Tom Reed

Mr. REED

Mr. REED. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the life and service of Brigadier General Harold H. Dunwoody, who passed away last month at the age of 96. General Dunwoody was a longtime resident of Randolph, New York. He graduated from the United States Military Academy at West Point in 1943 and served in the U.S. Army for 31 years. During his distinguished career, he fought in World War II, the Korean War, and the Vietnam War. In recognition of his exemplary service to our country, General Dunwoody was awarded numerous medals and commendations, including the Purple Heart, Silver Star, and Distinguished Service Cross. General Dunwoody hails from a family that has proudly served our country for generations. From the Revolutionary War to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Dunwoody family has fought to preserve our freedom in virtually every armed conflict in our nation's history. This commitment to service was carried on by Mr. Dunwoody's children: his daughter Ann Dunwoody became the first woman to achieve the rank of four-star general in the United States military; his daughter Susan Schoeck became a helicopter pilot in the Army; his son Harold Dunwoody, Jr. graduated from West Point and achieved the rank of first lieutenant in the Army. General Dunwoody dedicated his life to serving our country. He leaves behind a proud legacy of military service, which will have a positive impact for generations to come. I ask all of my colleagues to join me in honoring and remembering the life of this great American.

Mr. REED

Mr. REED. Mr. Speaker, I have come to this floor numerous times to stand for a priority that I have committed myself to here as a Member of this Congress, and that is to stand up for individuals and protect the private property rights that our fellow American citizens enjoy in owning their properties, their homes, their family farms, and their other property that they have worked tirelessly to obtain. I care about defending the constitutional rights given to all Americans and the generations that will follow us in the future. I fundamentally believe, Mr. Speaker, the American citizens' land is their land; it is not our government's. Every day, Mr. Speaker, I am getting more and more input in our office about examples of Big Government taking people's property without just compensation and abusing the power of eminent domain. I have heard of family farms. I have heard of homes. I have heard of rights that have been squashed time and time by Big Government. And individuals have nowhere to go. They essentially have two choices, either roll over, submit to the government and take what the government gives them or they try to fight and they use up their own precious resources while they fight a Big Government that seems to have endless amounts of resources and time, Mr. Speaker, on their side. I want to put this in a personal perspective for my fellow Members and American citizens. This gentleman is a gentleman by the name of Charlie Birnbaum of Atlantic City, New Jersey. Mr. Birnbaum is the son of immigrants who came to America after surviving the brutality of the Holocaust. His parents bought a home, raised a family, and passed that home on to Charlie. They lived and are living the American Dream. Mr. Speaker, this is that home. This is something where they have raised their family, enjoyed family memories, and where Mr. Birnbaum is living the American Dream and providing resources by teaching piano lessons out of this home and renting portions of it to tenants to make ends meet. Since early 2014, the Casino Reinvestment Development Authority of New Jersey wants to take this home and give it to an unknown entity. They don't even have a plan to redevelop this home. They just want his property. That is not right, Mr. Speaker. That is not the American way of life. That is not the American Government that I am going to allow to abuse this man's precious home. The solution is something that I have put together. The Defense of Property Rights Act is a piece of legislation that has come out of the Property Rights Caucus, working with my fellow Members from Maine to Alabama, to California, to stand up for private properties in America. I introduced the legislation in January. The Defense of Property Rights Act would stand with people like Charlie and say: What America and the Big Government mentality of today is doing is wrong, and there are Members in Washington, D.C. who are joining us in the fight to say no more. We will force through that legislation accountability. We will make sure that government thinks about what it is doing before it destroys Charlie's American Dream and the Charlies across the country. Because, if it can happen to Charlie, Mr. Speaker, it can happen to anyone. On my watch in Congress, I will do whatever I can to stand with those fellow American citizens and say: We are not going to let this happen.

Mr. REED

Mr. REED. Mr. Speaker, before I begin this evening, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials on the topic of this Special Order.

Mr. REED. Mr. Speaker, I rise today, joined this evening with colleagues on both sides of the aisle, to celebrate the upcoming October 2 National Manufacturing Day. Manufacturing in the U.S. is something that I support fully. U.S. manufacturing is something that, I think, shares bipartisan support across the country, coast to coast, north to south, east to west, because it is about real, family-sustaining jobs where we build things in America, where we can actually manufacture our products here to sell not only to the American economy, but to the world economy. Mr. Speaker, as I co-chair the U.S. Manufacturing Caucus here in Congress, I wanted to ask my colleague on the U.S. Manufacturing Caucus to rise and open us up on this Special Order this evening to celebrate U.S. manufacturing. I yield to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ryan), a good friend and my co-chair on the Manufacturing Caucus.

Mr. REED. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Ohio. He truly is a friend, and he is just as committed to U.S. manufacturing as I am. I have seen it firsthand. I have seen him in his district in action supporting U.S. manufacturers. The 3-D printing hub, the advanced manufacturing center that you reference and that we are so supportive of--working with Joe Kennedy here in the House and Roy Blunt and Sherrod Brown on a bipartisan, bicameral basis, getting that legislation signed, which was a priority of the administration--and having that type of advanced manufacturing center in Ohio, in your home State, obviously has demonstrated his commitment and his belief in U.S. manufacturing. As the gentlemen indicated, it is not just advanced manufacturing. It is the traditional manufacturing. It is the manufacturing that we believe in where the American spirit is alive and well, where the American Dream can be reached and obtained. I mean, as my good friend from Ohio indicated, these are good, solid, family-sustaining, middle class jobs to a large extent that put food on the table for our fellow Americans and put roofs over their heads and allow families to maybe pass on to the next generation a little bit better lifestyle or a little bit better American Dream than they enjoyed by having a little bit of money to invest in a college education for their kids and to try to enjoy and live that American Dream that I know my friend from Ohio believes in. So I applaud my friend, and I appreciate my friend for all the work you do on U.S. manufacturing. This is what gives me continued optimism here in the United States Congress that we can get things done, because we have come across the aisle and we have joined together to promote U.S. manufacturing. I yield to the gentleman.

Mr. REED. Mr. Speaker, as the gentleman points out, you know, what manufacturing represents is opportunity, an opportunity to so many Americans, so many people. Mr. Speaker, I know my colleague from Ohio will agree with me that U.S. manufacturing is positioned on a precipice of rebirth here in America. Now, my friend points out some areas that we need to continue to work on to make U.S. manufacturing even more competitive than what we are finding today. When we see the energy rebirth here in America with the shale revolution for oil and natural gas coming online and the feedstock and the utility costs going down and going lower and lower, it is positioning U.S. manufacturing to be in a competitive position on the world economic stage. To me, that is such a hopeful, optimistic position of time for the United States of America to be in. I can tell you story after story, Mr. Speaker. When I talk to U.S. manufacturers, they talk about the lessons that they have learned over the years of maybe chasing that cheap labor dollar, maybe chasing that overseas market, the whole issue of outsourcing. What I hear from U.S. manufacturers today is that they want to come back to America, because in America we have the best workforce and we have the best work ethic across the world. What we have in America, also, is the rule of law. So many of these manufacturers that have looked overseas and relocated overseas, they are finding that their intellectual property is disregarded. Those innovative ideas, those new ideas, those inventions that are going to spur that next product growth of tomorrow, they just get ripped off. They have no recourse to enforce what we in America, as the cornerstone of our philosophy, respect, and that is property rights and that is the rule of law and saying that, if you invent it, you own it. That is something that is critical for us as we go forward is to recognize the opportunity--and I know my good friend shares this--that U.S. manufacturing has right now with the competitive nature of the American marketplace. There are some things we can do. Serving on the Ways and Means Committee here in the House of Representatives, in charge of tax policy, trade policy, and health care, to a large degree, one of the things I think we have a shared commitment to is fixing our broken Tax Code. I don't know of anyone across America that will stand up and take that 70,000 pages of Tax Code and say this is working and this is putting our manufacturers in a competitive position on the world stage. I hear it time and time again that we need to fix that Tax Code. Because if we do that, that is another piece to advance U.S. manufacturing to that rebirth, that renaissance that I know--and I know my good friend from Ohio shares--can happen and will happen, because this is America where that opportunity can rise again.

Mr. REED. Reclaiming my time, I couldn't have said it better. I know the gentleman has shared stories that I have experienced myself. When we look at the present state of U.S. manufacturing, these are not the days of smoke-filled rooms where safety wasn't a concern and that it was a dirty, drudgery type of environment that they existed in. This is cutting-edge. This is a safe workplace. This is where safety is paramount and where skills are so necessary. One of the things that I still see today that we have to fight--and I think the gentleman will share this position with me--is I do a lot of work back in the district going to local high schools, standing in front of juniors and seniors and having conversations with those kids about what they want to be when they get older. I remember vividly one story. It was the first time when I asked the question, ``What do you want to be when you get older?'' The kids' hands went up. You have got the lawyers. You have got the doctors. You have got the people that want to be like the Al Rokers. They want to be the weatherman or on the broadcast TV, that type of thing. I said, ``That is all fine and good. That is great.'' Then one young man, who was a senior, said, ``Congressman, I am going to be a welder.'' I went over the Moon with that young man.

Mr. REED. I said, ``Do you understand''--to the rest of his class-- ``I just left a steel facility in this district where they are going to start welders at $60,000 a year starting pay?'' I said, ``This young man is going to be able to have a career. This is a career. He is going to be able to have a little extra money in his pocket. He is going to be able to maybe get married and raise a family.'' He got it, as a senior. I was so excited. As I walked out of that room and I was walking and exiting the building, I had one of the school officials, a guidance counselor, say, ``Oh, Congressman, that was great. You made that young man's day. There is no doubt about it. He is going to remember that day for the rest of his life.'' ``But,'' she said, ``we really don't try to promote those types of careers, though.'' I went almost through the roof, Mr. Speaker. I said, ``That is the problem. We have to change that concept, that stigma, that manufacturing historically carries with it.'' I know we are doing it. I know the gentleman from Ohio is working with us, Mr. Speaker, to get that done. What I see is, when you explain the opportunities to that next generation, when you talk to mothers and fathers and say this is really what is out there, their eyes light up. The burden is lifted from their shoulders to see that their kids are choosing to go into a career that they want to and that they recognize is rewarding, safe, and productive. I will tell you I am going to continue the efforts to promote U.S. manufacturing because it is not just the manufacturers. As my good friend from Ohio indicated, it is all those supply chains, all those mom-and-pops, those small businesses, that are not only supplying the pieces or the raw material to the manufacturers, but you think about the restaurants, you think about the service folks that are cleaning the facilities, you think about all that it takes to put that together. That is a vibrant, growing economy, Mr. Speaker. That is what we are promoting here with U.S. manufacturing. That is why I am so glad that October 2 is National Manufacturing Day, so that we, as a nation, could maybe take a moment on Friday and say, ``You know what. We are going to believe in American manufacturing again. We are going to make it here to sell it around the world, make it with our hands, create wealth, create something.'' I know that my friend from Ohio shares that passion. One of the things that I am so committed to when we talk about this is the STEM, the science, technology, engineering, mathematics need of education policy going forward. That is what our advanced manufacturing bill with Joe Kennedy was all about. And working with the Senate in a bicameral and getting it signed into law was to take these public-private partnerships, to take our schools, our universities, our colleges, work with our manufacturers to develop those skills that are necessary to do this manufacturing. Because, as my good friend who has been in many of the manufacturing facilities, just as I have--when you go and you look at these machines, you look at how these operations and assembly lines occur, you need high education. This is highly skilled stuff. You can just see the pride in the workers when they explain to me how they learned that computer program or they learned how to do that assembly line work. I will tell you, it is inspiring. I yield to the gentleman if he has got any stories.

Mr. REED. Reclaiming my time, yeah, think about this. As we see the cost of colleges and your college degree, kids coming out of school--I came out of law school at the end of the day owing over $110,000. I was raised by a single mother. I am the youngest of 12. I have 8 older sisters and 3 older brothers. To start life after school with a $110,000 mortgage on my head was a very difficult thing. You talk to these young men and women who are going into these programs--it is not just welding. It is manufacturing. It is HVAC. It is plumbing. It is all of the things that go into U.S. manufacturing-- and they are getting through school with these guaranteed programs or these community college programs. We have got a couple manufacturers in the district that have a certification process system that they put together where they guarantee 100 percent hiring at the end of the certificate program for these kids after--I think it is 24 weeks, if I remember correctly. They are getting into that job, making that type of salary, and have no debt to pay for that college degree. That is a win-win-win. And they enjoy it. And they enjoy it. I am sure the gentleman knows these stories and has seen those people firsthand.

Mr. REED. From this side of the aisle, on behalf of the people that we represent in western New York, you have that commitment, that I will continue to fight with you, stand with you to fight for U.S. manufacturing. I will not fight against you, but fight together so that we can advance U.S. manufacturing. It has been a pleasure to call you a friend. It has been a pleasure to be part of this caucus. Our caucus is strong, Mr. Speaker. We have bipartisan representation across the country. As we started this conversation tonight, in celebrating National Manufacturing Day this Friday, this is not a partisan issue. I go across the entire country, and people always tell me they appreciate the work we do in the caucus, in the Congress, when it comes to U.S. manufacturing. I again commit to you that we will continue to make this a priority so that we can make it here to sell it around the world again, bring those jobs back to American soil and create these middle class jobs to a large extent so that families, men and women, sons and daughters, can enjoy the American Dream. I appreciate the gentleman for joining us this evening.

Mr. REED. Mr. Speaker, in closing, I just want to summarize some of the numbers that are associated with U.S. manufacturing. Manufacturing supports an estimated 17.6 million jobs in the United States. That is about 1 in 6 private sector jobs. More than 12 million Americans are employed directly in manufacturing. They earn almost $15,000 more annually than the average worker. This is what U.S. manufacturing is all about. It is about creating wealth. It is about creating opportunity for generations to come. I will tell you, as we continue our career here in Washington, D.C., I will be a voice for U.S. manufacturing every day. We will break down barriers across the world so that we can have an even playing field, so that we can make those products, build those products here, access those markets where 95 percent of the world's consumers live outside of America's borders so that we have a vibrant economy not only servicing the American demand, but the world demand. I think, if we get our policies right here, if we get that trade policy done correctly, if we get that tax policy done where we have a Tax Code that is simple, fair, and is competitive for the 21st century--I am very confident, Mr. Speaker, that what we will create is an opportunity not just for U.S. manufacturing, but all American citizens, but, in particular, U.S. manufacturing to prosper and grow for generations to come. I am excited to be here this evening, Mr. Speaker. I am excited to share with such a good man from the State of Ohio a passion and commitment to a priority issue of U.S. manufacturing. Mr. Speaker, I just ask all of my fellow American citizens to take a moment this Friday, October 2, and celebrate National Manufacturing Day. Let's come together to have a great opportunity for the future generations of America to come. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. REED

Mr. REED. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Mr. REED

Mr. REED. Mr. Speaker, next Tuesday, September 15, will mark the 65th anniversary of Operation Chromite, better known as the Incheon Landing. This decisive invasion and the battle which ensued marked a key turning point at the outset of the Korean War in 1950. My father, Thomas W. Reed, was a veteran of the Korean War, serving as an ammunition officer with the U.S. Army's 45th and 25th Infantry Divisions. He fought alongside brave South Korean soldiers who were struggling to save their homeland from the onslaught of communism. For 65 years since, the United States and the Republic of Korea have continued to stand shoulder to shoulder in strength and solidarity to defend freedom, democracy, market capitalism, human rights and the rule of law on the Korean Peninsula. Indeed, our alliance, which was forged on the battlefield, has become a ``blood alliance.'' I had the privilege of visiting South Korea in April 2011 and the trip left a lasting impression. It was particularly meaningful for me to have been able to visit the Korean War Memorial and Exhibition in Seoul, to lay a wreath and to pray and reflect. My visit served as a humbling and sobering reminder of the cost of freedom that was paid 65 years ago through the service and sacrifice of all Korean War veterans. I also witnessed firsthand economic prosperity and industrial prowess in Korea that never could have been imagined when my father was there in the 1950's. Today, Korea ranks as the world's thirteenth-largest economy, the sixth-largest trading partner of the United States, the fifth-largest market for agricultural goods, and the third-largest destination for U.S. foreign direct investment in the Asia-Pacific region. Bilateral trade between our two nations averages about $80 billion each year, further cemented by the U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement. In the 23rd congressional district of New York, which I am privileged to represent, farmers, small business owners, and larger firms are already benefiting from the KORUS FTA. Of note, there are more than 140 family-owned wineries in the area around my hometown, and several of them are enjoying increased exports due to tariff eliminations. My district is also home to Corning Incorporated, which launched a joint venture with Samsung in 1995 to form Samsung Corning Precision Materials. SCPM is now a global leader in the development and supply of LCD glass substrates. For so many reasons, Korea constitutes one of America's greatest foreign policy success stories in the post-World War II era. Korea is not only an indispensable ally and friend but serves as the linchpin of regional peace and stability in Northeast Asia. To this end, Korean President Park Geun-hye will be visiting Washington in mid-October. Her visit is a timely and meaningful one, and I offer my expression of welcome and support for a productive and successful trip. I recall President Park's Address to a Joint Meeting of the Congress on May 8, 2013 when she eloquently stated that ``our chorus of freedom and peace, of future and hope, has not ceased to resonate over the last 60 years and will not cease to go on.'' I further applaud and support President Park's vision and goals as articulated in her Dresden Address in March of last year on South-North reunification, including a proposal to create an International Peace Park at the DMZ. In addition, the Northeast Asia Peace and Cooperation Initiative (NAPCI) will be an important means to promoting regional peace and prosperity through a trust-building process. In the post-KORUS FTA implementation era, there are several ways we can continue to enhance our bilateral economic relationship. First, I have supported the Partner with Korea Act, authored by my friend and colleague, Peter Roskam, to provide up to 15,000 temporary professional visas for Korean nationals. Second, I support the renewal of the U.S.- Korea Civilian Nuclear Energy Agreement which was signed on June 15, 2015. Third, I support Korea's Creative Economy action plan to enhance mutual competitiveness in the global marketplace. Mr. Speaker, the U.S.-Korea alliance is at its strongest ever and yet our alliance will continue to be tested as was evidenced in light of recent North Korean provocations. It is important we remain ever vigilant and resolute in our alliance to counter any and all threats that could lead to instability on the Korean Peninsula. In the Congress, I will do all I can to support and defend our great ally and friend--the Republic of Korea--and I urge my colleagues to do the same.

Mr. REED

Mr. REED. Mr. Speaker, I have listened to this debate. I have read this agreement. I heard my colleague from Illinois say something that resonates with me. We should listen. First and foremost, we should listen to the American people. They are overwhelmingly saying: This is dangerous. Reject this deal. Let's listen to the leaders that say this puts us in more jeopardy of going to war. We all want peace. There is not a human being in America that wants to go to war. To classify us on this side of the aisle as having a desire to go to war, shame. But you will get peace through strength, and you need to put the American citizens first. What about our four fellow American citizens that are sitting in an Iranian jail right now and the President said: We tried to negotiate it, but they wouldn't talk to us? Well, then you walk away. What about the families that are represented in the $47 billion worth of judgments that have been filed against Iran because they suffered terrorist acts at the hands of Iran and we are going to give $150 billion to Iran without paying those fellow American citizens, those families who suffered and lost dear loved ones? Stupidity. American citizens always must be first. Iran has raised no confusion as to what its intention is here. It wants a nuclear weapon. It wants to destroy Israel. It wants to destroy America. Listen to their own words. If you do, we would say we want peace, but it will be on our terms from a position of strength. Vote ``no'' on this deal.

Mr. REED

Mr. REED. Mr. Speaker, there are a lot of important issues before the House this week, but I wanted to take an opportunity to raise an issue that we have been working on in our office for quite some time. We, as a body, Mr. Speaker, will be faced with an opportunity, hopefully, to resolve this issue here shortly in the next few months, and that is the issue of the Social Security disability insurance trust fund. Not a lot of people are aware--and I just read the Social Security trustees report over the summer--that the disability trust fund goes insolvent in 2016. That means millions of Americans who rely on Social Security disability benefits are looking at a situation where their benefits are going to be cut 20 percent because of the insolvency of the Social Security trust fund--2016, Mr. Speaker, that is right around the corner. When I raised this issue 2 years ago with the White House, with Jack Lew--our Treasury Secretary--in our Committee on Ways and Means hearing, I asked him 2 years ago: What is the plan? What is the solution to this problem? What I was ultimately told was this is what we are going to do: we are just going to take money from the Social Security retirement fund and move it over to the disability trust fund and bail it out. Well, in my private life in business, I knew a lot of businessowners, and what that essentially was, it is robbing Peter to pay Paul because the Social Security retirement fund is on a path to insolvency just a few short years down the road. I said we could do better. That is why I was glad to join with my colleague, Sam Johnson, who chairs the Subcommittee on Social Security here in Washington, to change the rules to make sure that that solution would not be the one that we follow here in 2015 and 2016. We can do better. You know why we can do better? It is because we care. We care about the people that are in the disability trust fund, and we need to listen to those people. This is what their experience is with the disability trust fund today. They are frustrated. It is a bureaucracy. It is a mess. We have overpayments. We have fraudulent payments. We have a system that penalizes people returning to work, rather than trying to incentivize them and stand with them when they return to work. We had an individual by the name of Mike Zelly come before the committee and testify to us, and he is in the disability trust fund. He was in a horrific automobile accident 36 years ago and has been in a wheelchair ever since. These are the people we should listen to. These are the people that know the disability trust fund the best. What his testimony to us was, he says we should seize this opportunity to fix this problem, take care of the bureaucracy, make sure the overpayments don't occur because, when an overpayment occurs to a disability recipient, guess who has to pay it back? It is the disability recipient because of the Social Security Administration's incompetence. That is not right. That is not fair. Most importantly, what he talked about in his 36 years in the disability trust fund is that, when he tried to return to work, he was faced with obstacle after obstacle of a bureaucracy that said, if you do that, you will lose your benefit. That is not right. Mike Zelly offered ideas on how we can improve the system to streamline this bureaucracy. This is the process someone in the Social Security disability trust fund has to go through in order to try to go back to work. We need to simplify it, and we need to stand with the American work ethic for the people in the disability trust fund that want to return to work. There was a recent Brookings Institution report that came across my desk that I read. There was 40 percent return on the beneficiaries in the disability trust fund that indicated they would like to return to work, but because of the bureaucracy, there was fear. There was a sense that, if they did that, they would lose their benefit, and they just couldn't risk it. That is why we are offering commonsense reforms here out of our office, out of the Committee on Ways and Means, out of this House, hopefully, shortly, so that what we can do is make sure that those disability trust fund recipients don't look at a 20 percent cut in 2016. We will hold them harmless, and we will make sure we do what is necessary in order to make sure that our obligations and promises under the disability trust fund are met to those individuals because that is the right thing to do. We cannot lose this opportunity to modernize the Social Security disability trust fund to make sure that we stand with those that want to return to work and believe in the American work ethic like we do. I ask my colleagues to join with us on a bipartisan basis, and there has been an indication of bipartisan work that we have been able to show here in the initial conversations. Let's modernize the disability trust fund; let's cure the waste, fraud, and abuse, but most importantly, let's stand with the individuals like Mike Zelly who want to return to work because it gives him dignity and it gives him a sense that he is contributing rather than being in any way a burden on the system.

Mr. REED

Mr. REED. Mr. Speaker, I rise this morning to highlight an issue that I believe we must pay closer attention to in this Chamber and in this Congress. You see, on June 23, Mr. Speaker, we marked the tenth anniversary of an important Supreme Court case. That case was Kelo v. New London. Now, the title of the case really means nothing. But I point to Susette Kelo, who I have here depicted in this picture. She was the plaintiff in that case. And what happened in that case was this, Mr. Speaker, a real tragedy: She was told by her government that they were going to take her home and give it to another private owner for development. You heard me right, Mr. Speaker. She was told that her home was going to be taken by our government because they were picking the winners and losers because they felt they knew best how to utilize her property and give it to another private owner to develop it the way that private owner wanted to do. Well, Mr. Speaker, Susette Kelo stood up. She fought this fight. She was told by her friends, she was told by her real estate agents, she was told by her lawyers: Just roll over. The government always wins, and they are going to win this battle. But she fought it all the way to the Supreme Court. And what happened, however, is that that advice from her friends and from her real estate agent and her lawyers came true. The government won. But that day we all lost, as American citizens. Because here is what happened after that case. She lost her home. And this is a picture of her property--well, no longer her property--but that property, as it exists today. They demolished her home. They took her property. She lost her piece of the American Dream. And the result of it is a vacant lot that sits in New London. Mr. Speaker, I highlight this case today because it reminds us of an issue that we must fight for, and that is a fundamental freedom that we all enjoy as American citizens, to own and to use our property. It is something that is fundamental to our U.S. Constitution. It is something fundamental to us as American citizens. And it is time for us to unite, as Republicans and Democrats, and say enough is enough. We must push back on Big Government. We must stand with individuals. This land belongs to them, not our government. And that is something that I am afraid that started 10 years ago and continues to this day with actions of Big Government day in and day out, where government regulations, government overreach--local, Federal, State level--act in a way that takes away these fundamental property rights that so many have fought for. So in Congress I have led the fight. I formed the Private Property Rights Caucus, with Members from Maine to Alabama to California. I have sponsored and authored the Defense of Property Rights Act to say enough is enough. We are going to stand with individuals, and we are going to fight this Big Government overreach. Mr. Speaker, these hard-fought rights have come at the expense of so many, the blood of those who fought to preserve our freedoms, the blood of our Founding Fathers and the vision they set forth in our Constitution. And this Kelo case was a moment in time at a drop of a gavel when those fundamental rights were threatened and lost. So I stand today and ask my colleagues and all of the people across America to stand with us, to stand with me, to make sure we coordinate our efforts to make sure that our fundamental property rights are protected and individuals like Susette Kelo are rewarded for her bravery in taking the fight. Though she may have lost that battle, I stand with her to win this war to protect our fundamental property rights that so many have fought for over the years.

Mr. REED

Mr. REED. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Craig Howard on the completion of a successful career with the Department of Veterans Affairs. Mr. Howard has dedicated his career to serving our veterans. During his 37 years with the Department of Veterans Affairs, he has worked tirelessly to ensure that veterans receive the medical care they need and deserve. Mr. Howard has served as Director for the Canandaigua VA Medical Center since 2005. His leadership was instrumental in establishing the Center of Excellence for Suicide Prevention and PTSD, the Veterans Crisis Line, the National Homeless Call Center, and the National Caregiver Support Line. These resources and services have had a profoundly positive impact on the lives of our local veterans. During his tenure as Director, the Canandaigua VA Medical Center has ranked highly in both patient and employee satisfaction. Mr. Howard leaves behind a strong legacy of service and leadership: his work has left a lasting imprint on our community. I thank Mr. Howard for his years of dedicated service to our veterans and wish him the very best in his retirement.

Mr. REED

Mr. REED. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding. I rise today, Mr. Speaker, in strong support of trade. It is time for us to lead. When you open up markets to our manufacturers, to our workers, you are creating jobs here on American soil. I am a firm believer in U.S. manufacturing, Mr. Speaker. I co-chair with my colleague from Ohio the Manufacturing Caucus here, and what we are seeing is a renaissance in U.S. manufacturing. We are finally driving utility costs down. We are creating an opportunity where U.S. manufacturers are coming back on shore. What do we need to do? We need to create markets. Ninety-five percent of the world's population lives outside of America's borders. Forty percent of the world's market is represented in the negotiations that are going on with the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Why in the world would we not lead and negotiate an openness and fair level playing field for our American workers and our American manufacturers? It doesn't make any sense. I ask my colleagues to join us, join with us, to open up these markets so that we can create the jobs of today and tomorrow where we make it here to sell it there. That is what this is doing. That is what trade is all about. When we have rules-based trade, our workers and our manufacturers win. I encourage us not to get into these petty political fights and have some type of litmus test as to who is on whose side in regards to this issue. Stand with the American workers; stand with the American manufacturers; open up those world markets to our rules-based system, and I would agree, at the end of the day, we all win, and America will win.

Mr. REED

Mr. REED. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Shirley Magana on her retirement from Guthrie Corning Hospital. Ms. Magana has served as President and Chief Operating Officer of Corning Hospital since 2008. She has more than 35 years of experience in patient care and hospital operations. Corning Hospital has blossomed under Ms. Magana's leadership. During her tenure the hospital has expanded its operations and capabilities, allowing it to effectively serve the needs of our region. Ms. Magana was instrumental in the building of a new 232,000 square foot facility; her fundraising efforts resulted in over $5 million for the construction of the new hospital. This new state-of-the-art facility features a cancer treatment center and allows the hospital to provide lifesaving services and resources. Ms. Magana has worked tirelessly to better our local community. She is a member of the Corning Rotary Club and Corning Area Chamber of Commerce. She also serves as Co-Chair of the Fit & Strong Together Committee at Corning Hospital. Throughout her distinguished career, Shirley Magana has consistently provided exceptional medical care to those in need. She has positively impacted our local healthcare profession, and our neighbors are safer and healthier because of her years of dedicated service. I commend Ms. Magana on a successful career and I wish her the very best in her well- deserved retirement.

Mr. REED

Mr. REED. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to highlight an issue that is coming upon us very quickly. Mr. Speaker, many people across the Nation have talked about Social Security and Medicare and the trust funds going bankrupt for the retirement fund and Medicare sometime in 2033, 2034, but, Mr. Speaker, there is a more impending crisis coming down upon us. The Social Security disability trust fund is scheduled to go insolvent in 2016. That means, if we do nothing, what is going to happen in 2016 is millions of Americans across this Nation who receive those lifesaving disability benefits monthly will see a reduction in their benefits to the tune of 20 to 21 percent. That is unacceptable, Mr. Speaker. Two years ago, as I serve on the Ways and Means Committee, I had an opportunity to question our Treasury Secretary, Jack Lew. I asked him the question 2 years ago: You know this crisis is on the horizon. I have read your testimony to this committee of Ways and Means, and I read the entire President's budget. I said: Nowhere in there is a solution or a reference to this impending crisis. What is the solution the White House is offering? Simply, what they propose is they are going to take the portion of our payroll taxes that goes to Social Security retirement that is paid by future retirees and use the $270 billion necessary to bail out the disability trust fund. Mr. Speaker, before I came to Congress, I had a private business. If you talk to any small-business owner across America, what they will tell you that is, it is robbing Peter to pay Paul because the Social Security retirement trust fund is on that same path to insolvency in 2033. So why would you take from one and use it to bail out another when both programs are in dire straits? So, Mr. Speaker, I said to Jack Lew this year, when I had an opportunity to question him, that is unacceptable. We need to do better not only in order to protect the Social Security retirees, who are near and dear to me, but also to those in the disability community that rely on these benefits. The disability trust fund hasn't been reformed for decades. I care about those individuals deeply. And when I see disabled folks coming in to my office, as I have reached out to stakeholder groups and had conversations, what they tell me is they have a disability trust fund program that essentially penalizes them for trying to go back to work. That doesn't make sense. We should be standing with the disability community if they have a capacity, a willingness, and a desire to go back to work. Our policies here in Washington, D.C., should say we are going to stand with you, we are going to encourage you, and we are going to applaud you, not penalize you, for doing that. So, Mr. Speaker, I rise today to say that this crisis needs to be dealt with. It is time to lead. What we are looking for is input from across the country on ideas on how we can reform the disability trust fund, protect our Social Security retirees to the extent that we possibly can, and make sure that we have a disability trust fund that is designed and performing in the 21st century, a trust fund that says to the disabled community, we are with you, we are going to stand next to you, and we are going to give you the resources you need in order to live a great and fruitful life. At the same time we are going to look at our Social Security retirees and say to them, ``We are going to protect you.'' If we can't fix this crisis coming upon us in 2016, Mr. Speaker, then how in God's name can we fix the crises of Medicare and Social Security that are coming upon us in 2033 and thereabouts? There are millions of Americans that deserve a better answer than kicking the can down the road. Mr. Speaker, it is time to lead, and I rise today to ask all my colleagues to join me in that leadership role.

Mr. REED

Mr. REED. Mr. Speaker, I rise this morning to highlight and address, hopefully, an issue that needs to be held in check here in Washington, D.C. Mr. Speaker, our office has been contacted numerous times from individuals across the Nation about attacks on private property rights by Big Government. Big Government continues to increasingly address and impact private property rights day in and day out. We have heard stories of family farmers, people like Neil Vitale in my district, in western New York, who has been farming his land on the Pennsylvania border for years and years and years. Just yesterday, our Governor in the great State of New York banned the development of natural gas by banning hydraulic fracturing across the State of New York. How does that impact Mr. Vitale? Mr. Vitale was going to use the resources of the property rights represented in the natural gas mineral rights to the farm that he has taken care of for so many years in order to take care of the bills for him, his family, and his family farm, but now, that right has been lost because government action has taken that right away from Mr. Vitale. There is Bob Brace in Pennsylvania, who was ordered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the EPA to stop farming 30 acres of his land as they were determining it to be a wetland. Mr. Brace has been farming that land for years. He had to go through court. He went to the U.S. district court, and they said he is okay. He can keep farming the land. That wasn't enough for Big Government. They took it up to the court of appeals, and ultimately, the court ordered that Mr. Brace had to stop farming that 30 acres and pay a $10,000 fine and also hundreds of thousands of dollars in order to restore that property to the property that he has been using in his family for generations. When Mr. Brace tried to go to court to seek compensation for that right that was taken away, the court said: No, you don't have a right here. Well, Mr. Speaker, that is against my fundamental belief in this country of private property rights and freedom. In the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, it says that the government can act and it can take action, but it must provide just compensation when it impacts people's private property. That is why here in Washington, D.C., I have taken two concrete actions to address this issue, Mr. Speaker. Recently, I started the Private Property Rights Caucus with my colleagues in Congress. This is a caucus that has been made up of 14 original members, spanning from Maine to California, to highlight this issue and to say to Big Government, enough is enough. I choose to stand with the individuals and the fundamental property rights that they have paid for, they have earned, that they take care of in maintaining their property, paying taxes on their property, and living the American Dream. I also introduced the Defense of Property Rights Act. The Defense of Property Rights Act is based on just a simple reading of the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution. It says just that, if you take action as Big Government has done, Big Government will have to take into consideration the impact on private property rights. If private property rights are taken, we clarify the ability of individuals to go and follow the Constitution and at least get compensation from the government for taking those private property rights away from these individuals. Mr. Speaker, these are commonsense, simple principles that I think my colleagues on both sides of the aisle can join with me and say that is only fair because, if you really care about our fellow Americans, when their property rights are taken away because of Big Government action, we should at least say to them: we will stand with you as individuals and as Americans who believe in the fundamental principles of freedom and of private property rights, and we will at least get you some sort of compensation for the injury that you have suffered. As a result of that, I urge my colleagues to join the caucus, support the Defense of Property Rights Act, and join me in highlighting this issue so that we can say enough is enough. It is time to stand with our individuals, the constituents that we represent here in Washington, D.C., rather than the interests of Big Government and Big Government on all levels, Federal, State, and local.

Mr. REED

Mr. REED. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize a constituent, Mr. Wallace Higgins. Mr. Higgins was awarded the 2014 Congressional Gold Medal in recognition of his service with the Civil Air Patrol during World War II. Mr. Higgins was born in Kendall, New York in November 1925. From a young age, he was intrigued by aviation. Mr. Higgins joined the Civil Air Patrol in 1943, during his senior year of high school. Later that year, he enlisted in the Army Air Force and was chosen to join the Tuskegee Airmen. During his two enlistments with the Army Air Force, Mr. Higgins achieved the rank of Staff Sergeant and earned several commendations for his service, including the WWII Victory Medal, Army Good Conduct Medal, and New York State Medal for Merit. After receiving his honorable discharge, Mr. Higgins settled in Alfred, New York. Mr. Higgins has dedicated the past six decades to serving his community: he is entering his 50th year with the Alfred Lions Club, he is a life member of the Alfred Station Volunteer Fire Department, he is a member and former chairman of the Allegany County Office for the Aging Advisory Council, and he is a founding member of the Allegany Senior Foundation, where he currently serves as President Emeritus. Wallace Higgins truly exemplifies the qualities that characterize the Congressional Gold Medal. It is my pleasure to present this award to Mr. Higgins in recognition of his life-long service to our country and our local community.

Mr. REED

Mr. REED. Mr. Chairman, I thank Chairman Simpson for providing me time to engage in this colloquy. Through working with the chairman and others, the House was able to pass the Revitalize American Manufacturing and Innovation Act last year, and the legislation was signed into law. This legislation is designed to bring manufacturing in our country to the next level by increasing global competitiveness and training the workforce of tomorrow through the establishment of centers throughout the country. As some of these centers lie within the purview of the Energy and Water Appropriations bill, I want to take this opportunity to thank the chairman for working with me on this issue and to clarify that this bill we are considering today funds the establishment of at least one new center that can be coordinated with the Department of Commerce. With that, I thank the chairman.

Mr. REED. I thank the gentleman.

Mr. REED

Mr. REED. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize, again, April as Sexual Assault Awareness Month. Mr. Speaker, we must stand up and raise awareness across this country that sexual assault and domestic violence can no longer be allowed to exist in our country. We must be proactive on raising awareness on this issue. That is why I come to this floor today to do just that. Each Member--Democrat, Republican, East, West, North, South--has an opportunity, and I hope they join me to do this throughout April, to say ``no more'' to sexual assault in the United States of America. Mr. Speaker, every 2 minutes, another American is sexually assaulted, every 2 minutes. That is 237,868 victims--our fellow citizens--a year that are impacted by this heinous crime and assault and violence. Now, Mr. Speaker, one of the other things that we need to do, on top of raising awareness, is change our culture in America. Earlier this month, a graphic video was shown across this Nation and across this world of a gang rape that took place in broad daylight on the beaches of Panama City, Florida. The victim was clearly incapacitated and was clearly assaulted by several men on that beach. Mr. Speaker, those perpetrators should and will be held accountable. Justice will be done; but what culture exists in America to allow the hundreds of people that were standing nearby who witnessed this assault and did nothing? Bystanders need to understand that, in America today, we stand up and say ``no more'' to this heinous crime. Mr. Speaker, because this victim was unconscious and incapacitated, it would have been likely, absent this video, that this crime would have gone unreported. That is the norm in America. Sixty-eight percent of the assaults in the last 5 years were not reported. We need to change our culture, and we need to say ``no more.'' Now, Mr. Speaker, I have been on this floor numerous times; and, as many of you have seen before, I have shared my personal story from our family situation with this issue. I will tell you, just as I said the first time I came here and shared that story with the Nation, I say it again: there are no excuses for sexual assault and domestic violence in America. It is time for us to come together as a nation and say ``no more'' to sexual assault and domestic violence on our fellow citizens.