Louise Slaughter

Ms. SLAUGHTER

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

Ms. SLAUGHTER

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

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, today I want to talk about flight 3407 that crashed in Buffalo, New York, seven years ago tomorrow. This plane crashed in sight of the runway on an icy February night. We learned that the pilot and the co-pilot had never been trained or flown into any icy situations. The young woman co-pilot had flown the night before from Seattle. She was so poorly paid, around $13,000 a year, that she could not afford a motel room to sleep overnight. She instead, slept on the floor in the pilot's lounge. On the black box, before the crash, you could hear them both yawning. On that plane were two of the best musicians in the United States, a woman who was an expert on Rwanda and the genocide there, and one of the top anthropologists. They died because these pilots had neither knowledge nor experience to fly in those conditions. The families of the people who died on that plane have selflessly come to D.C. time and again, working to get regulations passed for seven years on how much training the pilot and the co-pilot have to have, and to ensure they have enough flying hours between them. Now, we're facing an FAA bill with an amendment that would undo those safety regulations. I implore my colleagues not to let that amendment pass or weaken the regulations that protect the flying public and reverse the competency of pilots who hold the lives of those we love in their hands.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak today about Flight 3407 that crashed in Buffalo, New York, 7 years ago tomorrow. This plane crashed inside of the runway on an icy February night. We learned that the pilot and the copilot had never been trained at all on flying into an icy situation. The young woman who was the copilot had flown in the night before from Seattle. She was paid so little--around $13,000 a year--that she could not afford a motel room to sleep, so she slept on the floor somewhere. On the black box, you could hear them yawning before the crash. In that plane crash were two of the best musicians in the United States, a woman who knew more about Rwanda and its problems than anybody else, and one of the most extraordinary anthropologists in the world. They died because these pilots had no idea of how to fly in those conditions. Colgan Air, their owner, was trying to take some responsibility. We have worked with the families of the people who died on that plane. They have selflessly come down here for 7 years, and we have finally gotten some regulation through the FAA of how much training they had to have, that at least the pilot or the copilot had to have some hours of flying time behind them that would be of some use. Now, we are facing an FAA bill here today, where they are trying to undo those safety regulations. It absolutely applies to every last one of us in the United States. For goodness sake, I implore my colleagues not to let it happen, that those regulations would be weakened and, once more, we would be flying people who are living on subsistence wages, unable to really cope with the weather or the elements. We deserve better than that in this century.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Madam Speaker, as a citizen and representative of the State of New York, I want to express my concern to all my colleagues from Michigan that in New York we care very deeply about this issue. I want to thank certainly Congresswoman Watson Coleman for her leadership in allowing me to speak tonight. I rise today, Madam Speaker, as the only microbiologist in Congress to discuss the current health disaster in Flint. It is not only a public health disaster but is also a violation of our social contract. The magnitude of the public health crisis in Flint first became apparent nearly a year ago, when lead levels of 397 parts per billion were first detected in the city's drinking water, 26 times the limit that the EPA uses to trigger action. In fact, last summer, a group of researchers found lead levels high enough to meet the EPA's definition of toxic waste. No wonder that the filters that have been given to the people of Flint have been rendered useless. The truth is, the only safe level of lead in water is zero. Sadly, children are particularly susceptible to the damaging effects of lead poisoning. The proportion of infants and children with above-average levels of lead in their blood in Flint has nearly doubled since this crisis. This toxic metal robs their brains of gray matter in the regions that enable people to pay attention, to regulate emotions, and control impulses. For the rest of their lives, these children will likely suffer from neurodevelopmental damage, reduced intelligence, behavioral changes, anemia, hypertension, renal impairment, and other lifelong effects of lead poisoning, including a higher risk of incarceration. What is worse, these children have been poisoned as a result of deliberate decisions and systematic failures by the State of Michigan. Make no mistake about it, all of us who serve in this House and in yonder hall, as they serve in the Senate, have a responsibility for these children because our oath requires that we will protect everyone from enemies both foreign and domestic. We have no right, and I think it borders on criminal that we would allow this kind of thing to happen to children who are also in our care. The failures of the Michigan State government are inexcusable, and doing this to our smallest citizens is criminal. Need I remind us that the democratically elected city council was superseded by a State-appointed emergency manager--I don't know what the emergency was, but he certainly created one--who made these dreadful decisions that brought us to this process and to this democratic process that was undermined and the hundreds who live with the consequences of it. Those in Congress who have blocked investments in our Nation's infrastructure need to take another look at the consequences of their inactions. Instead of investing in roads, bridges, and pipes, we spent trillions of dollars on bombs, on decimating other countries, on war and wounding about 60,000 young Americans. While this failure impacts all Americans, it disproportionately harms the low-income areas, communities of color, doubling down on the already wide racial, health, and economic disparities across the country. Now, Flint is only the latest example of this disturbing reality. I fear that it is a bellwether for the rest of the Nation. Just under foot nationwide are century-old water pipes in almost every city, certainly in the New England States, that may be the very next to fail. We have got to take the steps to reverse the failed choices that brought Flint to the brink, but also to ensure that what happened in Flint does not happen in other communities across the country. Again, that is our responsibility. I thank Congresswoman Watson Coleman for her timely concern over the issue and for yielding to me.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained and missed rollcall vote Nos. 695, 696 and 697. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye'' on rollcall vote Nos. 695, 696, and 697.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained and missed Roll Call vote number 694. Had I been present, I would have voted aye on Roll Call vote number 694.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, as co-chair of the Congressional Arts Caucus, I rise today in support of H.R. 1283, the Songwriter Equity Act. In today's evolving entertainment environment, songwriters sometimes don't get the credit or the pay they deserve--and it's time to change that. H.R. 1283 will ensure that these artists receive fair pay every time someone listens to their song--whether from satellite radio or digital music services and downloads. Congress established royalty rates of just two cents per copy in 1909, when Irving Berlin was beginning his career. Now, over 100 years later, the royalty rate has increased only to just over nine cents per copy. It's time to give songwriters the pay they deserve in today's dollars and cents. Thank you to my colleagues Rep. Doug Collins and Rep. Hakeem Jeffries for their strong support of the arts here in Congress--I'm proud to support them, the arts, and this bill.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today as co-chair of the House Pro-Choice Caucus in strong support of the caucus' resolution condemning violence toward women. This month, our Nation has seen unspeakable violence, including in a Planned Parenthood health center in Colorado and the awful things that happened in San Bernardino, California. I condemn this violence in the strongest possible way. We get so used to it, don't we? Eighty-nine Americans are shot to death every day, over 300 mass killings already this year in this country, and we get up on the floor of the House and we go through our piety and we ask for a moment of silence. That is all we can give. We are not going to give any more relief to the people of the United States from gun culture, but take a moment of silence. Those of us who sit in this Chamber who can do something about it steadfastly refuse to do so. For heaven's sake, many countries in this world don't have 89 killings in a month, much less every day. No American should feel intimidated or threatened because of choosing to access health care. Violence is unconscionable and we have to stop it.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained and missed Roll Call vote numbers 646, 647, 648, 649, 650, 651 and 652. Had I been present, I would have voted no on Roll Call vote number 646, 647, 650, 651 and 652 and aye on 648 and 649.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained and missed Roll Call vote numbers 644 and 645. Had I been present, I would have voted aye on Roll Call vote numbers 644 and 645.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman's yielding me the time. Mr. Speaker, on January 5, 2011, newly elected Speaker John Boehner announced: ``To my friends in the minority, I offer a commitment: openness, once a tradition of this institution but increasingly scarce in recent decades, will be the new standard . . . You will always have the right to a robust debate in an open process that allows you to represent your constituents, to make your case, offer alternatives, and be heard.'' What we were promised was openness, but what we got was absolutely the opposite. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to mark the breaking of a record, perhaps the worst kind of record: this has officially become the most closed session of Congress in American history. We are living it now. Today marks the 45th closed rule in this session of Congress, and with each new closed rule that the majority approves, we will break the record anew. Under a closed rule, no amendments are allowed on the House floor, which limits debate and silences half of the American people who are represented by the minority of the House. It is true that the trend toward more closed rules has been growing over the past 20 years under the leadership of both political parties, but my Republican colleagues have taken the trend to new heights. The Republican Congress, for example, passed more closed rules in 1 week in October of 2013 than in an entire year under Democrat control. It is the work of the Rules Committee to report each rule that comes to the floor, and according to our statistics, in this session of Congress, the majority has chosen a closed rule more times than any other kind of rule. Under this regime, the majority has wasted taxpayer money on their obsession with taking health care away from millions of people and held more than 60 votes to repeal or dismantle ObamaCare. They have spent over $5 million of taxpayer money on a duplicative, politicized Benghazi special committee even after nine other House and Senate committees and one State Department committee had found nothing nefarious nor illegal. Benghazi was, yes, a tragedy, but it was not a conspiracy. To continue with their wasteful, politicized special committees, they created a special committee to investigate Planned Parenthood, even after grilling the president of Planned Parenthood, Cecile Richards, for 5 hours in a hearing and the chairman later declared that no law had been broken. Ladies and gentlemen, this is what you get here for your taxpayer dollars. While Americans are riding over rutted roads, traveling over unsafe bridges, using crowded and outdated airports, and our schools are crumbling around our children, this majority insists on wasting millions of dollars and our time not on governance, but on purely political goals. These distractions keep true regular order nothing but a mirage. This is the work that we got under Speaker Boehner's promise of openness. As it turns out, Speaker Ryan promised the same openness for his tenure. On November 5, 2015, just after taking office, he said to a gaggle of reporters: ``I want to have a process that is more open, more inclusive, more deliberative, more participatory, and that's what we're trying to do.'' We have heard that before. He even explained the importance of an open legislative process and said: ``So that every citizen of this country, through their elected Representatives, has the opportunity to make a difference. That is the people's House. This is the branch of government closest to the people.'' Will we get that openness? Today gives us very little reason for hope. Let me remind us that while we may have a new hand wielding the gavel, no amount of good intentions can overcome the dynamics in the radical Republican Conference because it remains the same. Mr. Speaker, for this body to function as the Founding Fathers intended, we need debate and we need openness. For our constituents to be heard and for our institutions to thrive, we need debate and we need openness. Democrats have always been willing to provide the votes to move the country forward on any bill that would come to the floor, and I would like to extend my well wishes to our new Speaker, Paul Ryan, and express again our willingness to work together for the American people, because that is why we have been sent here. Let me mention, if I may, that today, when we are concerned about bringing refugees and immigration, that we have been begging for 2 years or more for this House to take up an immigration bill, and the majority has refused to do so. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. If we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to the rule to bring up H.R. 430, a bill to clean up the secret money in politics and give the American people the fair and transparent political system that they deserve. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of the amendment in the Record, along with extraneous material, immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Van Hollen), to discuss our proposal, the ranking member of the Committee on the Budget.

Ms. SLAUGHTER. I yield the gentleman an additional 2 minutes.

Ms. SLAUGHTER. I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. In closing, it really is a shame that the only way we can talk about campaign finance is to put it in our previous question because it is never a subject for debate here. That really is a shame because we have terrible situations going on in campaign finance unaccounted for, which is something that we have never had before in this country, certainly since the Watergate issue, where we cleaned up campaign finance considerably and did well with it. But now all that is gone and anything goes. Mr. Speaker, this rule we are doing today strikes a provision of the reconciliation bill that the House passed last month in the latest futile Republican attempt to undermine the Affordable Care Act. This provision is unprecedented, is unacceptable, and we oppose it. The stricken provision eliminates an auto enroll requirement that employers who offer health insurance automatically enroll new employees in the health plan. The rule strikes this provision from the reconciliation bill because it became law as part of last month's bipartisan budget agreement. My Republican colleagues may describe this as a simple housekeeping measure, but no matter what is done, the reconciliation bill will not become a serious piece of legislation. The bill passed by the House would add 16 million people to the ranks of the uninsured, would increase health insurance premiums by up to 20 percent for millions of others, and would reduce women's access to important health services by ending Medicaid funding to Planned Parenthood clinics. The best piece of housekeeping that Congress could do on the reconciliation bill is to set it aside and put an end, once and for all, to this fantasy of repealing affordable health coverage for millions of Americans. Instead, let us focus on the policies that actually help American families, such as improving access to education and to good-paying jobs. Mr. Speaker, I hope that people paid some attention to this debate today. There is so much going on in the House that one wonders if we have. Let me just reiterate that this is the most closed Congress in history. At every turn, the majority has chosen to shut out debate and silence the will of Members. We have heard again this morning the minority party, our constituents, and the democratic process itself are ailing, Mr. Speaker, and we must do something about it. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' and to defeat the previous question so that we can take up Mr. Van Hollen's good measure here and try to clean up, as even the members of the Supreme Court who voted to give us Citizens United would like to see us make some change there because they recognize that what they did has been a complete failure. Somehow they had this awesome wonderland idea that everybody would just continue to put their name down on their contributions, and we have certainly found that that is not the case. We don't even know what country a lot of the money is coming from. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' and defeat the previous question and also to vote ``no'' on the rule. I yield back the balance of my time.

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

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

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor our nation's veterans by asking the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) to issue a strong rule protecting our former servicewomen and men from predatory payday lending schemes. The CFPB should ensure that the federal rule leaves no room for the payday lending industry to circumvent laws in states like New York that have set strong, enforceable prohibitions on payday lending. Payday lenders have long targeted members of the military with promises of quick cash but realities of triple digit interest rates and even more debt. While the Obama Administration recently addressed many of these issues by closing loopholes in the 2006 Military Lending Act, our veterans are left vulnerable--and vulnerable they are indeed. The Department of Housing and Urban Development estimates that nearly 50,000 veterans are homeless on any given night, and the National Coalition for Homeless Veterans estimates another 1.4 million veterans are at risk of homelessness due to poverty and a lack of community support networks. We must do better by those who risked their lives in service to this country. It is because of financial challenges like those faced by our veterans--the struggle to find affordable housing, health care and a living wage--that payday lending has thrived where it is permitted. But where it has not been permitted, such as in New York, people have found ways other than abusive, unfair, and predatory payday loans to address their financial needs. The rules issued by the CFPB must uphold the strong protections states like New York have in place. At a minimum, the CFPB should: Require a meaningful ``ability to repay'' standard, without exceptions or safe harbors; Provide that a violation of state usury law is an unfair, deceptive and abusive act and practice (UDAAP); Provide that payday loans are subject to the law of the state where the borrower resides; Prohibit abusive bank account access by payday lenders; and Include enforceable protections against abuses by lead generators and other third-party marketing affiliates that sell people's sensitive personal and financial information to payday lenders. On the battlefield, our military pledges to leave no servicemember behind. Our promise to them must be no less when they return home. They promised to protect and defend this nation, and we owe the same to them. I urge my colleagues to join me in asking the CFPB to issue a strong rule that is fair and that honors those who served this country.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I am here to do my part of the rule. I thank the gentleman from Oklahoma, my friend, for yielding me the time, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Bipartisan Budget Agreement before us. Instead of the brinksmanship and short-term stopgaps that we have seen, we have, I am glad to say, a 2-year budget agreement that eases the burden of the damaging sequester cuts, protects seniors, affirms the full faith and credit of the United States, and provides much-needed economic stability and security to our Nation. This agreement provides relief from 90 percent of the sequester's cuts for the next 2 years. While we should eliminate the sequester in its entirety, this is a welcome respite from the sequester's grip, ensuring a renewed investment in research, infrastructure, and early childhood education. The agreement also includes a clean way to pay the debts that Congress has already incurred and will eliminate the threat of a debt limit standoff for the next 2 years. We should remember that the last time politics were played over the debt limit, our credit rating was downgraded for the first time in our history and our economy suffered. Because of this agreement, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates that the certainty that this budget agreement creates will encourage the growth of 340,000 new jobs in 2016 alone. The Los Angeles Times Editorial Board wrote this morning that the budget agreement will provide ``a welcome measure of stability at a time of increasing anxiety about the global economy.'' Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record the text of the editorial from the Los Angeles Times entitled ``John Boehner's Last Deal Leaves Congress Better Off.'' [From the Los Angeles Times, Oct. 28, 2015] John Boehner's Last Deal Leaves Congress Better Off In a parting gift to the conservatives who hectored him out of office, House Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) negotiated a budget agreement with Senate leaders and the Obama administration that increases federal spending and raises the debt ceiling in exchange for--well, not much that Republicans covet. There are no big changes in entitlements, no defunding of Planned Parenthood. Yet this backroom deal delivers the goods that matter most: It will avert the risk of a shutdown until after the next president takes office, providing a welcome measure of stability at a time of increasing anxiety about the global economy. Boehner had said he wanted to ``clean the barn'' for his replacement--most likely Rep. Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.)--which meant disposing of four divisive issues with rapidly approaching deadlines. The federal government is days away from hitting its borrowing limit. Federal agencies are slated to run out of funding in early December. The Social Security trust fund for disability benefits is expected to be empty by late 2016. And millions of elderly and disabled Americans face a whopping 52% increase in their Medicare Part B premiums at year's end. The compromise negotiated by congressional leaders and the White House would resolve all of these issues in the time- honored way: giving everyone much of what they want, then paying for it with budget gimmicks. The debt ceiling would be suspended until March 2017, the budget caps lifted for two fiscal years, disability benefits assured through 2022 and Medicare premium increases made less dramatic. Without these steps, Congress risks defaulting on debts, forcing a government shutdown and delivering a painful financial blow to vulnerable Americans. None of those outcomes should even be contemplatable, and yet Congress' record of dysfunction over the last four years makes them all real possibilities absent a deal like the one Boehner negotiated. Obviously, it would be better for Congress to make real choices about spending instead of relying on accounting legerdemain to make the numbers look good. The proposed fix for disability insurance, for example, would take the money out of a fund for future retirement benefits; that's a reprieve, not a solution. But when Congress ignores a problem until the last minute, it takes real solutions off the table, leaving lawmakers to choose between pragmatism and the sort of posturing that dissident House Republicans have made their stock in trade. Credit Boehner with opting for one last deal rather than showing the country again that the House GOP's reach exceeds its grasp.

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, this agreement avoids the harmful cuts to Medicare and Social Security beneficiaries by reforming tax compliance among hedge funds and private equity funds, ensuring that people in the top bracket pay their fair share. The agreement also limits any increase in the Medicare part B premiums for 2016, protecting millions of seniors from a roughly 50 percent rate hike. It does this by spreading out the cost of replenishing the Medicare trust fund over a number of years, and it prevents this kind of rate hike from happening again in 2017. The health savings included in this agreement focus on well- documented areas of overpayment and improved program integrity, clearing out waste in the system. What's more, the agreement avoids the deep cuts to Social Security Disability Insurance benefits that would occur at the end of next year, ensuring it continues to pay benefits without reducing benefit levels or imposing new eligibility restrictions. Social Security Disability will survive, but with reforms to ensure accountability and fiscal prudence that are long overdue. These are good steps forward. The agreement represents significant progress for hardworking American families, and for the next 2 years, we have come out of the sequester's shadow. Together, we have found a way forward to confront the challenges we face as a nation. This agreement is the first bipartisan budget bill we have seen in quite awhile. It serves as a roadmap that will lead us through the appropriations process; but until we finish that process, we are still on the path toward a government shutdown. However, with the reauthorization of the Export-Import Bank yesterday and now the introduction of this budget agreement, I am hopeful that this House can make progress on issues that are important to America and to our economy. We have sort of grown accustomed to governing by crisis with stopgap measures that do harm to the Nation. When John Boehner assumed the Speakership, he promised an open process for all Members; but what we have seen is that one party has been consistently shut out and only allowed to participate in fits and starts, which silences half the voices of our Nation. We have seen politicized select committees and political maneuvers, and we hope that the cries to the Speaker-in-waiting for open legislative process will include both parties and include all voices. This agreement, with a 2-year outlook, with input from leadership from both Chambers of Congress and the White House, has, perhaps, marked a turning point. Only time will tell. I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Carolyn B. Maloney).

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. My scheduled speakers have not arrived, and I am prepared to close. Mr. Speaker, today we have before us a 2-year budget agreement that protects seniors, invests in job training, and eases the burden of the sequester. However, unless we see the process through with the appropriations process, we are still on a path toward shutdown, which is not what the American people want from Congress and what the economy can't stand. So I urge my colleagues to vote for this bipartisan agreement, for the rule, and the underlying bill. I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds. I just say once again, no, they don't say: We are going to take away preexisting conditions. They just say: We are taking away the funding for the bill. When the funding is taken away, it dies. I think almost all Americans understand that. I am pleased now to yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers), the distinguished ranking member of the Committee on the Judiciary.