Mike Quigley

Mr. QUIGLEY

Mr. QUIGLEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Dr. Chuck Middleton, President of Roosevelt University, on his retirement from Roosevelt after 13 years of outstanding leadership and unwavering commitment to academic excellence and student success. As Roosevelt University's fifth president, Dr. Middleton brought relentless energy and dedication to the institution, transforming the university from a part-time, adult university to one primarily serving traditional-age, full-time students. During his tenure, Dr. Middleton expanded Roosevelt's faculty by 23%, created Roosevelt's College of Pharmacy, revitalized Roosevelt's intercollegiate athletic programs, and led construction of Roosevelt's Wabash Building, a multi-purpose 32-story, vertical campus that is the second tallest university building in the United States. Dr. Middleton is a professor and scholar of modern British history. In addition to Roosevelt, he has held senior administrative positions at the University System of Maryland, Bowling Green State University, and the University of Colorado at Boulder. Dr. Middleton's career is defined by his commitment to inclusiveness and diversity in education, and he has dedicated significant energy to civic and community leadership, including establishment of the national LGBTQ Presidents in Higher Education. Mr. Speaker, as an alumnus of Roosevelt University, I applaud Dr. Middleton for his invaluable and exemplary leadership to the many students and institutions he has served. I ask that my colleagues join me in congratulating Dr. Middleton on an accomplished career and wishing him a well-deserved retirement.

Mr. QUIGLEY

Mr. QUIGLEY. Mr. Speaker, last week, nine parishioners were shot and killed inside Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church in Charleston, South Carolina, one of the oldest African American churches in the United States. In the days following the horrific tragedy in Charleston, we paused to reflect and send our prayers to families grieving an unimaginable loss. I wish this tragedy in Charleston were an isolated incident, but it seems to be part of a terrible recurring pattern. After national tragedies, society should engage in a discussion about how to address and potentially prevent such tragedies from happening again. Let's remember that after Katrina, we talked about FEMA and national readiness. But the gun lobby doesn't want us to have this conversation. They accuse anyone who tries with exploiting the deaths of innocent people. With that logic, we couldn't talk about solutions when 13 people were killed and 8 were injured during the shooting in the Washington, D.C., Navy Yard; or after a person opened fire during a midnight screening of a film, ``The Dark Knight Rises'' in 2012, killing 12 and injuring 58 others; or when 28 people were shot and killed, including 20 innocent children, at Sandy Hook Elementary School; or when a man shot 3 people and killed 7 others at a Sikh temple in Oak Creek, Wisconsin; or when 14 people were shot and 6 were killed in 2011 during a constituent meeting hosted by our colleague, Congresswoman Gabby Giffords, in a supermarket parking lot in Tucson; or when a man opened fire in Fort Hood, Texas, in 2009, killing 13 people, injuring 30 others; or in 2008 when a man opened fired at a lecture hall at Northern Illinois University, shooting 21 students and killing 6; or when a senior at Virginia Tech went on a shooting rampage on campus in 2007, killing 33 people and injuring 23 others; or when 2 seniors at Columbine High School attacked their classmates and teachers, wounding 24 and killing 15; or in Chicago and cities across the country which experience gun tragedies every day. Yet, since I have come to this Congress nearly 7 years ago, the people's House has refused to hold even one hearing on the epidemic of gun violence we are facing. Last Sunday alone, in Chicago, 14 people were shot and 1 man was killed, all within a matter of hours. In May, Chicago saw 300 people shot and 37 people killed in shootings. Every day in America, 297 people are shot and nearly 90 people are killed by guns. According to Harvard University researchers, the rate of mass shootings has increased threefold since 2011, occurring an average of every 64 days. Let me repeat that. A mass shooting occurs in the U.S. on the average of every 64 days. When will enough be enough? When will we stand up and say we may not be able to stop every crime, but we can stop some of them and at least minimize the damage of others? When will we realize and acknowledge that this type of mass violence does not happen in other advanced countries? When will we finally be able to have a national discussion about gun violence? Instead, the gun lobby stymies debate by arguing that no gun regulation can prevent criminals and the mentally ill from killing people with guns, but I don't buy that. Sure, no single law or set of laws can prevent every act of senseless violence. Ending the American epidemic of gun violence will require more than a change in law. It is clear we need a change in our culture; but oftentimes, changing our culture starts with changing our laws. By enacting reasonable reforms, we can make a difference. We can make it more difficult for would-be assassins to access guns. We can ensure every gun in America is purchased after a background check rather than only 60 percent of guns, as is currently the case. We can crack down on the flow of illegal guns onto our streets by improving gun trafficking data, and we can reduce the fatality rate by banning assault rifles and high-capacity magazines that are designed exclusively for killing dozens of people at once. Let's face it, when you have an assault rifle with a high-capacity magazine, you are not hunting deer; you are hunting people. The gun lobby tries to argue that any attempt to regulate gun access is an attempt to restrict all gun access, but there is such a thing as commonsense, middle-ground gun reform, and most gun owners support it. Can we stop every shooting? No. But can we reduce their frequency and deadliness? Absolutely--the first step toward keeping dangerous guns out of the hands of dangerous people is to begin the conversation. Let's break the silence, stop the violence, and start the conversation.

Mr. QUIGLEY

Mr. QUIGLEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Cadet Captain Mary Kuprianczyk on earning the Amelia Earhart Award. The Amelia Earhart Award is presented to individuals upon completion of the first 11 achievements of the Civil Air Patrol Cadet Program. These achievements show personal growth in five program areas: aerospace education, leadership, special activities, physical fitness, and moral and ethical values. Once each of these achievements has been satisfied, the cadet must pass a comprehensive 100 question examination covering aerospace topics, leadership theory, and staff duties. To illustrate how prestigious this honor is, only 5 percent of all cadets earn this distinction. At the young age of 16, Mary Kuprianczyk has proven to be a role model we can all look up to. While working hard to fulfill these requirements, she has been an exemplary honor roll student at Rockover Naval Academy in Chicago. All of these accomplishments have been earned while being the first female Cadet Captain at the Palwaukee Squadron. After completing her education at Rockover, Mary plans to continue serving her country by pursuing an appointment to a military academy. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in recognizing Cadet Captain Mary Kuprianczyk and her exceptional accomplishments through the Civil Air Patrol Cadet Program.

Mr. QUIGLEY

Mr. QUIGLEY. Mr. Speaker, the sciences and the facts don't lie. Congress has stood here for too long debating the truth about climate change. What is there to debate? More than 12,000 peer-reviewed scientific studies are in agreement. Climate change is real, and humans are significantly to blame. For those of you keeping track at home, there are zero peer-reviewed scientific studies that state the opposite. As we continue to harm the environment, we are ultimately hurting ourselves and human health. In the movie ``Birdman,'' it was written: ``A thing is a thing, not what is said of that thing.'' I feel the need to remind my colleagues that climate change is a real thing, regardless of what is said of that climate change thing; just because you don't want to believe it doesn't make climate change any less real. It is rapidly becoming a threatening crisis in public health. As the planet warms, sea levels rise and lead to increased floods. Droughts are more frequent and intense. Heat waves and hurricanes are more severe. Climate change makes existing diseases and conditions worse, but it also helps introduce new pests and pathogens into communities. Respiratory allergies and diseases are becoming more prevalent because of increased pollen, molds, air pollution, and dust. Higher concentrations of these particles in the air cause severe breathing problems and lead to heart disease, asthma attacks, inflammation, and lung cancer. Every year, 220,000 people learn they have lung cancer, and 160,000 people die from lung cancer. That is twice the population size of my own neighborhood, Lakeview. Children who are especially vulnerable to these pollutants are harmed by the air they breath. Their lungs shouldn't be at risk when they go outside to play or walk to school, but asthma is the third leading cause of hospitalization among children under the age of 15. Nearly half of this Nation--our Nation--lives in areas with dangerous levels of pollution, 44 percent. My own district is included. Chicago earned itself an F in an air quality study from the American Lung Association. According to the same study, the Windy City is ranked in the bottom 5 percent for most polluted city in terms of short-term particle pollution in the Nation, and it is only getting worse. Not only is our air quality dangerous, but our most essential resource, which we all depend on, our water, is at risk due to climate change. Water is vital to survival. As temperatures rise, people and animals need more water to maintain their health and thrive. Increases in water temperature, precipitation frequency and severity, and changes in coastal ecosystem health could increase the incidence of water contamination. Currently, more than 840,000 people die each year from water-related diseases. That is more than the entire city of San Francisco. Climate change is expected to produce more frequent and severe extreme precipitation events worldwide. Over the past 50 years, the amount of rain falling during the most intense 1 percent of our storms increased by 20 percent. These turbulent changes breed outbreaks of waterborne diseases. In fact, in the United States, from 1948 to 1994, heavy rainfall correlated with more than half of the outbreaks of waterborne disease. Water sustains our economy by producing energy at power plants, raising livestock, and growing food crops. Many water supply sources are already overallocated, and people are suffering from degraded water quality. Given our current trajectory within the Western U.S. in severe drought, the competition for water resources will only increase, leading to great impacts on human health. Albert Einstein once said: ``We can't solve today's problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.'' We need to adjust how we think about climate change. We need to understand that severe weather, pollution, and changes in our water are not only harmful to the planet, but harmful to the people who inhabit that planet. Climate change is a direct threat to humanity, and it is time we reexamine how we think about it, talk about it, and respond to this growing problem. The health of humans worldwide is at stake.

Mr. QUIGLEY

Mr. QUIGLEY. Mr. Speaker, as Members of Congress continue to debate whether or not climate change is real, Americans are paying the price. To the climate doubters that I serve with, I will remind them that there are over 200 peer-reviewed scientific studies that conclude that climate change is real and that man contributes to it, and there are zero peer-reviewed scientific studies that say the opposite. Climate change often brings images to mind of melting icecaps and rising sea levels, but the effects of climate change are being felt every day by people around the country. Climate change is causing even more destructive storms which, when combined with our aging infrastructure, is resulting in cities around the country being pummeled by urban flooding. A little more than 2 years ago, residents in my district endured their second 100-year flood in a mere 3 years. A 100-year storm means that there is a 1 percent chance that a storm of that magnitude will happen every year, but folks in Chicago are experiencing these storms with greater intensity and frequency. The morning after the rains bombarded Chicago in 2013, I visited numerous community members and their homes. The damage I saw was devastating: thousands of homes and businesses flooded; tons of carpeting, furniture, and memories are ruined; businesses shattered; and entrepreneurs' dreams crushed, along with millions of dollars in damages. Throughout the region, we saw the closure of schools, libraries, and even hospitals were forced to relocate patients. That kind of devastation cannot be ignored. Our constituents cannot be ignored. In Chicago, over the past century, we have seen countless storms that have caused pipes to back up into houses and dump upwards of 1.5 inches of rain in a single day. What is more, rains of more than 2.5 inches a day are expected to increase another 50 percent in the next 20 years. The National Climate Assessment, released by the Obama administration last year, predicted that the frequency and intensity of the Midwest's heaviest downpours will more than double over the next 100 years. That means even more trouble for our Nation's already deteriorating infrastructure and the cities around the country that rely on that infrastructure to keep them safe. Storm drains are outdated; sewers are inadequate, and families are at risk. Whether it is because of flooded pipes or the lack of permeable surfaces in our cities, our constituents are paying the prices. Thousands of households in America are affected every year by urban flooding, yielding catastrophic economic, environmental, and social damage in some of our country's largest cities. Basements with water damage decrease property values by an estimated 10 to 25 percent. But the impacts don't end there. Chronically damp houses can cause respiratory problems and higher insurance costs. Additionally, almost two out of five small businesses cannot open after experiencing a flooding disaster. Urban flooding erodes streams and riverbeds and degrades the quality of our drinking water sources and the health of our aquatic ecosystems. It is time we come up with a national response to this growing problem. That is why I am proud to introduce the Urban Flooding Awareness Act. This legislation will finally create a definition of urban flooding to be used when designing flood maps and will require a first-of-its-kind study to analyze the costs associated with urban flooding and develop solutions. It would also help us better protect downstream communities from the flooding impacts of development in upstream areas. Existing regulatory and policy mechanisms are not adequate for this task. It is time we develop new strategies. By identifying the most effective and economical remedies to urban flooding, we are better preparing our communities to defend themselves against the devastation caused by increasingly intense weather. And investing in real solutions to this problem now is the only way to avoid higher costs down the road. We can learn from our successes and investigate innovative new strategies for funding crucial new programs that eliminate flood risk and damage. Our cities need the best tools available if they are going to survive this era of supersized storms.

Mr. QUIGLEY

Mr. QUIGLEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to remember and honor the life of an important and respected member of the Chicago community. Mr. Garrett FitzGerald passed away May 9th 2015 at the all too young age of 49 after his battle with brain cancer. Since 2006, Garrett FitzGerald was the Executive Director of the North Center Chamber of Commerce. Under his leadership, he increased membership from 23 to nearly 400. He loved his neighborhood and set out to make it better for its residents and all of its visitors. He was the driving force expanding the chamber's programing such as the concert series and movies in the square. Thanks to his hard work and passion, what was once a simple street festival, Ribfest has become the second biggest festival in Chicago. He was known for his ability to connect with others. His selflessness was the source of his boundless energy. It was not uncommon to see him making food to give away to concert goers at festivals. Garrett's top priority was always his family, and the love and support they provided him was the most important thing in his life. He will be missed most by his wonderful wife, Alicia; his daughter, Bridget; his parents, Kathleen and Thomas FitzGerald; his sister, Meghan Wiegold; and his many aunts and uncles. Mr. Speaker, May God bless the FitzGerald family and the memory of a man who was truly loved by his friends, his community, and his family.

Mr. QUIGLEY

Mr. QUIGLEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the Chicago Chapter of American Veterans for Equal Rights, which dedicated a monument for LGBT Veterans in Abraham Lincoln National Cemetery in Elwood, IL on May 25, 2015. This is an historic day, as this is the first federally-approved monument honoring LGBT veterans to be dedicated in a National Cemetery in the United States. It is fitting that this monument is located in the Abraham Lincoln National Cemetery. President Lincoln was not only our 16th President and from the great state of Illinois, but he was also the founder of the National Cemetery system. His Gettysburg Address of 1863 became a model of the principles of nationalism, republicanism, equal rights, liberty, and democracy. I am grateful for the efforts of the American Veterans for Equal Rights (AVER) and their continued commitment and dedication to equal rights and equitable treatment for all present and former members of the United States Armed Forces. Thanks to Stanley J. Jenczyk and his colleagues with the Chicago Chapter of AVER, the LGBT veteran community will have a lasting tribute honoring their achievements and sacrifices. This monument recognizes the innumerable accomplishments of our military and forever commemorates their endeavors as servants of our great nation. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in celebrating this significant dedication with the Chicago Chapter of American Veterans for Equal Rights. I am honored to have such an exceptional organization in my district.

Mr. QUIGLEY

Mr. QUIGLEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the Chicago Chapter of American Veterans for Equal Rights, which will dedicate a monument for LGBT Veterans in Abraham Lincoln National Cemetery in Elmwood, IL on May 25, 2015. This is an historic day, as this is the first federally-approved monument honoring LGBT veterans to be dedicated in a National Cemetery in the United States. It is fitting that this monument is located in the Abraham Lincoln National Cemetery. President Lincoln was not only our 16th President and from the great state of Illinois, but he was also the founder of the National Cemetery system. His Gettysburg Address of 1863 became a model of the principles of nationalism, republicanism, equal rights, liberty, and democracy. I am grateful for the efforts of the American Veterans for Equal Rights (AVER) and their continued commitment and dedication to equal rights and equitable treatment for all present and former members of the United States Armed Forces. Thanks to Stanley J. Jenczyk and his colleagues with the Chicago Chapter of AVER, the LGBT veteran community will have a lasting tribute honoring their achievements and sacrifices. This monument recognizes the innumerable accomplishments of our military and forever commemorates their endeavors as servants of our great nation. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in celebrating this significant dedication with the Chicago Chapter of American Veterans for Equal Rights. I am honored to have such an exceptional organization in my district.

Mr. QUIGLEY

Mr. QUIGLEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to remember and honor the life of an important and respected member of the Chicago community. On May 17th we lost a local legend. Mr. Maurie Berman, founder of the famous Superdawg passed away at the age of 89. After serving his nation in WWII, Mr. Berman returned to Chicago to serve his community. His vision was to serve delicious Chicago style hotdogs without customers even having to leave their cars. In May 1948, Maurie and his wife, Flaurie, opened the first Superdawg at the end of the streetcar line at Devon and Milwaukee Avenues in Chicago. It would be one of the first drive-in restaurants of its time with Flaurie as the first car-hop. Almost 60 years later, and countless hungry people fed, Superdawg has become a Chicago institution. The business has been passed down from generation to generation with Maurie's great-granddaughter putting in her first shift just a few weeks ago. Mr. Berman was known not only for serving one of the best hotdogs, but also for being a truly caring person. He was a loving husband, father, grandfather, great-grandfather, friend as well as a highly respected member of his community. Maurie never missed an opportunity to help his employees in times of need. I ask my fellow colleagues to join me in honoring and celebrating the life and accomplishments of Mr. Maurie Berman.

Mr. QUIGLEY

Mr. QUIGLEY. Mr. Speaker, Mark Twain once said that ``action speaks louder than words but not nearly as often.'' Since last week's tragic Amtrak accident, we have heard plenty of words about the need for stronger rail safety measures and investments in our infrastructure, but it is time for Congress to back up these words with action. It is time for Congress to put its money where its mouth is. We know how to prevent tragic accidents like the one that happened on Amtrak last week. We even mandated new technology called positive train control that would have prevented it. But what Congress has refused to do is to pay to actually get it done. Positive train control is a game-changer for rail safety. The technology would have likely prevented 140 train accidents that have caused more than 280 deaths and $300 million in property damage since 1969. But this safety technology is also incredibly complex and expensive to implement. We have mandated technology that is expected to cost billions, and we are forcing the Nation's railroads to foot the entire bill. Much of this last week's focus has been on Amtrak, but despite last week's accident, Amtrak is actually on target to implement positive train control by the end of the year. For the already cash-strapped commuter railroads around the country, it is a completely different story. For them, Congress' refusal to fund positive train control has pretty much stopped implementation in its tracks. Expected to cost commuter railroads nearly $3.5 billion, it is no wonder that over 70 percent of commuter railroads won't achieve positive train control implementation before this year's deadline. Our commuter railroads are integral to the daily commute of millions of Americans. In fact, Amtrak's annual ridership pales in comparison to our Nation's commuter railroads. While Amtrak carries 30 million riders a year, commuter railroads carry close to 500 million. In the Chicago area alone, Metra's ridership last year was over 80 million. With numbers like that, how can Congress justify mandating a policy that they know commuter railroads simply cannot afford while providing very little funding to help them do it? This unfunded mandate is forcing commuter rails to sacrifice other investments that are crucial to railroad safety and efficiency. Fifty percent of commuter railroads are currently deferring other capital investments to implement positive train control. And what happens when the commuters aren't able to implement this technology before the end of this year? They get penalized--fined. Instead of giving money to the commuters to pay for PTC, the Federal Government is actually going to end up collecting money from them for not being able to afford to do so. For good reason, Congress mandated incredibly important and incredibly expensive new technology. But it has amounted to a lot of words and very little action. The same 2008 law that mandated PTC also authorized $50 million a year in rail safety technology grants to help Amtrak and commuter railroads pay for this implementation, but in the 7 years since the law was passed, Congress has only appropriated funding once. Mr. Speaker, $50 million a year wasn't enough then, and it is sure not enough now. That is why I introduced a bill with the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Lipinski) in March to reauthorize PTC funding at $200 million a year. It is time for Congress to finish what it started. It is time for Congress to get serious about investing in our Nation's transportation infrastructure. And it is time for Congress to help our commuter railroads implement positive train control and prevent the kind of tragedies that we saw on Amtrak last week.

Mr. QUIGLEY

Mr. QUIGLEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Frank E. Lee who, after 35 years as the familiar afternoon personality at WXRT, Frank welcomed his much-deserved retirement last week. As the afternoon voice of WXRT, he is a Chicago institution unto himself. Frank's boss, Norm Winer, put it best when he said: ``Frank's wide-ranging love and knowledge of music, his remarkable verbal skills, his wry and sardonic sense of humor, impressive sense of professionalism, and generous nature have distinguished him among Chicago's all-time great air personalities.'' I invite my colleagues to join me in honoring Frank E. Lee for his career as one of Chicago's finest radio personalities and most recognizable voices. We thank him for his years of service on the air. I was there in the studio as he closed off his career with the Stones' classic, ``Moonlight Mile.'' We tried to capture the essence of how Chicagoans felt when he left. All I can say is I got silence on my radio.

Mr. QUIGLEY

Mr. QUIGLEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the achievements of Dr. S. Alan Ray. After seven years of exemplary service as President of Elmhurst College he will be retiring in June of this year. Since beginning his tenure at Elmhurst College in July of 2008, he has been vital to the development and execution of many transformative projects. On his first day he announced the first strategic planning process in the school's history. This plan set the ground work for the many improvements that would follow. Under Dr. Ray's leadership, Elmhurst College has improved its standing in the Chicago Metropolitan area by forming partnerships with John Marshall Law School, Elmhurst Memorial Healthcare, Roosevelt University, and a variety of other institutions. Elmhurst College has also seen an increase in diversity, with a 20% increase in students of color during his 7 years. In 2012, the School for Professional Studies was launched under the supervision of Dr. Ray. This new school is a source of graduate education as well as adult learning. These opportunities help those already in the workforce to remain competitive in our ever-changing economy. I invite my colleagues to join me honoring Dr. S. Alan Ray for the work he has done for Elmhurst College, his community, and this great nation by helping to improve the lives of thousands of students. We thank him for his invaluable service, and wish him well in his future endeavors.

Mr. QUIGLEY

Mr. QUIGLEY. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. QUIGLEY. Mr. Chairman, I respect Chairman Simpson's request that language be included in the E and W report to require a red team assessment of the affordability of this program. All I am adding to that is, if we have questions about the affordability of this program, a program that is not going to take place for some time, do we really want to accelerate the spending program? In this budget environment, it does not make sense to accelerate the development of a warhead while, at the same time, requiring an assessment on its affordability. Why would we put more money into a program that may end up getting tabled? Shouldn't we at least wait until the release of the red team report before adjusting the acquisition schedule? I urge my colleagues to support this commonsense amendment. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time. Announcement by the Acting Chair

Mr. QUIGLEY. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. QUIGLEY. Mr. Chairman, over the next decade, the U.S. is set to spend hundreds of billions of dollars operating and upgrading our nuclear arsenal. But in this budget environment, every dollar we spend to keep our outdated and oversized nuclear arsenal functioning is a dollar we aren't spending on other priorities that keep us safe and secure or on reducing our unsustainable debt and deficits. That is why the amendment I am offering with Mr. Polis will put $167 million towards deficit reduction by placing funding for the new nuclear-armed cruise missile warhead back on its original 2015 acquisition schedule. In the FY 2015 budget, production of the warhead was scheduled to begin in 2027, but this year's budget request sped up the development for the warhead by 2 years. This is despite the fact that the existing air-launched cruise missile and warhead isn't being phased out until the 2030s. And there is plenty of uncertainty about whether this program is affordable or even necessary. Chairman Simpson is so concerned about the cost of the warhead that language was included in the E and W report to require a red team assessment on the affordability of the program--and for good reason, given our history of spending large amounts of money on warhead programs that end up getting tabled. Given the cost concerns over the program, does it really make sense to rush the acquisition process? Furthermore, as some experts note, there is no longer a need to shoot nuclear cruise missiles from far away when we have the most advanced bomber ever created in our arsenal, the B-2 stealth bomber, which is capable of penetrating enemy airspace and dropping a nuclear bomb directly above a target. And if we decide we want to shoot nuclear missiles from thousands of miles away, we still have very expensive submarines and very expensive ICBMs capable of doing just that. So ask yourselves: Should we really be accelerating the development of a warhead that goes on a missile we don't need and could cost hundreds of millions, if not billions, more than anticipated? I ask my colleagues to support my commonsense amendment to maintain funding at the program's FY 2015 acquisition schedule, and save the taxpayers $167 million in the process. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. QUIGLEY

Mr. QUIGLEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize my friend Rabbi Michael Siegel of Chicago, Illinois, for his service today as guest chaplain of the House of Representatives. As the rabbi of the congregation closest to Wrigley Field, for 30 years, Rabbi Siegel's prayers for the Cubs have gone unanswered; however, Michael, again, assures me this is the year. More seriously, throughout his 40-year career, Rabbi Siegel has been a dedicated leader in the Jewish community, serving both locally and nationally. Since 1873, Anshe Emet has been a center for Jewish study, cultural activity, and Israel advocacy. Under Rabbi Siegel's leadership, the synagogue has grown and truly fulfilled its commitment to the entire community of Israel--klal yisrael--and healing the word--tikkun olam. I am grateful for my punctuation and pronunciation keys. I am also grateful that my constituents can be part of a such an inspiring community--kehila. Please join me in thanking Rabbi Siegel for leading us in prayer today as guest chaplain of the House of Representatives.

Mr. QUIGLEY

Mr. QUIGLEY. Mr. Speaker, in the competitive workplace of today, higher education is more important than ever. I rise today to recognize the 50th anniversary of Triton College in River Grove, Illinois. Since opening its doors in September of 1965, Triton has been one of the nation's premier two year colleges. Every semester, Triton provides over 12,000 students with the tools they need to be successful at a 4 year school, their careers, and in life. Since its inception, Triton has provided over 50,000 degrees and certificates helping to create a more educated workforce. With tuition rates on the rise, 2 year institutions have become one of our most important assets in self advancement. By offering quality education at an affordable rate, students have opportunities they would not otherwise have. As a former professor, I can appreciate the outstanding work Triton has done preparing its students for the future. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in celebrating the 50th anniversary of Triton College. I am truly honored to have such an exceptional institution of higher education in my district.

Mr. QUIGLEY

Mr. QUIGLEY. Mr. Speaker, as this April marks the 40th anniversary of the brutal Khmer Rouge regime's rise to power in Cambodia, I join Cambodian Americans to commemorate this tragedy in the community's past. As we solemnly recognize this moment for many we can also look at the hopeful future that lies ahead for the Cambodian American community. The Khmer Rouge regime seized power in Cambodia four decades ago on April 17, 1975 and began a four year long reign of terror and systematic genocide. Upwards of 3.4 million innocent men, women, and children lost their lives at mass grave sites now known as the Killing Fields. Thousands of refugees escaped these atrocities and were given sanctuary in the United States; many came to the state of Illinois. Thanks to the Cambodian Association of Illinois and our strong Cambodian-American community here in the United States, we are aware of the Cambodian genocide and its devastating effects. Organizations such as the Cambodian American Heritage Museum and the Killing Field Memorial carry out the vital mission of ensuring that we do not forget the atrocities of this period. The Cambodian community is committed to remembering and paying tribute to those lost in the Killing Fields while enhancing the public's awareness of these atrocities and healing the survivors and their families. As Illinois and other states recognize April 17th as the Cambodian Day of Remembrance, I rise today to join my Cambodian American friends to commemorate the atrocities of the Killing Fields and to provide comfort and hope to the victims' families. Let us take this moment to recognize that group-targeted violence and bigotry still exist in nations across the world, and we cannot ignore its presence. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in solidarity with the Cambodian-American community in remembering those who were lost to the Khmer Rouge regime and in recognizing our hope for a more peaceful future.

Mr. QUIGLEY

Mr. QUIGLEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate my alma mater, Roosevelt University, on the 70th anniversary of its founding in Chicago, Illinois. From its founding, the university has stood by its mission: to make higher education available to all students regardless of their socioeconomic status, racial or ethnic origin, age, or gender. At the 1945 dedication of Roosevelt, Eleanor Roosevelt said: We can prepare to help the rest of the world and do it without fear, do it with goodwill. For 70 years, the university has upheld the values of inclusiveness, opportunity, and social justice. In the next 70 years, I know Roosevelt will continue to provide transformational experiences and opportunities for discovery, shaping generations of socially conscious citizens. I had an extraordinary experience at Roosevelt, learning as much from my fellow students as from my classroom work, and the school was very kind to me. As my friend, colleague, and fellow alum, Bobby Rush, said: Roosevelt loved me before I loved Roosevelt. Congratulations to Dr. Chuck Middleton and to the entire Roosevelt community on the university's 70th anniversary. Go, Lakers.

Mr. QUIGLEY

Mr. QUIGLEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott), the ranking member.

Mr. QUIGLEY. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. QUIGLEY. Mr. Chairman, we must keep a critical part of ESEA: standards for paraprofessionals. Republicans and Democrats agree, classroom professionals--or paraprofessionals as they are called--must be prepared and equipped to carry out their work in the classroom. Today, paraprofessionals are qualified to provide much-needed instructional support, especially for students with special needs. Every school district in our country is in compliance with these standards and has been since 2006. In fact, 11 States, including my own State of Illinois, have already codified these requirements in their own State law. Removing these Federal requirements would risk defaulting to low or nonexistent standards for these professionals at the State or local levels. We simply can't let this happen. Classrooms are already severely overcrowded, and paraprofessionals provide teachers with the critical support they need to best educate our children. I am a strong supporter of our teachers, and part of that support comes in ensuring that their aides and other classroom counterparts are qualified to do their jobs. By eliminating these standards, we are turning our backs on the teachers who educate our children. Let's support our teachers and support paraprofessionals. I urge a ``yes'' vote on my amendment. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. QUIGLEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. McKinley).

Mr. QUIGLEY

Mr. QUIGLEY. Mr. Speaker, like many of you, as a kid, I learned about Robin Hood. You know the story: he stole from the rich and gave to the poor. But today, I come to talk to you about something a little less storybook. In this case, my friends on the other side of the aisle are supporting a bill that robs from poor schools and gives to rich schools. The so-called Student Success Act that we are debating today takes money from schools with the greatest need and redistributes it to less needy schools in more affluent communities, hurting students and teachers in its wake. That is hardly the definition of success the bill claims to make. The Student Success Act would reauthorize education funds first signed into law in 1965 by President Lyndon Johnson, who said that ``full educational opportunity should be our first national goal.'' But the Student Success Act completely misses the mark of what LBJ was trying to accomplish. A former teacher, LBJ believed that equal access to education was the key to success, and that the vital education funding that the Elementary and Secondary Education Act provided would help millions of ``children with poor families overcome the greatest barrier to progress: poverty.'' For 50 years, the ESEA has provided essential funding for school districts that serve low-income students as well as aid to State education agencies to help them improve the quality of elementary and secondary education around the country. But the robust progress that our schools made in the first 40 years after the passage of the ESEA has slowed over the last decade. Since the passage of No Child Left Behind, we have seen both sides acknowledge the problems that have resulted and commit to fixing them. But rather than fixing those problems and redoubling our commitment to equal access to education, the Student Success Act actually creates more problems, moving even further away from what we know is best for students, is best for teachers, and is best for our country. In its current form, H.R. 5 undermines the progress our Nation has made in providing a high quality education for all Americans, regardless of their ZIP Code. If we allow H.R. 5 to become law, school districts in Illinois and across the country will see their funding cut exponentially. Nationally, this will cut education funding by over half a billion dollars in 2016 alone. Chicago public schools, where over 60 percent of students are below the poverty level, will lose over $64 million in title I funding. That is a 23 percent cut in Federal education dollars at a time when Chicago schools need it the most. But wait, there is more. This bill eliminates qualification requirements for paraprofessionals, teachers' aides, and support staff, who provide vital assistance to classrooms across the country. It eliminates requirements to ensure quality professional development for teachers. It directs 1 out of every 10 dollars away from public schools and directs it to private companies. It allows students with disabilities to be taught with separate, lower standards. The bill fails to ensure that students succeed in the classroom or after graduation by gutting accountability standards. These are standards that help ensure that students graduate from high school, which we know is so intimately linked to economic success. This bill simply fails to provide our teachers and students with the resources they so desperately need to succeed. It is time to go back to the drawing board. It is time to actually focus on providing students, schools, and teachers the ability to be more successful with an ESEA that puts the focus where it belongs, on investing in education. We need an ESEA that returns to its original purpose of fighting poverty and ensuring equity, one that holds States and districts accountable for providing equitable resources, one that includes a system of supportive interventions for struggling schools and students, one that deals with the fact that two-thirds of the achievement gap is due to poverty--and does something about it--such as funding community schools, one that provides our teachers with the resources and support they need to help our young people succeed. We can do better, Mr. Speaker. We must do better. This is simply too important. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the so-called Student Success Act.