Debbie Wasserman Schultz

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Delahunt, I guess they follow the philosophy and the idea that if you say it enough times, people will believe it. Maybe if you say it enough times, actually our governor, it must be in the genes, also subscribes to that theory in Florida, and really believes that if you say something enough times, then it will come true.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Number 8, 45.8 million Americans have no health insurance at all, 6 million more than in 2000. Now, if things were getting better, that number would be, oh, I don't know, smaller, Mr. Speaker, not bigger, smaller. And you have, since then the cost of health insurance has risen nearly 59 percent. Yet workers' wages have only increased by 12 percent. Now, we all do different things in our lives every day. We go to the supermarket. I am out on the soccer field or at dance class or on airplanes back and forth. I am sitting next to a couple, a middle-aged couple, on the plane the other day from Tennessee. Not exactly a bastion of liberalism. They are from Tennessee. And do you know what they wanted to talk to me about when they found out I was a Member of Congress? What were we going to do about the cost of health care? They owned a small business. They employed quite a number, 75 people. They employed 75 people and he literally said, the husband, the husband and wife team literally told me that within the next couple of years, if health care costs continue to go in this direction as they have since 2000, they would probably have to close their business. I mean, that is how bad it was getting. So the garbage that the Republican leadership and this administration are trying to feed the American people, you know, that 31 percent, that number, I would expect would continue.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. If people thought everything was as rosy as they would describe.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. We are talking third-party validators here. This is not stuff we are making up. This is not the Debbie Wasserman Schultz encyclopedia.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. You know, Mr. Meek, I can understand why you would have trouble seeing past that giant rubber stamp. That is simply because this Chamber, through the Republican caucus and their Republican leadership, have been engulfed by the rubber stamp. You know, had our bobble-head Republican not turned up missing, we would be able to use that as yet another example of why you continually have these policies that are put forward by the Republican leadership, as rubber-stamped by the Republican majority, because their heads only move in one direction. I guess there is no hinge in this direction, only, yes, absolutely, we are glad to do whatever you say, anything you want, Mr. Speaker. I mean, it is just unbelievable. Fourteen months here and, ``No, sorry, my conscience won't allow me to do that'' is just not part of their vocabulary. And like I said, the joints just don't seem to work in this direction as they do for the Democrats. Now, you know, what makes matters worse about all of the things that we have been talking about, about the debt and the deficit and the bobble-head, rubber-stamp Republican majority that we have here, is that there are consequences. This stuff matters. It matters in real people's lives. And what the Republican leadership would have you believe, especially in recent days, their new thing now is that the economy is doing great. Now, obviously they are now trying to shift to a new frame and help everybody understand that in spite of an $8 trillion deficit, in spite of the colossal debt that we are in to foreign countries across this globe, in spite of the fact that we have disproportionate trade deficits with many, many countries, Americans are doing great. Really? Really? Okay, well, let's examine that. I have here what the consequences actually are. We came up with a top ten list that describes the consequences of Republican economic policies. Since they raised the subject, they have brought it up recently and said, everything is rosy, red rosy, and so let's just take a walk down memory lane here in terms of what is really going on in the United States of America. Number 10. I am Danielle Letterman this evening. Number 10, we have a projected surplus of $5.6 trillion that has vanished. It was replaced by a deficit in 2004 of $413 billion, which is the largest in our Nation's history, and a deficit of $318 billion in 2005, an almost $3.5 trillion deficit over the next 10 years. Number 9. The Bush administration is the administration with the greatest average annual decline in household income. We are talking real people here. Since Bush took office, household income has declined by $1,670.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Speaker, I think we are going to need to do these charts on dry erase boards from now on because it changes so rapidly and in the wrong direction that we are wasting public resources by printing them on unchangeable paper.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Just like our poster here, the colossal debt that we are caving in under that Mr. Meek just described. Sometimes it is hard to get your arms around, or mind around, what 1 billion is. One billion is a very big number. So we took the time to analyze or break down for folks the things that are analogous to 1 billion, and let me just walk people through that, Mr. Speaker, and this might be helpful for you, Mr. Speaker, as well. The question is, how much is $1 billion really. Well, for example, 1 billion hours ago, humans were making their first tools in the Stone Age. One billion seconds ago, it was 1975 and the last American troops had pulled out of Vietnam. Gee, I guess we sort of wish we were 20 years in the future and we could be saying that about the troops in Iraq, but I digress. One billion minutes ago, it was 104 A.D. and the Chinese had first invented paper, and $1 billion ago in Republican terms, Mr. Speaker, that was only 3 hours and 32 minutes at the rate that our government spends money. So when you talk about people who live paycheck to paycheck, people who are struggling to make ends meet, people who are desperately trying to not live off of their credit cards, it does not appear to matter to the Republican leadership here, Mr. Speaker. My colleagues, it really is astonishing to me. I have only been here 14 months. Both of you are more senior than me, but I am really surprised that some people actually believe what the Republican leadership says when they say they are the party of less government and more fiscal responsibility. Is an $8 trillion debt fiscally responsible? Is being in debt to OPEC responsible? I mean, where is the fiscal responsibility in that?

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Speaker, thank you. It is so great to be here with my 30 Something colleagues once again; and just to take off from where you left off, we try to help illuminate things during our hours and underscore for the American people, Mr. Speaker, what is really going on inside this Chamber and inside this Capitol and the debt, the colossal debt, that we are literally caving in under.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. It is time to move this country in a new direction and restore America's confidence in their government. We know we have a plan that we can do that.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Thank you. The only thing I want to add to tie a ribbon on this whole discussion is that what we have all noticed, whether we are in our districts with our constituents or talking to people across the country, when we interact with them, is that people have reached the breaking point. They don't buy it. They don't buy the garbage that is being fed to them by this administration that the economy is rosy, that everything is going well, that everything is hunky-dory. They are falling off the cliff into the Republican cavernous abyss, and they are tired of it, and they want to have the Democrats or someone other than the people who are taking them in this direction that they no longer are willing to go, to fix it. Even their former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said that they are seen by the country as being in charge of a government that can't function.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Rosy, rosy. Things are rosy, rosy. Number 2, since President Bush took office the economy that is rosy, rosy has posted only 15 months of job gains of 150,000 or more. That is since he took office, that is in 6 years. That is the number of jobs needed to keep up with the population growth. So we are not talking about anything to write home to talk about. Finally, number 1 of the top 10 worst consequences of Republican economic policies, 7.2 million Americans remain unemployed today with an additional 4.2 million who want a job, but are not counted among the unemployed because they have been looking so long they get taken off the rolls. The economy is rosy.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. The economy is growing so well that we have number 3, in which the Bush administration, it has become clear, has the slowest job growth of any administration in over 70 years. Since January of 2001, 2.9 million manufacturing jobs have been lost. That is entire towns in Mr. Ryan's district.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Ryan, I think I have figured it out. You have broken the code. The Republicans are the party of the cavernous abyss. They don't mind sending people right off the cliff into it, whether it is expanding poverty, sinking job growth, increasing the number of uninsured by millions each year. The party of the cavernous abyss is the party that created this Medicare prescription drug program with another cavernous abyss that senior citizens fall into just after they spend a little amount of money on their prescription drugs. So you have to ask where the American family is. They are engulfed by the Republican cavernous abyss. Number 4, I think we are on now. Yes, number 4. There are now 1.3 million more unemployed private sector workers than there were in January of 2001, the beginning of the party of the cavernous abyss. The long-term unemployment rate, which is people who are unemployed for more than 26 weeks, has nearly doubled since that time. This is the rosy economy that we are living in, Mr. Meek. This is how great we are doing.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Oh, please.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Madam Chairman, American women have a constitutional right to choice as guaranteed by the right to privacy. However, our servicewomen and the wives and daughters of our servicemembers are denied this basic right when stationed at military installations overseas. This amendment guarantees that women who selflessly pledge to defend our Constitution at all costs are afforded the same rights that they fight to uphold. Current law allows women stationed overseas to access abortion services on a military base only after an act of rape or incest or when her life is in danger. It is bad enough that victims of rape or incest have to pay for these procedures out of their own pocket. But as American women, it is unconscionable that they cannot access the same safe, clean and legal reproductive services available to women here the United States, even if they are paying for it themselves. Are we really asking these brave and noble women, who are ready to make the ultimate sacrifice, to relinquish the same rights that they fight so valiantly to uphold and defend? I encourage my colleagues to stand with our servicewomen as they put their lives on the line. Lift the ban on privately funded abortions and support this amendment.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Cleaver, they do those things. It is the Republicans that do those things. I just want to point that out. When you are using ``we,'' that includes us and we don't do that.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Speaker, we have been talking about energy supplies and the cost of a tank of gas and how difficult it has been for Americans to deal with those increases, and another equally important issue is how people are going to continue to be able to educate their children from their youngest age all the way through higher education. One of the things I think it is important for us to highlight tonight is the devastating budget cuts that this Republican budget puts forward in terms of the public education needs that we have. Literally, the Republican House budget resolution would make the biggest cut, and I think I am right, correct me if I am wrong, the biggest cuts to the Department of Education in 23 years. I guess the only thing that would be worse would be when they proposed to completely eliminate the Department of Education, but they are not doing that. They simply have the biggest cut in 23 years. The budget resolution cuts next year's Department of Education budget by $2.2 billion, with a B, below this year's funding level. It matches the President's budget cuts in his budget proposal dollar for dollar. Rather than increase education funding, both of the budgets, the Republican leadership's budget and the President's, grossly underfund education, social services and training programs. They cut those programs $4.6 billion below the amount needed to maintain current services. They eliminate completely 42 different education programs, not ones that people would think are not necessary anymore, but things like vocational education, safe and drug free school State grants, a college readiness program for low income students and both parts of the Federal Perkins loan program. It is just really unbelievable. You talked about priorities. This is where the Republicans priorities are compared to where we are as Democrats.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will yield, only to clarify who the hypocrites are, because if you separate where the Democrats' voting record is on energy and making sure that we focus on alternative energy like in our Innovation Agenda we rolled out in November, which includes an ironclad commitment that when we take control of this Chamber that we will within 10 years wean ourselves off of foreign oil and become energy independent. So the hypocrisy exists on the other side of the aisle. So I just want to make sure whose hypocrisy we are talking about.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. What makes that more obscene is that the energy bill that Mr. Carnahan referred to at the beginning of our hour highlighted the fact that not only did the oil companies make universal record profits. Let us take it beyond the galaxy, we gave away our rights to collect revenue from them in exchange for the drilling rights. I mean, what so many people do not realize is that the government owns the land underneath where the drilling takes place, whether it is in the gulf or whether it is on land. The United States Government owns that property, and we give the oil companies the right to drill there in exchange for tax revenue and fees. In that legislation last summer, we forgave all of those fees. We gave it to them for free. Then a few weeks later they are making universal, history making, record, earth shattering profits and now people are paying more than $3 a gallon for gas, and we gave them our gas rights, our oil rights. It is unbelievable.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. You are absolutely right. One of the other elements of our alternative budget plan would embrace once again, as was the policy during the Clinton administration and when Democrats controlled the United States Congress, was the concept of PAYGO. That is, I know, with you as a member of the Budget Committee and Mr. Spratt as the ranking member, is an idea that our Democratic Members have championed as a part of our alternative. And we have done that on a number of occasions and attempted to get the Republicans to go along with us and the concept of PAYGO. PAYGO is very simple. We came from States, and in our State legislatures you have to operate in the black. Just like people who are members of their families, they struggle not to have to go into debt, not to have to live paycheck to paycheck and not to have to go into massive credit card debt. Unfortunately, the Republican leadership here does not subscribe to that philosophy, and that is evidenced by their rejection of pay-as- you-go rules whereby we would not spend more than we have. On March 17 of last year, Mr. Spratt, our ranking member on the Budget Committee, offered a substitute amendment to the 2006 budget resolution that failed 165 to 264, no Republicans supporting pay-as- you-go legislation. And we have the rollcall indicating that we were supportive. Again, Mr. Spratt offered another amendment dealing with PAYGO that would have reestablished PAYGO, 224 Republicans voting ``no,'' none voting ``yes,'' and it failed, to 232. So we have certainly tried. It is not for our lack of trying to make sure that we restore some fiscal discipline here. The thing that has been the most frustrating for me as a new Member of Congress, and I am sure it is a frustration you have faced, is that the Republicans try to lead people to believe that they are the party of fiscal responsibility. Yet, I am someone who believes that actions have to back up words and talk is cheap, and that seems to be all that they have been about since I have gotten here.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. We have good graph-makers among our staff. You talk about summer gas prices. Just look at the difference over the years since the Republicans have been in charge. In 2002, Mr. Carnahan, the average price of a gallon of gas was $1.39; that was the summer of 2002. Then you go to the summer of 2003, it was $1.57. 2004, $1.90. Move over to the summer of just last year, $2.37. And then this April, just last month, we hit $2.91. Now, most of us in the last several weeks have all paid over $3 in most communities across America. So this is the reality of the rosy Republican economy that they have been describing and painting for us over the last several days.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Thank you.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. And the astronomical increase we have had in gas prices, which affects everyday Americans every single day, has just been unbelievable. Actually, Mr. Carnahan, we have a chart that illustrates those drastic increases, that is being brought over right now, that I think would be helpful; because I am a visual person, and graphically depicting some of these significant problems is really helpful.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Speaker, I am here today to join my colleagues and the Nation in recognizing May as Asian Pacific American Month, a time to celebrate the numerous contributions that Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders have made to American life. But first, I would like to recognize and congratulate my colleague, the gentleman from California (Mr. Honda). As the Chair of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus, Congressman Honda has worked tirelessly to highlight the contributions of the Asian Pacific American community. Congressman Honda's leadership emphasizes the importance of diversity, cultural education, and awareness of the many beautiful cultures and heritages that are woven into the fabric of our country. Thank you, Congressman Honda, for your dedication and your passion. May was chosen to commemorate the immigration of the first Japanese to the United States on May 7, 1843, and to mark the anniversary of the completion of the transcontinental railroad on May 10, 1869. The majority of the workers who laid the tracks were Chinese immigrants. Asian Pacific American Heritage Month is celebrated with community festivals, government-sponsored activities, and educational activities for students. Currently, 15 million Asian Pacific Americans live in the United States. With more than 25 Asian and Pacific Islander groups with different languages and unique histories, including Taiwanese, Vietnamese, Chinese, Filipinos, Indian, Pakistani, Korean, Japanese, and Bangladeshi, Asian Pacific American Heritage Month highlights the diversity that makes up our great Nation. As an American Jew, I am proud to say that Asians and Jews have a unique and celebrated history of partnership and community. Asian Americans have developed many thriving communities in California and New York City, for example, where there are also a large number of Jewish communities. Our cultural similarities and major emphasis on family and education present a variety of opportunities for cooperation between the communities, including community organizing, mutual support and political advocacy. Asian Americans have impacted our Nation in several distinct ways: in science and technology; arts and media; and business and social work. Approximately 1.1 million Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders own small businesses in the United States. Additionally, Asian Pacific Americans have served bravely in the United States Armed Forces, and more than 300,000 Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders are veterans. The theme for this year's Asian Pacific American Heritage Month is ``Dreams and Challenges of Asian Pacific Americans.'' Throughout the month of May, this theme serves as a reminder that while this community has made several strides, many Asian and Pacific Americans face economic and societal challenges. Affordable health care and education are among those challenges that all Americans, including Asian Pacific Americans, face. It is estimated that more than 2 million Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders currently have no health insurance, a figure that is far too large. We must focus on policies that will provide all Americans the opportunity to prosper in our great country. Throughout the month of May, Mr. Speaker, I ask all Americans to join me in raising awareness of this growing community as we celebrate together Asian Pacific American Heritage Month.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Chairman, we cannot overestimate the importance and vulnerability of the maritime domain. Maritime security involves hundreds of ports, thousands of miles of coastlines, tens of thousands of commercial and private craft, and millions of shipping containers. In addition, many major population centers and critical infrastructure are in close proximity to U.S. ports or accessible by waterways. In the 20th District of Florida that I represent, our ports, including Port Everglade in Ft. Lauderdale and the Port of Miami, serve as an entryway to millions of tons of cargo and people each year. It is clear that our country still needs an adequate overarching approach to the challenges of maritime security. That is why I am standing today in support of the Ruppersberger amendment. Security command centers are vital to the protection of our ports and to the safety of all Americans. This amendment would help make these centers more efficient, better organized, and promote better coordination among the various entities responsible for security. This amendment just makes sense. Why wouldn't the Secretary of Homeland Security seek input and advice from those most intimately familiar with the specific mission and needs of a seaport? We must have a broad and comprehensive maritime security strategy, and this amendment is one step to help us get closer to that goal. I urge my colleagues to support the Ruppersberger amendment on security command centers. I am pleased that the chairman of the committee is in favor of it as well.