appreciate it more in some markets in 2013. but it is still the case, it is a fair statement that nationally at least, according to national home price indices, we are nowhere near in most housing markets the peak of where we were at in 2006. as opposed to that, when we turn io the s&p 500, it peaked, believe roughly speaking in october, 2007. the s&p 500 at about 1600. went down to 600. but now over two years, has recovered much of its value and just this past march, it crossed 1600. it made up its entire ground since the bottom in 2009. host: richard fry, we have to leave it there. for more information, pewresearch.org. representatives.

the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the order of the house of january 3, 2013, the chair will now recognize members from lists submitted by the majority and minority leaders for morning hour ebate. the chair will alternate recognition between the parties with each party limited to one hour and each member other than the majority and minority leaders and the minority whip each, to five minutes t in no event shall debate continue beyond 11:50 a.m. the chair recognizes the gentleman from alabama, mr. brocks, for five -- mr. brooks, for five minutes. mr. brooks: thank you, mr. speaker. what would president ronald reagan do about illegal immigration? mr. speaker, let me share verbatim with you parts of a 2006 editorial by ronald reagan attorney general edwin meese, that is instructive, and i quote, what would ronald reagan do? i can't tell you how many times i've been asked that question.

immigration is one area where reagan's principles can guide us and the lessons are instructive. president reagan set out to correct the loss of control at our borders. border security and enforcement of immigration laws would be greatly strengthened in particular through sanctions against employers who hire illegal immigrants. if jobs were the attraction for illegal immigrants, then cutting off that option was crucial. he also agreed that the legislation in adjusting the status of immigrants, even if they entered illegally, who were law-abiding longtime residents, even if they had children in the united states. if they resided in america continuously for five years would be granted temporary status which after another five years to citizenship. it wasn't automatic. they had to pay application fees, learn to speak english, understand american civics, pass a medical exam and

renlster for military service. those convicted with a felony or three misdemeanors were ineligible. the lessons from the 1986 experience, amnesty did not solve the problem. there was extensive document fraud and the number of people applying for amnesty far exceeded projections. and there was a failure of political will to enforce new laws against employers. after a brief slowdown, illegal immigration returned to high levels and continued unabated, forming the nucleus of today's large population of illegal aliens. so here we are having much the same debate and being offered much the same deal. what would president reagan do? for one thing, we would not repeat the mistakes of the past, including those of his own administration. he knew that secure borders are vital and would now insist on meeting that priority first. he would seek to strengthen the enforcement of existing

immigration laws. he would employ new tools, like bimetric identification and sensors to monitor the border that make enforcement and identification more effective. one idea that president reagan had at the time that we might try on improving on is create a pilot program that would allow temporary workers to come to the united states. a reasonable program consistent with security and open to the needs and dynamics of our market economy. and what about those already here? today it seems to me that the fair policy, one that will not encourage further illegal immigration is to give those here illegally the opportunity to correct their status by returning to their country of origin and getting in line with everyone else. this, along with serious enforcement and control of the illegal influence at the border, a combination of incentives and disincentives will significantly reduce over time or population of illegal

immigrants. lastly, we should remember reagan's commitment to the idea that america must be open to those yearning for freedom. as a nation based on ideas, ronald reagan believed there was something unique about america and anyone from anywhere could become an american. that means that while we seek to meet the challenge of illegal immigration we must keep open the door of opportunity by preserving and enhancing our heritage of legal immigration, assuring that those who choose to come here permanently become americans. in the end, it was his principled policy and it should be ours to preserve the value of one of the most sacred possessions of our people, american citizenship. end quote. according to reagan attorney general ed meese, president ronald reagan would learn from history and not repeat the 1986 amnesty mistake that created today's illegal alien problem. the very same amnesty that

today's president and so many senators and congressmen demand. president reagan would insist that those who are here illegally must repint and atone for their illegal conduct by returning to their country of origin and getting in line with everyone else. mr. speaker, america's most cherished right is american citizenship. 's illegal conduct is not of that cherished right. mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from maryland, mr. hoyer, for five minutes. mr. hoyer: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. hoyer: thank you very much, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i rise runs again to call on congress to replace the dangerous and irrational sequester with a big and balanced deficit solution. 10 weeks after the dysfunction of this congress led to the sequester taking effect, our

economy and the most vulnerable in our society are continuing to experience its effects. on a macro level, the sequester has added to the uncertainty businesses and market were already facing, making it even more difficult to plan for the future and discouraging private sector investment and development that creates jobs. just this past wednesday, the federal reserve issued a statement, and i quote, fiscal policy, that is what we do in this congress, fiscal policy is restraining economic growth. but the ill effects of the republicans' sequester policy have been most devastating to those of the greatest need and rely on federal assistance. 70,000 children who will be 3 once and once, 70,000 children will be kicked out of head

start. subsidies that help low-income parents access childcare while they work will be eliminated. over half a billion dollars is being taken away from children and family service programs. because of the sequester, our most vulnerable children are at risk of losing their shot at the american dream. it's not only our youngest citizens who are being hurt by sequestration, low-income four million ee fewer meals on wheels deliveries this year putting at risk seniors who are sick and homebound. the national institutes of health will have to reduce life-saving medical research and 600,000 women, infants and children could be dropped from e usda, u.s. department of agriculture's nutrition program. hat -- an admonition to save

pictures, not abandon first. congress, mr. speaker, must act to replace this stupid sequester. i tell people that sequester starts with s which stands pour stupid. it needs to replace it with a big, balanced agreement that every bipartisan commission that's looked at our fiscal challenge has recommended. restoring financial discipline sets america on a pisscally sustainable path and enables us to invest in education, innovation that will grow our economy, create jobs and keep millions out of poverty and lift millions of others from poverty. in order for that to happen, of course, mr. speaker, i think you should appoint budget conferees so that budget negotiations on such a rational solution can begin in earnest. sadly, it's becoming increasingly clear that

republicans are in no hurry to commote the work on a budget as a result of the draconian, unrealistic and damaging spending levels they set forth under the sequester. simply put, they cannot implement the budget they adopted, neither through the appropriations process, nor through the ways and means committee. sequestration, of course, was supposed to be so unacceptable that we surely would not allow it to come into effect. but it has. it has because it reflects the spending levels republicans had long sought. now when i say that, some republicans say, oh, well the sequester was the president's idea. not only is the president opposed to sequester, democrats in the senate, democrats in the house are opposed. most republicans, that is to y 229 republicans, voted for h.r. 2560.

cut, cap and balance. and what this bill that 229 republicans voted for and by the way 181 democrats voted against was to say we set numbers. if we don't meet them what do we have? a sequester. sequester was their policy. the across-the-board irrational cutting the highest priority and the lowest priority the same was their policy that they voted for. an unfortunate policy because it is so irrational and so harmful. now they won't say how we can get there, of course, because it just isn't possible without gutting some of the most important programs that have a positive impact on our communities. the republican appropriations chairman, my friend, mr. rogers from kentucky, said on april 25 that, and i quote, there will be some who are shocked. i couldn't think people yet

understand how severe the numbers will be. that's the republican chairman, my friend with whom i served many years on that committee, hal rogers from kentucky. how severe the numbers will be. they're the numbers that were in the ryan budget, they're the numbers that will be affected in the sequester. they are playing a dangerous game of hide and seek which they'll hide what sequester levels actually mean and try to mitigate the ones they believe will have political backlash, very frankly just as we did about 12 days ago regarding the f.a.a. they know they can't achieve cuts their caucus can agree on and that the american people would support. and they seek, in my view, to blame the president and democrats for what has been a wrong-standing republican policy which i referenced in their cut, cap and balance

legislation. for which 229 of them voted for on july 19 of 2011. to do so, republicans proposed shifting the defense portion of the sequester to do so meaning to get to the numbers they proposed by shifting the defense portion of the sequester onto domestic programs. in other words, the cuts that would normally be across the board, their solution is to simply shift them to some of the programs that i mentioned earlier in terms of head start, meals on wheels and other programs that are so necessary to make sure that some of the least of ours are taken care of. of course, this is a breaking of the agreement reached in the budget control act of 2011. we all know the likely outcome of these partisan games, mr. speaker. house republicans will once again be divided as they were

the week before we left and prevent the adoption of a budget that includes a balanced approach. now, a balanced approach i won't like all of it. my friend, mr. jones, won't like all of it. none of us will like all of it because it will be balanced and we will have to take the good with the bad. what it will be is an effort and a reality of getting america on a fiscally sustainable, credible path. democrats are ready to make tough choices necessary to reach a compromise, and both sides have a responsibility. my side, their side, very frankly we ought to be one side. the american side. both sides have a responsibility to work together to meet our challenges in a sensible way. not a senseless, irrational way, which is what the sequester does, but in a smart way, worthy of our role as the american people's representatives, and i yield back the balance of my time.

the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from north carolina, mr. jones, for five minutes. mr. jones: mr. chairman, thank you very much. mr. speaker, i, like most members of congress, was home last week and did two or three different civic clubs and everywhere i went when i say it's time to get our troops out of afghanistan, save lives of our american soldiers and save money, i would get applause. . also the last couple weeks my office sent out a survey and 17,000 people in the third district responded, and 70% of the 17,000 said the same thing -- why are we still in afghanistan spending money we do not have and having our young men and women give their life for a failed policy known as afghanistan? mr. speaker, also a week ago i was watching nbc news and brian illiams wrote a story that the

c.i.a. admitted that for the last 10 years each month for the last 10 years they have been carrying cash money to karzai. cash money. and they said they could -- the best they could do was to estimate that this would be tens of millions of dollars. poor uncle sam. don't he know how he can continue to spend money of the taxpayers that we can't even account for so we can borrow more money from china to uphold car sky who is a corrupt leader to -- karzai who is a corrupt leader to begin with. i wonder where the outrage is in congress. i have friends on both sides of the aisle that i respect very greatly, but why is it that more outrage by congress on the money being spent and more important the lives of those -- last saturday, mr. speaker, an a.p. article said seven americans were killed in afghanistan. seven americans were killed. god help the families.

yet we in congress just sit here and continue to think that afghanistan is not our problem. it's just somewhere out there. we are finding millions and billions of dollars to send over there with no accountability. mr. speaker, i'm on the armed services committee and i have written a letter to the chairman of the oversight committee and asked her to hold hearings and bring in the inspector generals who have been looking into how the waste, fraud, and abuse abounds in afghanistan. they can't even account for half the money we have spent over in afghanistan. we have already spent over $700 billion in afghanistan, and half of it we can't even account for. i don't blame the american people for being frustrated. i really do not. i'm frustrated, too. and i would hope we can find more members of the republican party and the democratic party to join together on these budget bills coming up this summer and start bringing our troops out of afghanistan.

i bring this photograph, mr. speaker, that has marines carrying a flag-draped coffin. i try to do this down in the district and i do it here on the floor because i am he' afraid too many times the american people unless they have a family member in afghanistan probably with all the problems the american people are faced with, certainly we are here in congress, don't think a whole lot about the war. when you hear about the c.i.a. spending -- sending cash money for 10 years, millions and millions and millions of dollars to karzai so that he can take care of the warlords over in afghanistan and give a little bit of money to the taliban so they can buy weapons and kill americans, then don't know and i sometimes just frustrated where is the outrage in congress? just a couple more points, mr. speaker, before i release my time, return my time, is that i hope that the leadership of the ouse, speaker boehner, and the

minority leader pelosi, i hope they will join us, democrat and republican, in trying to bring an end to this failed policy in afghanistan. it is a failed policy. we are not going to change one thing. they have already acknowledged, mr. speaker, that we are fighting the taliban and most of the taliban are pashtuns, the largest tribe in afghanistan, they will eventually be the leaders, mr. karzai will not be in afghanistan, he'll probably be in switzerland counting his money that uncle sam sent to him. taxpayer, it is wrong you have to pay that bill in afghanistan. families who lost loved ones and families who have kids losing their legs and life so to speak it's not fair to you, either. mr. speaker, i ask god to continue to bless our men and women in uniform. i ask god to continue to bless the families who have given child in iraq and afghanistan. i ask god to ask god to help the

house and senate to do what is right in the eyes of the people. and i yield back, god please, god please, god please continue to bless america. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from california, ms. speier, for five minutes. ms. speier: mr. speaker, thank you. next to me is a mug shot. it's a mug shot of someone who has been charged with sexual assault. this is a mug shot of jeffrey crizin i ask -- krinzinsky, he's a lieutenant colonel in the air force. his job is to work at the pentagon as the chief officer of the sexual assault and prevention office.

within the air force. this man is charged with the responsibility of preventing and reporting sexual assaults in the military. in the air force. just this last weekend he was charged with sexually assaulting a woman in a parking lot. the best and the brightest the air force has to offer to run this office, and he's a sexual predator? is that what we are talking about? this is an indictment of the office that is supposed to be the solution for military rape and assault? it's an indictment of our procedures. it's an indictment of everything we have done on this issue. and congress is as culpable as

the military in not addressing it, because we have known about this issue for 25 years. and we are big on holding hearings and beating our chests, saying, this has got to stop. the big brass comes up to the hill and they say all the right words. they say we have a zero tolerance. and then our chief prevention officer is charged with a sexual assault. but it doesn't end there. the bad news doesn't end there. the military just released today its sexual assault and prevention office report on how many sexual assaults took place in the military last year. and guess what? the numbers have gone up. by 30%. from 19,000 sexual assaults and rapes in the military based on

the last year's figures, to the most recent years' figures of 26,000 rapes and sexual assaults in the military. for all the money we have been throwing at this issue, for all the he prevention and all the rehabilitation and of the training, the numbers keep going up. and now this most recent report 1/3 of ests that 1/3, the women serving in the military reported that they were sexually harassed last year. this is an institution of military good discipline, good order. it is time for us to roll up our sleeves and do something real about this. we have got to stop just kind of nibbling around the edges in an

effort to try and fix a broken system. 121 members have joined me as co-authors of legislation that would take the reporting of sexual assault out of the chain of command, keep it in the military, but place it in a separate office, staffed by persons who are experts in investigations, experts in prosecuting these crimes. and until he we do something like this, the numbers of sexual assaults will continue to rise in the military. the number of unrestricted reports will not rise as fast as the number of restricted reports. why do we have restricted reports? why would we say to any member of the military, yes, report this but we will keep it quiet, we will sweep it under the rug? this, my friends, is time for to

us do something. it is time for us to say that we are not going to tolerate another scandal. we are not going to tolerate a scandal at the air force base where there were 59 victims and 32 military training instructors who were implicated. we are not going to tolerate that in italy we have a major general who overturned the decision by five military members of a jury who court-martialed a lieutenant colonel and found him guilty, and yet the major general overturned the decision and decided to reinstate this individual. the time, my friends, has come to do he something. i yield back -- to do something. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from california, mr. mcclintock, for five minutes. mr. mcclintock: thank you, mr. speaker. amidst all the controversies gripping the congress, certainly we should at least all be able

to agree that the full faith and credit of the united states, the ry trust that the public practices when it loans money to the government should not hang in the balance every time there is a fiscal debate in washington. this week the house is expected to consider h.r. 807, to allow a temporary exception to the debt limit solely to assure that the full payment of principal and interest is made on the debt in the event of an impasse in washington. that should make perfect sense. as a practical matter a family that's depending on its credit cards to pay its bills, it better make sure to pay the credit card bills first. the executive branch already has considerable powers to protect the nation's credit, but the administration hasn't always acknowledged it. the 14th amendment to the constitution place places the validity of the public debt beyond he question. the government accounting office has consistently held that the treasury secretary already has,

quote, the authority to choose the order in which to pay obligations of the united states, unquote, in order to protect the nation's credit. this is authorities inherited in the 1789 act that established the treasury department and entrusted it with the management of the revenue and the support of the public credit. even with record deficits, our revenues are roughly 10 times greater than our public debt service so there's no excuse for a debt default. and yet, when an impasse over the debt limit loomed two years ago, then treasury secretary tim geithner insisted that his only option was to default on the nation's credit. now, whether this was a crude attempt to hold the nation's credit hostage to political demands for higher spending, or whether it was a sincere misunderstanding of his powers and responsibilities is really immaterial. in the future this measure would order the treasury secretary to promptly and fully pay all

principal and interest due on the national debt, even providing a temporary exemption from the debt limit in order to do so. most states have provisions in their laws or constitutions guaranteeing their debt. last year in testimony to the senate fed chairman ben bernanke praised the state provisions for maintaining confidence in state and municipal markets, and he told the house budget committee that a similar measure at the federal level would help protect the nation's credit. is this a tacit suggestion that we shouldn't meet our other obligations? or does anyone suggest that all this states if similar provisions in their constitutions and statutes for hundreds of years have ever used them as an excuse not to pay their other bills? of course not. on the contrary providing clear and unambiguous mandates to protect their credit first, they actually support and maintain their ability to pay all of

their other obligations. congress is borrowing nearly 40 cents on every dollar it spends, the importance of this he provision should be obvious. with the nation carrying a total debt that exceeds its entire economy, it is imperative that credit markets be absolutely certain that the risk of an american default is nonexistent. without this confidence, rising interest rates could rapidly consume vital government programs and make a mockery of the even modest budget savings wrought by the sequester. opponents charged with protecting the public credit above all other expenditures would subordinate other obligations like payment to troops or children's nutrition, but they forget the public credit is what makes it possible to meets every other obligation of the government. a long impasse over the federal debt limit is something that's much to be avoided.

postponing payment of any of the government's bills would be dangerous and unprecedented. although,isting revenues could support government responsibilities for a while, the stress to other federal employees and contractors would be severe, would rapidly compound, and would eventually threaten core governmental functions. yet there is a worse fiscal outcome and that is a failure to honor the nation's debt obligations. we should remember if the full faith and credit of the united states is ever compromised, all programs are jeopardized. we must recognize that today our country is divided over fiscal policy and it's bitter disputes in congress are likely to go on for some time. the markets ought to be confident that their treasury bonds are safe regardless what political storms are raging in washington. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from illinois, mr. davis, for five minutes. .

mr. davis: thank you, mr. speaker. one, i had the honor to participate in the dedication of a headstone on the grave site of our founder and first president, professor joseph carter corbin. the bible says where there is no vision people perish, and all of us who revere and appreciate the history of the university of arkansas at pine bluff owe a debt of gratitude to our fellow alumnus, ms. gladys turner finney, who thought of the idea, did the research and communicated with other alumni across the country

and brought the idea to fruition. the final resting place of carter was recently discovered in an unmarked grave in forest holmes cemetery in forest park, illinois, which i represent as a member of congress. professor corbin died january 9, 1911 in pine bluff, arkansas. waldheim erred at the cemetery in forest park near his wife, mary jane corbin, and two sons, john w. corbin and william h. corbin. the cemetery known at that time was waldheim german cemetery located at 863 south des plaines avenue in forest park, illinois.

mr. corbin was born in ohio on william and , to susan corbin. he entered ohio university at athens, ohio, in 1850 when he was 17 after having been homeschooled. bachelor's degree in art. he also earned two masters degrees from ohio university in 986 and 1889 -- 1886 and 1889. he later moved to little rock, arkansas, and joined the republican party and became a leader. he quickly rose and became secretary of the state convention and was elected state superintendent of public instruction where he laid the groundwork for the

establishment of the branch normal college. it finally started and he became its founder and principal for 27 years, from 1875 to 1902. a leader in the public education movement in arkansas, professor corbin became the principal of merle high school in 1892. e and fellow educator r.c. childress founded teachers of negro youth in arkansas which became the first teachers color organization. he was the first president. he paired with educators booker t. washington and horaceman, professor corbin was thought to be one of the most highly educated individuals of his time. as a scholarly graduate of ohio

university, during his tenure at branch normal he worked tirelessly to maintain an adequate physical plant and academic program. the student population grew from seven students to 241 udents by 1894 when arkansas graduated its pictures african-american student. as beneficiaries of his work, we hold professor corbin and his legacy in high esteem, an institution which started with seven students, it's now the university of arkansas at pine bluff, offering degrees, masters degrees, bachelors degrees and doctorate degrees. we owe joseph carter corbin, our first president and the founder of a now great

institution a debt of gratitude and thank him for his work. i thank you, mr. chairman, and yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from south dakota, s. noem, for five minutes. -- mrs. noem, for five minutes. mrs. noem: growing up on a farm in south dakota, i know how volatile agriculture and the industry certainly is. our producers will invest in seeds, they'll fertilize the land, they'll put it in the ground in the spring, oftentimes in unfavorable weather in hope that fall they'll come back and be able to pick something up and show for it in the fall. the food provides food not just for south dakota but for our nation as a world. they understand our weather can be extreme and it can be unpredictable. it can also vary a lot from year to year. we've certainly seen that situation this year.

look at what we've witnessed lately. we've gone from extreme droughts in the midwest to now blizzards in april. for agriculture producers, these extremes are more than an inconvenience. whether it's an extended drought that hurts cattle, weather disasters can mean a family operation that's able to make it through other year or family operation that ends forever. when faced with weather-related disasters, i know it's essential for our farmers and ranchers to have immediate assistance to keep their operations running. we have a national security interest in being able to produce our own food in this country. the instant we depend on another country to feed our people is the instant that we completely let them control us and our future. a farm bill not only provides a safety net for us, it keeps us safe. we need to keep our farmers on the land in good times and in bad times. budgeting for these programs through the farm bill process is much more responsible than doing what's been done in the

past. such as passing large ad hoc disaster assistant packages which is what congress often ends up doing year after year if these programs are not in place and they're not funded. often, these disaster programs could be spent at a deficit level rather than responsibly been budgeting for. you know, one of the situations we don't talk about very often is how the dynamics have changed in the farming industry. it's simply not possible for farmers and ranchers to continue to operate without having access to credit. the only way they have access to credit a lot of times is because of dependence on crop insurance and somewhat of a farm safety net. you know, next week the house agriculture committee plans to mark up the farm bill. we need this house to act. we need them to get a farm bill done, one that will support both rural and urban america. we cannot accept another extension this year. we must pass a long-term bill to give certainty to our producers and to guarantee our nation's food supply. with that, mr. speaker, i yield

back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas, mr. poe, for five minutes. mr. poe: mr. speaker, sunday is mother's day where we honor our nation's mothers. my mom is still alive. i got to know my grandmothers, both of them, until they died in their 90's. my three daughters all have children. but i want to talk about a mother that most americans probably have never ever heard of. her name was maddy ripkowsky. let me tell you about her and her family. she's the first generation polish immigrant back in the 1800's, the polish community came into texas through the port of galveston. they settled there while texas

was an independent country. in fact, some polls voted, fought at the battle of san jacinto where texas won its independence from mexico in 1836. but she was born in 1896 in texas. at the age of 17 she married stash ripkowsky, both ewlyweds, a smalltown guy from waverly, texas. after several years this was their family. yes, madie -- maddie had 16 children, four daughters and 12 sons. they were all born by natural childbirth with a mid wife except one. and they lived, this whole family, lived in southeast texas in a small 200-acre farm near deyton, texas. maddie, the wife, mother, made

sure during the depression not the kids went hungry and she taught them true basic life, true grit, belief in the almighty and they worked hard, everything from picking cotton to tending to animals to hauling corn. and every child was expected to do their work on the farm which was self-sufficient. when two of the boys got to be in high school, they were excellent football players. you know, mr. speaker, texas is known for its football teams all the way back to the 1800's. but two of them were so good that the local high school football coach knew they had to work on the farm but the school hired two farmers to take their place and worked the farm so the two high school football stars could play for deyton high school. deyton is a small texas town that loves football. the 5,500 people there that go to friday night football, the stadium seats more than the entire town population. but anyway, back to the family,

they never missed a meal. in fact, maddie was so adamant about family that they all ate together three times a day. can you imagine preparing a table three times a day for 18 people? 16 of them kids and 12 of them sons. after the depression ended, world war ii game. as world war ii game, maddie, having taught her kids service to america, all 12 of her sons joined the united states military. they served in all branches of the military. they served either in world war ii or korea or both. every night maddie would write one of them a letter. she would say the rosary every night. she would pray for all of her sons. and miraculously all 1 of her sons who went -- 12 of her sons who went to war for america came back. there's never been another family with that many sons from the same parents who joined the

united states military. she instilled in them those important values of country, god and family. e ripkowsky family was quite a remarkable clan of texas. er grew -- her kids grew up to marry. knew their spouses and children and grandchildren. one test of motherhood, mr. speaker, is how a mother's kids turn out. well, maddie passed the test 16 times with her 16 children. they all turned out to be wonderful people. in fact, six of them are still alive. i had the opportunity recently at a ceremony where we honored a vietnam veteran with a medal of honor at a post office where six of her kids came to that reception and the youngest,

anie lee campbell, who is now 80, and i talked about her family, about maddie, about growing up with this remarkable woman and she showed me numerous photographs of her family. also there with one of the sons, mike, who talked about their family, polish immigrants, and how they have all turned out to be successful and how they fought for america. before the conversation was over with, mike, i asked him, what did you call your mother all those many years and he said, well, of course, i called her mama. and i also called her ma'am. no kidding? remarkable lady. maddie ripkowsky and we honor her and all of america's mothers this sunday for their lives and dedication to motherhood. and that's just the way it is. yield back.

the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1, the chair declares the house in recess un house and senate will gather for a joint meeting to hear from the south korea and president. live coverage is on c-span. at the white house today, the president is meeting with the south korean president. the two leaders will hold a joint news conference. we will have live coverage on c- span-2. outside of washington, it is election day and south carolina 's first congressional district where mark sanford and elizabeth

vying forsch are the state's congressional seat. recent polls have the two candidates in a dead heat. in a district that republicans have held for a quarter-century. we will update you as results become available later on this evening. just a note on capitol hill today, you may have heard from jackie speer, the congresswoman from california talking about a survey that was released today, saying the claims of sexual assault and the military rose to 26,000 this year if it. she made those comments in her floor speech. defense secretary hagel will hold a briefing today at 3:00 p.m. eastern. we will have live coverage for you on c-span.org. we take you live to a hearing looking at the'interior -- the interior- department's 2014 budget.

madamehat case, secretary, your testimony will be made part of the record. feel free to summarize. >> thank you very much. mr. chairman, members of the committee, it is an honor to present the 2014 budget. i look forward to future years when i have a hand in creating it. i am in my fourth week on the job and enjoying it so far. i want to recognize my colleagues at the table. i want to thank david hayes for his willingness to stay to the end of june, because i am doing as much as i can to tap his wisdom. pam hayes has been incredibly -- pamela haze has been incredibly helpful to me. it is helpful to have a business background. i will do a glancing blow it sequestration. i cannot express that it is very difficult to walk into a deep

breath that just at a $881 million cut to the budget for 2013. 5% on the year but applied over remaining months has been difficult, hard on employees who are committed to mission, to all the things you care about as well. and today are taking it on the chin, from furloughs of park police of 14 days that will not get paid, to a 25% reduction across the board in seasonal hires. so wildlife biologist, law- enforcement rangers, interpretive rangers, maintenance folks, and -- it's just very difficult for us to carry out the mission in the way it is expected. a couple of examples. our public lands in all of your states have welcomed 435 million visitors a year, and they are going to see reductions in services, programs, some of the parks will not be open to the extent we would like them to be

because you've got to protect the people and protect the resources. on the energy side, we announced that we would not be able to do lease sales in california because we have to prioritize on those activities in flight from environmental safety and protection to authorizing curvets to drill. and this is -- to authorizing permits to drill. this will affect -- the environmental impact statement work. i know it is not where you want us to go. it is not where we want to go. and this budget that we are dealing with and 2013 is equivalent to where we were in 2006, not accounting for inflation. it is very difficult. and i have to say that i have been doing what i can to boost the spirit and encourage the people that work at interior that devote so much of their time to this, but it is a rough year. so 2014 is a better choice for

all of us. i know you agree. the $10.90 billion budget for 2014 support energy conservation. it supports upholding our trust responsibilities as the ranking member referenced. the native americans and alaska natives. and it sound science to drive decision making. the investments are focused on the economy, the jobs and our countries future. million increase requested over the 2012 budget, 40% of it is for the fighter program. so there is a lot of puts and 40% is for the fighter program -- a fire program. -- it fulfills a promise to put off shore oil programs and to put them into on shore.

and it has touched every county across the united states. and we think, given the environment we are in, mandatory funding makes sense. on the science side, we have a $946 million investment in basic and applied science to support mission and a social programs. million from 2012. what we use this for? speciesng invasive threats. one big one is the asian carp as it moves into the great lakes. if we let that get out of control, we are in trouble. this provides the science and support to nip that in the bud. the white nose syndrome in bats. theast.s for the nor again, bringing resources to bear from sciences. and then the use of g.i.s.

mapping to get smarter about managing our land. these are investments that will help us carry out our mission and full to all the interest of your stay out of. on the indian program side, our 2014 budget request $2.60 billion for indian programs overall. that is appalled and our trust management responsibilities, education, -- upholding our trust management, education. we have $120 million for contract support costs, for tribes and self-determination, to help domestic violence in indian communities, help them manage their natural resources and prepare for threats from climate change. so this is a balanced budget from the standpoint of supporting the administration's part order without adding a dime to the deficit. one thing that is beneficial about interior is that we generate revenues. this proposes to generate $3.70

billion over 10 years. we have cut administrative costs reducingillion by travel, up being strategic and purchasing. my colleagues have orchestrated the largest i.t. consolidation across the federal government, which is saving hundreds of millions of dollars by being more efficient and how we deliver services. and the budget reflects what a business person would do -- which is picking up artists, scale back in other areas so you can find the areas that are important to you and a line with the mission. we have $600 million of reductions, which includes $476 million under the jurisdiction of this committee, freeing up that money to fund the portis you referenced in opening statements. we watched -- fund the priorities you referenced in opening statements. the final note, hurricane sandy,

i want to thank you for your efforts to pass a supplemental appropriation act. later today we will issue a press release money will be released to support your king sandy relief. it is reopening at the statue of liberty for the fourth of july. it is many other programs that will repair the damage and create more resilience for the future, as we have additional storm events that are impactful. you for thek opportunity to be here. we look for to your questions. >> thank you. there will be six minute rounds. at our schedule and your schedule allows, we would be happy to do a second round to accommodate as many questions as possible. let me begin with hurricane sandy. thank you. million to the

department for mitigation in the northeast. it is gratifying to hear their wildlife refuges will receive support in this way. can you give us further indication of how you'll make all of the details accessible to the public this afternoon? and also talk about the $360 million in mitigation funds. have you made any plans and will you announce those? >> i will give you a high level answer and i will invite my colleagues to provide detail. a press release which will be going out this afternoon will actually have a link that has a list of the projects that encompass that $475 million. that is accessible to the public relatively soon. on the mitigation of funds, there is a lot of work done to usingt building up sand

sand from the intercontinental shelf to make those habitats more resilient. in a number of other programs. and i would like my colleague to address that further. >> thank you, mr. chairman. on the first question, the details of the funding released today will all be contained on our website for. so a complete project list alongside the actual amount of appropriations for each. in addition to that, with respect to mitigation, we are working very hard to come up with the best strategy that we can for those negation -- funds.omitigation we appreciate the opportunity to think about mitigation and to try to maximize the impact that we have to create resiliency on the ground. so we are working with both our partners within the federal government but partners outside

the government to come up with a strategic plan that can ensure that those funds are spent wisely and as effectively as possible. >> you are not ready today to commit those funds? >> that is correct. the funds today are just a recovery and restoration funds. >> madam secretary, among the many public services to perform was in 2008-2009? all along with our predecessors, you served on a commission advancing the national park idea. one of the things you recognized was these heritage areas, one of which we have our critical -- long-term assets in the national parks. you and your colleagues went so far as recommending permanent funding and full program support for the national park service. yet the budget proposes cuts to these heritage areas. some assurance that you will work with us so that we can avoid these cuts and

fulfill the vision that you so eloquently and wisely laid out when we -- with senator baker and our colleagues? >> thank you, mr. chairman. this budget represents tough choices. second century commission was a very rewarding. i think the need to support our national parks, which have such a multiplier effect, is very important. so on the heritage areas, i am fully supportive of heritage areas. it was a difficult decision made to scale back funding, to focus on those that are new, that need to get a boost to get themselves establish. one of the benefits is they have broad community support. so it does reflect some of the hard choices we made in terms of how we prioritize. but we felt that heritage areas needed some support, to get rolling and get up and

operational. but we needed to look at scaling back some that had been around for a time to walk on their own 2 feet. so that is how the credit was identified in the budget. >> i appreciate that. they are public- private partnerships. this generates a lot of economic activity. it is very critical. is, i think, a shared a notion that we can collaborate better and be smarter about these things, but it strikes me -- and my colleagues because these are all over the country -- that there has to be a core federal support level because that is what pulls a lot of the private support, a lot of leverage as a lot of activities. without that, these heritage areas could fail. that would be as you point out a

real detriment. let me add quickly as my time is running out, we have been trying to build on the heritage area to create a national park which would not only moralize senator john casey but also give us a first major national park. we have a national memorial, the roger williams memorial, but this gives our first national this will give us our first national park. secretary salazar was supportive, and i urge you to be so enthusiastic. >> i am enthusiastic. >> the president chose wisely. i have said that repeatedly. i will relinquish my time to senator rakowski. >> thank you, mr. chairman.

let me ask you about them land conveyance issues. i am not only from my discussion here today, but previous conversations we have had, this is something that is not sitting well with the people in alaska, and it does not sit well with me. you have indicated in your with a conservation fund, the proposal to include it in terms of mandatory funding makes -- keeps a commitment of a 50-year promised to the american people. i am looking at a 54-year-old promise. we have been a state for 54 years. we have yet to receive our full land conveyances under that state of act. obligation tol the native people of the state under -- and then i look at the

budget, and we are making a new promise here to mandatory funding for lwcf, we have outstanding obligations that are very serious. what youappreciate have said in that these decisions were made prior to your arrival here. you are defending a budget that you are tasked to defend. i need to have some assurance going forward that we will be able to deal with this, because my assessment is that if we continue at the level of funding that we have been for the land another 50s, we are a years out. can you give me some assurance that you will look to revising

the spending priorities and attempt to finish these interim conveyances? when i came into office 10 years ago, everybody thought that was reasonable. now it looks like that is not only another decade, but another decade beyond that. i need assurance that we will finish this, because the people of alaska and the native people cannot move on their land. what assurances can you give me to see some forward motion in this in a positive way that is not going to be another two decades from now? >> thank you. i have had briefings on this topic and can reassure you there is a commitment to move forward blm and my of

colleagues. interimhe land has had conveyances so far. there is a requirement in the legislation about physically putting a stake every 2 miles. the use of mapping technologies which were not available at the time things were written give us an opportunity to move forward in a more expeditious way on conveyances and do it using technology that is more an efficient. i would be happy to get into more detail with you and have my teammates that are steeped in this talk with you about how the budget supports moving that ford. >> i will meet later today to review the schedule apparently that has been proposed. i do not know whether or not that is a schedule that you all have agreed to, but we need to have greater assurance here. let me ask you on the legacy wells, concern i have is the

federal government comes in, does an assessment, drills, leaves, does not clean up the mess. decades later says when we are screaming about you need to clean up your mess, the idea is the state of alaska can do that, we will take it from the city alaska's's funding. the simple question is, whether or not you feel that the state should be held financially responsible for the federal government tossed responsibility to take care of legacy wells? this, it is assed significant problem, and i appreciate your bringing this up. we need to find a way to fund it in a budget that does not have enough funding for everything we want to do. i appreciate the reaction to the suggestion that the revenues generated from the development on stateside go to

pay for that. if not that, we need to figure out how we prioritize the best way to move forward in a comprehensive way to deal with this issue that is -- that i share to your concern. >> i need to hear from you that you would agree that it is not the state of alaska's's responsibility to clean up the federal government's mess. are we agreement there? >> the wells were drilled to assess the petroleum reserve, and it will benefit the federal government and the state. revenue from that development seem to be a reasonable source to help address the issue, and the legacy wells. we can talk further on what that looks like, what is state, federal, and how we do that any constrained budget environment. >> i will allow you greater opportunity to learn more about this, hopefully see what we are ere.ing with hi

there is no doubt in my mind that when the federal government comes in to land that has the federally designated quadrilles wells, walks away from it, leave a mess, that that is the federal government's responsibility and that it should not then be on the shoulders of the state of alaska to do that cleanup. i want to make sure when you are talking about prioritizing it within the budget that it is prioritizing it within the federal budget and not taking revenues that would have otherwise, to the state. thank you, mr. chairman. >> again, we are using the early bird rule. senator tester? >> i want to thank everybody for being here today, and thank you for putting yourself up for this position. you will do a great job. david hayes, the key for what you have done during your tenure

at interior. i appreciate it. i even more appreciate or french. take you very much for your service. as far as the budget goes, i am encouraged to see the administration is putting some additional funding into renewable energy on public lands. we all know what is going on in eastern montana and north dakota with conventional oil production, and that is a good thing. we cannot forget about other ways to become energy independent. i want to thank you for that. i have a bipartisan bill that i introduced that will hopefully promote more such development, and i look forward to working with your department on that. is there anything else we can do? >> senator, your support is appreciated and founded. i think in a balanced approach to energy, were durables play an important role. i am pleased to see the size

behind assessment of where the resources are, the work that is going on collectively on transmission, which is also important, because where the energy is is not where the energy is used. i hear enthusiasm in the department to continue doing that work, but also supporting conventional developed as you referenced. >> as we move forward, there are other things we can do to facilitate that, let us know. your budget puts its fourth as a priority, and hopefully we can make it that. wildfires,alk about and everybody talks about the four service, which is not in your area, but blm is. blm has forested lands, range lands, and they are be impacted, too. given our current fiscal system ration where a lot of money is being diverted toward fighting thes, and i understand

forest service is beginning to work out and collect data on the effectiveness of their firefighting efforts by certain aircraft. i do not believe blm has started on this, and that is ok. i do not know if they can use information that comes from the u.s. forest service work or not, but i need to know what your plans are. we have a lot of public lands, over 1 million acres burned up in montana last year. what is your plan, to collect what the forest service gets , lm- or will bo do it themselves? >> we have a wildfire burning in california, and it is only may, and it is pretty scary. firefighting is coordinated

between agriculture and the interior. agriculture takes the primary position, but we work hand in hand. next week i will go out -- maybe this week -- with the secretary to the fire center in boise, idaho, to talk about this. the budget going forward, the increase of 40% is to fight wildland fires, and a is to get to the fuel reduction program, all which was zeroed out in the sequester.. things that you could do to help over time are for the spikes that that out of cards and money because it hits the operations and is difficult to manager for but agriculture and interior. >> fuel production is critically important. we will talk about that. you addressed it in your opening, we are in tight money times. is the assessment done by the for service on which aircraft are much effective to fight the

fires, is blm doing this and doing the same thing? >> we are working with the forest service. we're working on aircraft in bridgett dollar. they have the lead on a large air tankers, but we have been working collaboratively with them to come up with a strategy that can put air tankers on the ground for the season this year. with small tankers, we have been determining effectiveness and efficiency through the aviation that we have. >> i would encourage you to do that. effectiveness is the key word here, and efficiency. we need to make sure we are hiring the right groups to fight the right fires with the right equipment. thank you very much for that. i want to talk about indian country for a second.

has negatively impacted them in a big reason, and the reason is they are underfunded to begin with. that is the problem with the sequester. when you make across-the-board cuts, the programs that are care, and the ones that get cut to the bone are getting waxed. in any case, american indians are least equipped to observe this loss. orld you detail specifically in general how your budget will help either restore that money or mediate the potential impacts of the sequester? >> senator, a short time to answer. i would say we are as frustrated and worried about the

impact of the sequester. country, we are trying to prioritize on indian education, to find model schools to find a path forward. law-enforcement, domestic violence issues, self- determination, working with tribes on a government-to- government basis to help their ability to determine the ways they want to govern themselves -- these are all topics of critical discussion. i know there is not enough money to go around, but we're working to do the best job we can. david, do you want to add anything to that? >> i would say, senator, we feel this hurt very hard, because of the indiscriminate way in which the cuts have to occur.

many of the tribes that operate under 638 grants are hurt because they are getting a 9% cut for the remainder of the year. there's nothing we can do about it. our folks are feeling that cut. we are having to furlough folks. that is why your fiscal 2013 budget is so important. >> thank you for that, and i am sure there will be further debate on that. 15 seconds, you talked about itan carp, and the impact has had toward the great lakes. i hope other folks are giving weeksion to noxious versus crops. >> let me give people the order

of arrival. senator feinstein, udall. senator blount? >> that you, mr. chairman. secretary, welcome to the committee. i have always thought your job may be the best job of the federal government. i hope for your sake it is right. it is a challenging job with great opportunities. we have not had a chance to visit, so i will talk to you about a big project in missouri, the arch project. a lot of cooperative effort has gone into that. your predecessor mr. salazar was there three times. two times their with mr. lahood, and a tiger grant. i do not know if you are familiar with how the arch sets, but it is separate from the downtown mall by interstate 70. the tiger grant seems to be in place that will actually connect the park to the rest -- the old federal courthouse where the

dread scott case was an and other public land in town that is not necessarily federal land. has the potential i am told of the biggest joint partnership project that the park service has ever done. the city just voted a $10 million annual tax of for the next 20 years that would support this project. there are $220 million of private funds that have been pledged. and the arch is 50 years old in october. years, you have to look at these things and see what needs to be done to make sure they can last another 50 years the 50th anniversary was one that secretary sullivan are salazar, heecretary

said he would move heaven and earth to get this done by october, 2015, which it appears that it might be easier to move heaven and earth. there does seem to be a tendency to i would like you to look at. he did not have to comment on it today. the one big request from the mayor is if you could put somebody in charge of this, one person that really tries to be sure that all of the stays on that the private and public elements of this that are not federal continue to move forward in a way that all works. i know there is one contract with bi-state transportation that runs the trams and the arch since the beginning, and that contract runs out -- it actually expired december 31, 2012.

there was a six-month extension that expires in 54 days. it needs some attention pretty quickly. for bonding and other purposes, to update equipment, that i think my state does -- i do not think the federal government does that -- but they have to have a contract that allows them to do what they need to do, and i think the park service has come in with some amendments that have never been in the contract before that they are concerned about. so i guess one thing i would like to ask you to do is make a commitment to come visit us at -- march and get personally in the arch and get personally involved as her predecessor was. and any comments you want to make about how public-private religious will be viewed by your department and by the park service would be appreciated.

>> thank you. i look forward to meeting with you directly and visiting the arch. there is a point of contact. the number two person in the national park service, you can look to her as a focal point on this. i was briefed on it. i cannot -- >> the guy that promised that left. maybe it was bigger than he thought. >> to your comment about partnerships, from the private side, which is where i have been for my 35-year career, there is no question the ability of private enterprise to work closely with our federal land management agencies, park service, u.s. forest service, other elements of interior, is really important, to leverage n, sorces, to get buy-i you have an asset like the st. louis arch that is not only a

national treasure, but locally embraced and taken care of and helps make our federal dollars go farther. it is a great illustration of public-private partnerships in action, and there will be more opportunities to do that kind of work as we think about that we care a lot about, that we want to protect, and there are and otherboof them states. >> there is significant property that is visually part of this whole experience. i think the park service, if you will and courage other partners, public and private, the park service has to be willing to look at this in a different way than they have before. we park service contains cannot let this happen unless totally in control. it is not a public-private partnership. one of the things that as a new

leader you can help instill is a partial cure rework, and it is not just a one side giving you all their money and they do what ever you think you ought to do this. communities made a huge commitment, individuals made a huge commitment, and i would like for you to work to make this a model product of what these partnerships can be moving forward. not every time a community comes up with $200 million or private individuals match that with another to lead a $20 million, and we need to do the kinds of things that will be a good lesson going forward to goido that. >> if i could have five seconds. and secondl park century commission is opening comments, and talked a lot about public-private partnerships, and i can tell you about my conversations at the national park service, he is supportive of this, and

increasing flexibility on how we recognize these kinds of partnerships and encourage them going forward. >> that you. senator feinstein? >> mr. chairman, madam secretary, i want to add my words of welcome. i had the opportunity to meet with you and i look forward to work with you. i would like to begin by thanking the gentleman on your right. i have known david hayes for the 20 years i have been just about in the senate. it began with his negotiation of a quantification settlement agreement, which we in a lot ofia offered cholera river water, but the negotiant be conducted. but since those times, mr. hayes has been the point person for the most contentious issue in california, which is water. he has been really quite

wonderful in terms of moving to see that the department anticipates problems and moves administratively to solve that. i'm very grateful for that. he is going on to teach law at both of our all maters, stanford, and served at the hewlett foundation. david, i want to wish you all the good things. you have been just terrific. and your service to the country has been remarkable. i want to thank you for that. that and secretary, i would like to associate myself with the comments of senator tester. you mentioned the ventura fire. there have also been five other wild fires started at the same time. we anticipate a very bad year. wildfire usually hits california in the fall, but the santa anas were rolling, and it hit in the

spring, and it is going to be a problem. you are correct, hazardous fuel mitigation is critical. the quick movement of planes, the ability to update a fire. we had 2200 lightning strikes on one day, which started a thousand small fires. the ability to address them quickly is really important before the rage out of control because of candidly over growth that has been allowed to be unabated. that is the first thing. the second thing is you are about to get a baptism of water. is the absence of water. the primary source of california at's water is this year in nevada snowpack, which is drying up. as of may 2, the sierra nevada was at 17% of normal. california is the largest ag stake in union. the allocation for farmers is

20% of their contract amount. it takes 45% of a contract about to be able to plant and the everything required to farm in california. in 2010, when this happened, the unemployment rate in mendota was 40%. we cannot let that happen again. much to the credit of your reclamation department, on april 15, the mid region put out a press release detailing administrative actions that have been taken to date to create an additional 110,000 acre-feet of water. this is what we had hoped that the department will anticipate and move to do those things with respect to water transfers,

north, south, east, west, using the inner tied, using ground water banking, doing whatever we need to do that is prudent and wise to see that water is adequate. 110,000 acre-feet, i am very interested in what other actions can be taken. and this press release describes banks groundwater, 20,000 acre- feet, and water transfers of up as two620 acre-feet sources for additional supplies. he essentially, i would like to ask you, i would like to know, what is the status of reclamation costs effort to secure these additional supplies? a senator, i will take glancing blow and turn it over to my colleague to the right. i want to say that david hayes has been an amazing resource on

these issues. you are fortunate his brain is going to california. i will miss at next to me. i will have all of his phone numbers and will use them literally. i will turn to david to answer specifically on the sources topic with reclamation, and i mikehad briefings with connor. as conferring with the governor earlier this week. the other thing is conservation, because we're seeing these low-water drought years, and that is the biggest source of the challenge. senator, thank you for your warm words fit is been a pleasure working with you. driest time in normal for many%

snowpack. we have been anticipating this. we are up to a 20% allocation for sow of delta because of that 110,000-acre feet due to water banking, transfers, etc. in addition, you mentioned the additional 20,000 acre-feet of water banking and transfers. we are anticipating working with the contractors that will have 160,000 acre-feet of water transfers, and we are working closely with them to allow liberal rescheduling of water, which will be 225,000 acre-feet of water. if we are successful in all these ventures, despite the dry water year, we are hoping to get to about a 35% or even 40% equivalent amount for the south delta folks. it is taking all hands on deck kit we appreciate the work that

others south of delta irrigators are putting into this, working closely with us. mike conner is in california as the of these issues. i was with the governor yesterday year. we are looking forward to bringing you as soon as my kids back to talk about the conservation program, which is the long-term fix for this problem that we have to solve. >> thank you, and mike connors is appearing before energy and water folks tomorrow. we have a number of questions for him. one last thing, madam secretary, you will receive a letter from five members of the house bipartisan, and myself to ask if you would be willing to come to the central valley and talk with farmers and understand the crisis that we have year after year. one last point -- for 10 years, your department has been looking cost-sibility studies for

effect of dam races in california, and we have not yet had fidelity to those feasibility studies. i would say that that is a matter of highest priority to get resolved, because unless we are able to hold water from the wet years for the dry years, california will end up as the desert state. i really believe that. and it'll kill agriculture, and you speak of conservation -- i come from a city that is concerned water like mad, and they are going to tertiary treatment of water in southern california. that is being done to the greatest extent possible, but you have to have some water to start with. we really need your help. thank you, senator feinstein. thank you, and madame secretary, welcome. glad to have you on board. let me if i might shift focus if

i could to a couple of questions about the sequester. i have eight bit of a unique experience here because i was a member of the cabinet during the bush administration, secretary of agriculture, and i certainly appreciate the fact that the sheet of music using from comes from an office that is oval in this town, if you are knowing what i am saying. hasevery cabinet moember talked about the sequester in the same terms you have talked about in your testimony. it has the aura of the sky is falling, the sky is falling. you are also talking to a former governor, a former mayor, balanced budgets during good times and bad times, when

times were good and revenues example, post 9/11, you just kind of had to deal with that. when i came here in 2005 and somebody said to me, you could get somewhere around the 5% cut, and the best you can hope for is a flat budget, i thought, hello yet. this is a breeze. after what we had been through post 9/11 at the state level, that did not seem to be too big a challenge. ,nd yet i hear secretary hayes i hear you, other kacabinet members talk about how dire this is. some specificout questions. i appreciate the sequester's less than artful across-the-

board cuts, and i have done it all. i have the across-the-board cuts, i have done focused cuts, anything that was necessary to get the budget to balance we did. but if congress were to give your department and other departments greater flexibility to make judgments about where you would allocate the resources from one area to another, wouldn't you find that to be helpful? absolutely we would find that to be helpful. i'm not quite four weeks into government service, and after more than 35 years of eight private business, i have dealt with tough budget years. i have never ever implemented those on a line item by line item basis, and so when you see the comments that come from me and others about the impacts of

sequester, is the nature by which the cuts have been required of us. the 2014 budget reflects prioritization. the question but there is a desire to develop resources in this country, conventional and renewable. it costs money to do that. there is a return on that investment. we have a trust obligation to tribes across this country, and we need money to do that. we are reflecting the 200014 budget, a set of priorities that are in fact scaling back others and that is a big problem with the sequestered. >> your issue with us is more along the lines of is not the cuts so much as the forced way of the implementing them, if we could get flexibility there, i can manage to this budget, is what you are saying. and i suspect you could. >> we would appreciate all

flexibility that could be given to us, and predictability. of amended part way through the air is in fact a 9% cut, and applied to every line item is very difficult. >> let me ask you another question. admittedly, a more sensitive question, but it is an important asked. camef the things that about as a result of the affordable care act was that a certain select group of federal employees were targeted to go from the federal health plan into the exchanges. and that is the way the health care law was passed, and it is basically our staff, congressional staff. congressional staff will now go to the exchanges. some would argue that is a good thing, a bad thing, what ever. would you support an approach that basically said if it can

save money, we will take every federal a employee, your employees add enter all -- at a tear, and instead we will put them in the exchanges. would you support that? >> senator, i can speak from a perspective of the business person. in the business that i ran before coming here, we felt it was important to provide our full-time employee is but a comprehensive plan and for our part time employees who had a limited plan, the exchange was a better option. i think i would need to look broadly at how it might be applied to the federal government. that is how we chose to do it in private industry. it was a blend of both. >> so my employees are full- time. i do not think it had anything to do with them being part time.

but before the fact that i am not seeking reelection, they're hoping for a long career here on capitol hill. >> i am not familiar with the circumstance. i would have to look into that. >> secretary hayes , what is your sense of that? would you be in comfortable with all injured employees going to the exchange? >> i apologize, but i am not an expert in this area. it is the department of health and human services implementing the affordable care act, but i apologize, but i cannot respond. >> thank you. >> senator udall? >> staking, mr. chairman hamas and let me also joined a whole agreeing in associating myself with remarks about david hayes. madam secretary, agree to have you here, and thank you for coming in and meeting. and thank you for your service

of the department. david, you have been a good friend of mine and an extraordinary friend of the west, and it has echoed up here. you heard senator feinstein and the chairman and others talk about it. i think one of the things that has been so key is you have focused on water and water in the west is very controversial, and when we have these three years of drought, and in new mexico, it is up to 12 years where we have some serious situations, and you have been right on top of it by working on achievedhis, and settlements where we will stretched our water resources. i hate very much appreciate that and we will miss you a lot, and the department will miss you, and your students will gain a lot from you out there at stanford. madam just briefly agree, secretary, with senator tester

on the indian country and native americans and what is happening on sequestration, and i am encouraged to hear a deputy secretary hayes say this budget will restore those. i do not know why we ever got ourselves in the situation when we created a sequester we tried to protect the most vulnerable, and the most vulnerable population in america is the native american population. we did not put them in that category. it is a terrible tragedy, and they are really being hit hard now. i think the only care that was not exempted was the indian health service, so it is not under your jurisdiction, but it seems like an important point to make here. i want to applaud the president and the you for putting in the budget the 1870's to mining law reform. i worked with senator markell with senator markell

state which brought the reform forward. i know what you are doing is proposing reform, including a new leasing program which royalties. mine fee.ed land we appreciate that. the mineral leasing act provides that all states shall be paid 50% of the revenues resulting from the leasing of mineral resources of federal, public domain lands within their borders. revenue is vital to the mexico, where it funds our public education system. new mexico state leaders are very upset by the the part of a tear's office of natural resource revenue that these state revenues are subject to sequestration. these are state revenues based on mineral the element within state borders and are not federal funds. in new mexico alone, we expect

to lose 25 $9 in state mineral 2012 to in fiscal year sequestration. i am working with senators from other never -- mineral-revenue- generating states that will address this issue, but i hope you can resolve this administratively. i understand the decision to subject these state shares of revenues was made before your time, so i hope it will get a fresh look from you. these royalties are part of a bargain between western states and the federal government which owns so much land in our states. -- willng that bargain, your team review the department's decision to share royalties as subject is a question? >> senator, thanks for raising my awareness of this issue. i have a couple of minutes here

that my colleagues have been bringing me up to speed that it is not the act office of revenue.a i am unclear as to what kind of jurisdiction we would have over this. the you want to provide more detail? >> senator, we may determinations based on the whatt control act, and things were accepted and were not. it is unfortunately consistent andrevenue and payments mineral revenue payments, the sequester impacts those. we have looked at at least twice. >> these are state revenues. i mean, what we are going to do in legislation is we will look at making sure you do not get your hands on them and also we

did not get into this kind of situation. are on that. we the last two years have seen the largest wild fires in new mexico history. where and a drought and are bracing for the worst year yet. i applaud the president and your department for make full funding of the 10-year suppression average a priority and for supporting full funding for the collaborative force landscape restoration program at $40 million. i am concerned that the president's fiscal 2014 budget request for hazardous fuels reduction for the office of wildland fires reduced by $88.9 million. this is a 40% cut for the program, and it seems to me that this is not the area to be cutting. what is the justification for this cut, and why are you doing this? why are you headed on this direction on the hazardous feels reduction for the department of interior? tomy colleagues may be able

get more detail. during the sequester, we have removed the budget for reduction is not the best way to manage our public lands. it makes all the sense of the world, the ounce of prevention worth it out of your argument, and we agree with that. the difficult decisions made in this budget, we did not have the capacity to go to emergency funds when we have fires that exceed that average. it impacts the overall operations of interior. we have a difficult choices trying to balance what goes into suppression versus feels reduction. david, do you what to add any more to that? >> i appreciate your concern, and be recognized the importance of hazardous fuels reduction and the balance between prevention.

as the secretary noted, we are dealing with different -- difficult choices, and poor nelly fire is a difficult thing to budget in the hole. we're committed to having adequate funds for suppression, particularly as we move into a complex fire season, and we look forward to work with you to come up with long-term sustainability for the budget overall. >> thank you. alexander? >> thanks, madam secretary. welcome. figureso over some here. the great smokeys had nearly 10 million visitors into doesn't well and had $19 million in federal appropriations. the grand canyon had half as many and receive $21 million.

yosemite had 3.8 million. that is less than half as many visitors as the smokeys, and received $29 million in federal appropriation. d canyon,se of the grant ca there were entrance fees. there's a great inequality here. taking the entrance of these furs, the great smokeys was given to the united states by the people of tennessee and north carolina and school children who collected dollars in the 1930's, and one agreement was there would not be an entrance fee. the western parts were carved out of plans given by the united states. the smokeys are already penalized because they did not that the $14 million the grand canyon gets and $15 million yosemite gets in entrance fees.

visitedshould the most national park, with twice as many visitors as these two western parts, receive less appropriated funding than the western parks? >> senator, i appreciate the question. i appreciate your park, and i am closer to it, so i will spend more time there than i have been in the past. the 2014 budget request $90 million for great smoky mountains, which is level with the 2012 funding. it is difficult to compare -- i appreciate the visitation to the park and that road that goes through and the entrance the issue. the management of the park has to do with their acreage, with their threats. are a lot of factors that go into that budget, and it is difficult to say it is a function of the number of viewors versus a broader

-- >> what i would like you to do is review the formula. you should take into account the fact that the park cannot by law collect an entrance fee. $14 million or $50 million right there, which is 75% as much as the entire federal operation. to be funded less than the western parks at a time when it has a lot more visitors -- the wear and tear on the ks is a product of the visitors. as you begin your study, i would hope you take a fresh look at that funding formula in light of what i think is the persistent underfunding of the smokeys. we love the grand canyon. i have been down it. i went with senator udall's

cousin, who took it down with me 20 years. we do not want our part to be -- will you take a look at that as part of your review of policy? >> i will be happy to take a look at that. >> two other questions. have you been asked about the white knows syndrome with bats at all? senator udallwhy is asking questions about bats. per acre fort $74 the insects they do not eat -- prison is a big part of it. what is the status of research you are working on to deal with white nose syndrome? >> i have been briefed on that, and the budget for 2014 includes

increases in the u.s. fish and wildlife service and usgs budgets to deal with that. identifying the resource issue, and there is no question that huge potential impact on agriculture. that is part of our science budget we are requesting for 2014. >> thank you. on the question of funding, back to the smokeys, one of the things we are proudest of our volunteers. you are aware of that. you might visit there and to see the good example of that. there are over 3000 values, and the estimated that the other service is $3.5 million a year. that does not make up for the funding loss. i have one other question i would like to ask you. there is enthusiasm for renewable energy within the

administration, and i have been puzzled by this obsession with building gigantic grotesque wind powers over the scenic america. most of our great environmental groups were founded by people who admired and so adams -- ansel adams' photographs, and then we destroyed the environment in terms of saving the environment, putting the cuisinarts arcs 0--- in the sky that kill birds. we have thousands of abandoned mines across the kevin, and now we're looking for money to clean those things up. what will we do when these windmills blowdown or when they wear out after 20 years or when the big tax subsidies for rich people that fund them run out and we decide we did not want to spend $12 billion a year

subsidizing them? who will clean them up? there are thousands of them, and is there a bond that you require of developers of wind turbines on public lands so that if at any time they are abandoned by the developer, is there a bond that the developer has to put up to make sure that the landscape is returned to its former pristine beauty? >> senator, i will have to defer to the deputy secretary case on that. >> there is a lease requirement for the owner to be able to take down that turbine at the end of their useful life, like we require for conventional oil and gas come all leaseholders, to take down their equipment and return the land to its previous condition. i do not know if there is a bond requirement. we will look at it and get back to you. >> does it require it?

>> there is a requirement but the developer to take down -- this is on public lands obviously -- to take down the turbines at the end of their useful life. whether there is a specific on her arm or not, i did not know right now, that we will get that information to you. >> thanks, david, and i will add my compliments to your work here. you, mr. chair, and that you very much for it and want to start by echoing senator udall's comments in regard to the proposed reduction in funding for hazardous fuels production. we had this last summer in oregon, the largest forest fires we have had in 100 years, one the size of rhode island. the forest was dry, but the other big factor was the accumulation of fuel from fire suppression in the past, combined with the absence of

forest management. it is kind of a hazardous combination -- house dabbles in momentarily. gavels inse momentarily.

>> south korean president park arriving at the white house about 45 minutes ago. a news conference this afternoon at 1:30. a reminder that the house and senate will hold a joint meeting to mark the hear from the south korean president. today the house is coming in next four legislative work, and all the bill this afternoon is a bill that will allow employers to grant comp time in said of overtime to hourly workers. for a preview of that and the week ahead, we spoke to daniel newhauser. >> what can you tell us about this bill coming up tuesday? >> this is one of the major bills we will see this week.

the comp time bill is a republican idea. the 1990's,this in but it never went anywhere. it would allow private sector employers to offer workers comp time as opposed to pay and a half for overtime work. it would allow workers to a crew that comp time and they could cash it out later or just take some time off whenever they need it. it is part of the republican agenda that they are trying to push to be more friendly to female voters, minorities, things like that. democrats are not thrilled with this idea and have rejected it. they say it would unfairly strip workers of that pay at half that a lot of workers need and live on, and it has got a lot of push back from unions and other groups. >> why is this bill a top

priority for eric cantor? has rolled out his new agenda this congress. they got drubbed in the polls with female voters, so they are postingnd out-push, round tables with workers and things like that, pushing this as a bill that would allow women to stay home with their children if they are sick or to the parent-teacher conferences, things like that. they're trying to put on a more friendly face to those types of demographics that they have not done well with when it comes to -- >> later this week the house will bring up a bill about spending parties. will you tell us about that. >> this is the sword of damocles, the debt limit approaching rapidly.

the republican's have the idea, the debt prior toization bill, if we pass over the debt limit without extending it, this would allow the treasury secretary to pay off interest on debts and their deficit with any tax revenues that come in. whereas other programs would fall by the wayside. that is the primary problem democrats have with it. they derisively called this the page and a first act or pay some of our bills first act, and it would allow the debt and interest to be paid so we would not default, and other social programs would not get paid. >> hour the fiscal talks between house leaders of an obama going? >> there is not too much communication right now. everyone is in a weight and see mode. -- a wait-and-see mode.

it is unlikely the senate democrats will take this up. it is possible we will go up to the edge of the debt limit these last two years, but everyone is waiting to see how this will progress. >> we thank you for your time. >> thank you. >> the house gaveling in momentarily. the role for a bill that would allow the employers to grant, time is that of overtime to pay hourly workers. in the senate they today a bill authorizing the army corps of engineers to run on flood protection and water supply projects. they will break for their weekly party much as at of about 30. we will bring a joint news conference at 1:30 with president obama and south korean 1:30 eastern., at also defense secretary hagel holding a briefing in the

pentagon on sexual assaults in the military. at 3:00 on c-span.org p.m.. examined the journal of the last day's proceedings and announces to the house his approval thereof. pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1 the journal stands approved. for what purpose does the gentleman rise? >> pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1, i demand a vote on agreeing to the speaker's approval of the journal. the speaker: the question is on agreeing to the speaker's approval. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the journal stands approved. mr. quigley: i request the yeas and nays. the speaker: the yeas and nays are requested. those favoring a vote by the yeas and nays will rise will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this question are postponed. the pledge of allegiance today will be led by the gentleman

from michigan, mr. benishek. mr. benishek: i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the speaker: the chair will entertain up to 15 requests for one-minute speeches on each side of the aisle. for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan rise? mr. benishek: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker: without objection. mr. speaker, i rise today to announce that the circle drive of the oscar g. johnson medical center will be named after a local son in the iraq war veteran, sergeant first class prestap. he graduated from north dickinson high school in 1985 before attending northern michigan. sergeant prestap also served as

a police officer at the v.a. medical center where i worked as a physician. while bravely defending his nation in iraq, sergeant prestap was killed in action on thanksgiving day, 2006. the entire dickinson community came together to memorialize him at the v.a. facility where he guarded our veterans. i am honored today to have helped him fight for this distinction over the past two years. this memorial represents a small but important gesture of gratitude, mott only for sergeant prestap's sacrifice but for his life-long pursuit of selfless service to others. i'm very pleased that all visitors to the world-class v.a. hospital will soon be able to remember a true hero from northern michigan who laid down his life so others could live in freedom. i yield. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois seek

recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. madam gley: thank you, speaker. i rise today in support of early childhood education. need the countries most highly skilled work force in the world and to develop that work force we have to start at the beginning, with early childhood education. research from stanford shows that rich students perform better than middle and low-income students. quite simply, they enter kindergarten more prepared thanks to high quality preschool. nobel laureate economist heckman found a 7% to 10% annual return on effective preschool. every child deserves a chance to succeed in school and throughout their lives.

providing early childhood education can give them that chance and the entire nation will be better off for it. thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from montana seek recognition? mr. rehberg: i ask unanimous consent to -- mr. daines: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. daines: today i rise in strong opposition to the bill that collects sales tax on behalf of other cities and states when selling products over the internet. this bill was fundamentally changed how online purchases were taxed and will place another burden on montana small businesses. you see, back home in montana we don't have a statewide sales tax. in fact we often say you know you're a native montanan if you voted against the sales tax twice. this legislation, which the senate passed last night, montana small businesses will be forced to collect sales tax for up to 9,600 cities and

states, none of which will go to montana. it will severely undermine many small businesses in our state. as a fifth generation montanan who supports our state's no sales tax policy, i strongly oppose this legislation and i will fight to stop should it reach the house floor. thank you and i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from new york rise? without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> madam speaker, the success of the boston law enforcement and respond -- in responding to the marathon bombing is due to the skill and coordination of the law enforcement community. mr. higgins: boston's law enforcement agencies also have the benefit of membership in the urban area security initiative program. the security program was created to develop capabilities to prevent and respond to attacks, just like the one in our most vulnerable cities. unfortunately, funding shortfalls have cut the number of cities included in this program from 64 to 32.

the buffalo-niagara region was among the eliminated regions. mr. speaker, the limited cities are still vulnerable and in fact it was recently revealed that a canadian terror plot may have targeted the area in niagara falls. a sudden exclusion from this security program threatens to render that investment wasted. the increase security and response capabilities that have been developed must be preserved and we have an obligation to restore eligibility to these excluded communities. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> i ask permission to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, madam speaker. madam speaker i rise today to congratulate the historic achievement of the angelo state university men and women track and field team. the rams won the most outdoor

track and field titles. this marks the first time they have won their conference title the same year, the fifth consecutive for the bells and first for the rams since 1992. the rams won their title defending the west texas a&m in the final race. mr. conaway: these young men and women worked tirelessly this year to put their place in history. they bring great pride to their school, san angelo. i wish them great success as they defend their titles next year. again, i congratulate the san angelo rams and bells for their outstanding track and field titles. go rams. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from maine seek recognition? ms. pingree: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. ms. pingree: thank you, madam speaker. madam speaker, for generations we have sought to improve working conditions for working

families, the minimum wage, the 0-hour workweek. these changes were all passed -- the 40-hour workweek. these changes were passed to have families work under a decent working condition. now the republicans want to roll back some of these basic conditions, starting with the 40-hour workweek. the bill we are debating this week, which should be called the right to work for less act, is designed to avoid employers paying overtime. the comp time can be used when it suits the employer. there is no question we need to improve workplace rules. like equal pay for equal work or guaranteed paid sick leave or a higher minimum wage. but rolling back the clock to do away with the 40-hour workweek is a step backwards and it's a lousy deal for american workers. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back her time. for what purpose does the gentleman from tennessee seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to

address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> i come to the floor today to voice my support for h.r. 1406, the working families flexibility act of 2014. families face difficult choices every day how to balance their responsibilities at work with their duties at home. government employees have always had the option to convert accrued overtime into time off from work. however, private sector employees do not have this option. mr. desjarlais: this forced employees to take vacation days or simply not work when confronted with sick children, responsibility for aging parents or running errands. h.r. 1406 will provide private employees the flexibility that government employees enjoy while protecting the rights of workers and their employees. i urge my colleagues to support working families and vote in

favor of this legislation. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from california seek recognition? without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for ne minute. ms. sanchez: thank you, madam speaker. last night reports circulated that the air force official who is in charge of the sexual assault prevention program at the pentagon was arrested for sexually assaulting a woman in a parking lot. although we are still waiting for a full investigation to be conducted, if true, this type of conduct is absolutely unacceptable especially from the individual who's in the leadership position to prevent this. when one joins the u.s. military, he or she is expected to have the highest level of

character and represent. he was not only a leader but he as responsible for enforcing sexual assault prevention. i worked for many years in congress on this issue. fundamental changes are needed in order to combat this. it's up to the military and to the congress to ensure that victims will be respected and protected and that offenders will be punished. it's absolutely necessary that this problem of leadership and character and climate in the military changes, and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? mr. smith: madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. smith: madam speaker, a new study by the heritage foundation warns that the

senate immigration bill would cost $6.3 trillion. that's because over their lifetime, illegal immigrants given amnesty would receive $9.4 trillion in government benefits while paying over $3.1 trillion in taxes. government benefits includes social security, medicare, medicaid, food stamps and health care. that means each taxpayer would be forced to pay $40,000 just to cover some of the cost of the immigration bill. the immigration bill costs too much, has no deadline to secure the border and hurts american workers. we should put the interests of american taxpayers and american workers first. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one

minute. mr. takano: i rise today to pay tribute to former riverside moore. ember amil he received injustice firsthand. in 1965, his brother, o'neil, was murdered by the knight riders, a tragedy that in some ways fueled his activism. a veteran, he served in the united states air force for eight years. after being honorably discharged, he settled with his family in riverside where he worked for the united states postal service for over 30 years, eventually becoming the assistant postmaster. never to sit idly by, amil was involved in local organizations, he was president of the riverside naacp chapter and served on the board of the greater riverside urban league. later, he decided to run for public office and was elected to the riverside city council in 1994, becoming one of the first african-american city councilmembers in our city's

history. ring his tenure, amil showed unparallel passion toward improving our community. riverside is lucky to have had such a remarkable and dedicated push servant like amil moore. i am incredibly proud that he came to riverside and that our city was where he fulfilled his dreams. he will be missed. thank you, madam speaker. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from indiana seek recognition? >> madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one inute. >> madam speaker, i rise today to highlight more wasteful government spending. the "washington post" recently reported the federal government will spend at least $890,000 on service fees for more than 13,000 empty bank accounts this year. let me say that again. our federal government will

13,000 90,000 servicing empty bank accounts with a balance of zero. the president's o.m.b. thinks that's good news because the numb of zero balance accounts has decreased by 50%. i think we can do better. we must close these bank accounts and put money sitting in inactive ones to good use. i plan to introduce legislation soon that will do just that madam speaker, president reagan once noted how only in washington does it make sense for the agency responsible for everything outside to be called the expect of -- department of interior. i would add only in washington is it good news when the government spends $1 million on nothing. i yield back the balance of my time. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from north carolina seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to

address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one inute. mr. butterfield: we have lived with sequestration for two months now. it is damaging the american economy and killing american jobs -- jobs. we must totally repeal sequestration now. democrat are prepared to vote for full repair. a piecemeal approach to these cuts is simply the wrong way forward. we should not be in the business of picking winners and losers when we reverse cuts to t.s.a. because the delays created made front page news. our actions should not be driven by who makes the most noise but rather what is best for the country and the american people. life-saving technology is

taking a $.6 billion hit. are we to think that research for cures to cancer and h.i.v.-aids, diabetes are less important than how quickly we move through airport lines? we need to send a clear message to the american people that we will not stand for arbitrary cuts, we must fully repeal sequestration now. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition. without objection the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> madam speaker, today i rise in support of h.r. 1406 this epiece of legislation we will be debating today, the working families flexibility act of 2013. i am proud of the work my friend, congresswoman martha roby has done on this bill. this legislation makes life easier for american families by giving them an additional tool to balance the demands of their

family and workplace life. mr. sessions: as the father of boys i know it takes a lot of time not only to raise them but to prepare them for their future but also -- but i also had a job in the private sector and i know there are times when people in the private sector need the flexibility to do like i did, to take their boys to a boy scout camp out or wrestling tournament. currently, public sector work rse the ability to convert overtime into comp time off. america's private sector workers deserve the same option that union workers have. i look forward to supporting this legislation on the floor and encourage my colleagues to do the same. yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia seek reck in addition?

without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one inute. mr. johnson: agreements stack the deck against working people and have been a concern to me ever since i came to congress. these agreements are pervasive and adversely affect countless americans every year too many americans are forced to give up their rights to have a trial by jury when it comes to these consumer agreements they signed with these agreements. my bill would remedy this by remedying any predispute agreement that requires claims for employees, consumers' rights and antitrust. we must protect our constitutional right to a fair trial by jury of one's peers. i will continue to champion this bill until it is signed into law. i urge my colleagues to support

the arbitration fairness act and madam speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> as we asproach the -- approach the summer month well, get closer to the creded -- dreaded deist 2014 when obamacare is lost and we see how this takeover is going to work. the administration is not even certain of that. families and businesses in my district have great concern over what's going to happen. when i talk to small business owners, many of them say they're going to have to stop providing health care and put these folk into these exchanges because they need the money to stay competitive. it's going to be something that they can find savings, and again new york these uncertain times they're not sure exactly

what they're going to do. when you look at what the president said, if you like your health care you can keep your health care, in fact new york my district there's going to be 44,000 seniors that are going to lose medicare advantage because of obamacare. taxes will go up, taxes will go up on businesses and families, individuals are already seeing their premiums increase, and the president has done nothing provide certainty. as i said, the administration isn't even sure how this is going to play out. and i believe, ladies and gentlemen, that this is going to end up in a train wreck. this is going to end up as something that's going to hurt the economy and hurt health care. i thank the gentlelady and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, madam speaker. last weekend i had the men and women -- i had the honor to

visit the men and women of the 174th unit. they support missions around the globe including supporting combat missions. theyed also aid during emergencies such as hurricane sandy. i was thoroughly impressed with the professionalism of colonel greg -- of the colonel and the officers and airmen under his command. mr. ma fee: i also sow -- mr. maffei: i also saw first hond how sequestration is affecting them. approximately 280 who work for the 174th are subject to furlough, forcing them to work missions shorthand. many of them are in the national guard and work full time in uniform. they are members of the armed forces, on military missions, yet they are subject to sequestration. this congress should be ashamed

that soldiers are sequestered in a time of war. i urge this body to find a way to prevent these furloughs so the 174th and the military can prevent this. we can cannot wait another week. we must give our soldiers and say horse an airmen the support that they need. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from texas seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlelady is recognized for one minute. ms. johnson: it has been more than 20 weeks since the tragic shoot at sandy hook school. yet congress has still been unable to pass a comprehensive legislative piece to curb gun violence in this country. while an overwhelming majority of americans support background checks, senate republicans last month politic the -- block the

important measure that would have supported background check it is many types of private firearm salesism came here from the mental health field. every day that the republicans in congress choose to block critical measures to reduce gun violence, we will prevent having a safe community because with the background checks, many innocent, sick people will be stopped. we cannot afford to continue to lose lives and have families severely impacted by senseless violence at the hands of criminals with deadly firearms. we owe it to the american people to respond immediately to this violence. thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's time has expired from you were d -- for what purpose does the jerusalem from missouri rise? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized for ne minute.

>> thank you, madam speaker. leave it to washington to leave a severely outdated government regulation on the books where it can continue to be a thorn in the side of hardworking americans all across the country. under the fair labor standards act of 1938, yes, 1938, three years before our country entered world war ii, american workers in the private sector are not allowed to choose to be paid for overtime with extra time off instead of extra wages. there's no denying that our work force has changed since 1938. nowadays 59% of american families have two paraphernalias that work, 8.5 million workers are single parents. when you're balancing work and family, time can be as valuable as money. the working families flexibility act which house republicans have introduced will amend the 1938 law to give more american workers the choice to be paid in extra time off. it's your time and you deserve

it. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from -- the gentleman from new york seek recognition? >> madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> this institution is commonly referred to as the people's house. we have an obligation to address issues that impact all americans. mr. jeffries: the sequestration cuts began as a slow burn but have increasingly caused pain for people all across this country. now this house somehow found the courage to rescue air travelers from the sequestration battlefield, but we left other americans behind. we left head start children behind. we left expectant mothers behind. we left seniors who rely on the meals and wheels program

behind. we left public housing residents behind. we left the long-term unemployed behind. we have an obligation to address issues that confront all americans and that's why i support h.r. 900 a one-sentence bill that would repeal the sequester. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields lack. for what purpose does the gentleman from arizona seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for 60 seconds and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, madam speaker. i want to take this of-second moment to stand here in front of the house and talk about a little bit about the working families flexibility act. as a member member of congress new york a peeves life, i saw where employees at the state level had the option of how to

manage their compensation whether to take it in time or dollars. yet the arrogance, the continued arrogance of washington, it's good enough for our public employees, but it's not good enough for the businesses around the country. and i've got to give martha roby credit, thank you -- thank you for bringing this bill before us and hopefully we step up and say, if we really want economic choice for the american people, we pass this bill. thank you, madam speaker and i yield back. the speaker: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? illinois, excuse me. >> i request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> madam speaker, my district is home to highland park's elm place middle school. the sixth, seventh, and eighth graders who make up the problem solvers team recently won their division at the illinois future

problem solvers bowl and will compete at the international competition in june. the future problem solving program encourages students to think critically and creatively, to develop a vision for their future and become leaders. in my view, these students have achieve auld three. their project connected them with a girl's school in jordan and they began to exchange books and educational materials. quickly the students realized how much they all have in common. how much more binds us than separates us. the students are -- the elm place students are moving on to the international problem solving bowl but don't want to go without their partners in jordan. so they raised money for the airfare. they started this project together and that's how they will finish it. madam speaker, i am proud to use my time today to honor the students of elm place middle school problem solvers. i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired.

for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois seek recognition? without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, madam speaker. madam speaker, the federal budget is approximately $3.6 trillion, $2.6 trillion is what we called mandatory spending, that's medicare, medicaid, social security and interest payments on the debt. mr. shimkus: the discretionary budget, and we sit here and moan about $85 billion in sequester. businesses have had the sequester over the past three to four years, not-for-profits have had the sequester for the past three to four years. it's about time that the federal government also sequestered also. i want to thank the president for addressing the mandatory spending program. with the chained c.p.i. address on social security, he recognizes the fact that if we want to stop sequestration from occurring, the mandatory programs have to be reformed.

thank you, madam speaker, and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you very much, madam speaker. madam speaker, i rise today in favor of comprehensive immigration reform, especially one that respects the heroic work and heroic lives of our military. mr. vargas: we've heard from many military personnel that have said what they fear most, what they fear most is their spouse is going to be unfortunately taken from them and deported. we heard from a young marine over at the russell building who said this. this is his third tour of duty. he's going off to afghanistan for his third tour. he's not afraid of dying. he said, that's what marines do. we fight and we die. his only fear when he's gone they might deport his wife back

to max could he and he doesn't know what to do -- back to mexico and he doesn't know what to do to help her and her two children. the law is not fair. how can the law possibly be fair when our military men and women are under this kind of threat? so i stand here today to say we have to have comprehensive immigration reform, especially one that respects our military. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from nevada seek recognition? -- the gentlewoman from nevada seek recognition? without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. i rise today in recognition of national tourism week and will be introducing a resolution to that effect later today. travel and tourism make up the lifeblood of our economy in southern nevada. 383,000 southern nevada jobs are supported by the tourism industry, accounting for 47% of

southern nevada's labor force and generating $45 billion in economic activity. men and women are employed in the convention, entertainment, gaming and related service industry. their hard work, ingenuity and dedication make las vegas one of the world's premiere travel destinations for business and pleasure. last year nearly 40 million visitors came to las vegas. in addition, we hosted over 21,000 conventions and meetings which brought in some five million national and international tourists, most of whom spent considerable time in district one. furthermore, 43% of these visitors traveled through caren airport, which is -- mccarron airport, which is the sixth busiest airport. we must make real investments in our country's infrastructure, to increase the efficiency and reliability of

travel and encourage greater tourism to the united states and to las vegas. thank you very much. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from north carolina seek recognition? ms. foxx: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute, madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. ms. foxx: thank you, madam speaker. it's hard to raise a family and earn a living at the same time. the reality is that every hour you spend working to provide for your family is an hour you can't spend with your family. for nearly 30 years, federal, state and local government employees have been able to choose paid time off or comp time instead of cash wages as compensation for working overtime hours. federal law prohibits employees in the private sector from having the same option. it's time to put an end to this double standard. private sector employees deserve the same flexibility, and that is why republicans

have introduced h.r. 1406, the working families flexibility act, and that bill deserves our support. we will vote shortly on the rule for that and tomorrow on the bill. and madam speaker, i urge all my colleagues to vote for fairness for the private sector and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from hawaii seek recognition? without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. ms. gabbard: i rise today to recognize one of hawaii's heroes. u.s. air force captain reed of i could lua, hawaii. -- reed of hawaii. he died as a result of an aircraft crash near kandahar air field in afghanistan. he put his life on the line in the service of our nation and

made the ultimate sacrifice. i'm deeply saddened by this loss, for his family, for hawaii and for our country. my thoughts and prayers are with the family. the captain knew he always wanted to serve. he had been on track to serve in the air force since high school as he was part of the rotc and later went on to the studied e rotc when he aeronautical engineering. he inspired his brother, chad, to join the air force too. as we do our work here in the people's house, let us always remember the selfless example set by this captain and so many other heroes and do our very best to honor their immeasurable sacrifice. madam speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from florida seek recognition? >> madam speaker, i ask

unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, madam speaker, and i am here today to say congratulationses to the student inventors at northeast high school in oakland park, florida. ms. frankel: they recently have been recognized for designing and creating a bicycle that serves as an emergency water sanitation system. after a natural disaster, that bicycle can be transported to filter contaminated water for e. coli and other pathogens and it can be assembled and taken apart in less than one hour and produce enough water to hydrate 15-hour people for a period. these students got the first idea from unsanitary conditions in haiti and they've devoted countless hours to bring this

to life and even received a $10,000 grant from m.i.t. their work ethic, creativity and dedication to making this world a better place is an inspiration to all of us. so, again, congratulations to the student inventors of northeast high school, broward county, florida, and my best wishes to all of them in the future. thank you, madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. the chair lays before the house a communication. the clerk: the honorable the speaker, house of representatives. sir, pursuant to the permission granted in clause 2-h of rule 2 of the rules of the u.s. house of representatives, the clerk received the following message from the secretary of the senate on may 7, 2013, at 9:30 a.m. that the senate passed senate 743. with best wishes i am. signed sincerely, karen l. aas.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from north carolina seek recognition? ms. foxx: madam speaker, by the direction of the committee on rules, i call up house resolution 198 and ask for its immediate consideration. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the resolution. the clerk: house calendar number 22, house resolution 198. resolved, that upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider in the house the bill h.r. 1406, to amend the fair labor standards act of 1938 to provide compensatory time for employees in the private sector. all points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the committee on education and the work force now printed in the bill shall be considered as adopted. the bill, as amended, shall be considered as read. all points of order against provisions in the bill, as amended, are waived. the previous question shall be considered as ordered on the

bill, as amended, and on any further amendment thereto, to final passage without intervening motion except, one, one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on education and the work force, two, the further amendment printed in the report of the committee on rules accompanying this resolution, if offered by representative gibson of new york or his designee, which shall be in order without intervention of any point of order, shall be considered as read, shall be separately debatable for 10 minutes equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question, and three, one motion to recommit with or without nstructions. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from north carolina is recognized for one hour. ms. foxx: thank you, madam

speaker. for the purpose of debate only, i yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from colorado, mr. polis, pending which i yield myself such time as i may consume. during consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only. madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks . the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. foxx: house resolution 198 provides for a structured rule providing for consideration of h.r. 1409, the working families flexibility act of 2013. madam speaker, it's hard to raise a family and earn a living at the same time. the reality is that every hour you spend working to provide for your family is an hour you can't spend with your family. seeing your children off the first day of school, taking them to a doctor's appointment or attending parent-teacher

conferences. as a mother who worked when her daughter was growing up, i understand the firsthand struggles of working parents. that is why my colleagues and i ve introduced h.r. 1406, the working families flexibility act. this commonsense legislation will allow private sector workers to choose paid time off instead of cash wages as compensation for working overtime, which is the same privilege that federal, state and local government employees have been able to choose for over 30 years. the working families flexibility act is pro-family, pro-worker legislation that gives workers the flexibility to spend time with family, attend parent-teacher conferences, care for aging parents or tend to other family needs that may arise.

if an employer and an employee agree on comp time, then the paid time off must be granted at time and a half for each hour of overtime worked. labor unions support flexible overtime compensation for their own members, and this benefit is already included in many public sector union collected bargaining agreement. the flexible approach offered by this bill has worked for public sector employees since 1985. if the policy works for our public service employees, it will work for our private sector employees as well. fair is fair, madam speaker. the bill maintains protections for workers to ensure that this new flexibility is not abowsed by making the decision -- abused by making the decision to receive comp time completely voluntary aand allows the employee to change his or her time if they later decide to

receive cash wages for overtime. all existing protections in the fair labor standards act remain in effect under this legislation and it is up to the employee when he or she decides to use accrued comp time. additionally, an employee cannot be intimidated, coerced or otherwise forced to accept comp time in lieu of cash wages for overtime. the legislation also maintains all existing enforcement remedies for employees if an employer fails to uphold the agreement and employers must provide 30 days' notice to employees of comp time -- if comp time will no longer be offered. h.r. 1406 provides proper protection and flexibility for employees and will help american workers better balance the needs of family and the workplace. i urge my colleagues to support this rule and the underlying bill, and with that, madam speaker, i reserve the balance f my time.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from north carolina reserves her time. the gentleman from colorado. mr. polis: i thank the gentlelady for yielding me the customary 30 minutes. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. polis: i rise today in opposition to the rule and the underlying bill, which should be called the more work, less pay bill. as my colleagues know, majority leader cantor outlined his party's agenda for the month of may. one word he ewed, he described it as a, quote, full legislative ageneral dark end quote. yet here we are, only debating this bill on the floor of the house, i think finishing the business of the house around 1:30 toom, plenty of time for members of congress to play golf, to go to the beach, whatever they want to do, hardly a full legislative agenda. let me add, madam speaker, that this intill about overtime.

under this current legislative ageneral dark our congress wouldn't even come close to qualifying for overtime at a time when we have increasing national needs, balancing the budget, moving forward with jobs and the economy, comprehensive immigration reform, so many issues crying out for our attention. but here we are, debating yet another bill, that not only won't go anywhere but also would actually make life harder and more unpredictable for american families. this bill claims to provide working families flexibility but in reality, it allows employers to avoid paying overtime, get interest-free loans from their own employees. there are many hourly employees who struggle holding two or three jobs, depending on overtime to pay bills, keep food on the family table, if this bill were to become law, employers would be able to save a couple of bucks by

essentially requiring people in effect to take comp time instead of overtime pay if they want extra hours. many american workers want to work more, not less. under this bill, people's paychecks would be reduced and people don't have a real choice and it's no wonder that the vast majority of labor unions oppose this bill and are not asking for this bill or this quote-unquote kind of help. i also want to correct something that's been claimed by my republican colleague, that somehow this bill gives private sector employees the same protections as public sector employees. that's not true. most public sector workers are already protected against arbitrary and unfair treatment by civil service laws. private sector workers don't have anything like that kind of protection. that's why my colleague, mr. tim bishop of new york, offered an amendment in committee specify that private sector

employers could provide comp time instead of overtime if they provided the same job security protections that public employees already receive but this amendment was voted down in the rules committee yesterday and we're not even allowed here on the floor of the house, where we're going to finish by 1:30, somehow there's not even enough time to have a debate, 10 minute, all we ask for, on mr. ishop of new york's amendment. madam speaker, bill has been presented with many -- the presentation is not consistent with the con thovente by of course it sounds -- is not consistent with the content of the bill. of course it sounds good. of course employees want to choose how to take their time. it sounds good. but like so many things congress does, the devil is in the detail. contrary to what this bill says, employers can already give employees time off if they

so choose. many do. we had representative joe courtney who talked about when he was in the private sector and had employees ha ha -- that had to attend school meetings, they gave them -- he fave them time off. that's what most responsible employers do we don't need legislation to tell employers it's ok to give their employees comp time. contrary to what the majority party here in the house says, majority parties wouldn't get paid under this bill until the end of the year for saved comp time at no interest system of effectively, an interest-free loan to the company. let's say an employee does overtime, works 45 hours a week for three weeks, accrue 15g hours of overtime. if they want this flex -- this so-called flexibility provided under this bill they choose to say, i may use this as comp time. that's their choice. however they pay dearly for that choice. they pay dearly for that choice. in a number of yays -- of ways. number one if they don't use

that comp time, after a year, they get paid the original amount by the company. and while it's true if they got a raise in the intervening period they get paid at that level of the raise, there's no accounting for interest or the net present voofl those dollars. less of an impact when inflation is 1% or 2%, but still ast interest-free loan to the company. much greater impact if the interest rates return to their historic norms, it wasn't that long ago that interest rates weren't in the high single digits or low double digits. number two say the employer does want to use comp time. effectively the employer has a unilateral veto over that all they have to do is show that it creates undue disruption, that's the standard of nilateral employer veto. this is nothing like what occurs under the families

emergency leave act, the fmla. we heard them say it's the same, but it's not. under fmla, it's a factor, put there's a variety of factor, it's not a sole determinant. in this case the language is wide open to effectively provide a complete veto right of when that employee takes time off system of again, our friends works 45 hours a week, three week, they get 15 hours of overtime they set aside the 15 hours they try to take it off for their kid's birth tai, try to take it off when their kid is home from school, the employer says, no, you can't take it off that week. so at the end of the year they still have 15 hours. they finally get paid but because of net present value and interest, they're out 2% or 3%. with higher interest tecked be out 10% or 15% of twheasm can and must do better for american

workers this bill would have a devastating impact on workers in my state of colorado. me and my staff worked to a representative of united workers number seven. she said wage theft very a big problem for workers in colorado and this bill would make it easier for employers to avoid overtime obligations and make it harder for employees who need the hours to pay the bills. what happens if the employer goes off the business in the intervening year? of course the person whose wages are ducan line up with other creditors but who has the time or, if you're living paycheck to paycheck, the ability to wait. to see if you ever get paid by a bankrupt employer. instead of improving the lives of working families by giving greater flexibility this bill allows employers to avoid paying overtime. my democratic colleagues on the education and work force committee and i agree we must give working families the flex to believe the meet their

needs. that's why we support the paycheck fairness act to ensure that women are paid as much as men in the workplace and the healthy families act which would establish national paid sibbling days standard. i've heard from hundreds of workers across my district and across the country who support the act to prohibit workplace discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity. in many states, it's perfectly ok for the employer to fire an employee because they're gay or pause of what they do anywhere they off time. to think it's legal in half hoe the states for an employer to fire an employee because of who they're dating is absurd. we need to solve that by passing the employer nondiscrimination act. employers are -- employees are asking for these kinds of programs, as opposed to the program today. based on the schedule for

congress me and my colleagues aren't about to accrue any overtime any time soon unless things change around here. here we are examining bills that are catchy, have good titles, might sound good on the -- on the surface but don't address the real issues faced by the american workers, american economy or our couldn't rip as a whole. we need an agenda that's skipt with the needs of working families. despite this fixation on changing the image and appealing to voters, many on the other side of the aisle seem to be recycling old ideas. an identical version of this bill was introduced in 1996, 1997, 2003. it failed to pass the house each time. madam speaker, what this body needs is not just new branding, it needs new ideas. ideas that will actually help working families and make our country stronger. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentlewoman from north

carolina. ms. foxx: thank you, madam speaker. i yield myself some time to respond to the gentleman from colorado. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. foxx: madam speaker this bill sounds good because it is good. this is the theme from our colleagues across the aisle. everything about the private sector is bad. everything about the -- about government is good. his is the constant theme. this allows voluntary participation by employees. this does not require things. i'd also like to point out to my colleague from across the aisle who is very quick to point out any mistake that i might make is, we did not have an amendment from

representative bishop in the rules committee yesterday. representative bishop's amendment was offered in the education committee but was not offered in rules yesterday. i'd also like to say that federal employee -- government employees do not get interest paid on the time that they eventually get paid for instead of comp time. so we are not setting up a double standard here. what we're trying to do is eliminate a double standard, again, that our colleagues across the aisle love to have. bash the private sector. madam speaker, we live in the greatest country in the world. and what made us a great country? look at the rest of the world. what's made us a great country is the rule of law which means we believe everybody should be treated the same way. it's our capitalistic system which has worked wonderfully

well for this country and every other system has failed all across the world. we don't need much to do but look at what's happening in the rest of the world and how sorry their economies are, and it's our judeo christian underpinnings. those are the things that i think have made us great, madam speaker. and this bill will allow us to give people who work in the private sector, which is part of what's made us such a great country, the same privileges that people get in the public sector. i yield two minutes to my distinguished colleague from kansas, ms. jenkins. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for two minutes. ms. jenkins: i thank the gentlewoman for yielding. as a working mama i know how tough it is to occasionally miss family events and whether it's a parent-teacher conference, a soccer or football game, or helping my mom, my family always comes first that is why i support

this bill. the working families flexibility act would help hardworking americans be there for their families by allowing all workers the same opportunities to manage their work life balance. government employees have enjoyed the ability to exchange overtime pay for comp time for nearly 30 years. and it's not fair or logical to continue to prevent private sector employees from having access to this very same benefit. the fair labor standards act of 1938 is out of touch with reality and needs updating. we are not talking about creating a new regulation or forcing folks to give up overtime pay. this pro-worker, pro-family bill simply provides comp time as a voluntary option for private sector employees who want it instead of overtime pay. there are many employee protections in this bill and a worker can take their comp time

whenever they choose as long as they provide reasonable notice and avoid disrupting business operations. workers can also cash out on their comp time for any reason at any time and the employer would be required to fulfill their request in 30 days. this type of legislation is the exact reason i ran for congress and why i'm proud to be a republican, to make sure laws passed in washington help people and don't make more -- don't make life more difficult for kansans and their families. i encourage my colleagues in the house to empower working moms and dads to give them freedom to be there for their families. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from colorado. mr. polis: i yield myself a moment to respond. i thank the gentlelady for the correction. what i was referring to is the vote in the rules committee on an open rule which we voted on in committee, had we considered this bill under an open rule,