Adrian Smith

Mr. SMITH of Nebraska

Mr. SMITH of Nebraska. Madam Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Again, I would like to take this time to thank my colleagues for taking the time to consider the reauthorization of this important program. The MIECHV Program has bipartisan support due to its focus on achieving real results for families. This program works because its funding is tied to real evidence. It is imperative that we continue this program in a responsible way, partnering with States to increase the program's success. I might repeat that for emphasis. It is imperative that we continue this program in a responsible way--a reasonable way, I will add--as we partner with States to increase the program's success. This bill shows how we can prioritize our Federal spending, focusing on programs with evidence that shows they actually work. I look forward to moving this bill forward to reauthorize the MIECHV Program so more Americans can get the help they need to get ahead. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SMITH of Nebraska. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. SMITH of Nebraska. Madam Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Chair, this amendment seeks to establish a careful balance between two competing views in regards to where and how home visiting programs should be operated. The law requires States to operate home visiting programs in areas of highest need. However, some States expressed concern that they have been required to operate home visiting programs in areas where they were likely to fail, as they were not permitted to take into account staff and community resources and other requirements of a home visiting model when choosing where to operate. In the bill I introduced with my colleagues, we allowed States to take these considerations into account, and States were generally pleased with this change. However, since the introduction of the bill, we have received additional feedback that some changes might be needed to make sure States could take into account these factors but not simply avoid serving actual areas with the highest need, including rural areas and remote areas that I represent, as well as others. During the Ways and Means markup of this bill, Representative Sewell offered an amendment to address this problem. Although we did not include her actual amendment in the reported bill, as we did not have enough time to review it and consider any unintended consequences, Representative Sewell and I have been able to review her proposal since the markup and discuss its implications. I am pleased today to offer this bipartisan amendment to address the concerns she and others have raised. Specifically, this amendment, combined with the language in the underlying bill, allows States to take into account staffing, community resources, and other requirements when determining how to operate their home visiting programs, while requiring that they operate at least one home visiting model in those communities with a high need for services. This ensures States do not shy away from some of the most difficult areas, which are often those that need home visiting services the most. I am glad we have been able to work together on this bipartisan amendment, and I urge my colleagues to support the amendment as well as the underlying bill. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SMITH of Nebraska. Mr. Chairman, again, I am grateful that Ms. Sewell and I could work together to come up with this amendment. I certainly urge its adoption as we do move forward with the bill. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SMITH of Nebraska. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. SMITH of Nebraska. Mr. Chairman, since the creation of the MIECHV Program, States have been required to demonstrate their home visiting programs result in measurable improvements in six benchmark areas specified in the law. One of the benchmark areas States can choose to focus on is ``improvements in family economic self-sufficiency.'' Yet, as the result of changes made last year under the prior Presidential administration, ``economic self-sufficiency'' no longer means what you think it means--increasing work and earnings. Instead, it was defined as whether you have health insurance or are in school. Clearly, this is not what Congress meant when the program was created and included the concept of economic self-sufficiency. So this bill would make sure that States, if they choose to focus on family economic self-sufficiency as one of the four benchmarks of the six, would measure employment and earnings as a part of that metric. Again, States can choose among six different benchmarks when they decide which home visiting programs to operate and what goals they would like to achieve within those previously established by Congress. They don't have to choose this metric, as I mentioned earlier. However, when they do explicitly set out to increase economic self-sufficiency-- emphasis on the economic--information on work and earnings must be part of what is measured to determine whether they have achieved their goal. I believe it is absolutely critical that this intent be restored in the law. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment and support the underlying bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SMITH of Nebraska. Mr. Chairman, again, I urge my colleagues to oppose the amendment as well as support the underlying bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SMITH of Nebraska. Mr. Chairman, I support this amendment, the Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting Program, that is designed to serve families with young children living in communities at risk of a range of negative outcomes. Today, HHS allocates money for MIECHV based on the share of children under age 5 in families at or below 100 percent of the Federal poverty line living in each State and territory. It is imperative that the distribution of funds is done using the most accurate and up-to-date information so we can use our limited resources to target those most in need. I thank the sponsors of this amendment, Representatives Murphy, Gonzalez-Colon, and Velazquez, for bringing this issue to our attention and for offering this amendment. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SMITH of Nebraska. Mr. Chairman, I urge support of this amendment and the underlying bill so that we can help children. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SMITH of Nebraska. Mr. Chair, I move that the Committee do now rise.

Mr. SMITH of Nebraska

Mr. SMITH of Nebraska. Mr. Speaker, I claim the time in opposition to the motion to recommit the pending bill.

Mr. SMITH of Nebraska. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the motion to recommit. This bill is the result of an open process. In fact, several amendments were agreed to--in fact, one sponsored by my colleague who just spoke--and so I think we should reject this procedural motion so we can move on to pass a good underlying bill with modest reforms. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SMITH of Nebraska

Mr. SMITH of Nebraska. Mr. Chair, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall No. 513. Amendment No. 186 Offered by Mr. Ellison

Mr. SMITH of Nebraska

Mr. SMITH of Nebraska. Mr. Speaker, I thank Congressman Arrington for yielding. It is great to join him and others here this evening to really celebrate rural America. A lot happens in rural America. Oftentimes, it kind of flies under the radar. That is okay. That is generally the way rural Americans like it. It is interesting. As I represent the 75 counties of Nebraska's Third District, it is part of two different time zones and just a diverse perspective there of many different Nebraskans. I would say that anecdotally, at least, the most common request among my constituents is to be left alone. And it is interesting that when we talk about policies like waters of the U.S. or various--healthcare, interestingly, you know, a lot of promises were made there that haven't panned out, and so I am grateful that I can represent so many Nebraskans who are focused on solutions, and I seek to really reflect their ideas as solutions here in Washington. Obviously, there is a lot happening now. I would say all too much or all too often there is so much bickering that we can't get to the solutions that we know will help the American people. I am proud to represent the top producing agriculture district in the country, and of course, with 75 counties, we have a lot of production, whether it is livestock, whether it is row crops. I am happy to have helped start the Modern Agriculture Caucus, and I am grateful for colleagues participating in this effort to focus on new ways of doing things in terms of agriculture. We know that, obviously, agriculture has been around a long time, and things change. Resources can change oftentimes, but I am glad that we can focus on new ways of doing things that we know are good for the environment. We conserve resources, natural resources and others, as we focus on research that has led to increased yields for our crops so that we can help feed the world. We know that many countries around the world look to America as leaders in agriculture, especially production agriculture, and so I am glad to help reflect to those successes, help celebrate those successes. Who would have thought that not so long ago, who would have thought that today, we can have record yields amidst a drought. That not only helps producers, that helps consumers, and that literally helps every person around the world. And America is a big country, we know that, and oftentimes there seems to be somewhat of a disconnect between rural America and urban America. Interestingly, I like to share this story. There was a very well- meaning civil servant who visited rural Nebraska a while back, and we were touring part of Nebraska. We turned onto a gravel road, and this well-meaning individual said it had been about 20 years since he traveled on a gravel road. I don't think there was any intended disrespect at all, but certainly a difference of perspective. And so here we are, literally raising the awareness of all of America in terms of what we can do in rural America as we do focus on helping feed the world, helping feed America, certainly, but applying biotechnology out across the fields and across the prairies of rural America. And when it comes to trade, we know that we are good at producing agriculture products. We want to sell our products around the world, especially when 96 percent of these customers reside outside our country. So that is why I hope that we can focus on trade policies moving forward so that we can bring some prosperity to the home front amidst a struggling ag economy. Let us be honest about that. Crop prices are not what they were, but property taxes are still high, input costs are still high, and we want to do what we can to bring stronger market prices to agriculture. That is why we want to and we need to focus on the global economy that is so important. I am grateful to have the opportunity to stand here and really celebrate rural America, as we do have so many of the solutions that our country needs right now.

Mr. SMITH of Nebraska

Mr. SMITH of Nebraska. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment, although I am not opposed to the amendment.

Mr. SMITH of Nebraska. Mr. Chairman, I am prepared to close if there are no more speakers. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SMITH of Nebraska. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials on H.R. 2842.

Mr. SMITH of Nebraska. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support to talk about H.R. 2842, the Accelerating Individuals into the Workforce Act. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, there are more than 6 million job openings, the highest level since the government started tracking the data in the year 2000. At the same time, the share of Americans participating in the workforce is near a four-decade low. Moving welfare recipients into employment is a central goal of the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program, or TANF. Yet only half of all TANF recipients receiving cash assistance are working or preparing for work. Some TANF recipients have a difficult time transitioning from welfare into a job, so these types of on-the-job work experiences aid in the transition. The same goes for employers who may be reluctant to hire welfare recipients with limited work experience or other barriers to working. So the question is: How can we bridge the gap? How do we connect out- of-work Americans with all of the employers who want and need to fill job openings? H.R. 2842, sponsored by Congressman Curbelo of Florida and Congressman Davis of Illinois, encourages employers to work with State and local agencies to hire TANF recipients. States would only be able to use this money to provide benefits to those who are working, providing paychecks in lieu of benefit checks, a key tenet to welfare reform. Employers would take the lead by partnering with State and local agencies to hire TANF recipients, providing recipients with highly valued work experience and on-the-job training, including apprenticeships. Earn-and-learn models help people become familiar with the workplace, gain needed skills, and earn a wage. The bill reserves up to $100 million for 1 year from the TANF Contingency Fund, which has already been extended through the end of fiscal year 2018 to subsidize up to 50 percent of a TANF recipient's wage for no more than 12 months. Fifteen percent of the funds would be set aside for career pathway programs, which combine work, training, and other supports to help individuals enter the workforce and move up the economic ladder. Finally, high-quality evaluations would be used to determine whether these public-private partnerships were effective in helping welfare recipients move into jobs and retain work. There is broad support from the employer community for helping low- skilled Americans gain on-the-job experience, and there is plenty of support here and across the country for tying government assistance to work or work preparation for those who are able-bodied. Decades of experience tells us the most effective anti-poverty program is a job. It is helping low-income Americans earn success through the dignity of work. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to stand with Mr. Curbelo in supporting this bill today, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SMITH of Nebraska. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Florida (Mr. Curbelo), the lead sponsor of the bill.

Mr. SMITH of Nebraska. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the efforts here today of my colleague from Illinois (Mr. Danny K. Davis) and the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Curbelo) working together focusing on solutions. Mr. Chairman, we know that, this day and age, it is very easy to identify the problems and the challenges that our country faces. It is a little more difficult to come up with the solutions and bring people together. I appreciate the efforts of both sides coming together today. I truly believe that the solutions to our challenges are out in the communities where needy families live, and we know we have many needy families across our country for various reasons. America is a big country. And when you look at the challenges that individuals might face economically, I hope that we can come together as Americans to focus on growing our economy, growing opportunity, hoping that we see, as our number one responsibility, the need to provide for opportunity in the future. We can't set certain and determine certain outcomes, but we can certainly measure the outcomes from our efforts here in Washington. That is why this bill, very importantly, requires States to report on outcomes through this program. We know that we need to provide more flexibility for States. This does exactly that, and, even more so, with communities. As we do get the feedback from the States, I hope that we will heed their advice because they are the folks who are more in touch with the needs of their various communities around their jurisdictions, all 50 States. Mr. Chairman, they are experts, and I hope that we can work together with them here, on both sides of the aisle, in Washington, but also all across America with very diverse needs for needy families. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SMITH of Nebraska. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate Mr. Curbelo and Mr. Davis for their leadership on this issue, and then colleagues from both sides coming together in a bipartisan way so that we can help more Americans get back to work. This bill requires high-quality evaluations to determine whether these public-private partnerships are effective in helping welfare recipients move into jobs. These evidence-based results will be used to inform future policy decisions to reform our welfare system, similar to the approach taken in the mid-1990s. I look forward to working with my colleagues on these important issues so more Americans can earn a wage and feel the dignity of work. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SMITH of Nebraska. Mr. Chairman, I support this amendment. It requires States to coordinate efforts under this bill with other Federal programs designed to help low-income individuals obtain the necessary skills to enter employment and climb the economic ladder. Our Federal welfare system is large, fragmented, and growing in cost. The nonpartisan Congressional Research Service estimates that we currently operate over 80 programs that provide food, housing, healthcare, job training, education, energy assistance, and cash to low-income Americans. Reducing bureaucracy and streamlining a State's administration of employment and training services to low-income Americans is a step in the right direction. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment as well as supporting the underlying bill. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SMITH of Nebraska. Mr. Chairman, again, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment as well as the underlying bill. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SMITH of Nebraska. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment, although I am not opposed.

Mr. SMITH of Nebraska. Mr. Chairman, I support this amendment. This amendment provides further information to ensure we have high-quality evaluations requiring States to measure how many recipients entered employment in the same field they received on-the-job training. The more we know about how these programs work and their return on our investments is important when we make decisions down the road. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support the amendment as well as the underlying bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.