speaker, doing nothing is unacceptable. This issue affects all of us, young and old alike. Just last week, I received 60 letters, 60 letters from constituents living at Heritage Point, a senior community, each letter asking me to take action to prevent so many senseless deaths. These letters said: ``Most of us have families, children, grandchildren, and even great grandchildren. We have much anguish due to the recent and terrible shootings taking place almost in our own backyard.'' Gun violence destroys families and communities. We must work together to keep dangerous weapons out of the hands of dangerous people. We cannot allow the frequent news of gun violence to desensitize us into believing it is the norm. It is not the norm, and it is not unavoidable. There is something we can do to prevent gun violence. If Congress puts people first, people ahead of the gun lobby, we can save hundreds of lives each year. Our role, as elected Representatives, is to prioritize and fight for the well-being of our constituents and our communities, not the score we are assigned by the gun lobby. Standing up to powerful special interests is a radical transformation of how Congress operates, but that change is long overdue. We need commitment and action by Congress to pass commonsense gun laws like H.R. 8, to expand background checks. We need to fund CDC research on firearms and the impacts of gun violence. Without Congress' action, if we simply offer thoughts and prayers, but do nothing, our children, our families, our communities, will increasingly suffer from preventable injuries, preventable suicides, and preventable homicides, preventable shooting massacres, and the fear and trauma associated with gun violence. Gun violence is an epidemic, and we can no longer afford to point fingers or to place blame. We must act. On both sides of the aisle, we must have the courage to fight gun violence for the common good of the American people. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. PORTER

Ms. PORTER. Madam Speaker, I was unable to be present for votes on Tuesday, January 22, 2019. Had I been present, I would have voted as follows: Roll Call Vote Number 44 (Passage of H.R. 676, the NATO Support Act): YES; and Roll Call Vote Number 45 (Passage of H.R. 328, the Hack Your State Department Act): YES.

Ms. PORTER

Ms. PORTER. Madam Speaker, huge critical elements of our Federal Government have now been shut down for 26 days. 800,000 blameless Federal employees have already missed their paychecks, and they don't know when their next paychecks are coming. These furloughed workers are in crisis. They are facing impending loan defaults, utility shutoffs, long-term reductions in their credit scores, and potentially foreclosure or eviction proceedings. They are unable to buy necessities for themselves and their families, including necessary medications like insulin. About 42,000 of those Federal workers are in my home State of California, and they are hurting. The costs of housing are a real challenge for families in my district, California's 45th. Thousands of Orange County residents rely on Federal affordable housing programs to pay the rent each month. Nationwide, this shutdown has already forced the expiration of over 1,100 rental assistance contracts between the government and private landlords and developers. These housing units are at risk of being permanently removed from our affordable housing stock. In my district, California's 45th, the tenants of 749 homes rely on the Department of Housing and Urban Development to help pay their monthly rent. Our local Public Housing Authority distributes those funds to needy families. As required by law, 75 percent of these funds help applicants who are low-income. Orange County's rental costs are the ninth highest in the country, averaging over $2,000 per month. The cost of living is entirely unaffordable for many tenants without this Federal housing assistance. This past spring, our Federal Reserve found that 40 percent of Americans--4 in 10 Americans--don't have the cash to pay for an unexpected $400 expense without selling a belonging or borrowing funds. American workers cannot withstand the financial shock of going unpaid. For workers living paycheck to paycheck, this shutdown can easily spiral into bankruptcy. Even if we provide workers with backpay, which we have passed legislation to do, it will not make the harms of this shutdown erased. The government isn't paying for groceries or utilities or child care. When the government reopens, it won't be paying the late fees that these workers have incurred in the meantime. It also won't pay the interest on new loans taken out by Federal workers to try to make ends meet until the President chooses to put people over politics. These families will still have $30 late fees on credit card payments. They will still have to pay interest on mortgage payments, which can be hundreds of dollars. They will still have delinquencies on their credit reports, which can drop their credit scores and stay on their records for up to 7 years. That is why I have asked the major financial institutions of this country to step up and provide relief to Federal workers and their families who, through no fault of their own, have found themselves in financial distress. These banks and credit card companies should waive fees, pause debt payments, and stop eviction and foreclosure proceedings until weeks after workers receive their pay. Lenders should also stop reporting negative information to credit reporting agencies during this difficult time. Many of our Nation's credit unions are offering zero percent interest, short-term loans to help furloughed workers. I have sent letters to all of the Nation's largest lenders and, each day, have been meeting with representatives of the major banks, urging them to do more to help those affected by this shutdown. I have been pleased with some of their responses. For example, Discover is allowing furloughed workers to use its existing disaster relief program to cope with the financial shock of going unpaid. This generous program halts all payments and prevents the imposition of late fees. Ally Financial has created a customer assistance program that offers help to those hurt by the shutdown. Ally is willing to refund transaction fees, to eliminate bounced check fees, to waive late charges, and to remove early withdrawal penalties on CDs and other savings accounts. Wells Fargo is waiving fees and pausing negative credit reporting, auto repossessions, and foreclosure proceedings for furloughed workers. I urge all lenders to contact our office to share what they are doing proactively to help customers, their customers, who are going unpaid through no fault of their own. I will continue to share with my colleagues what banks and lenders are doing so that they may do outreach to constituents in their districts who are being affected by the furlough. The damage the shutdown has caused, and will continue to cause, doesn't end there. Thousands of IRS employees have been furloughed because of the shutdown, which has delayed tax refunds and income verification processing. Without income verification documents, lenders may not be able to finance or refinance mortgages or other loans. For families experiencing recent financial hardship, access to refinancing could be critical to helping them right themselves. These delays in tax processing are particularly harmful to low-income filers, especially those who qualify for the earned income tax credit and the additional child tax credit. The EITC is one of our government's largest anti-poverty programs, and millions of taxpayers rely on tax refunds each year to catch up on bills, to pay off debts, and to fund items like delayed medical procedures. Understaffing will make it difficult for the IRS to answer taxpayer questions this year. This is the first year that taxpayers will be filing after the Republican tax law was implemented. As a result of President Trump's tax law, Californians are, for the first time in our country's history, unable to deduct all of their State and local taxes. The elimination of this deduction is incredibly punitive to Californians in my district. At this moment, Californians, who are about to owe more Federal taxes than they did a year ago, don't have access to the Federal Government, to the IRS, to help them navigate this tax morass. From late January through March 2, 2018, the IRS paid out tax refunds totaling over $147 billion to 48.5 million households. Californians submit more tax returns than any other State. For families expecting an average refund of about $3,000, the shutdown will have very real consequences. If that weren't enough, the shutdown has also created an open season on the American consumer. Consumer protection websites run by agencies, like the Federal Trade Commission and the Federal Communications Commission, are closed due to lack of funding. The FTC maintains the National Do Not Call Registry. Consumers can't sign up, and telemarketers can't check the updated lists. There is no one on the beat to enforce robocalling regulations. The FTC has also shut down its critical website identitytheft.gov. In normal times, victims of identity theft can use this website to file a report and get the paperwork that they need to prove to banks and businesses that someone stole their identity. That website is no longer operating. I want to take a minute to speak directly to every American hurt in any way by the shutdown. Whether you are a Federal employee or someone who relies for support on one of those employees, I encourage you to ask for help. The shutdown is not your fault and you could not have predicted the longest shutdown in our history. I know how hard it is to ask for help. But do not let embarrassment prevent you from protecting your credit score and maintaining your financial well-being. I have spent the last few days meeting with those representatives from our Nation's banks. Every bank I have met with has said to please contact them and ask for help, and do it sooner rather than later. They will waive your late fees. They will push back your payment deadlines, whether it is car insurance or your mortgage or credit card or some other line of credit. If you need something specific, like to delay foreclosure or have a bounced check fee waived, ask for that thing. I have cast my vote to end the shutdown multiple times, and it makes me sick to think about how working families are hurting. I have dedicated my career to protecting consumers from financial hardship and from bankruptcy. I am proud to have the opportunity to use that expertise to help my constituents and unpaid Federal workers across this country. Call your lender, call your bank, call your credit card company and ask for help. And if you need more help, call my office. Until the President ends this shutdown, it will be my priority in Congress to help all those who are being hurt by it.

Ms. PORTER

Ms. PORTER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the subject of my Special Order.

Ms. PORTER. Mr. Speaker, I am here today to describe the enduring financial challenges that families are experiencing because of the President's government shutdown. I know how terrifying it is when your livelihood is suddenly taken away. I grew up during the 1980s farm crisis and watched as my neighborhood bank closed. Everyone in my town felt a real sense of panic and of loss. Farmers were being foreclosed on and losing farms that had been in their family for generations. There were suicides and the kind of social pain and personal pain that comes with economic hardship. While the town eventually recovered, the people and the community were changed forever. I understand how devastating a financial crisis can be, and I understand how one missed paycheck can spiral. I know this from my own childhood during the farm crisis and from the nearly two decades I have spent studying families on the brink of bankruptcy. Federal workers are now questioning whether working for the Federal Government is a stable paycheck. They are wondering if their family, if their kids can count on this administration. Families are wondering how long they can afford to wait for the shutdown to end, and they are having hard discussions at the dinner table about whether to leave the Federal workforce in search for a new job. Tomorrow, 800,000 Federal workers and their families will miss paychecks, plunging employees into uncertainty. About 42,000 of those Federal workers are in my home State of California. More than 5,000 of these unpaid workers live in my district, and many of them are hurting. With each missed paycheck comes missed payments on bills and missed payments on loans. Families will be hit with late fees and interest, often in the double or even triple digits. Despite having no paycheck, Federal workers still have urgent expenses--prescription drugs, gas, childcare, groceries--and those who are still required to report for work incur costs to get to and from their workplaces. This past spring, the Federal Reserve found that 40 percent of Americans don't have the cash to pay for an unexpected $400 expense without having to sell a belonging or borrowing money. Those families also don't have the cash to go without paychecks. Families may feel forced to consider taking out a payday loan to get quick cash to meet their expenses. In the past 2 years, more than 10 percent of Americans have gone to a payday lender, even though the interest rates are incredibly high and the national average is almost 400 percent interest. In California, the average rate is 460 percent. In Virginia, where even a larger percentage of Federal workers live, the average payday loan is over 600 percent. For workers living paycheck to paycheck, the shutdown and its missed paychecks can easily spiral into bankruptcy. Even if we provide Federal workers with backpay, which we should, it will not make those hurt by this shutdown whole. When the government reopens, it won't be able to help Federal workers who incur late fees or hits on credit reports during the shutdown. It won't pay interest on new loans taken out by Federal workers. One of my constituents in California's 45th Congressional District, Aubrey, told me that her family has filed paperwork to borrow against their 401(k) retirement. Borrowing against that 401(k) will come with large tax penalties, but she is part of a single-income household living on a Federal Government wage. She and her wife and their kids rely on a steady paycheck, and they are understandably concerned about the impact that the shutdown will have on their family. Another constituent in my district, Melinda, told me that she has been working for a government agency for over 30 years. She is debating taking out a loan. She is researching whether she can file for unemployment. She loves her job and wants to go to work but is prohibited from doing so. She just paid the tuition for one of her kids to go to college, and she does not have the means to live without a paycheck. This shutdown is a disaster for Federal workers who aren't getting paid, and it is a disaster for working families who deserve to get the tax refunds they are owed. Right now, families are denied tax refunds because of the government shutdown. Yesterday, my colleagues, Democrats, voted to reopen the Treasury Department, the IRS, and the Small Business Administration, and we were joined by several Republicans, but this administration won't even consider opening up the Treasury. Now this administration has said the IRS will service tax refunds even with the government shutdown, but before this announcement, the IRS was operating with a barebones staff. Only one out of every eight employees was in that office, and that has made it so much harder for Americans to prepare their tax returns. As we start filing for tax returns, American people need certainty from their government, not the chaos of a shutdown. And since this is the first year that the Republican tax law raised taxes for Orange County families, it is even more important that taxpayers get the refunds and the tax help that they deserve. As a professor of bankruptcy law, I also know that many families who struggle with overwhelming debt, often from unexpected medical bills, wait until this time of year to file for bankruptcy. That is because they have to use their own tax refunds to pay their attorney or filing fees. If the IRS does not get these families the refunds they are owed, they won't be able to get help in bankruptcy from their overwhelming debts or catch up on loan payments. And without the money to file for bankruptcy, families can lose parts of their paychecks to wage garnishment, squeezing families in this country even tighter. It is past time that we reopen the government. This is day 20 of the shutdown. This administration is recklessly hurting Federal families and workers who are counting on basic government services, including getting their own hard-earned money back from the IRS, and even backpay for these workers will not erase the harm of this shutdown. Those families will still have $30 late fees on credit card payments. They will still have to pay interest on their mortgages that could run into hundreds of dollars. If they are 2 weeks late in paying their credit card bills or mortgage payments, they can be hit with negative credit reporting, which can drop their credit scores, and those negative reports stay on their records for up to 7 years. Simply reopening the government won't make these families whole, but it is a necessary start. That is why I am sending letters to the leading banks and credit card companies asking them to offer relief to families. These letters ask the banks and credit card companies to waive fees, to pause debt repayment timelines, to freeze eviction and foreclosure proceedings until 2 weeks after our Federal workers receive their next paycheck. They should also freeze the reporting of negative information to credit reporting agencies during this difficult time. Many of our country's credit unions have already offered their customers such relief. For example, Orange County's Credit Union is providing furloughed workers 2 weeks of pay, up to $5,000, at 0 percent interest for 60 days, and they are offering these furloughed workers 90-day waivers on payments for existing loans. Another credit union in my district, Kinecta Federal Credit Union, is offering unpaid workers $2,000 at 0 percent for 12 months. That 12- month loan period recognizes how long it will take unpaid workers to right themselves from the harm of this missed paycheck. These efforts by these credit unions will go a long ways to mitigating the real consequences of this shutdown for American families, and I hope other financial institutions and lenders join and engage in similar efforts. President Trump has the power to reopen the government and stop hurting families, especially unpaid workers. Orange County, California, and this Nation deserve a government at work. I yield to my colleague from Michigan (Ms. Tlaib).

Ms. PORTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield to my colleague from the great State of California, Mike Levin.

Ms. PORTER. Mr. Speaker, how much time is remaining?