Bonnie Watson Coleman

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the ``Homeland Security Drone Assessment and Analysis Act.'' On January 27th, a small drone landed on the grounds of the White House. Thankfully, this incident did not threaten the President or his family, as it was nothing more than an ill-advised misadventure by a hobbyist. It did, however, raise serious questions about the threat commercially available drones may pose to individuals, infrastructure, and our aviation system. Recently, drones were observed flying over sensitive assets in France, including nuclear installations, the home of the French President, and near the United States Embassy. These drone activities have raised concerns about the security implications of the commercial availability of small and medium sized drones. Undoubtedly, drones have great commercial potential and their utility will aid our agricultural sector and others in the decades to come. Even as drones have the potential for so much good in the hands of a farmer, there is the risk that they will be used for ill in the hands of someone who intends harm. Last week, the Subcommittee on Oversight and Management Efficiency, of which I am the Ranking Minority Member, of the House Committee on Homeland Security, held a hearing regarding the potential security threats posed by small and medium sized commercially available drones. During the hearing, we heard from experts in the field regarding the need for DHS to act as the Federal lead in researching the issue of security vulnerabilities posed by small and medium sized drones. The witnesses described the need for DHS to develop security policies and for DHS to disseminate information to State, local, and tribal law enforcement officials regarding how such officials may bolster preparedness for and responses to attacks perpetrated by commercially available small and medium sized drones. I authored the ``Homeland Security Drone Assessment and Analysis Act'' to address the issues raised before the Subcommittee last week and to ensure DHS serves as the lead Federal department responsible for the security issues raised by small and medium sized drones. The bill also requires DHS to conduct a comprehensive risk assessment regarding small and medium sized drones so that the policies the Department and its components develop are based on sound analysis and the probable rather than the possible. Finally, my bill will address the concerns we heard from the President of the International Association of Chiefs of Police regarding a lack of information being disseminated regarding how State, local, and tribal law enforcement agencies should respond to potential threats posed by drones. It does so by mandating that the Secretary of Homeland Security provide information to State, local, and tribal law enforcement entities regarding how to prepare for and respond to potential threats posed by drones. I urge my colleagues to support the ``Homeland Security Drone Assessment and Analysis Act''.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker, I haven't been in this office very long, but it doesn't take long to pick up certain patterns of my Republican colleagues. They find a way to hamstring immigration reform or prevent women from getting the right to choose at every possible opportunity. In the case of the SGR fix, a very important bill that I am proud to have also voted for, Republicans have chosen the latter. At the risk of pointing out the obvious, Mr. Speaker, this is 2015. We can talk to our TV remotes. We have phones that show us in 3-D the nearest restaurants, and printers that print prosthetic limbs. In 1973, Motorola gave us the world's first mobile phone. But 1973 was also the last time there was any question of whether or not a woman had the right to make her own decisions about her health, according to the U.S. Supreme Court. I am not the youngest Member of Congress, but I am one of the newest. So I would like to take this opportunity to invite my Republican colleagues to join me in the 21st century. Moving forward, I urge my colleagues to stop waging war on women's right to make their own choices.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the subject of my Special Order.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker, earlier today, my colleagues and I debated and passed a budget about which I have quite a few concerns. Budgets are statements of values. They should map out the priorities we have for our Nation. The resolution that the House adopted earlier suggests that our priorities are the interests of the top 1 percent of earners, the interests of corporations. Certainly, not the interests of working families. Mr. Speaker, according to a Pew Center analysis of census data, 4 out of every 10 households with children now have a mother who is either the sole or primary bread winner. That means that 40 percent of families are led by woman. As we approach the end of Women's History Month, my Congressional Progressive Caucus colleague and I have come to the floor this evening to talk about the impacts of the Republican budget on women. As I have said, women now lead 40 percent of our Nation's households with children, a huge socioeconomic shift for this country; but when you dig deeper, 25 percent of those households are single-parent homes where women are the only provider. Those women need health care to be able to keep going to work. As we know, Mr. Speaker, not every employer offers health care. Fortunately, 5 years ago, we passed the Affordable Care Act, and now, more than 16 million Americans have access to health insurance, many of them for the first time. The Affordable Care Act gave women more control over their health than they have ever had before, with free preventative care, including annual screenings, and free coverage for contraceptives. There were also a host of benefits, economic and otherwise. The Congressional Budget Office projects that combined Federal spending for Medicare, Medicaid, and the Children's Health Insurance Program, commonly referred to as CHIP, will be $682 billion less over the 2011-2020 period than projected in 2010 without the Affordable Care Act. Our national healthcare costs have, indeed, slowed dramatically. The uninsured rate for working-age adults dropped 35 percent, from 20.3 to 13.2 percent; but it seems that all the bill's benefits don't mean much to my Republican colleagues who have found a huge and factually questionable portion of their budget's ``savings'' from repealing the law. Mr. Speaker, we have just discussed the impact of health care and the Republicans' budget repeal of the ACA. Without access to the health care they need for themselves and their families, Republicans must be assuming that women will be able to take paid time off for work. Unfortunately, we passed the wrong budget for that. To tell you a little more about this problem, it is my pleasure to yield to the gentlewoman from Michigan (Mrs. Lawrence).

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. I thank the gentlewoman from Michigan. Mr. Speaker, with more women as the primary breadwinners than ever, it is important to point out that two-thirds of the minimum wage workers are women. Women are notoriously underrepresented with equal pay for equal work. The Federal minimum wage right now is only $7.25 per hour. A woman working full time would make just $14,500. That is below the poverty line for a family of three. If we want to make sure American families can work hard to get ahead, it seems that we would want to make sure they are getting paid enough to do so; yet this issue is completely absent from the Republican budget, and still, women will be notoriously underpaid for the work that they do. Mr. Speaker, women are also notoriously underrepresented in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics fields. These are the jobs of tomorrow. These are the jobs that will grow our economy, that will make us globally competitive. Unfortunately, we cannot address these issues of underrepresentation of women in those areas--science, technology, engineering, and mathematics--because the Republican budget that we passed today does not think it is important. The people's budget, on the other hand, would lift the minimum wage, would increase the opportunities for women in educational fields where they have been underrepresented and would result in a raise for more than 27.8 million workers, including the 15.3 million women. There are broader societal impacts to raising the minimum wage as well. For starters, since women are the majority of minimum wage workers, lifting that Federal minimum wage would close the pay gap by nearly 5 percent. I know it has been said time and again, Mr. Speaker, but raising the minimum wage will also boost our economy. For these workers, additional wages aren't dropping into savings accounts; they are paying for things they need right now. Research indicates that for every $1 added to minimum wage, low wage worker households spent an additional $2,800 the following year. That is a win-win situation. Unfortunately, we didn't adopt the budget that included the minimum wage increase. We adopted the budget that included new tax cuts for the top 1 percent at the expense of the middle class. Mr. Speaker, the point that we have tried to make here is that we have passed the wrong budget. The Republican budget is wrong for women. It is wrong for the middle class. It is wrong for the Nation's economy. The foundations of the American Dream are crumbling beneath our feet just right as we speak, with stagnant wages, struggling schools, and a wealth gap that is only getting bigger. We can't move forward with policies that are only going to make matters worse. We need to open our eyes and fight together for policies that will build an economy that works for everyone. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Madam Chairman, I rise to urge support of the people's budget--the budget put forth by the Congressional Progressive Caucus. This budget is responsive to working people of this country who work hard every day and play by the rules in an attempt to accomplish the noble task of providing for their families in the midst of escalating costs and decreasing wages. The people's budget recognizes that corporate profits are at their highest level in 85 years, but workers' wages are simultaneously at the lowest level in 65 years. The Progressive budget was built with the working people of America in mind. It is designed to allow working families to keep more of the money that they earn; access higher wages; and live healthy, productive lives by increasing access to health care and lowering taxes. It recognizes it is not enough to fight against efforts to take from the middle class to give tax breaks to the rich. We must also fight for tax breaks for the middle class, expand family tax credits, fight for the cost-of-living increases for the retired, provide universal pre-K for children, and help students finance their student loans. The people's budget makes real working people of this Nation its priority, and I would urge my colleagues to support this, the people's budget.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. I want to thank the gentlewoman, my colleague from Illinois, for providing this opportunity for me to share with you this evening. I am also honored to join my Congressional Black Caucus colleagues on the floor as we celebrate Women's History Month, and I am particularly grateful to our chairman, Chairman Butterfield. This year's commemoration of the women who have shaped this Nation is especially important here in this body because, for the first time, more than 100 women hold seats, speaking on behalf of Americans from Alaska to Florida. This year, the Congressional Black Caucus includes 20 women who are fighting for working families, for better wages, for more funding for better education, and for the many other policies that will make our Nation stronger and our families healthier. Mr. Speaker, I am honored to be the very first African American woman to represent the State of New Jersey in Congress and to be the only woman currently serving in this delegation. These are outstanding firsts, and I am thrilled to be one of them, but this is 2015, Mr. Speaker, and we shouldn't still be speaking about ``firsts'' and ``onlys'' when it comes to women. There may be 104 of us, but women still make up only 20 percent of Congress while we make up more than half of the population. Women across this country still earn just 78 cents for every $1 that is earned by men, and we have heard that women of color, particularly African American women, earn even less than this. Women still face a culture that questions our ability to excel in science and tech-focused fields, a culture that rushes to blame victims of sexual assault instead of protecting them, a culture that doubts that women are capable of making choices about their own health without the interference from lawmakers, who in the majority are men. Women's History Month is about celebrating trailblazers, but it is also about honoring the strength of all women and recognizing that we are just as capable as men and are just as ready to bring something to the table. We just celebrated the 50th anniversary of the marches from Selma to Montgomery, and in the process, we paid tribute to many of the leaders who risked their lives on the Edmund Pettus Bridge that day. Most people connect these events with Dr. Martin Luther King or our esteemed colleague Congressman John Lewis, but Amelia Boynton Robinson was among the first to bring the organizers to Selma. Even fewer know Viola Liuzzo, who paid the ultimate price for joining the march as she saw men and women brutalized on that bridge purely because of the color of their skin. I mention those names, Mr. Speaker, because, when it comes down to it, women have been leading for generations, even if it has been behind the scenes and without recognition. I join my colleagues in paying homage to a long history of amazing women; but I also ask every Member of this body: What are we doing to make history? What are we doing to build an economy in which women are equals and a society in which women are respected? What are we doing to make the phrase the ``first woman of history'' an unnecessary question? When we look at the opportunities before us, we know, Mr. Speaker, it is now that we have the opportunity to make history--right now. We have the opportunity to make history with the first woman, an African American, as the U.S. Attorney General of this great country, and we have an opportunity in the near future to say that there has been a woman elected President of the United States.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. I yield to the gentleman from Minnesota.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker, I am thankful for this opportunity to share the good news about the Progressive budget and to inform those who are here as well as those who are at home what this budget represents. One last issue that I think I would like to address that we may not have clearly or substantively articulated has to do with environmental issues. This budget acknowledges the devastating impact that we have had on the environment, and it takes concrete steps to reverse it, forcing polluters to pay for the carbon that is causing so much of our climate change, eliminating fossil fuel subsidies for Big Oil that, frankly, don't need government support, and ensuring EPA has the resources it needs to help reduce our carbon footprint. We have spent this last 45, 50 minutes--I am thankful for this opportunity--sharing the good news about the people's budget, the Progressive budget, and I hope that anyone who has a need for additional information will seek this information out online. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Well, I certainly would like to yield to the gentlelady from Michigan. I just simply want to say that the associations, the affiliations, and the organizations that you identified just very quickly represent the interests of working class people, represent the interests of those who wish to be part of the middle class, and represent those individuals who are responsible for the standards that we have that protect people in the working environment, that protect jobs here in America, and that protect the aspirations and hopefulness of those who recognize that things like public education are great equalizers. Congressman, I would very much appreciate the opportunity to yield to the gentlewoman from Michigan, my classmate and my friend, Congresswoman Brenda Lawrence.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Thank you very much for giving me the opportunity to respond to that question, Congressman. As a State legislator, I spent many years in appropriations and on the budget committee, and I came to realize that there is no other document that represents the values and the priorities of the governing entity than the budget statement. So where we put our money is where we think our interests lie; where we put our money represents our priorities; where we put our money represents our values. And that is one of the major reasons that I am just so proud to be associated with the people's budget as crafted by the Congressional Progressive Caucus. Thank you for giving me that opportunity.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker, can you tell us just how much time we have left?

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. I appreciate the comments that have been offered by both of my colleagues here. I think that you can certainly understand that a lot of work went into the creation, the development, and the evolution of this budget. We are happy to note that, over the years, some of those issues that were identified by the Progressive Caucus have now become part of the regular budget that is presented by the Democratic Caucus. I want to highlight a couple of other things, because I think we just talked about the need for housing. And we recognize that not only did we lose a lot of housing during the predatory lending crisis, a lot of that housing is still vacant, and we need to figure out a way to recapture that housing and use it for affordable housing purposes. Our budget proposes the extension of the use of vouchers for housing because we recognize how fundamental the need is to have safe and secure housing. We recognize that, over the last several years, millionaires, billionaires, and corporations have been getting tremendous tax breaks, that the very wealthy have received extremely generous credits. We want to see working people get credit for work, get tax advantages for the work that working people do, get additional child care credits so that they can provide the kind of safety and security and healthy environment for their families. Everybody has the desire to have a healthy family. Everybody has a desire to be able to participate in our society, to even pay taxes, Mr. Speaker. They just need to have the mechanisms, the infrastructure, the opportunity, the policies that will provide those opportunities, and this budget does just that. It is known that one in five children live, in the United States of America, in poverty. One out of three African American children live in poverty. That is unacceptable for any child to live impoverished in a nation that is as rich and that has so much wealth concentrated in so few hands. To whom much is given, much is required, and it is pay now or pay later. We need to recognize the significance of our budget that recognizes that education is, indeed, the equalizer here. Not only are we looking to expand access to preschool care, but full funding of K-12. In addition to that, we recognize that higher education is what distinguishes our middle class from those who never can get into the middle class. But we want to make sure that students have access to education without being overly burdened with debt. So we want to look at creating opportunities for students to refinance their debt. Let's look at this country as a country of diplomacy, of humanitarianism. Let's look at this country as a country of peacefulness and hopefulness for goodwill for all nations. Let us move away from the sort of cold war mentality; look at modernizing our militaristic events; look at what we are doing with our resources; invest our resources here in America, not overseas; seek to bring humanitarian aid; seek to bring diplomacy. Seek, first, peace; seek, first, coalitions; but seek, first and foremost, to invest in America. Our unemployment rate is supposedly somewhere around 5 or 6 percent, but that is so misleading. It is so misleading on so many different levels. Number one, that is not true in rural areas, and that is not true in urban areas, and that is not true for minority communities, and that is not true for those who simply aren't looking anymore because they have been so doggone discouraged that they don't even think that there is any hope for them to have a job. For those people, for that cohort that I am speaking of, unemployment is double digits. It could be 25 percent. It could be 13 percent. It is something that we really don't even know exactly what it is, but we need to be focusing on lifting up all of our communities. And if we truly, absolutely want the American economy to expand, then we need to know that we need more consumers. We need more jobs. We need more paychecks. We need more customers. And we do that by investing in our middle class. We do that by investing in small businesses, in new businesses, in startups, in education, and in research and development. This budget recognizes that if we are going to be the great America that we are supposed to be, that we need to make these investments. Today was monumental for me because I got to articulate and to stand with individuals who expressed things that I have believed. Even as a legislator in the State of New Jersey, I believed that if we are to experience an America that really works, an America where our communities are safe because there is full employment--so no one is trying to rob anybody or no one is feeling a need to engage in illegal activity simply to put some food on the table--if we are going to be competitive globally, then we need to be investing in education. We need to be building schools. We need to ensure that even the schools in the poorest districts across the United States of America have all of the 21st century technology and opportunities to learn and produce. And we need to have high expectations. We need to have high expectations for everyone. So I thank you very much for this opportunity, and I will take this moment to yield back to my colleague, the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Ellison), the cochair of our Progressive Caucus.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Not only have I heard it, but I have helped some of the teachers buy the supplies for their classrooms.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. First of all, let me just say for those individuals who, without any fault of their own, were victims of the trickle-down economics that have failed us from 40 years ago to even today, those individuals who but for the shift in policies and having this negative impact because of trickle-down economics which doesn't work except for perhaps on an essay paper, they struggled. They struggled. They lost their homes; they lost their family; they lost their health care; and they lost their health. The people's budget recognizes the responsibility that government has to those individuals. So to extend the unemployment benefits for the 99 weeks, I believe it is over a 2-year period, gives people an opportunity, as well as gives the policymakers an opportunity to create opportunities for these people to find jobs and to have some meager form of income while they are looking, because they basically have been left with absolutely nothing. So it is a further illustration that the people's budget is a reflection of the people's needs. I am so very fortunate to be associated with it. One last thing I wanted to raise as it relates to our urban centers, Mr. Speaker, right now in Washington, D.C., there is a conference of the urban mayors from the State of New Jersey. I am going to have an opportunity to speak to them later on this evening. I tell you, I am very excited to talk to them about what it means to support the Progressive budget, the alternative Progressive Caucus budget, and what it means to their communities, whether it is for education, for teachers, for aides, for paraprofessionals, for police, for nurses, for hospitals, whatever. They will understand that this is a budget that recognizes that where the majority of the people live in this country there is a budget that acknowledges that their needs are paramount to the success of collective success of our economy and our country. I yield to the gentleman.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. I thank you for the opportunity to address this because I know this firsthand. In the capital city in the State of New Jersey, they have had to actually close libraries. Now, we already experience a digital divide in urban centers and in poor environments, and sometimes the only access that students have to computers and the Internet and the capacity to do research is in the libraries, in the local libraries. So it has negatively impacted their ability to get the information that they need to succeed in school. It has also negatively impacted those who are looking for jobs, who go to libraries to be able to research jobs on the Internet. It has had a devastating impact on the community. So when we look at our budget, the Progressive budget, and we recognize that we wish to restore services, restore funding to programs that empower our communities, it is giving them a chance, again, to become productive, productive in the work environment, productive in the school environment. It restores hope where hope has been taken away for so long.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Thank you for that question, Congressman. It means all of those things. What it means for communities like the capital of the State of New Jersey, which is the city of Trenton, it means that our neighborhoods are unsafe. It means that police are running to situations that have already occurred, as opposed to having the resources and the capacity to understand what is happening out there and be proactive and preventative in nature. So it certainly does negatively impact the quality of life for those who live in the city--and cities particularly--and those who work there. I am particularly concerned about the seniors who invested in the cities years ago when the cities where the thriving environments, Congressman, and now they are still living there because they can't afford to move. So they are finding themselves in communities where, because of the housing crisis, there are vacant houses all around them. Members of gangs have settled into some of those houses, creating almost prison-like environments for the people who can't even go outside and sit on their porch. And all of this has been the function of our disinvestment in our cities.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker, I am here today representing the Congressional Progressive Caucus and to discuss our budget, the people's budget. I pray that I am not the only one that is speaking for the 60 minutes allotted. Yesterday, Mr. Speaker, the House of Representatives released their budget proposal. Although they have a new chairman, they are following the same game plan: privatize Medicare, slash spending on safety net programs, and hope that tax cuts for the rich trickle down from top earners to the rest of the country. That is not what the American people need. They need a plan that levels the playing field, that gives them an opportunity to succeed, and puts their interests above the interests of corporations and the wealthy. They need a budget that is of the people, by the people, and for the people. That is what we are offering in the people's budget. If you need a way to pay for affordable child care while you are at your job, we have got it in the people's budget. If you need access to quality education for your children, teachers that are trained to give them the knowledge they need to be great, we have got it in the people's budget. If you worked hard to get into college but now need a way to pay for your tuition, we have got it in the people's budget. If you can't make ends meet, if the pay you take home barely keeps a roof over your head and you are making important choices between food and shelter and you are looking for a livable wage, we have got it in the people's budget. Mr. Speaker, in the hands of the GOP, this Congress has offered tax break after tax break after tax break after tax break for corporations and billionaires while cutting the very programs that working Americans rely on to pull themselves up the economic ladder that has given generations of American families access to the middle class. If anyone deserves a tax cut, it is not millionaires. It is the folks that are loading the trucks, the folks that are scanning the groceries, the folks that are cleaning the office buildings, the folks that are working as clerks, the folks that are working as secretaries, and the folks that are doing the important service jobs that our society so needs. The people's budget would invest in priorities that will keep the American people strong, just for everyone. It offers jobs that will restore our middle class. It addresses our Nation's most pressing challenges, issues like climate change, aging transportation infrastructure, access to education at every level, and good-paying jobs. This, Mr. Speaker, is about restoring Congress' commitment to serving hardworking Americans who are playing by the rules but still not getting ahead. This, Mr. Speaker, is about the lives that regular Americans are able to live. Some say that it is not hard to find any old job and get a paycheck, but does that job offer a high enough wage or enough hours to pay the rent? Can you take time off for illness or to take care of your kids? Do you know that you will have enough to pay for child care while you are at the job? Do you have health insurance in the event that you need it? My Congressional Progressive Caucus colleagues and I think that taxpaying Americans deserve to confidently answer ``yes'' to all of these questions, and that is what we are fighting for. Today, we were given the distinct opportunity to present tenets of our budget to a group of interested people--everyday working people-- people who are working for decent-paying jobs. They are not looking for handouts. They are looking for recognition that they are part of this American Dream, and it is our responsibility to ensure that we are not impediments, but that we are facilitators of that American Dream for everyone. At this time, Mr. Speaker, I yield to my colleague, the chairman of the Progressive Caucus, Congressman Ellison.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. I yield to the gentleman from Minnesota.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker, we have spent the last week and a half debating funding for the Department of Homeland Security, a debate that started because my colleagues on the other side of the aisle didn't like the President's executive actions on immigration. House Republicans finally did do what they ought to have done all along: joining with Democrats to pass the bipartisan funds for DHS through Fiscal Year 2015. That legislation has restored certainty for thousands of employees at the Department of Homeland Security; and, even more importantly, it ensures the safety and security of our entire Nation. Mr. Speaker, while we settled the funding for DHS, we haven't addressed the issues that led us to the impasse in the first place. Republicans in both the House and the Senate wanted to hinder the President's legal authority to better manage our broken immigration system. They have called it illegal amnesty, and many of their conservative counterparts have gone as far as calling the President a tyrant, but they have not offered any plan of their own. Today, during this Special Order hour, I would like to take the opportunity, on behalf of our Progressive Caucus, to join with my colleague, the Congressman from Arizona, to express our concerns from the Progressive Caucus' perspective on our plans for the future as it relates to immigration. To that extent, Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Grijalva).

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Thank you very much. I am very grateful to my colleague, the gentleman from Arizona, for sharing his vast knowledge, experience, and dedication to such an important issue. Mr. Speaker, I am relatively new to this Chamber; but I must tell you that, as I have been working here and observing, I am always reminded of the fact that this is a nation of immigrants. This is a nation that was conceived of by immigrants. It was created by immigrants. It was made great by immigrants because all of our Founding Fathers who are responsible for the way this country operates and the way we operate this democracy came to this land from another land. According to our polling that has been released by the Public Religion Research Institute in February, 77 percent of the country supports either a pathway to citizenship or permanent legal residency for undocumented immigrants. Only 19 percent want to enforce deportation. Citizenship is also favored over deportation in every single solitary State in this Nation, frequently by very wide margins. In the last Congress, as my colleague from Arizona noted, the Democratic-led Senate passed legislation that would have provided that pathway for 11 million immigrants seeking the American Dream but currently living in the shadows. That bill also would have strengthened border security, something I hear my Republican colleagues argue about quite frequently. That measure passed with significant Republican support, 68-32 votes; yet our Speaker, Speaker Boehner, declared that that bill was dead on arrival in the House. It is not just my constituents, it is not just Democrats that know it is time for a change on immigration. The American people are quickly reaching consensus that the American Dream should not be withheld and that there is nothing to fear from those who are seeking it. The American people are beginning to understand that the absolutely deplorable rhetoric used to keep immigrants in the shadows is just that, rhetoric. The American people are starting to agree that our legacy as a nation of immigrants means that offering the same opportunities to new generations should be the order of the day. Mr. Speaker, I am calling on my Republican colleagues right now to open the discussion on real immigration reform. This, as I said, is a nation of immigrants, built by people who came from different worlds, seeking opportunities to change their futures. So we should be having a conversation about how we honor that legacy and protect the promise of the American Dream for a new generation that is ready to work hard, play by the rules, and seize it. This is not a nation that will thrive by keeping our immigrants in the shadows. This is a nation right now that is just gaining traction and economic growth, with plenty of people still looking for employment and a government too burdened by austerity measures to provide any relief. So we should be having a conversation about the economic benefits of comprehensive immigration reform and the extraordinary impact it would have on job creation and innovation. It is not just the right thing to do; it is the fiscally right thing to do; it is a morally right thing to do; and it is a timely thing to do. We need to let go of our excuses and end the scare tactics. Let's get together and pass comprehensive immigration reform right now. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the subject of my Special Order today.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker, first of all, let me thank my colleague, Mr. Pocan, for yielding back and giving me this opportunity to address the people of the United States of America. I am new around here, and so I like to generally listen and evaluate before I speak, and I only try to speak when I might have something to add of value. If you drive through my district, which is the 12th Congressional District of the State of New Jersey and includes a lot of highways, byways, and bridges, you will see this iconic sign in the capital of New Jersey that says, ``Trenton Makes, The World Takes.'' It is a sign that points out the legendary industrial past of our community. However, this industrial revolution, it has passed us by, and it is a reminder of the employment that the city used to have. Yes, the city of Trenton was once the place that you found employment. The Trenton Iron Company produced the wrought iron beams for the dome on this U.S. Capitol Building where we stand today. Trenton's John Roebling's Sons Company produced wire rope that was used to build the Brooklyn Bridge, the now-famous George Washington Bridge, and the Golden Gate suspension bridge in California. Trenton was also known for its potterymaking, and even today, Trenton pottery can be found on display in museums around the world because of its artistry and superior craftsmanship. Trenton's booming industry is responsible for the invention of even the oyster crackers, pork roll, Bayer aspirin, and felt-tipped markers. Yet, today, Trenton, New Jersey, has a 15 percent unemployment rate. The city of Trenton's legendary industrial past does little for the thousands of unemployed workers searching for work today. The city has had a turn for the worse since the manufacturing sector has left and took with it great-paying jobs. We are not alone in that problem and this crisis. The same can be said for Cleveland, Ohio, or Detroit, Michigan, or Gary, Indiana, or Philadelphia--to name just a few--towns which were once thriving centers of commerce where jobs were plentiful and unemployment was rare. Today, these same towns face an unemployment crisis where securing work that enables a mother or a father to support a family is an elusive proposition. At the same time we experience this employment crisis, we also have a crisis in our infrastructure. New Jersey has 39,213 total miles of road. We are small, but we have a lot of concrete, but 35 percent of the major roads are in deprived condition. New Jersey has 6,566 bridges, but 36 percent of which are underfunded, considered structurally deficient, or functionally obsolete. Over 200 million trips are taken daily across deficient bridges in the Nation, but in total, one in nine of the Nation's bridges are rated as structurally deficient. You may recall, in 2007, the I-35W Mississippi River bridge in Minneapolis--which had been categorized as structurally deficient-- collapsed, killing 13 and injuring 145 people. Mr. Speaker, our bridges are crumbling, and we need to invest in building and fixing them. The Nation's estimated 100,000 miles of levees can be found in all 50 States and the District of Columbia. The reliability of these levees is unknown in many cases, and the country has yet to establish a national levee safety program. In 2005, New Orleans' levees failed to hold back the floodwaters of Hurricane Katrina, claiming the lives of more than 1,800 people and causing at least $125 billion in economic damage. Public safety remains at risk from these aging structures, and the cost to repair or rehabilitate these levees is roughly estimated to be $100 billion by the National Committee on Levee Safety. Mr. Speaker, these numbers are reflective of what America has become. I take a look at our communities today, and I see the vestiges of our past. I ask that we, as Congress, stop playing games, that we get to work for real this time, that we recognize that here we will have the opportunity to not only create safe infrastructure, not only to create safe bridges, not only to protect communities that are subject to flooding from levees, but we will also be able to create jobs. There is no more meaningful social action program than a good job, and we know that government has a history for creating those jobs in times of need that help not only to build the strong infrastructure of this great Nation, but to put families back to work, to make sure that they are earning a wage for which they can take care of their children, help provide opportunities for their families, take care of their elderly, ensure that their children have access to quality education, and ensure that our future is strong and stable, based upon the fact that they have had good, predictable, dependable, decent-paying jobs with decent wages. I look to our Congress, as many people do in this country, and I know who we really are, and I know that if we put our foot to the pedal, that if we decide that we are going to put this country back on a strong footing--metaphorically, as well as literally--I know that if we are understanding that if we build out and support that middle-income layer, those people, the working people of this Nation, that we will create an economy that will grow and prosper everyone from the very, very top to the very, very bottom. That is what we need to do right now in this country, from a bipartisan perspective, is to introduce, to advocate for, to debate, discuss, design, and develop an infrastructure bill with bipartisan support that signals to the working families and all families in this country that, A, we want to make sure that you are safe as you travel our highways and cross our bridges, that you are safe when you live near waterways and need to be protected with levees, and that you are given the opportunity to give back to your country, to build it, make it the strong country that it should be and, at the same time, create the kind of jobs that we need in order to grow our economy for everybody. Mr. Speaker, I thank you for this opportunity to speak to the American people today, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentlewoman from Alabama for bringing us together around this important issue. It is my honor to be a cosponsor of this endeavor, to take this opportunity to demonstrate our appreciation and our respect for the sacrifices that were made by the foot soldiers who marched in the three marches. It is my honor always to be a part of this wonderful body that serves along with John Lewis, who happens to be one of my personal heroes. This Congressional Gold Medal is not just simply an award. It is emblematic of a selflessness that was demonstrated by people who stood up and did the right thing and put their lives in jeopardy to ensure that we, as a democracy, had an opportunity to participate at the very highest level, and that is the level of voting. As I stand here and thank each and every one of our colleagues on both sides of the aisle for supporting this initiative, I rise also to remind us that we have work still to be done, that the battle that was before us that we thought we won is still there to be won, and that we need to correct the actions of the Supreme Court and follow through on the actions of giving people the right to vote.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Mr. Chairman, thank you to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cummings), the ranking member, for this opportunity to speak. I rise today also in opposition to H.R. 50, the misleadingly named Unfunded Mandates Information and Transparency Act of 2015, which passed out of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform on a strictly partisan vote. This bill neither improves nor streamlines the regulatory process. Instead, this ill-conceived bill is an assault on consumer protections, gives private industry an unfair advantage to weigh in on rules, and erects new, unnecessary barriers in the regulatory process. H.R. 50 would require agencies to provide the private sector with an unfair advantage to influence proposed regulations. The supporters of this bill claim that it creates parity between the private and the public sectors, but that is simply not true. What it really does is provide the private sector with a sneak peek of proposed rules before they are even made public. This bill propels regulated private sector entities to the front of the line while pushing the consumers these laws are designed to protect to the back of the line. It further gums up the regulatory process by allowing opponents to delay or invalidate rules through litigation. The existing Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 prohibits courts from using the law to stay, enjoin, invalidate, or otherwise affect an agency rule. H.R. 50 would fundamentally change that law by eliminating this prohibition, giving regulated industries the ability to abuse this expanded judicial review and tie up rules in courts for years. For example, Wall Street banks could take agencies to court over Dodd-Frank consumer protection rules that have yet to be finalized. Most Americans, and certainly most of my constituents that I represent, simply do not have the means to hire lawyers to sue Federal agencies if they are dissatisfied with a Federal regulation, but large corporations do. H.R. 50 would give corporations the ability to sue and to stall regulations they view as unfavorable. By unnecessarily layering an additional, burdensome judicial review and giving private industry an unfair advantage, this bill shows that it is not working for the consumers, but it is only working for the chosen few.