Louise Slaughter

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I do have a late entry here. I would like to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews). (Mr. ANDREWS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Then I am prepared to close, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I sincerely regret that today we will consider legislation that has no chance of becoming law. Our constituents send us here with an expectation that we will work together and deliver results. That doesn't mean that they expect us to abandon all of our principles, but it does mean that while we engage in fierce debate, we do so in the spirit of collaboration and at the end of the day we come together to produce bipartisan legislation that will address the major issues that are facing our country. For the last 2 years, the majority has actively avoided such bipartisan legislating, and as a result we face a mounting number of issues that demand our attention. Sadly, none of those pressing issues are addressed in today's bills. So I urge my colleagues to oppose today's rule and the underlying legislation. It is time we put aside political games and address the pressing national issues facing this country. 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. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the previous question, to defeat the previous question, and I urge a ``no'' vote 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

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, It is my esteemed honor to celebrate the Rochester Institute of Technology's 100th year of Cooperative Education. I am joined by the Honorable Kathy Hochul and the Honorable Tom Reed as we congratulate the Rochester Institute of Technology (RIT). RIT is home to our nation's fourth oldest established Cooperative Education Program. Cooperative Education provides students with the opportunity to enrich their traditional higher education experience by alternating periods of full-time study with periods of full-time, for credit, paid employment appropriate to their educational and career goals. It is a true testament to the progressiveness of Rochester region to be home to this longstanding educational program. Established in 1912, RIT's Cooperative Education has grown to be nationally recognized as one of the nation's top programs by U.S. News and World Report and the Office of Cooperative Education and Career Services. RIT offers one of the largest programs in the world with more than 3,800 students completing nearly 5,800 quarterly work assignments with more than 2,000 employer partners throughout the U.S. and in 40 other countries around the world each year. In the Cooperative Education program, RIT encourages students to explore their interests through hands-on experience while they are still working towards their degree. By providing students with the opportunity to experience their field of interest outside the classroom, RIT's graduates are better equipped to enter full-time jobs and thrive. Cooperative Education is a required component in several of RIT's colleges including the Kate Gleason College of Engineering, the Golisano College of Computing and Information Sciences, The Saunders College of Business, and the College of Applied Science and Technology. Through Cooperative Education programs, our universities ensure that American students are trained in best practices and have in-depth knowledge of the cutting edge technologies of today's global world. RIT's program and others like it are crucial to ensuring that the next generation of American professionals can compete and win in a globalized world. Through the support of RIT faculty and administration, countless students have expanded their knowledge and skills in the Cooperative Education program. They've been exposed to unique experiences and unparalleled knowledge that has prepared them for successful careers. For one hundred years, RIT has dedicated itself to providing these unique learning opportunities, and helped to prepare America's next generation for years of success to come. Today I stand with Representatives Hochul and Reed to congratulate the Rochester Institute of Technology on its 100th anniversary of enriching countless students through Cooperative Education. I ask my colleagues to join me in celebration of this momentous occasion.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, it is my esteemed honor and privilege to recognize Dr. Thomas K. Mclnerny of Rochester, N.Y., as the next elected President of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP). The AAP is the nation's largest pediatric organization, with a membership of 60,000 primary care pediatricians, pediatric medical subspecialists, and pediatric surgical specialists dedicated to the health, safety, and well-being of infants, children, adolescents, and young adults. Dr. McInerny is Associate Chair for Clinical Affairs and Professor of Pediatrics at the University of Rochester Medical Center and Golisano Children's Hospital, and has worked as a primary care pediatrician at Panorama Pediatric Group in Rochester, N.Y., for 40 years. After earning his medical degree at Harvard Medical School, Dr. McInerny completed his residency at Cincinnati Children's Hospital and Boston Children's Hospital. Dr. Mclnerny has held numerous elected and appointed positions, including the AAP Task Force on Mental Health, the Task Force on Immunization, and the Steering Committee on Quality Improvement and Management. He has served as President of Chapter I, District II (Upstate NY), Treasurer of District II, and has served on the board of directors and as chief medical officer of the Rochester Community Individual Practice Association, a physician-run organization dedicated to maintaining a community-wide panel of health care professionals to provide high quality, cost-effective, and accessible health care to 500,000 residents of the Greater Rochester Area. It is our responsibility to ensure that children grow up in a safe and healthy environment--protecting children's health must be our top priority. This is why I am so pleased to see that dedicated doctors such as Dr. McInerny are recognized for their achievements. Dr. McInerny has spent decades working to protect the children and families of the Rochester area and now has the opportunity to broaden his positive impact nationwide. As President-elect, Dr. McInerny has stated that he will work with legislators and stakeholders to ensure that children have access to quality health care. I am confident that Dr. McInerny will be a strong and dedicated leader in protecting the health of our nation's children. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in warmly congratulating Dr. McInerny upon his election as President of AAP.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, today I am proud to reintroduce the Waterfront Brownfields Revitalization Act. This bill will authorize a much needed grant program to assist communities that are overcoming the unique challenges of waterfront brownfields and fostering innovative approaches to remediation. America's industrial heritage was established along the banks of its rivers, lakes and coasts. Our nation's vast and interconnected natural water system helped provide the power that fueled our rise to international prominence, and allowed us to move our manufactured goods efficiently to all corners of the country. However, that legacy also includes many decades of environmental contamination on the waterfront. Abandoned factories, dilapidated mills and underutilized ports can be found along the shores of many metropolitan areas. As localities seek to reconnect with their waterfronts and revitalize their downtowns, brownfield barriers threaten to derail community efforts to create jobs, promote recreational opportunities, restore the ecology, increase tourism, and grow their tax base. Waterfront brownfields present challenges beyond typical environmental assessment and cleanup projects. Hydrology, water quality, wetlands, endangered species, habitat, dredged materials, flooding, environmental infrastructure, navigation, and other considerations must be carefully addressed so as not to exacerbate existing site contamination. Typically, waterfront brownfields require the involvement of multiple governmental agencies. As such, waterfront brownfields require special attention and resources to overcome their larger hurdles. In my own district, the City of Rochester, NY is currently working to revitalize its beautiful waterfront, while attempting to cope with the unique challenges that waterfront brownfields present. The city is undertaking a major community revitalization strategy to redevelop its port and waterfront area into a mixed use development, which will include housing, commercial, retail, and educational uses, enhanced recreation, new parks and open space, and improved public access to Lake Ontario, the Genesee River and the surrounding ecosystem. However, because the Port of Rochester and surrounding waterways were used extensively for industrial purposes from the late 1800s into the first half of the 20th century, significant environmental remediation will be required prior to redevelopment. Mr. Speaker, Rochester is not alone in facing these types of complicated and expensive challenges to redevelopment. Cities all across the country are dealing with similar roadblocks as they try to engage corporate waterfront real estate into their redevelopment plans, from Yuma, AZ and Portland, OR in the west, to Savannah, GA, and Philadelphia, PA in the east, and almost everywhere in between where lakes and rivers exist. My bill recognizes that the federal government can be an effective partner to communities interested in reconnecting with their waterfronts. Specifically, this legislation would authorize the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to establish a waterfront brownfields pilot demonstration program to provide localities and other eligible entities with up to $500,000 to assess and cleanup waterfront brownfields. The bill would also establish an interagency taskforce on waterfront brownfields restoration to identify barriers and potential solutions to waterfront brownfields revitalization, and seek methods for federal interagency collaboration on such projects. As cities across the country struggle to thrive in a changing global economy, and as our communities work to rebuild local economies, it is imperative that Congress do all that it can to help these cities redevelop and succeed. Industrialization and manufacturing helped make this country the power that it is today and remediating the contamination left behind will revive areas in cities across the nation that once were feared to be lost. This legislation will give these cities the flexibility and support they need to redevelop in an environmentally safe way, and utilize their waterfront as an incredible economic asset. I urge my colleagues to show their support for these communities by supporting this bill.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize September as National Ovarian Cancer Awareness Month. This is an important time to raise awareness about the disease and its symptoms. In 2012, it is estimated that approximately 22,280 women will be diagnosed with ovarian cancer and 15,500 will die of the disease. Ovarian cancer is the ninth most common cancer among women and the fifth leading cause of cancer-related deaths, making it the deadliest gynecologic cancer. If ovarian cancer is treated before it spreads outside the ovary, the five-year survival rate is 93 percent. Currently, only 15 percent of ovarian cancers are found at such an early stage and overall the five-year survival rate is 46 percent. I urge my colleagues to help make women aware of the potential warning signs to prevent future deaths. Experts recommend that women see a gynecologist if they experience any of the often subtle symptoms of ovarian cancer daily for more than a few weeks. Four major symptoms of ovarian cancer include bloating, pelvic or abdominal pain, difficulty eating or feeling full quickly, and frequent or urgent need to urinate. I ask all of my colleagues to become familiar with these symptoms and to share the information with their friends, family, staff, and constituents. Because no ovarian cancer screening or early detection test exists, organizations such as the Ovarian Cancer National Alliance stress that ``until there's a test, awareness is best.'' I commend the Ovarian Cancer National Alliance for its steadfast commitment to make women aware of the risk factors, signs, and symptoms of ovarian cancer and for its advocacy on behalf of women and families touched by this devastating disease. I also want to mention a few very important federal programs that are providing hope to those with ovarian cancer. The National Cancer Institute, NCI, at the National Institutes of Health does crucial research work in all areas of cancer, including ovarian cancer. These efforts will hopefully one day lead to breakthroughs that reduce ovarian cancer incidence, mortality, and morbidity. NCI has more than 550 active research projects on ovarian cancer in its cancer research portfolio. Another important program is the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) Ovarian Cancer Control Initiative. This initiative works to coordinate and fund health activities working toward early detection and improved treatment options. CDC also plays a critical role in disseminating information about ovarian cancer risk factors, signs, and symptoms to women, health professionals, and the public. It is imperative that these programs continue to receive adequate funding in order to perform basic research and then translate that research into results for women with or at-risk for this terrible disease. I encourage all Members of Congress and staff to join me this month in bringing greater awareness to ovarian cancer and to help educate the women in your life about the risk factors, signs, and symptoms of ovarian cancer. Together we can help save lives from ovarian cancer.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate a group of Olympic champions from my home area of Rochester. All Rochesterians-- and Americans--are incredibly proud of these dedicated athletes who have trained to be the best and who achieved their dreams at the XXX Olympic Games in London. Abby Wambach led the United States Women's Soccer team to their third straight Olympic gold medal. Abby grew up in Rochester, NY where she played soccer and basketball at Our Lady of Mercy High School, and was named to Parade Magazine's high school All-America team. She attended the University of Florida, where she was a first-team All American and led her team to the Final Four in her senior season. In 2001, Abby joined the Women's National Team and played in her first Olympic games in Athens in 2004, contributing four goals and one assist to the gold- medal effort for Team USA. She missed the 2008 games in Beijing because of a broken leg sustained in a collision in the final match before the Olympics. Abby was back with a vengeance in 2012, however, and scored a goal in every game leading up to the final match where the USA was victorious in dramatic fashion. Jenn Suhr soared to a hard-fought Olympic gold in the Pole Vault. Jenn was born in Fredonia, NY and was a multi-sport athlete at Fredonia High School, playing softball, basketball, soccer, and track and field. As a senior in high school in 2000, Jenn won the New York State pentathlon. She then went on to Roberts Wesleyan College in Rochester and focused her athletic energy on basketball and track and field. Not only did she take her basketball team to the NCCAA national championship game and become the team's all-time leading scorer in basketball with 1,819 points, but she also graduated with a degree in psychology and began a graduate degree in school psychology. Jenn did not even begin working on her pole vaulting skills until 2004, but she quickly proved her excellence in the sport. She was an Olympic silver medalist in 2008 in Beijing, and fought her way to the gold medal in London. Meghan Musnicki was one of the women's eight team who rowed to their second straight Olympic gold in London. Meghan was born in Naples, NY and attended Canandaigua Academy for high school, where she played soccer and basketball. She first picked up an oar as a freshman in college at St. Lawrence University in 2001. Later Meghan transferred to Ithaca College, where she helped row her team to NCAA Championships in 2004 and 2005, including an undefeated season in 2004. Meghan graduated from Ithaca College with a degree in psychology. She was first selected to the U.S. National Rowing Team in 2010, after narrowly missing a chance at the Olympics in 2008, and was part of two World Championship eight boat teams prior to winning the gold in her first Olympic games in 2012. Ryan Lochte swam to five medals in the 2012 Olympics, adding two golds, two silvers and a bronze to bring his total to 11 medals over three Olympic games. Ryan was born in Rochester, NY and attended school in Canandaigua before his family moved to Florida, where his father coached swimming. He was a 7-time NCAA Champion while swimming for the University of Florida and was named an NCAA All-American twenty-four times. Even more laudable than Ryan's athletic achievements is his commitment to raising awareness for Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy, a neuromuscular illness to which Ryan lost a family member. He has helped Parent Project Muscular Dystrophy ``Go for the Gold'' by raising money for research projects towards finding a cure for the disease. Henrik Rummel rowed with his team to a bronze medal in men's four race of the 2012 London Olympics. Born in Denmark, Rummel moved to Pittsford, NY with his family in 2000 and attended Pittsford Mendon High School. Previously a basketball player and a skier, Henrik began rowing on the Pittsford Crew Team in 2001. He made his first national team just three years later in 2004. Henrik was recruited to Harvard, where he studied applied mathematics and economics while rowing for one of the most renowned crew teams in the country. He swept the Harvard- Yale regatta in 2008 and 2009 and won gold in the pair with coxswain at the 2009 World Rowing Championships. Henrik's bronze medal with the men's four came in his first Olympics games. Jason Turner competed in sport shooting events in London for the third time as an Olympian. Jason is originally from Rush, NY and graduated from McQuaid Jesuit High School. At just 12 years old, Jason began shooting competitively in 1987, and was named to the 2004 Olympic team in the free pistol and 10m air pistol events. He won a bronze medal in the 10-meter Air Pistol at the 2008 Olympics in Beijing. In London, Jason finished 34th with a score of 569 in the qualifying round. Kara Lynn Joyce spent time in both Irondequoit and Webster, NY as she grew up, and still holds two school records in Webster. She attended the University of Georgia where she was an All-American three years in a row, and became the first female swimmer to win the 50-meter, 100- meter and 200-meter freestyle events. The London Olympics were also the third for Kara, who earned a pair of silver medals in the 2004 Olympics in Athens, and two more silvers in the 2008 Olympics in Beijing. Kara competed in the 50m free in London, and after finishing her heat tied with two other swimmers for sixteenth and final semi-final spot, treated fans to an exciting swim-off that was won by the host country's swimmer. Jim Boeheim, best known to Western New Yorkers as the Hall of Fame coach of the Syracuse University men's basketball team, traveled to London to coach in his second Olympic games as an assistant coach for the USA Basketball team. Jim is a native of Lyons, NY and graduated from Lyons Central High School before attending Syracuse University where he attained a degree in social science. His remarkable career as a college basketball coach, which includes 34 consecutive years at one school--and the record for most career wins at one school--has now been enriched by leading the U.S. men's basketball team to two gold medals. Gloria Peek made history in London as an assistant coach for the first-ever women's boxing event at the Olympics. Making history was nothing new for Gloria, a native of Geneva, NY and a former counselor for juvenile delinquents in Rochester, who was banned from amateur boxing in the 1970's for being a woman. She founded the Montgomery Boxing Club in the basement of the West Avenue Methodist Church in Fairport, NY in 1988 to keep young people off the streets, and she helped them finish school, apply to college and find jobs. At the 2012 Olympic games, Gloria helped coach the three women who qualified for the U.S. boxing team, including Claressa Shields, the first woman--and only member of the 2012 U.S. boxing team--to win Olympic gold. Mr. Speaker, I am extremely proud of these men and women who dedicated themselves to excellence, and took advantage of the opportunity of the Olympic games to showcase to the world what Rochester can do. I look forward to following their future careers, as well as those of all the young Rochesterians that they have undoubtedly inspired to pursue dreams of their own.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, it is my honor to congratulate Emily Sabo, Carolyn Grant, Ashley Stafford and Jodie Reese--members of the Hippie Pandas Girl Scout team of Rochester, NY. Along with their coaches Cheryl and Christa Lawniczak, the Hippie Pandas recently pioneered an invention that is preventing disease, and saving lives. The young ladies of the Hippie Pandas recently partnered with engineers at the Rochester Institute of Technology and Eastman Kodak Company to design and build a device to change the world. Through extensive research and hard work, the young women created a solar- powered pasteurization system that processes raw milk. As I write, this invention is providing women in developing countries with an easy and inexpensive way to access safe milk for themselves and their families. This invention was spurred by a desire to help women in Nicaragua, where unpasteurized milk has caused women to suffer from higher-than- normal rates of miscarriage and disease. They've done exactly that, as their invention has already been put to use in Nicaragua, and requests have come in to expand its use to other countries. Across the world, women face the tremendous challenge of accessing safe, affordable and secure health care. Indeed, in many countries, lack of resources and gender discrimination conspire to leave women vulnerable to contracting preventable disease. Every day, some of the most accomplished and heralded professionals in the world work to address these challenges. Yet, quietly, a small group of dedicated young women in Western New York solved one such challenge with an incredible invention. Through their hard work, the Hippie Pandas have helped change the course of life for women a world away. In the process, they have shown this Congress, and this country, the important role that science and technology play in making our world a better place. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to represent such intelligent, innovative, and accomplished young women. Through their work, the Hippie Pandas have shown the best that the Rochester area has to offer. Their scientific and technological knowledge, together with a deep passion for serving a greater good, embodies the values that serve as a foundation for my hometown and our Nation. In honor of the Hippie Pandas' service to the global community, I ask my colleagues to join me in congratulating Emily, Carolyn, Ashley, Jodie, Cheryl and Christa, and their mentors at Rochester Institute of Technology and Eastman Kodak Co. for their innovative work and dedication to science and technology. I speak for all of Western New York in expressing our pride and gratitude for the life-changing work the Hippie Pandas have done.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to take a bold step to keep America secure and rebuild our domestic electronics sector. Today I am introducing the ``Keep America Secure Act,'' legislation that directs the Department of Defense (DoD) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to only purchase electronic components that are manufactured in the United States. These electronic components--including computer chips, communications devices, and guidance systems--are used in crucial defense and homeland security equipment. This bill is the perfect complement to our ongoing efforts to enhance ``Buy American'' requirements and to ensure that all DoD and DHS equipment be Made-In- America. If we are to maintain the most advanced military force, with the most advanced weaponry, we must have a dedicated stream of domestically produced parts. Regrettably, today this simply is not happening. Our armed forces dependence on foreign parts has major security ramifications. From missiles to computers, much of our crucial defense and homeland security equipment relies on sophisticated electronic components to function. We must act now to eliminate our reliance on foreign electronic components in our defense systems. In May 2012 the Senate Armed Services Committee concluded a yearlong investigation that found a substantial increase in the number of counterfeit electronic parts used in the production of sensitive military equipment. The Committee noted, ``Our report outlines how this flood of counterfeit parts, overwhelmingly from China, threatens national security, the safety of our troops and American jobs.'' Furthermore, the SASC report found approximately 1,800 cases of counterfeit parts in U.S. Military Aircraft while noting that both defense contractors and the Department of Defense lack an adequate understanding of the depth and severity of the problem. My legislation will ensure that no counterfeit parts ever find their way into any U.S. military aircraft by requiring that these parts be made right here at home. And, for the first time, it will require the Federal Aviation Administration to formulate rules to ensure no counterfeit parts are making their way into passenger aircraft as well. When Operation Iraqi Freedom began in March 2003, a Swiss company stopped shipments of a crucial guidance system component for U.S. smart bombs. Both these incidents could have resulted in U.S. forces being in harm's way without necessary tools to defend themselves. Fortunately, neither incident caused threats to our troops, but they clearly demonstrate the need to protect our production supply lines from being cut, especially in times of war. Similarly, during the first Gulf War, the United States was forced to turn to Japan--not once, but on three separate occasions--for essential parts in the production of the Patriot Missile. Additionally, Mr. Speaker, as one who is very concerned about the state of domestic manufacturing, I strongly believe that the Keep America Secure Act will help re-ignite our high-tech sector. Between 2000 and 2010 the United States lost more than 5 million manufacturing jobs. The Keep America Secure Act would help promote the remaining U.S. high tech firms. We need to rebuild the domestic electronic components industry, and this bill will help us do it. We have spent the last ten years rebuilding Iraq and Afghanistan while continuing to neglect our weakening manufacture sector here at home. Congress must make a commitment to rebuilding our domestic manufacturing base and to ensuring that our courageous defenders continue to have the best equipment available. And as our economy suffers, let us give the manufacturing sector a needed shot in the arm. Unless Congress stands up and puts a halt to it we will eventually be at the mercy of any adversary who controls the manufacturing of our weapons or the critical components of our weapons. Mr. Speaker, in the days to come, I will look to my like-minded friends, on both sides of the aisle, and say to my colleagues: let's work together to keep America secure.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. We all agree that the Tax Code needs to be updated and reformed--and my Democrat colleagues and I are ready to work in a bipartisan manner to accomplish that goal--but the flawed and entirely partisan priorities reflected in this majority's bill make a very bad start. Their principles seem to point in one direction: less fairness and less of the burden shouldered by the people who have the most; fewer brackets, lower top rates, lower corporate taxes, less revenue, and higher deficits. My Democrat colleagues and I have a different vision for tax reform, a vision that is reflected in our alternative proposal today. My amendment would replace the principles found in the majority's bill with a different set of priorities for a fairer and simpler Tax Code. I would like to take a minute to outline these priorities. First, we must identify sources of revenue that, in combination with smart and targeted spending reductions, will provide the long-term means to reduce the national debt significantly while making investments in national priorities such as infrastructure, education, research, and defense, which are critical to the future of American competitiveness and job growth. I would note that nothing in the Republican bill says tax reform needs to lower the deficit or to even hold it level. On the contrary, there are indications that Republican tax reform would make the deficit worse. I think that they believe, along with Vice President Cheney, who memorably said, ``Deficits don't matter.'' My Democrat colleagues and I disagree with that approach. Second, we believe that there should be a rate structure that distributes the tax burden in a more progressive manner. We support a Tax Code that discourages tax avoidance, including the use of entities and accounts in tax haven jurisdictions, such as Swiss bank accounts or assets hidden in Bermuda or the Cayman Islands, all done simply to avoid paying United States taxes. We believe in preserving and improving the provisions of the Tax Code that support middle class homeownership, education, retirement savings, and health care. In addition, we agree that the time has come to repeal the alternative minimum tax, and we want to retain and improve refundable tax credits that encourage work and education while lifting millions of Americans out of poverty. We support eliminating tax breaks for businesses that move jobs and profits overseas in combination with a reduction in tax rates for American manufacturers, which are vital to innovation and job growth-- in other words, reward the people who stay here. Finally, we want to preserve and improve incentives for small business investment and growth. These businesses are the engine of job creation, and we must do all we can to support their success. Mr. Speaker, this Republican bill can be explained in one sentence: House Republicans want special procedures that allow them to force their rightwing legislative agenda through the Senate. Why are we wasting time in trying to change the rules of the Senate-- trying to force the other body to accept partisan Republican priorities--rather than just sitting down together and working out a bipartisan path forward? It's a major question, I think, in this congressional term that, like others have said, is the most poorly productive in history. Our amendment would remove the flawed expedited procedures and misguided Republican principles, and it would replace them with the principles that I have laid out. Let me end by expressing my utter disbelief at how difficult House Republicans are making it to pass the middle class tax cuts right now. They make clear they intend to hold the middle class tax cuts hostage to the tax cuts for the top 2 percent of Americans, though we agree that earnings of $250,000 and below should not see any tax increases. Yesterday, I offered a simple amendment that would say we would delay our departure for the August break until we got this proposal signed into law. It was defeated. Cutting taxes should not be that hard, and I hope my colleagues will join me to support my amendment and to help in our effort to create a fair and simple Tax Code that works for all Americans. I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I have an amendment at the desk.

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, this afternoon, all this discussion is about priorities. As I said, we all agree the Tax Code has to be reformed, but the majority has not come to the floor today with a serious proposal to get us there. My amendment would put us all on record in favor of the priorities of the middle class: more fairness, a simpler Tax Code, a lower deficit, and incentives to keep jobs here in the United States. I ask my colleagues to support my amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. I thank my colleague for yielding me the time, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, under the rule before us today, we will choose between two starkly different visions for America. My Democratic colleagues and I are proposing a simple and fair tax cut for the middle class. This proposal has already passed the Senate. If passed by the House, the legislation could quickly become law. Our tax cut is based upon a simple premise--that it is time for the wealthy and corporations to pay their fair share--no more. Their fair share. Unfortunately, despite agreeing with the tax cuts proposed in our bill, our colleagues on the other side of the aisle are standing in the way of the tax cut becoming law. Instead of passing a commonsense tax cut, the majority is demanding that any tax cut for the middle class be accompanied by an additional tax cut for the richest 2 percent. Their proposal is based upon the disproved theory of trickle-down economics--a failed economic theory that has led to record inequality and a broken Tax Code that is riddled with loopholes and giveaways to the wealthy. For decades, our tax system has been tilted in favor of the wealthy and big corporations--a rigged system that isn't working for most Americans. As just one example, between 2008 and 2010, 30 profitable Fortune 500 companies paid absolutely nothing in Federal taxes, and many more companies and wealthy individuals avoid paying taxes by sheltering the money in bank accounts overseas. This stands in sharp contrast to other moments in American history. In the 1950s, 1960s, 1970s--a 30-year period that saw the creation of the middle class and the realization of the American Dream--top income tax rates often reached levels we wouldn't even dream of today. But despite these tax rates, we saw incredible economic growth and the creation of the strongest middle class on Earth. The middle class grew, in part, because we did not allow the most successful members of our society to dodge their responsibility as American taxpayers. In years since, we've witnessed a purposeful and concerted effort by some to undermine the notion of shared responsibility, which this government was based on. In years since, we've witnessed a purposeful and concerted effort to undermine that. Starting with Reaganomics in the 1980s, a new theory pervaded American politics--a belief that our focus should really be on helping corporations and the wealthy in hopes that they might in return help some of us. Many on the other side of the aisle subscribed to this idea and believed that by providing for the powerful interests first, success would trickle down onto the middle class. What we now know is the theory is simply not true. Today, America is increasingly unequal, millions of jobs have been shipped overseas, and the middle class has been gutted. These results are strong evidence that trickle-down economics have completely and utterly failed. In 2001, President Bush proposed a series of unpaid-for tax cuts that exploded our deficit and put millions of dollars directly into the pockets of the richest families in America, and that's where we are today. At the same time, President Bush claimed that these tax cuts would create jobs. And Vice President Cheney told us not to worry about the cost to our Nation because ``deficits don't matter.'' A decade later, we can see that President Bush and Vice President Cheney couldn't have been more wrong. Under President Bush, our deficit exploded to record levels; and according to FactCheck.org, he created only 1.1 million jobs. In contrast, President Clinton erased our deficit through a balanced tax plan and created 23 million jobs--quite a difference--which brings us back to the legislation that we are considering today. Today, the majority proposes that we continue failed policies by extending the Bush tax cuts for the richest 2 percent. Doing so, Madam Speaker, would cost us nearly $1 trillion over the next 10 years, it would force us to continue borrowing billions of dollars from China, and would force us to make cuts in vital programs like Medicare and student loans. To continue the failed status quo is a disservice to the American people that we represent. It is high time that we start making our Tax Code fair for those who work hard and play by the rules--not just the wealthy who lobby hard and rewrite the rules. We can do that by passing a simple and fair tax cut for the middle class today. Unlike the proposal from the majority, the Democratic proposal to cut taxes for the middle class is something that both sides already agree on. The majority's strategy of holding middle class tax cuts hostage in exchange for tax cuts for the top 2 percent is outrageous, and it must end. Far too often, the majority has pursued a partisan and zero-sum ideology that has led this Congress down dead-end roads. We've seen it over and over again, whether it's the majority's proposal to end Medicare as we know it, or their inability to avoid a downgrade--the first in our Nation's history--in our credit. Unfortunately, their proposal today is yet another partisan piece of legislation that will never become law. Indeed, the President has already said that he will veto the majority's proposal if it ever reaches his desk. When faced with these two starkly different proposals--one, a noncontroversial and commonsense tax cut for the middle class; the other, a partisan tax cut to benefit the richest 2 percent--it's clear what we should do. I urge my colleagues to provide a fair and simple tax cut to all Americans--because the rich will benefit too--while standing up for the financial security and prosperity of the middle class. Why would we continue a program we know has failed? I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. SLAUGHTER. I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro).

Ms. SLAUGHTER. I yield the gentlewoman another minute.

Ms. SLAUGHTER. The real issue here today is: Are we going to continue something that we know utterly failed? More than 10 years ago, this deal was made with corporations that we would cut the tax rate and that they would produce jobs. We didn't get the jobs. Half of it didn't work. Why would a country as intelligent as ours want to continue that failed policy? We are at a critical crossroads here, and we had better this time get it right. In that regard, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer), a member of the Committee on Ways and Means.

Ms. SLAUGHTER. I think I must say that 97 percent of small businesses in America will not be affected at all. With that, I'm pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews). (Mr. ANDREWS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Ms. SLAUGHTER. I will be happy to yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentleman from New Jersey.

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Madam Speaker, I'm pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Vermont (Mr. Welch).

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Engel).

Ms. SLAUGHTER. I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Cohen).