Jan Schakowsky

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I would like to honor Alderman Mary Ann Smith, who represented Chicago's wonderful 48th Ward for 21 years before her retirement this May. Alderman Smith has dedicated over 30 years of her life to public service. As Alderman, she was especially active in public safety, community- directed development, transit and walkability, lakefront planning, animal rights, health care, seniors' issues, affordable housing and public sector accountability. Her recent groundbreaking advocacy to combat Medicare and Medicaid fraud and the exploitation of the mentally ill has helped make nursing homes and our communities safer. Alderman Smith was chair of the City Council Committee on Chicago Parks where she worked to restructure the Chicago Park District and its management, improve programming, secure the parks and increase access to recreation for all Chicagoans with an emphasis on teenagers and youth. She was also a member of the City Council Committees on Traffic Control and Safety, Buildings, Rules and Ethics, Budget, Finance, Historical Landmark Preservation, License and Consumer Protection and the Mayoral Task Forces on Lake Michigan and on Transportation. She served on the city's Advisory Council on Chicago ``Green'' development and as a commissioner of both the Northeastern Illinois Plan Commission and the Chicago Plan Commission. Mary Ann is extremely proud of the diversity of the 48th Ward. She worked to integrate immigrant groups into the mainstream business, financial and social structure of the neighborhood. An early supporter of the Human Rights Ordinance, she interacted closely with advocacy groups to protect the rights of all people. She served as vice chair of the Illinois Citizens for Better Care, a group which advocates for nursing home residents' rights and was founder of the Committee Against Nursing Home Election Fraud. Internationally recognized as a leader on building livable communities and protecting the environment, particularly around Chicago's lakefront, Alderman Smith represented the city of Chicago on the International Council on Local Environmental Initiatives. She served as vice-chair of the City Council Subcommittee on the Chicago Lakefront, as a vice-chair of the Lake Michigan Federation (now the Alliance for the Great Lakes), and was a founding member of PCB's Gone. Her leadership on environmental issues earned her a United Nations Environment Programme Award for Citizen Action to Protect the Global Environment and a fellowship from the German Marshall Fund of the United States to study urban planning in several European cities. Alderman Smith's commitment to employ new alternative energy and flood control technologies in the 48th Ward includes the installation of the nation's first water-permeable alley in 2001 and the creation of rain gardens. Her work on public safety and transportation in the community include unsnarling long-standing traffic and transportation problems. She was instrumental in helping to organize the state's first city/suburban traffic and transportation and in obtaining funding for a project to improve pedestrian safety and neighborhood walkability. Alderman Smith is a passionate advocate against cruelty to animals, and, in response to information about the cruel treatment of elephants by trainers, she introduced legislation that would outlaw the use of disciplinary methods that inflict pain and/or cause injury to the animal. I have had the pleasure of sharing an office with Alderman Smith since 1999, and our offices have collaborated closely on issues and projects including environmental concerns, animal rights, community safety, nursing homes and seniors, education, and youth. I consider her a treasured friend and wish her fulfillment and success as she embarks in a new direction. Mary Ann and her husband Ronald, a professor at John Marshall Law School who recently served as chairman of the American Bar Association Criminal Justice Section, have lived in the Edgewater and Uptown communities for more than 30 years. They have two sons, Michael, a software engineer in Portland, Oregon, and Matthew, a clinical psychologist who also lives in the 48th Ward, and many beloved pets.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Chair, on rollcall No. 344, had I been present, I would have voted, ``no.'' Amendment No. 24 Offered by Mr. Sarbanes

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. We're talking about poor seniors and middle class people. Don't support this plan. Announcement by the Acting Chair

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. I am getting a real kick out of this debate. I really am. You know, we hear one after another of my Republican colleagues coming up here and self-righteously talking about ending the demagoguery and we should end the TV ads. And I just want to remind you that through the 2010 elections, the Republicans went on television and, yes, how about demagogued, the issue of Medicare, saying that Democrats wanted to cut $500 billion from Medicare. Well, let's talk about the truth. We were challenged, just a little while ago: What is your plan? Well, here was our plan to save Medicare and that was to say in The Affordable Care Act, yes, we are going to cut subsidies to the insurance companies that meant that we were bilking the government and the taxpayers, and we were having to overpay them, and, yes, we are going to cut waste and fraud from the Medicare program. And that's how we are going to save $500 billion. But not only would we not cut a single penny from benefits, but we were actually able to increase benefits while trimming Medicare. We, you know--so you scared the heck out of seniors but never mentioned, of course, at the same time we reduced the cost of Medicare. We improved Medicare by adding to its solvency; we closed the doughnut hole, making prescription drugs more affordable; and we provided a wellness exam every year at no cost; and we provided preventive services with no cost sharing. But nevertheless, on television, those ads warned against those Democrats who didn't cut one thing from Medicare and improve it. And now you are saying, well, we are not going to do anything to people 55 and under. To me that sounds like 55 and under, you better look out. Now, the ads in New York are working because people love their Medicare. And what they don't want to see, you know, all but four Republicans voted to literally end Medicare. You can call it something else, but you can't call it Medicare because those guaranteed benefits are gone. It makes huge cuts in Medicare benefits. Seniors that fall under the new plan would have to pay about $6,000 more a year. That's what the Congressional Budget Office says, $6,000 more a year out of pocket for their health care, and it would put insurance company bureaucrats in charge of seniors' health care, letting insurers decide what tests and what treatment that seniors get, throwing seniors back into the arms of the insurance companies who have shown no love to them. And so let's look at what the American people think about Medicare. Well, if you are 65 years and older, 93 percent of Americans say the Medicare program as it is right now is very important or somewhat important to them, actually 83 percent very important. If they are 55 to 64, 91 percent say Medicare is very important; and if you are 40 to 54, we have got 79 percent of Americans who say the Medicare program is very or somewhat important; and if you are 18 to 39, 75 percent. People get it. Medicare works. Medicare is efficient. Medicare is good for our country, for people with disabilities and for the seniors. And if we are looking to save Medicare, we do have a plan. We know how to make that more efficient. We have done it in the Affordable Care Act. And we are willing to sit down and talk about how we make Medicare more efficient, but not by ruining, destroying and getting rid of Medicare to the point that you've got to find another name. It won't be Medicare anymore. And so they've admitted, it seems to me, that people 55 and younger, you better look out. Because that program that will allow our seniors to live perhaps to 90 years old, people who are going to be eligible for Medicare as it is right now will no longer be in place. And we are not talking about rich people----

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. I move to strike the last word.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize National Teacher Appreciation week and the extraordinary work done by America's teachers to provide students with the knowledge and skills they will need to compete and thrive in the 21st century. Every day, hard working men and women go into the classroom to prepare our children for a successful future. For this, they deserve not just our utmost gratitude and respect but fair and adequate compensation. Instead, teachers and other public workers across the nation are under attack. Earlier this year, I went to Wisconsin to lend support for teachers and other state workers who are not only fighting cutbacks in salaries and benefits but the loss of long-standing collective bargaining rights. Fortunately, in Wisconsin and other states, people are turning out in large numbers to show opposition to those attacks and demonstrate support for teachers and public employees. Rather than demonize teachers, it is imperative that we recognize the essential role they play in our society not only this week but throughout the year. President Obama has spoken at length about America's need to ``Win the Future.'' As our nation looks to achieve that objective, we must not lose sight of the fact that nothing has a more direct impact on student achievement than having a great teacher in the classroom. As a former elementary school teacher, I know just the teaching profession is both rewarding and challenging. I encourage every American to take a moment this week to thank a teacher for the incredible work they are doing to make our nation a better place.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to celebrate Yom Ha'atzmaut, Israel's Independence Day, and to mark the 6314 anniversary of the founding of the state of Israel. Despite enduring decades of war and terror, Israel has emerged as a strong and vibrant democracy, a close U.S. friend and ally, and a global leader in technology, energy, and scientific innovation. For me, as a Jew, ties to Israel are very personal. Growing up, I saved my money to buy tree certificates to help make the Israeli desert bloom. As a member of Congress, I continue to be a strong supporter of the State of Israel, of a vibrant U.S.-Israel relationship, and of a peaceful and secure future for Israel and the entire region. The U.S.-Israel relationship, begun a mere minutes after Israel's founding, remains critically important to both our nations. Based on shared values and interests, this deep and abiding friendship is as important now as ever, in the face of international threats and a growing tide of delegitimization. In February, I traveled to Israel with the Jewish United Fund of Metropolitan Chicago. In addition to discussions about regional developments and critical security issues, I also had the opportunity to learn more about Israel's excellent social programs as well as cutting edge research into green technology. As with previous trips to Israel, I left with both great pride and a renewed hope for a lasting peace solution. Today, we mark the 63rd anniversary of the founding of the state of Israel, our steadfast friend, ally, and partner, and we reaffirm the unbreakable bonds between our two countries.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 3, the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act. House Republicans are waging a war against women and they have made their extreme and dangerous agenda clear--to undermine women's access to reproductive health care. H.R. 3 is a radical attack on women and their reproductive rights. It extends unprecedented limitation on access to abortions, and it singles out and punishes women who want access to this legal service. Do not be confused. H.R. 3 goes far beyond current law--which is already highly restrictive, and which I oppose. The Hyde Amendment already prohibits women enrolled in Medicaid and Medicare, federal employees, women serving in the military, women in federal prisons, Peace Corps volunteers, and women seeking care under the Indian Health Services Act from getting the care they need. Its very narrow exceptions do not even give women facing severe health conditions like cancer access to medically necessary abortion care so they can receive chemotherapy treatment. One of the original goals of this legislation was to narrow the already harmful Hyde exceptions even further. The bill's sponsors tried to redefine rape and incest--to take us back to a time when saying ``no'' wasn't enough. Public outcry at this mean-spirited and hurtful attempt to make it harder for survivors of rape and incest to access coverage for abortion services forced its removal. Unfortunately, based on the House Judiciary Committee Report accompanying H.R. 3, some members of this chamber are still intent on narrowing the rape exception. This bill is both hurtful and offensive. H.R. 3 expands an unfair, punitive policy that is dangerous to women's health and applies it to millions of women and men in the private insurance market. No one should be limited in terms of their access to safe and legal abortion. This legislation redefines the concept of ``government funding'' far beyond the current common understanding. It prohibits even private and nonfederal government funds from being spent on any activity remotely related to the provision of abortion--any time federal money is involved in funding or subsidizing other, nonabortion-related care. This legislation increases taxes on small businesses with abortion coverage in their private insurance plans. For decades, small businesses have been fighting insurance company premium demands and struggling to maintain health insurance coverage for their employees. Many of those small businesses--1 in 3--are owned by women, but this bill affects both men and women. The Affordable Care Act provides small businesses with tax credits to help make health insurance both accessible and affordable. Those tax credits are available now. Today, they are worth up to 35 percent of health insurance premium costs. By 2014, they will be worth up to 50 percent. The Republicans have already passed legislation to repeal the Affordable Care Act--taking away tax credits from small business owners and employees who need help. Repeal is bound to fail. But H.R. 3 takes another course--it would repeal this benefit for any small business insurance policy that includes coverage of abortions. Small business owners will face an unfair and discriminatory choice. If they need the tax credit to make coverage for themselves and their employees affordable, they will need to drop the abortion benefit. If they want to keep the benefit, they will have to go without the tax credit--raising their costs and taking away money that could be used to expand their business and maybe hire another employee. H.R. 3 will raise taxes on millions of small businesses. Nearly 90 percent of private health insurance policies offer abortion coverage and this is a blatant attempt to force employers to drop abortion coverage from their private health insurance plans. Now is the time to work on the issues that are most important to Americans--creating jobs and improving the economy--rather than punishing small businesses and workers through legislation that takes health care away from women. American women will suffer if this bill becomes law.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to Chicago Alderman Helen Shiller, who has been the Alderman of the 46th Ward since 1987. Alderman Shiller is retiring after 24 years of dedicated service to the residents of the 46th Ward and the City of Chicago. She is a tireless, passionate advocate for her constituents and for the community. She has been an especially powerful champion for those whose voices too often go unheard--the poor, immigrants, those who need affordable housing or shelter, the hungry. Alderman Shiller is the Chair of the Chicago City Council's Committee on Human Relations, where she has a long and outstanding record of achievement. She played a key role in the passage of the human rights ordinance, recycling programs and city responsibility for public health and safety in the Chicago Public Schools. She initiated and passed a tough anti-apartheid ordinance in 1990. Her budget amendment tripled the city's AIDS budget in 1992. She co-sponsored the domestic partners ordinance extending benefits for unmarried couples. Throughout her aldermanic career, Alderman Shiller has fought for affordable housing and for city budget investments to make Chicago a more affordable place to live. A strong voice for sustainability and green technologies, Alderman Shiller took the lead on a voluntary pilot program for multi-unit residential building recycling and created a task force to improve the city's recycling program. She is an advocate for LEED certification in all planned developments as well as in other development projects throughout the city. In 1989, Alderman Shiller sponsored a resolution that created a sub- committee to focus on ways to end domestic violence. As a result of her leadership, the city now funds domestic violence counseling centers and programs for supervised visitations. Alderman Shiller has continuously worked to keep the 46th Ward both economically and culturally diverse, while at the same time working to develop virtually every area of the ward. It is important to Alderman Shiller that the 46th Ward continue to be defined by its unique mix of people with very different economic and cultural backgrounds. She has worked on many models to retain this diversity and, with the City's Department of Housing, developed the Planned Purchase Price Assistance Program (now called CPAN), which provides opportunities for home ownership for working families. Alderman Shiller led a comprehensive and inclusive community planning process resulting in the development of affordable housing and thriving retail development at Wilson Yard in the heart of Uptown. Helen Shiller received her high school diploma from Woodstock Country School in Vermont in 1965. She attended the University of Wisconsin at Madison as a history major and received her BA in 1969. In 2005, she graduated from DePaul University's School for New Learning's Master's Program where her focus was public policy. I am confident that Helen will continue to contribute to her community and city. I wish her the very best, and I am proud to call her my friend.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I rise to commemorate Holocaust Remembrance Day, or Yom Hashoah, and to pay tribute to the men, women, and children murdered by the Nazis during the Holocaust. This week, we pause to join in solidarity with people around the world to remember one of the darkest chapters in human history. During the Holocaust, six million Jews were killed, and countless others were brutalized, raped, dehumanized, and robbed. The world pledged ``Never Again'' would such a tragedy be allowed to occur, but over sixty years later we continue to fight anti-Semitism and other forms of hatred and intolerance, even genocide. The Days of Remembrance hold a deep meaning for me, as a Jew, and for my community. My district, the 9th Congressional District of Illinois, is home to one of the largest concentrations of Holocaust survivors in the country. An estimated 3,500 Holocaust survivors live in the Chicago area, including the Village of Skokie, which boasts a vibrant Jewish community built by survivors in the 1940s and 50s. The community recently celebrated the opening of the new Illinois Holocaust Museum and Education Center, a state of the art facility dedicated to preserving the memory of the Holocaust. This year, we also mark the 65th anniversary of the verdicts at the first of the Nuremberg trials, as well as the 50th anniversary of the trial of Adolf Eichmann. By holding the perpetrators of genocide legally accountable for their heinous crimes, those trials were defining moments in the evolution of international justice. The trials also produced a comprehensive record of the Holocaust by collecting both documentary evidence and survivor testimony. In a world where genocide and other massive violations of human rights are far too prevalent, it is critical that we preserve the history of the Holocaust and the memories of survivors and other witnesses. This week, we pause to remember all those who perished, honor those who survived, and redouble our pledge to fight genocide, intolerance, and persecution wherever they occur.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to H.R. 1214. School-based health centers are a critical component of our nation's health care safety net. More than 1,900 school-based health centers across the country provide access to care to nearly two million students. Centers in high schools in my district like Maine East, Evanston Township, and Sullivan and Senn in Chicago, ensure that students can get access to primary, mental, and dental health services. School-based health centers are often the only source of health care for many children and adolescents who would otherwise go without needed services, and services are provided regardless of students' ability to pay. They offer treatment to students who lack insurance or whose parents are unable to take time off work to take them to the doctor. They keep children from missing school, and they ensure that children's health care needs are met. Studies have shown that school-based health centers decrease emergency room visits and Medicaid expenditures while improving grades, school attendance, and graduation rates. The Affordable Care Act provides grants for construction, renovation, and equipment for school-based health centers to increase access--this bill denies access. If we are concerned about providing our children with access to health care--we must reject this bill.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 3. You know, Republicans say that they are for smaller government, but that ends when it comes to women. In order to curtail women's reproductive rights, it isn't enough to prevent the public dollars from helping poor women end a dangerous or unplanned pregnancy. That's already the law: no public money for abortions. But now they are going to raise taxes on small businesses, telling them that if they offer a health plan for men or women that has the gall to cover abortions--and, by the way, that's about 90 percent of plans that cover all legal procedures--then they can no longer get a tax break for offering such a plan. Raising taxes on businesses that offer comprehensive health plans, that's the bill that's up today. Now, even private money of individuals, both men and women, and businesses will now face a new tax. So, so much for small government and lower taxes that the Republicans talk about.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 3, the so-called No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act. But don't be confused. H.R. 3 goes far beyond current law which is already highly restrictive and, frankly, which I oppose. The Hyde amendment already prohibits women enrolled in Medicaid and Medicare, Federal employees, women serving in the military, women in Federal prisons, Peace Corps volunteers, and women seeking care under the Indian Health Services Act from getting the care they need. In other words, there is no Federal funding for abortion. But actually what it does do, among other things, is attack small businesses. Let's hear the words of Frank Knapp, Jr., president and CEO of the South Carolina Small Business Chamber of Commerce with 5,000 members. Here is what he says: H.R. 3 is an attempt to roll back the historic small business health insurance tax credit created by the Affordable Care Act. When the House voted to eliminate and defeat the entire Affordable Care Act, we--he means small businesses--could rationalize that this great benefit for small businesses was just collateral damage. My own Congressman told me he would support the small business health insurance tax credits in the Affordable Care Act replacement legislation. But small businesses can no longer think of themselves as collateral damage. Mr. Knapp says: Let me make this very clear. A vote for H.R. 3 is a direct attack on small business. Every Representative who loudly proclaims their love for small businesses because they are the backbone of the economy now can put their vote where their mouth is. Their true support for small business will be judged by their ``no'' vote on H.R. 3. I urge all my colleagues not to let this phony use of the Tax Code to take away the rights of small businesses that get tax credits or individuals to pay for abortions with their own money.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to H.R. 1213. This bill would eliminate funding for a key component of the Affordable Care Act's coverage expansion--the State-based health insurance Exchanges. The Exchanges are the chief vehicle through which we will give millions of individuals and small businesses--currently locked out of the market--access to affordable coverage. The Affordable Care Act provides each State with the flexibility to design its own Exchange--tailored to meet the needs of its residents, strengthen the private insurance market, and provide consumer protections. This bill repeals the funding for the Exchanges and eliminates that flexibility. Repeal would deny Illinois and every other State the funding needed to setup a unique State solution for improving and fixing broken insurance markets. This bill undermines the work already being done in Illinois and, given the State budget situation, will likely mean Illinois would be unable to run its own State-based health insurance Exchange. In September, Illinois received a $1 million grant to begin planning and establishing its Exchange. Without funding to move to implementation, we won't have the resources to get our Exchange up and running and millions of Illinoisans will lose access to affordable, adequate health insurance coverage.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Polish Constitution Day and to commemorate the signing of Europe's first codified constitution on May 3, 1791. Three years after the adoption of our own constitution, Poland became the second nation in the world to codify a constitution. Under the leadership of King Stanislaw August, Poland approved a constitution that contained many of the groundbreaking democratic principles also embraced by America's founding fathers. Among those was the separation of legislative, executive, and judicial powers. The constitution also placed peasants under the protection of the government and established the concept of political equality. Since the adoption of the 1791 Constitution, Poland has withstood countless hardships to emerge as a strong U.S. friend and ally. Here in the United States, Polish-Americans have made critical contributions to the development of our nation. This weekend, the city of Chicago's vibrant Polish community, the largest outside of Warsaw, will hold its 120th annual parade in honor of this historic document. I join with people in the United States, Poland, and around the world in commemorating the anniversary of this historic document, celebrating Polish history, and recognizing the important contributions that the Polish people have made to the development of democracy.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Finally, the United States of America made real the possibility of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness--all of which are literally impossible unless health care is a right for all in our great country. This resolution goes in the opposite direction. A vote in favor of this resolution tells Americans and small businesses that they will be left to do battle with insurance companies on their own, insurance companies that will once again refuse coverage, deny claims, and subject them to double-digit premium increases. And under their budget plan, they now want to end Medicare and leave seniors and disabled people to the mercy of private insurers. Enough is enough.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, House Republicans have made their extreme agenda abundantly clear--undermine women's access to reproductive health care and attack the local women's health providers they rely on to provide cancer screenings, routine gynecological examinations, contraceptive services, immunizations, and testing and treatment for sexually-transmitted infections. One in five American women has received care from a Planned Parenthood health center at some point in her life, making it one of the largest women's health care providers in the country. Planned Parenthood clinics serve over 3 million Americans every year and plays a critical role in our Nation's health care system. The Republican budget would deny them any funding. Bonnie S. from Evanston, IL, wrote: ``I found myself without health care in my early twenties even though I was still working. I was in a committed, long-term relationship and needed birth control and a yearly pap smear. Planned Parenthood was my main healthcare provider for nearly ten years.'' ``I have only had one sexual partner in my life. I have never had an abortion. Without Planned Parenthood, I would not have been able to afford birth control and a yearly pap smear, things that no woman should have to go without. I'm sure there are many women out there with a story like mine. Stopping funding for Planned Parenthood would be a horrible thing.'' Lesley W. from Evanston, IL, wrote: ``I was shocked and horrified to learn that Congress has voted to defund Planned Parenthood. As an 18 year old college freshman, Planned Parenthood was the difference for me between getting reliable, high quality birth control and gynecological care, and leaving my reproductive health to chance. Now at age 49, married and a mother, I credit Planned Parenthood with giving me the tools for a healthy and responsible sex life. I never had an unplanned pregnancy. I never got an STD. When AIDS came around, I knew how to protect myself and my partners. Planned Parenthood may well have saved my life, as it has saved the lives of thousands of women (and men) over the years. To not fund it is not only cruel and unethical, it is remarkably short sighted. How many more unplanned pregnancies, abortions, and STDs will we now see? How many young women will avoid prenatal care because they are afraid of a gynecologist's office? How many will avoid screenings for cervical cancer?'' ``Planned Parenthood was there when I needed it, and I want it to be there for my daughter and the next generation of young women. It plays a crucial role in our national healthcare, and must be funded.'' Poll after poll has shown that Americans support the work of Planned Parenthood centers because investing in commonsense, proven, effective prevention and primary health care is smart health policy. Republicans need to stop attacking Planned Parenthood and they need to end their war on women's health.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. I thank the gentleman for yielding. The Republicans are trying to claim the mantle of fiscal responsibility today. It's just ridiculous. They are the party responsible for a decade of fiscal recklessness with two unpaid-for wars, two unpaid-for tax cuts, and a blind eye to Wall Street leading to a disastrous recession. And as the President said yesterday, ``There's nothing serious about a plan that claims to reduce the deficit by spending $1 trillion on tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires.'' This chart illustrates that, from 1979 to 2005, the bottom 20 percent of households saw their incomes increase by a grand total of $200. Over the same period, the top .1 percent here in the red saw income growth of nearly $6 million each year. There is nothing courageous about a plan that would protect the wealthy and Big Oil and big corporations that ship jobs overseas at the expense of elderly and their Medicare and their Medicaid and the disabled and children. The Republican budget resolution does not reflect the values of Americans, and I urge my colleagues to reject it soundly.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Here they go again. The Republicans failed in their efforts to repeal the Affordable Care Act, and now they are reversing course and trying to cripple implementation by attacking individual provisions of the law. The United States has a health care system designed to treat the sick, not to prevent disease from occurring in the first place. The Prevention and Public Health Fund is a crucial component of the health reform law's effort to remedy that weakness and transform today's sick care system into a prevention-focused health system. The Prevention and Public Health Fund will avert future illness, save lives and restrain the rate of growth of health care costs. It's a dedicated investment in community prevention and is a much-needed down payment on the health and economic well-being of all Americans. Federal investments from the Prevention and Public Health Fund have already begun to address improvements in the Nation's health status by supporting essential and proven prevention activities, such as immunization--immunization and tobacco cessation. The Prevention and Public Health Fund holds great promise to improve the capacities of State and local health departments to protect communities from health threats through the use of technology. It will increase numbers of highly skilled scientists and other public health professionals. I want to be very clear, and you've heard it yourselves. This is simply another attempt by Republicans to defund the Affordable Care Act and stop its implementation. I urge my colleagues to vote against this bill to repeal the Prevention and Public Health Fund.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. You know, budgets aren't just about a series of numbers. Budgets fundamentally are moral documents. And I fear that Republicans have made clear that their moral compass puts the wealthy and big business ahead of the American middle class, our seniors, disabled, and poor. In order to pay for an enormous tax cut for millionaires and billionaires, they are ready to abolish the guarantee of Medicare. In order to protect tax cuts for the oil industry, they would cut Medicaid, resulting in seniors and the disabled being forced out of nursing homes and causing poor children to lose health care coverage or pay more. In order to pay for tax cuts for businesses that ship American jobs overseas, they would cut investments in education and job training programs. The Republican budget does not represent Americans' core values and should be rejected.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. One of the things that they say, that Paul Ryan says, We all have to sacrifice. Shared sacrifice. I believe in that. I think that's a good idea. But some people have been sacrificing for a long time. If you drew another line starting at the bottom left and going to the top right of productivity increases in the United States, that line would shoot way up because we have the most productive workers in the world. Productivity has soared. And yet where have the benefits gone for our more productive workers? Right here. And it has been deliberate, and it's been based on policies that have passed in the Congress, a partnership between government that's been hand-in-hand with the wealthiest Americans. And the rest of America--and you know what, the other thing is if you started up here and tracked union membership, you would find that line going straight down. When workers, as 62 percent of Americans agree is a good thing, have collective bargaining, they're able to help raise the middle class instead of having a disappearing middle class, which is what's happening now.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Yeah. Take it from Medicare and give them a tax break. And, by the way, the top tax bracket in the United States of America right now starts at $375,000. So if you make $27 million or $375,000, you're still paying the same tax rate. What I did was say, okay, let's make the taxes fairer. I said, starting at $1 million--that's earning in 1 year--45 percent tax rate. And it would ratchet up, $10 to $20 million, $20 to $100 million, $100 million to $1 billion, and then a $1 billion tax bracket. And you know what? There are Americans who have made $1 billion last year. The top 20 hedge fund managers, an average of over $1 billion a year. One guy made over $5 billion in 1 year. I'm saying those billionaires, that top tax bracket, 49 percent taxes. And guess what? That is lower than the tax rate in all the Reagan years. I'm under Ronald Reagan's highest tax bracket. It's fair. This is not about punishment. It's not about revenge. It's certainly not about jealousy. It is about fairness in our tax system. And we would have plenty of money here. We wouldn't have to cut Medicare, of course we wouldn't. We wouldn't have to cut Medicaid, the poorest people off their health care. We wouldn't have to threaten seniors with cuts in Social Security benefits. And we could fund those job training programs to put people back to work. We could even fund infrastructure programs that put people on the job, or green energy programs that make America a leader in the world. We could do all those things. We are not broke as a people. So my Fairness in Taxation Act, I hope people will sign on as cosponsors. Eighty-one percent of Americans think it's a good idea. We have to have the courage to follow--listen to people out there, and follow

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Just the people who need it, right? Just the people who need a tax break. Isn't that astonishing that they should actually pay less?

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Yes.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. I am so happy to join you. And I thank you for coming down to the floor each week and making the point that we have choices in the United States of America. We can put our people back to work. We can reduce our debt and our deficit, but we don't have to do it on the backs of middle class Americans, and we certainly don't have to do it on the backs of our elderly. That's exactly what the budget proposal by our Republican Budget Chairman Paul Ryan says. He said, look, the country is broke. We've got to just show courage and we've got to cut that deficit--we agree with that--and the way that we think we ought to do it is by ending Medicare as we know it, by abolishing Medicare. Instead of that guaranteed benefit that all older Americans can aspire to now, can get when they're 65 years old, that persons with disabilities would get, they know that it's there--and I cannot imagine that there is not every single Member of this House, Republican or Democrat, where people come in and say, I hope I can make it until I'm 65 and get on Medicare because I can't get insurance, and even if I could, I can't afford it right now or I have a preexisting condition. He wants to do it on the backs of senior citizens. It's been said many times tonight that 700,000 jobs would be lost if H.R. 1--the top priority of the Republicans--were to pass, that the cuts that it would make, instead of spurring on jobs, creating jobs, putting the 15 million people that want to pay taxes--that's all they want is to go back to work and actually pay taxes, that that would be their dream come true, and it would also cut our deficit. But you know what the American people are thinking? They're thinking, We aren't broke--maybe we are, but not everyone is broke in America. This is a sign that my staff made before I introduced a bill with an idea supported by 81 percent of Americans that it is time for millionaires and billionaires to pay their fair share; 81 percent of Americans. That means it's not just Democrats and it's not just Republicans. It's Independents, and I believe that it's Tea Party people, too. They know that they are not getting a fair shake and that the millionaires are. Did you explain the chart?