John Tierney

Mr. TIERNEY

Mr. TIERNEY. I thank the gentleman. I think it is reprehensible, actually, that the majority has chosen to go with the Ryan budget numbers over the agreement that was reached last August. I think it has put the chairman and ranking member and the members of that committee in a terrible position. We can see it just by the juxtaposition of two programs here that obviously people think have merit on this aspect. As much as taking $10 million from the amount of money that otherwise would have gone to the Mars program would leave them $10 million less than they would have had, but $78 million more than otherwise was in there. Doing nothing with respect to this motion would lead to our Justice program with zero dollars in the House budget. So I am thinking that we'll take a vote here; and if we pass, I hope that the committee is able to work with the Senate to bring the Mars program back to where people want it to be. I am hoping from what I have heard here that people think there is merit to our district attorneys and our public defenders as having some money in their accounts so that they can have good qualified people moving our justice system forward, and they will take care of that in conference. But one way or the other, we need to know that taking a program and putting it down to zero at a time when our justice system is crying out for fairness and crying out for the tools to operate appropriately for our district attorneys throughout the country as well as public defenders who are saying that this is essential, that maybe at least having a debate on this issue and talking about it will make sure that we can get all the programs that we need funded to the level that we're able to do so that we can move both of those things. So either way this motion goes, I hope that if we win on this case, that we argue strongly to hold that number in the conference and then work to do something with the Mars program. People feel strongly about that. Should this motion not prevail, then I hope that our chairman and our ranking member and others will work hard in conference to make sure that the John R. Justice Program is not reduced to zero because I have heard everybody here talk now about how they think it is a good program and that we move forward and we fund it so that the system can work the way it was intended to work.

Mr. TIERNEY. Madam Chairwoman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. TIERNEY

Mr. TIERNEY. I thank the gentleman for acknowledging this. Americans need to know that their family member is going to be able to afford a college degree, whether it is a 2-year degree or a 4-year degree. Too many people are afraid that their child is not going to be able to get through college. Too many students don't think they can meet the cost of it. And that's what we need to deal with. Public dollars for schools, Pell Grants, lower interest rates, work- study, those are things that we've done together to allow people to have the opportunity of college so that everybody can try to achieve their goal, to have an equal opportunity to achieve those goals with things we have done together in the past. We have been helping businesses find very educated and skilled people to drive our economy. It doesn't matter if you earn $20,000, $30,000, $60,000 or if you are suddenly unemployed because you lost a job. It feels the same if your kids are pushed out of school if they can't afford to pay for it. Getting a degree really makes a difference for many people, whether or not they're going to be able to get a good job. And helping them do that is something we've all decided to invest in. Carrying a huge loan debt, it may mean that you have to delay starting a family, delay buying a house, taking a job that you otherwise wouldn't take. Pell Grants, work-study, lower interest rates, all of those things for higher education, one of the opportunities that we all helped to create so that people that have long been benefiting from special favors, from tax loopholes, corporations and people that are extremely wealthy, they need to do their part. That's simply what we're asking them to do. We can keep this country moving forward if we can invest in our future. What we want to do is find a way and make a time that those who have benefited so extraordinarily realize that they too have to step up to the plate and join the rest of us to help pay for those opportunities to make sure that we can move forward. This is a good time to invest in America and Americans. We have 250 tax expenditures in the Tax Code. Those are special tax rates, special favors, credits, deductions. Our friends on the other side of the aisle apparently think that's what America should borrow for, that that is what they should borrow for and pay corporations that made $130 billion last year, to give them more money instead of helping people get through college and get a degree that they need to get a good job.

Mr. TIERNEY. I filed a bill last week that would have lowered the interest rates, back at a time when the Republican budget would have let it double, back when the Speaker and the chairman of the Education Committee and the second-ranking Member of the Republican Party all voted to keep it at 6.8 percent. I filed a bill, and I found a way to pay for it. It was paid for by taking one tax credit from Big Oil that made $130 billion last year, one tax credit that they weren't originally intended to have even benefited from but had managed to sort of squeak their way into eventually. So there's a way to pay for it. Now, if you didn't agree with it, the Republicans didn't agree with it, then they could have found one that wasn't noxious, one that everybody could agree on. But instead, they finally came around to deciding that they wanted to lower the interest rates because they couldn't take the political heat when the President was out there talking to American families. And American parents and American students said, What are you doing? Why are you borrowing and giving oil companies $130 billion of profits plus tax credits when we could be having a way to make sure that our family members get the education they need to get a job and move forward in their lives? So the Republicans finally came along and said, Okay, we will lower the interest rates. We can't take the heat. But we are going to find a poison pill. We are going to look at what the President has planned to do with preventive funds, which are screenings for breast cancer, screenings for cervical cancer, immunizations for children; and we'll use that. I will suggest to my friends on the other side, stop waiting for the Senate. Use some leadership. Come across the aisle and look at those 250 tax expenditures. Let's find one we can agree on, not wait for the Senate and not blame it on them. Let's move forward on that. Stop being so partisan and stop being so ideological. And let's move forward.

Mr. TIERNEY

Mr. TIERNEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 3 minutes. Mr. Speaker, it's nice to have our Republican friends finally agree that the interest rates would be a problem if they rise and double. Since 2007, when the rates were first reduced when the Democrats were in the majority, it's been resisted by our friends on the Republican side--resisted in 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, and 2011. And not until recently, when the profile of this issue had been raised to a degree where students and families started to really get involved and engaged, did our friends on the other side of the aisle finally decide that, well, they now don't want the rates to go up either. But cynically, some might say, the only way they can find to pay for it is to attack women's health and children's health. Now, women don't want this bill that way. Children and students don't want the bill this way. Labor doesn't want the bill this way. Public health groups don't want the bill this way. The Senate has said that they won't accept the bill this way; it's dead on arrival. And the White House senior staff says they'll advise the President to veto the bill this way. If we really want to set aside partisanship and do this, let's pick a pay-for that the American people can get behind and that we can all agree on. Let's put aside the cynicism, let's stop playing games, and let's do the right thing. Let's make sure the interest rates stay at 3.4 percent. Let's make sure that 177,000 students in Massachusetts and 7 million nationwide have affordable access to college and are able to pay for that bill in a better way when they graduate on that. Let's start doing the right thing. Last week, our Republican friends found $46 billion to give to hedge fund managers in a tax cut, to give to Donald Trump in his Trump Towers leasing company, to give to other people that already had millions of dollars and didn't pay for it. This week, they finally get brought around to the issue of trying to help students and come up with this cynical aspect of paying for it by, once again, attacking women's health, in this case adding children on--children's immunizations, women's screenings for breast and cervical cancer and birth defects. This is insidious. This is ridiculous on this. And we should move forward and do the right thing. The fund that the bill addresses is a fund that was attacked a little bit the last time, as the Speaker mentioned, but left largely intact. This one would wipe out the entire fund, twice the amount of money necessary in order to fund what they're purporting to do because they are ideologically going after the health care bill. We need to make sure that women's health care and children's health care is protected. We need to make sure the interest rates stay low. We are certain we can do that. It won't be done by doing it this way. And Members in the Senate will have to work in conference to make sure that we get to a pay-for for this that makes sense, and it's something we can do. There's 250 tax expenditures in the Tax Code, 250--$1.3 trillion. We can find a way to pay for this interest rate reduction here and do it in a way that all of America can get behind and both parties can get behind without the cynicism and without moving in this direction. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. TIERNEY. Mr. Speaker, I remind the gentleman that in 2007, the bill was paid for. In fact, it was paid for, and 77 members of the Republican Party agreed as well. Now it is time to pay for it in an intelligent and correct manner. I now yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Miller).

Mr. TIERNEY. Mr. Speaker, the Republicans' long-term fix, of course, was voted on a couple of weeks ago in their budget which allowed for the rates to go up to 6.8 percent and took away the in-school subsidy for interest rates, driving students' costs even further up. That's why we're here today. I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews). (Mr. ANDREWS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. TIERNEY. Mr. Speaker, I just note that it was common sense about 2 weeks ago and almost the entire Republican Party voted to let the rate go to 6.8 percent. It's nice to see that they've found some reality here. At this time, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer).

Mr. TIERNEY. I yield an additional 1 minute to the gentleman from California.

Mr. TIERNEY. I yield myself such time as I may consume in order to address the fact that the elimination of the fund would mean that on an annual basis, 326,000 fewer women would be screened for breast cancer. I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Courtney).

Mr. TIERNEY. I yield the gentleman another 15 seconds.

Mr. TIERNEY. Before yielding further, I'm going to take 15 seconds and yield that to myself. Mr. Speaker, this supposed slush fund the people are talking about is a fund identified and given Appropriations Committee authority to designate where it would be spent. That authority was advocated by our friends on the other side, and the Secretary has in fact specified every year where the money be spent: $326,000 in screenings for breast cancer; $284,000 for cervical cancer screenings; $10,000 for breast and cervical cancer; and so on down the line. At this time, Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the minority leader of the House from California (Ms. Pelosi).

Mr. TIERNEY. Before I yield, I do want to correct the gentleman. There is somebody around here who gets a free lunch under your bill, and that would be the oil companies, which made $80 billion in profits last year. I yield for the purpose of making a unanimous consent request to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis). (Mr. DAVIS of Illinois asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. TIERNEY. With that, Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee).

Mr. TIERNEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Holt).

Mr. TIERNEY. Mr. Speaker, I note that I was at that education meeting and heard the Secretary say very quite clearly that no child who gets an immunization under this program will get an immunization under this program if the fund is eliminated. Mrs. Biggert, of course, analyzed the taking a little bit of the money and equating that with taking and wiping out the entire fund. With that said, Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman).

Mr. TIERNEY. Will the gentleman yield? That is an empty challenge.

Mr. TIERNEY. Well, Mr. Speaker, I would have addressed my remarks to the Chair and taken the challenge if it had been anything other than an empty challenge and would have noted that Secretary Sebelius and the administration know clearly that those funds would have been diminished and that thousands of screenings for breast cancer and cervical cancer would have been passed by, hundreds of thousands, in the administration's own analysis on that. With that, I ask the Chair for the time remaining on both sides, please.

Mr. TIERNEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee).

Mr. TIERNEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro).

Mr. TIERNEY. Mr. Speaker, at this time, I would like to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin). (Mr. LEVIN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. TIERNEY. Mr. Speaker, at this time, I would like to yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey).

Mr. TIERNEY. Mr. Speaker, at this time, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Davis).

Mr. TIERNEY. I have at least five more speakers.

Mr. TIERNEY. At this time, Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Clarke).