the chair: on this vote the yeas are 164. the nays are 254. the amendment is not adopted. the unfinished business on the request for recorded vote on amendment number 2 printed in part b of house report 114-37 by the gentleman from massachusetts, mr. kennedy on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 2, printed in part b 6 house report -- house report number 114-37, offered by mr. kennedy of massachusetts. the chair: a recorded vote has been requested. those in support of the request for recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device.

this will be a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the chair: on this vote the yeas are 184. the nays are 231. the amendment is not adopted. the nature of a substitute. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the amendment is adopted. accordingly, under the rule, the committee rises. mr. speaker, the committee of the whole house on the commune had under consideration h.r. 1030 and pursuant to house resolution 138, i report the bill back to the house with an amendment adopted in the committee of the whole. the speaker pro tempore: the chair of the committee of the whole house on the state of the union reports that the committee has had under consideration the

bill h.r. 1030, and pursuant to house resolution 138, reports the bill back to the house with an amendment adopted in the committee of the whole. under the rule, the previous question is ordered. the question is on adoption of the amendment in the nature of a substitute. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed to. the question is on engrossment and third reading of the bill. those in favor will say aye. those opposed will say no. the aye vs. it. third reading. the clerk: a bill to prohibit the environmental protection agency from proposing finalizing, or disseminating regulations or assessments based upon science that is not transparent or reproduceable. . >> mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the house will come to order. >> mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the chair would ask all members to

please take their conversations from the floor. the chair would ask all members and staff to please take their seats. >> mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman will suspend. >> i have a motion to -- the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the chair would ask all members to please take their conversations from the floor of the house. the chair would ask all members to please take their seats. the house will be in order. for what purpose does the gentleman from hawaii seek recognition? mr. takai: mr. speaker i have

a motion to recommit at the desk. the speaker pro tempore: is the gentleman opposed to the bill? mr. takai: i am opposed. the clerk: mr. takai of hawaii moves to recommit the bill h.r. 1030 to the committee on science, space and technology with instructions to report the same back to the house forthwith with the following amendment -- add at the end the following new section. section 3 protecting taxpayers from science promoted by polluting companies. under the amendment made by section 2 the environmental protection agency -- the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will suspend. for what purpose does the gentleman from -- >> i reserve a point of order. the speaker pro tempore: the point of order is reserved. >> mr. speaker i reserve a point of order. the speaker pro tempore: the point of order is reserved. the clerk: shall not rely on advice from any scientists whose primary source of research funds comes from corporations or individuals convicted of major environmental crimes, including the release of toxic pollutants into safe drinking water, refusal to clean up superfund waste sites or violations from

the release of air pollutants that endanger human health and safety. the speaker pro tempore: the chair would ask all members to please their conversations from the floor ask all members to please take their seats. the gentleman from hawaii is recognized for five minutes. mr. takai: thank you, mr. speaker. aloha. this is the final amendment to the bill which will not kill the bill or send it back to committee. if adopted the bill will immediately proceed to final passage, as amended. mr. speaker, this amendment is simple. it would prohibit the e.p.a. from relying on advice from any scientists whose primary source of research funding comes from corporations or individuals -- >> mr. speaker, the house is not in order. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from hawaii will suspend. the gentleman from georgia is correct. the house is not in order. the chair would again ask members to plose take their

conversations from the floor -- please take their conversations from the floor of the house. would ask all members and all staff to please take their seats. the gentleman from hawaii is recognized. mr. takai: thank you, mr. speaker. this amendment will prohibit the e.p.a. from relying on advice from any scientist whose primary source of research funding comes from corporations or individuals convicted of major environmental crimes. the democratic motion to recommit would help ensure the integrity and the independence of e.p.a.'s scientific review process by prohibiting reliance on advice from those who are funded by the biggest abusers of our environment. the secret science reform act would impose arbitrary unnecessary and expensive requirements that would seriously impede e.p.a.'s ability to use science to protect public health and the environment as required under an array of environmental laws

while increasing uncertainty for businesses and states. this bill would stack the cards in favor of industry-backed data studies rather than the most reliable studies and in doing so prevent the e.p.a. from using the best data possible to make decisions. think about 50 years of tobacco-backed studies that lied about the effects of cigarette smoking to avoid labeling, regulation and fines. that is the type of data that this bill wants the e.p.a. to rely on to make decisions of our environment. industry-backed data that shifts the favor to polluters, climate deneyers and those that don't have the best interest of public health and our environment in mind. this amendment would make sure that this data does not come from corporations or individuals that show disregard for environmental laws which is the main reason why the e.p.a. exists in the first place. consequences of h.r. 1030 could

include the public release of industry-funded studies and data intended to bias the body of scientific evidence that the e.p.a. has a-- is allowed to consider toward a particular industry position. for example, research that shows arsenic mercury or benzene is good for you could be in the majority of studies that e.p.a. is allowed to base its recommendations and regulations on. unfortunately republicans will claim this bill increases the e.p.a.'s transparency and accountability by ensuring that its regulations are based on public data that can be verified and reproduced. in reality mr. speaker, this bill would prevent the e.p.a. from functioning effectively and by using the most relevant scientific data including data that is legally protected from public disclosure. an effort to limit the scope of science that can be considered by e.p.a. does not strengthen scientific integrity but undermines it. the e.p.a. relies on peer

review scientific research from our universities as the backbone of their mission to protect public health and our environment. this amendment ensures that this data does not come from sources that routinely break our environmental laws. because clinicians and researchers are legally prohibited from making the data publicly available if this bill becomes law, the e.p.a. would be forced to ignore this valuable research when protecting the public. at no point does this bill make the public safer, which is the fundamental function of government. the secret science reform act would only reduce the science available to the e.p.a. on some of the most important decisions it makes. mr. speaker, over 30 of the most respected groups dedicated to scientific and health research have opposed this bill, and i urge our colleagues to do the same. however, before doing so i urge our colleagues to vote for this commonsense amendment to this bill.

again all this amendment does is prohibit the e.p.a. from relying on advice from any scientist whose primary source of research funding comes from corporations or individuals convicted of major environmental crime. this ensures the integrity and independence of -- >> the house is not in order. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from hawaii will suspend. the gentlelady is correct. the gentleman from hawaii may continue. mr. takai: thank you, mr. speaker. this ensures the integrity and independence of the e.p.a. scientific review process by prohibiting advice from those who are funded by the biggest abusers of our environment. i urge my colleagues to vote in favor of the democratic motion to recommit and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from hawaii yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from arizona seek recognition? mr. schweikert: mr. speaker, i withdraw my point of order and rise in opposition to the motion. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from arizona is recognized for five minutes. mr. schweikert: thank you, mr. speaker. and to our -- the gentleman

from hawaii, who i have not actually had a chance to make friends with yet, you're actually hitting one really good point. if there's data being used by bad actors, shouldn't we all know it? and the way the e.p.a. operates right now with keeping their data secret none of you are going to get to know that. that's actually what this piece of legislation fixes. if there's going to be data of groups that are bad actors industries that you consider dodgey wouldn't it be a wonderful thing to have that data available for everyone, whether you be on the right whether you be on the left, so it can be refined by sunshine so it can be reviewed and meshed up against other data sets?

if you believe information when made public refines it, if you believe public policy should be made by public data and public data should be available in the making of public policy, you like this piece of legislation. and what is so fascinating in the debate we've had this time and last year is i have a number of memos demand letters, threats of subpoenas from when the left was in this body in both the majority and minority but there was a republican president demanding this type of legislation. let's try something new around here. a little bit of intellectual consistency. do you believe the public the researchers, the scientists those who are academics, those who just have an interest in the subject area should have

the right to touch the data, model it, stress it, put it up against other data sets and see are we doing what's best for our environment? are we doing it the best way? is there a better way? is there a more efficient way? is there a more cost-effective way? that's what this bill accomplishes and i have no idea why my brothers and sisters on the left are so fearful with that. and mr. speaker, i yield back, but with that yielding back, i beg of all my fellow members here, vote yes on this legislation but no on this motion to recommit. thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from arizona yields back. without objection, the previous question is ordered. the question is on the motion to recommit. all those in favor say aye. all those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair the noes have it. mr. takai: i request a recorded vote. the speaker pro tempore: the motion is not adopted. the gentleman from hawaii requests a recorded vote. a recorded vote is requested. those in favor of a recorded vote will rise.

a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. pursuant to clause 9 of rule 20, the chair will reduce to five minutes the minimum time for any electronic vote on the question of passage. this is a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas 181. the nays are 239. the motion is not adopted. the question is on passage of the bill. so many as are in favor say aye. sme. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the bill is passed. the gentleman from texas

requests a recorded vote. a recorded vote is requested. those favoring a recorded vote will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 241. on this vote the yeas are 241. the nays are 175. the bill is passed, without objection the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table. for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that when the house adjourns today it adjourn to meet at 9:00 a.m. tomorrow. the speaker pro tempore: without objection.

the chair will now entertain requests for one-minute speeches. for what purpose does the gentleman from washington seek recognition? without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the house will come to order.

the gentleman from washington. mr. newhouse: thank you, mr. speaker. as a third generation farmer from washington state, i am amazed by the level of progress our nation's agricultural community has made even in just my lifetime. it is because of this great progress that today we celebrate march 18 as national agriculture day. few people realize that during the 1960's the average american farmer fed 25 people. today it is 144 people. the difference is that today our farmers are growing more disease and pest resistant crops that require less water and pesticides and better conserve our resources. advancements in technology and technique have allowed our farmers to continue the long held tradition of caring for the land they use and the people they grow for. on national agriculture day, please join me in recognizing our farming community and the essential role they play to

continue to fill in feeding our nation and the world. thank you, mr. speaker. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from maryland seek recognition? mr. hoyer: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to speak out of order for one minute, and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. hoyer: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i rise to pay tribute to one of our nation's greatest higher education leaders and great advocate for accessible, quality higher education. he is a dear friend and a colleague of mine for the last 40 years. on june 30, dr. william e. kerwin will retire after 12 years as chancellor of the university of maryland system. under his leadership, the university system has transformed from being a national leader in public higher education, into a national model in several areas. these include campus diversity,

academic innovation and efforts to close the achievement gap. there is, of course, a lot i could say mr. speaker, to my colleagues about dr. kerwin's distinguished career. and commitment to improving higher education across the country. so i ask their consent and yours, mr. speaker, to submit the balance of my extended remarks honoring dr. kerwin into the drord -- across-the-board -- congressional record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. hoyer: thank you, mr. speaker. the gentleman from north carolina seek recognition? ms. foxx: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute ms. foxx: thank you, mr. speaker. march is women's history month which honors and celebrates the struggles and achievements of american women throughout the history of the united states. since 1917, when republican representative rankin of montana became the first woman to serve

in congress 313 women have served as u.s. representatives, senators or delegates. in 2014, the american people made history by electing a record number of women to congress. in january 12, new women -- in january 12 new women were sworn in to the house of representatives. joining 72 incumbents who won re-election. the number of women serving in the senate has reached 20 and four of the five nonvoting delegates are women. these women with rich perspectives and a commitment to good ideas and tellwork are tsh-teamwork are changing the way washington does business. the women of the 114th congress are shaping their nation and it's an opportunity and responsibility that we take seriously. i yield back. . the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from nebraska seek recognition?

>> mr. 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. ashford: mr. speaker, i rise as well in observation of national women's history month. during this time it is important to celebrate the achievements and contributions of women in our great nation. i am proud to recognize my friend, mayor jean stothard, the medicare of the great city of omaha, nebraska as the first woman elected to this office. in 1993 she moved to nebraska quickly embracing her new home. her advocacy garnered an appointment to the millard school board, a position to which she was re-elected three times. expanding her passion for service she sought and won election to the omaha security council in 2009.

with a strong work ethic and ambition, she was elected mayor of the city of omaha on may 14 2013. an illustration by our very famous editorial cartoonist portrays her by breaking the per verbial glass ceiling in omaha. good for her. she represents women in omaha who are taking leadership positions in our community and in our state. thank you for this opportunity and i would yield back the remainder of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the remainder of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? mr. thompson: mr. speaker, request 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. mr. thompson: mr. speaker, yesterday the house agriculture subcommittee on conservation and forestry, which i chair, held a hearing to review the definition of the waters of the united states proposed rule and

its impact on rural america. enacted in 1972, the clean water act established a federal-state partnership to protect our nation's navigable waterways. however despite strong opposition from congress and the public, the obama administration has taken upon itself to redefine the clean water act's jurisdictional waters. the e.p.a.'s proposed rule could have serious consequences for rural america and the nation's economy. yesterday members of the house:on agriculture asserted the administration has acted on its own without input from states and the stakeholders threatening the like livelihood of farmers ranchers and rural america. it is my hope that the administration will repropose a rule and allow a new round of public comment. mr. speaker, there's too much on the line to continue down the current path. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from california

sook recognition? -- seek recognition? >> to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. ms. waters: today i have introduced the addressing the wealth gap resolution which calls on congress to recognize the wealth gap and racial wealth gap as the national economic crises and focus its efforts on their elimination. this country is facing the widest wealth gap since 1983. the statistics are alarming. wealthy families make nearly seven times as much as middle-class families and 70 times as much as lower-class families. african-americans have 13 times and latinos have 10 times less wealth than white households. they have $100,000 more in retirement. savings in african-americans and latinos. the cause of this gap stems from a structural crisis that started well before the great recession. then the recession hit, the housing market collapsed and

made everything worse. in the aftermath, middle-income families and people of color have had to endure income inequality, slow wage growth, skyrocketing student loans and continued unequal access to quality education and barriers to the housing market. these problems are widened and they have widened the gap and require congress to implement pragmatic solutions. we cannot sid idly by and expect things to change. that's why i'm introducing the addressing the wealth gap resolution. the first step to resolving this problem is acknowledging that it exists and i encourage all of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join in and focus on the goal of rebuilding wealth in america. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: time has expired. are there further one-minute requests? under the speaker's announced policy of january 6 2015, the

gentlewoman from new jersey, mrs. watson coleman, is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader. mrs. watson coleman: thank you very much mr. speaker. thank you. i am here -- i am here today representing the congressional progressive caucus and to discuss our budget the people's budget, and i pray i'm not the only one that's speaking for the 60 minutes allotted. yesterday mr. speaker, the house republicans released their budget proposal. although they have a new chairman, they're following the same game plan. privatize medicare, slash spending on safety net programs and hope that tax cuts for the rich trickle down from top earners to the rest of the country. that is not what the american

people need. they need a plan that levels the playing field, that gives them an opportunity to succeed and puts their interests above the interests of corporations and the wealthy. they need a budget that is of the people, by the people and for the people, and that's what we're offering in the people's budget. if you need a way to pay for affordable childcare while you're at your job, we've got it in the people's budget. if you need access to quality education for your children, teachers that are trained to give them the knowledge they need to be great, we've got it in the people's budget. if you worked hard to get into college but now need a way to pay for your tuition we've got it in the people's budget. if you can't make ends meet, the pay you take home barely keeps a roof over your head and you're making important choices

between food and shelter and you're looking for a livable wage, we've got it in the people's budget. mr. speaker, in the hands of the g.o.p., this congress has offered tax break after tax break after tax break after tax break for corporations and billionaires while cutting the very programs that working americans rely on to pull themselves up the economic ladder that has given generations of american families access to the middle class. if anyone deserves a tax cut, it's not millionaires, it's the folks that are loading the trucks, the folks that are scanning the groceries, the folks that are cleaning the office buildings, the folks that are working as clerks, the folks that are working as secretaries and the folks that are doing the important service jobs that our society so needs. the people's budget would invest in priorities that will keep the american people strong just for everyone. it offers jobs that will

restore our middle class. it addresses our nation's most pressing challenges. issues like climate change, aging transportation infrastructure, access to education at every level and good-paying jobs. this mr. speaker, is about restoring congress' commitment to serving hardworking americans who are playing by the rules but still not getting ahead. this mr. speaker, is about the lives that regular americans are able to live. some say that it is not hard to find any old job and get a paycheck, but does that job offer a high enough wage or enough hours to pay the rent? can you take time off for illness or to take care of your kids? do you know that you'll have enough to pay for childcare while you're at the job, and do you have health insurance in the event that you need it? my congressional progressive caucus colleagues and i think

that tax-paying americans deserve to confidently answer yes to all of these questions, and that is what we're fighting for. today we were given the distinct opportunity to present tenants of our budget to a group of interested people, everyday working people people who are looking for decent-paying jobs. they're not looking for handouts. they're looking for recognition that they're part of this american dream and that it is our responsibility to ensure that we're not impediments but we are facilitators of that american dream for everyone and at this time, mr. speaker, i'd like to yield the balance of my time for whatever amount of time my colleague chairman of the progressive caucus congressman ellison needs. thank you mr. speaker. mr. ellison: well let me thank

the gentlelady from new jersey, bonnie watson coleman. she may have gotten sworn in as a member of congress a few months ago, but she's no stranger fighting for people and that was on full display when she spoke at a rollout of our progressive caucus budget where she talked about -- where you talked about how you can look at any aspect of the progressive caucus budget and you'll find the same thing in every place -- prioritizing people making sure that people can get their needs met in this government, making sure that workers can get access to a job, making sure that people who are sick but who are working can actually get a sick day so they don't bring that sickness back to their workplace and they don't have abandon their children who might be sick too. you pointed out congresswoman watson coleman, the fact is it is job creation that should be the primary metric of any budget. how are we doing putting people back to work in good jobs? how are we helping taking care of them while they're on the

job? that means if they're sick, can they take time off? how are we educating people? you focused on the key elements of the progressive caucus budget, and i was proud to hear you do it the fact is is that the progressive caucus budget -- this is our fifth budget that we put out -- is a budget that's about helping people. that's why we call it the people's budget. we ask you to check out the progressive budget online website. the progressive caucus budget -- let me name a few things about it to highlight -- it creates 8.4 million good-paying jobs by 2018. now, you just take the republican budget that was put out yesterday. it was interesting to me that none of my republican colleagues wanted to tout how many jobs their budget would create, how many jobs the economists after looking at the republican budget proposed would create because that's not

what they consider to be a priority. but it is a priority to the progressive caucus budget. our priority is 8.4 million good-paying jobs, investing in america, make sure americans are working again. now, you might correctly ask how are you going to get all of these jobs? one way we're going to get these jobs is we're going to invest $820 billion to repair america's rapidly aging roads and bridges and upgrade our energy systems to yield climate change. to address climate change, prepare for the next generation to thrive in our society and work force. and i'd like to share with the speaker that i come from a town, minneapolis, minnesota, where six years ago the i-35 bridge fell into the mississippi river because we had not taken care of the bridge. we had not done adequate maintenance on this bridge. 13 people died when that bridge fell, and they were black, they

were white they were wealthy they were low income, they were born in america they were born abroad, they were america. that's who lost their lives on that bridge. and 100 more people got injured. this progressive caucus investment in infrastructure repair is not just a job creator and a productivity increaser, it's public safety to have decent, safe infrastructure. so i'm very proud of that. we also provide $95 billion to help states and municipalities rehire police, firefighters, health care workers teachers librarians and other public employees. you know, mr. speaker, i got to tell you, i met with my chiefs of police in the fifth congressional district about a week ago and, of course, all of us here tonight represent more than one city. i met with the police -- chiefs of police and i'm very proud to represent that law enforcement are dedicated and they were

telling me you know, what's going on with the byrne grants, what's going on with the j.a.g. grants, the cops grants those that helped us be a better police department have shrunk. it is weakened by our limited resources. well, we're going to do something about that. we want to rehire teachers so if you got a teacher with 30 second graders in the classroom, trying to keep up with all of them, we can hire a teachers' aide that might help that teacher what they do effectively. we put $1.9 trillion in america's future by investing in working families. this restores -- it restores and enhance funding for vital programs that americans rely on like snap, like food nutrition so that young people can be -- can be in the classroom and can be fully fed and ready to learn and so these are just a few things about the progressive caucus budget, but i wonder if

the gentlelady from new jersey or michigan would yield to a question. . would you yield to a question? should a budget be a moral document, which lists the priorities of the nation? >> thank you very much for giving me the opportunity to respond to that question, congressman. mr. cole: as a -- mr. cole: cole as a state legislate -- mrs. watson coleman: i came to realize that there's no other documents that represents the values and the priorities of the governing -- of the governing entity than the budget statement. so where we put our money is where we think our interests lie where we put our money represents our priorities. where we put our money represents our values. and that's one of the major reasons that i'm just so proud to be associated with the people's budget, as crafted by the congressional progressive

caucus. thank you for giving me that opportunity. mr. ellison: will the gentlelady yield to another question? so, the progressive caucus budget was not just written by members of the progressive caucus. we didn't just sit in a room and write up a budget. we actually pulled in our partners like the economic policy institute, labor, how important were our progressive partners in pulling our budget together? i yield to the gentlelady from new jersey or michigan. mrs. watson coleman: i certainly would like to yield to the gentlelady from michigan. i just want to say that the associations the affiliations and the organizations that you identified just very quickly, represent the interest of working class people. represent the interest of those who wish to be a part of the middle class. and represent those individuals who are responsible for the standards that we have that protect people in the working environment. that protect jobs here in america. and that protect the

aspirations and hopefulness of those who recognize the things like public education it's a greal equalizer. with that -- it's a great equalizer. with that, congressman, i would very much appreciate the opportunity to yield to my classmate and my friend, congresswoman brendsa lawrence, for whatever time she may -- brenda lawrence, for whatever time she may need. mrs. lawrence: mr. speaker, thank you, and to my colleagues, thank you for yielding. i'm here today to speak in my support for the congressional progressive caucus alternative budget and their feet for -- and their fight for greater access to affordable housing. as you know, i was previously a mayor and the quality of life in america is determined by our housing options. and the c.p.c. budget acknowledges that.

we have an affordable housing crisis. only one in four families are eligible for housing assistance receive it. there's a shortage of low-income apartments and rental homes that are affordable in low-income households. we have seen the results of sequestration taking housing assistance from 70,000 families and the c.p.c. budget moves us to try to preserve existing affordable housing, to make significant improvements and investments in new production. when you are an elected official or mayor of a community you see firsthand the challenges from unemployment, the challenges of jobs that are being reduced the unemployed, and trying to

maintain housing. it is important that we realize that in this budget we call for two new sources for affordable housing. the national housing trust fund and the capital magnet fund. to be fully funded by contributions from fannie mae and freddie mac. as is already required by law. this budget gives families and communities devastated by foreclosure the resources to renovate and resell homes and maintain overall property values. i come from michigan and i represent detroit. and here i have an article that states that downtown detroit tenants rally to demand decent and affordable housing. this conversation is happening all over the country. while we see some communities where families are actually

being displaced as a result of the upper class of our communities being able to buy and push prices up, where those in the bottom of our economic class are being challenged every day to find the simple thing that we call quality of life in america and that's housing. in my state of michigan, we have a campaign to end homelessness to promote housing. first, through the prevention and rapid rehousing activities. we understand in michigan that in order to effectively approach homelessness, a community needs a clear, deliberate and comprehensive strategy. the low incomes of so many families across this country make it increasingly difficult for them to manage the rising cost of housing. this puts them at risk and some lose their housing and fall

into homelessness. we may call this a homelessness crisis, but it is primarily a housing affordability cry sills. -- crisis. permanent housing subsidies like section 8 need to do a better job of addressing family housing crises. however, as this body knows, such subsidies are severely underfunded. nationally only 1/4 of the need for such subsidies are being met. before i yield back the balance of my time, i want to be clear that we as members of the progressive caucus stress strongly that we present a budget that is funded, that will ensure that in america the american dream and the basic quality of life right to have a home is maintained through our budget. thank you.

mr. ellison: will the gentlelady yield for a question? mrs. lawrence: yes. mr. ellison: i represent minneapolis, minnesota. and i was talking with my housing authority people who are here in town the other day -- who were here in town the other day, i bet yours were too, and one of the things that they said to me is that they opened up their list and for 2,000 available units they have 37,000 people who applied for those positions. here's another separate fact which i would like to you react to, if you don't mind. in minneapolis, we pride ourselves on being a progressive town, we have 4,000 kids who leave shelters every day to go to public schools. and those kids are asked to take standardized tests. you know, how important is it for a budget particularly a progressive caucus budget, to house america's people? i yield back. mrs. lawrence: it is extremely important, thank you. it is extremely important. and those of us who understand the cry of the people for

housing and understand the impact of homelessness on americans today funding of housing, affordable housing, is critical. i served on the local government board and one of the things we looked at consistently is how do we sustain the low-income or sustainable housing for our population? children repeatedly, every day across this country, awaken go to school, and then their families, they're living in cars or they're living in shelters and they have to take on that responsibility as a child and adjust to an environment that they can learn. and we know that that is a total distraction. some of them through this homelessness, the school is the only stable place for them to go to every single day. so now we have -- we are in a

position where we're looking at cutting back on education. we're cutting back on housing. and so in america, are we sending a message through our budget that will not support sustainable housing for american citizens who are not in the top 1%, who some, by no fault of their own are unemployed, are we in this country, and as a government, turning our backs on those people? that's why we have, through the progressive caucus, a budget that will awaken the minds of so many in this country in this government. and we want our colleagues across the aisle and all of our colleagues to look at this budget and say that this is a time in america when we need to step up and find -- and fund sustainable housing in america. thank you. i yield my time. mrs. watson coleman: thank you very much. mr. speaker, can you tell us how much time we have left? the speaker pro tempore:

approximately 40 minutes. mrs. watson coleman: we're good we're good. i appreciate the comments that have been offered by both of my colleagues here. i think that you can certainly understand a lot of work went into the creation, the development, the evolution of this budget. we're happy to note that over the years some of those issues that were identified by the progressive caucus have now become part of the regular budget that is presented by the democratic caucus. but i want to highlight a couple of other things. because i think we just talked about the need for housing. we recognize that not only did we lose a lot of housing during the predatory lending crisis, a lot of that housing is still vacant. and we need to figure out a way to recapture that housing and use it for affordable housing purposes. our budget proposes to -- the extension of the use of

vouchers for housing. because we recognize how fundamental the need is to have safe and secure housing. we recognize that over the last several years millionaires billionaires and corporations have been getting tremendous tax breaks, that the very wealthy have received extremely generous credits. we want to see working people get credit for work. get tax advantages for the work that working people do. get additional child care credits, so that they can provide the kind of safety and security and helpinging environment -- healthy environment for their families. everybody has the desire to have a healthy family. everybody has a desire to be able to participate in our society, to even pay taxes, mr. speaker. they just need to have the mechanisms, the infrastructure, the opportunity, the policies

that will provide those opportunities. and this budget does just that. it is known that one in five children live in the united states of america in poverty. one out of three are african-american children, live in poverty. that's unacceptable for any child, to live in poverty in a nation that is as rich and that has so much wealth concentrated in so few hands. to whom much is given, much is required. and it is pay now or pay later. we need to recognize that the significance of our budget, that recognizes that education is indeed the equalizer here. not only are we looking to expand access to preschool care but full funding of k-12. and in addition to that, we recognize that higher education is what distinguished our middle class from those who

never can get into the middle class. but we want to make sure that students have access to education without being overly burdened with debt. so we want to look at creating opportunities for students to refinance their debt. and let's look at this country as a country of diplomacy, of humanitarianism. let's look at this country as a country of peacefulness and hopefulness for goodwill for all nations. let us move away from the sort of cold war mentality, look at modernizing our mill taristic events, -- militaryistic events, look at what we're doing with our resources, invest our resources here in america, not overseas. seek to bring humanitarian aid, seek to bring diplomacy, seek first peace, first -- seek first coalitions, but seek

first and foremost to invest in america. our unemployment rate is supposedly somewhere around 5% or 6% but that is so misleading. it's so misleading on so many different levels. number one, that is not true in rural areas, and that is not true in urban areas and that is not true for minority communities and that is not true for those who simply aren't looking anymore because they've been so dog-gone discouraged that they don't even think that there's any hope for them to have a job. . unemployment is double digits. it could be 25% it could be 13%. it is something we don't even know exactly what it is, but we need to be focusing on lifting up all of our communities. and if we truly absolutely want the american economy to expand, then we need to know we need more consumers. we need more jobs.

we need more paychecks. we need more customers. and we do that by investing in our middle class. we do that by investing in small businesses, in new businesses and start-ups, in education, research and development. this budget recognizes that if we are going to be the america great that we are supposed to be, that we need to make these investments. and so today was monumental for me because i got to articulate and to stand with individuals who expressed things that i had believed even as a legislator in the state of new jersey that if we are to experience an america that really works, an america where our communities are safe because people -- there's full

employment, so no one is trying to rob anybody or no one is feeling a need to engage in a legal activity simply to put food on the table. if we are going to be competitive globally then we need to be investing in education. we need to be building schools. and we need to be ensuring that even the schools in the poorest districts across the united states of america,ville all of the 21st century technology and opportunities to learn and produce. and we need to have high expectations. we need to have high expectations for everyone. so i think very much for this opportunity. and i will take this moment toll yield back to my colleague, the co-chair of our progressive caucus, congressman ellison. mr. ellison: i was intrigued by the things you were saying about the progressive caucus budget,

because i have always believed that you know someone's treasure by how they prioritize their expenses. you know -- you look at a family budget and if you see a lot of money being spent on television and movies and candy, you know they care a lot about that. and if you see people spend a lot of money on books and education, you know they care about that. what does it mean if you have a budget of a nation where the biggest amounts of the budget are spent on helping rich people get richer, cutting health and safety regulations, what does that mean? at a time when income inequality is at its height since the great depression. i mean, my problem with the republican budget is that they have been acting like rich people don't have enough money

and poor people have too much for 40 years, what it has brought us is massive income inequality and their answer to that is to do it some more. it has hurt this economy to prioritize the well-to-do over everyone else. it doesn't even help rich people very much, because rich people own stores and factories and stuff like that, if regular folks don't have any money how can can they help boost the consumer demand. this economy that we have, it's important to point out that the united states is a country of tremendous resources. this is still the richest country in the world. and not only is america the richest country in the world, america itself has never been richer. if you look at per capita income and you scale it on a graph and compare it to over time, you're

looking at a steadily rising line and yet, the american budget, our governmental expenditure has -- a proportion of it -- we have even one of the lowest proportions of government spending relative to g.d.p. in a great many years. the fact of the matter is, the reason that the proportion of g.d.p. -- the proportion of government expenditure to g.d.p. is going down is because america has been given -- giving away the resources that it needs to take care of its people. i'm talking about life-saving research in medicine, dealing with issues of climate i'm talking about infrastructure investment. one of the things that the progressive caucus' budget does to recapture some of the money the government is due and owed is that we end corporate

inversion and deferral. what is corporate inversion? where the company doesn't actually physically move anywhere, but they sell themselves to a foreign corporation with a lower tax rate or no tax rate thereby escaping payment of monies to and taxes as an american corporation but not really moving anything. they might increase their physical footprint in the country that they're in. we have had that happen in my own community. and before i went to criticize the company that did it, i found out it is legal to do. how are you going to blame a corporation trying to get money when it's legal to do? rather than blame the company i blame congress. you know, so we went and did something about it. we went to the progressive caucus budget and end inversions. we also in this process of

deferral, this idea that corporate profits don't have to be paid as long as they are deferred and kept overseas. we end this process. we end deferral. and these two things alone will bring money back to the united states government so we can invest in roads, bridges and infrastructure, so we can make sure that no five-year-old kid is leaving a shelter going to a public school in the morning. so we can make sure -- that kids have a decent meal to eat and our seniors can actually hope to one day be able to beat parkinson's and alzheimer's and all kinds of diseases. this takes public investment to solve these problems. the progressive caucus budget, i'm very proud to be a part of because it is a budget that looks at the needs of the american people and does something about it. let me talk about the education side of it.

we have universal pre-k. doesn't matter if you are a conservative economist or liberal economist. they all agree that the best return on investment is educating little kids. you educate those little guys and it will keep them out of trouble and put them on a path to college or some form of higher education and they will not become a government expense. they will be a government asset. we will not have an expenditure but will be paying taxes. the progressive caucus funds universal pre-k. i'm so happy about that because those little guys are so cute and we definitely want to see those bright-eyed little children maximize their talents. they are actually really smart. and if you put them in an

education environment they can do more than just learn how to count, they can use a computer. you never know what tremendous benefits they will bring to our society. and we move from there in k-12 education we fund municipal and local employees who need help $95 billion where we can put a teacher or teacher's aide back into the classroom. local governments have been shedding public employees, including teachers. what does this mean? to the average teacher, used to have a classroom, 28 kids, 19 kids, well those classes are bigger, because you have fewer teachers. used to be able to have a little budget to put -- decorate the classroom, put inspiring messages and notes and pictures up there. now teachers -- and i would ask

the gentlelady to yield for a question. have you had the experience of talking to a teacher where they tell you that they are going into their pocket to decorate the classroom, have you heard that? mrs. coleman: i helped some of the teachers buy the supplies for their classrooms. mr. ellison: we need to respond to these kinds of things. and i ask the gentlelady if she would yield for a question again, you know, what does it mean to a police department that needs about 40 people to protect the people of the city but only has 20 folks, what does that mean? does that mean they don't get out of their cars and form relationships. they are running from call to-to call and doesn't have the equipment that they need? mrs. coleman: it means all of those things. what it means for the communities like the capital of the state of new jersey, which is the city of trenton, it means

that our neighborhoods are unsafe. it means that police are running to situations that have already occurred as opposed to having the resources and the capacity to understand what is happening out there and be proactive and preventive in nature. it does negatively impact the quality of life for those who live in cities and those who work there. and i'm particularly concerned about the seniors, who invested in the cities years ago when they were thriving environments, mr. congressman, and now they are still living there because they can't afford to move. and so they're finding themselves in communities where because of the housing crisis, there are vacant houses around them, members of gangs have settled into those houses creating a prison-like environments for people who can't go outside and sit on their porch and this has been function

of disinvestment in our cities. mr. ellison: until -- what the progressive caucus budget is trying to address these issues. when you talk to officers and firefighters, health care workers teachers, all these government functions have been cut. and would the gentlelady yield for another question? what does it mean to see your library hours cut in your city because the federal assistance or local taxpayers, there is no help for the library and see your hours go -- cut. library staff cut. what does that mean to a local community? i yield to the gentlelady. mrs. coleman: thank you for the opportunity to address this firsthand in the capital city in the state of new jersey, they have actually had to close libraries. we experienced a digital divide

in urban centers and sometimes the only access that student had to computers and the internet and the capacity to do research was in the local library. and so it has negatively impacted their ability to get the information they need to succeed in school and also negatively impacted those who are looking for jobs who went to the library to be able to research jobs on the internet. it has had a devastating impact on the communities. and so, too, when we look at our budget the progressive budget, and we recognize that we wish to restore services, restore funding to programs that empower our communities, it is giving them a chance again to become productive, productive in the work environment productive in the school environment. it restores hope where hope has been taken away for so long. mr. ellison: that's right. and if i could just say, so putting workers back on the job

who are firefighters, police officers teachers, these are very important to the quality of life. i would like to refer to these people as every day heroes. they may not wear big letters on their chest, but when i think of the people other than my parents probably a teacher or a cop who saw me hanging on the corner saying, we know you are smart you could be doing better than what you are doing. every day heroes that make neighborhoods run every single day. i think it's important for the progressive caucus that we are going to prioritize and rehiring these people who have been let go in the course of this recession. we have seen private-sector employment increase every single month, but you know what? we have seen public-sector employment actually go down. and one of the things i also

would like to get your take on if you wouldn't mind sharing your views on this issue is restoring and enhancing emergency unemployment compensation. as you know back in december 26 2013, the long-term unemployed were cast adrift by the republican majority. these are people who were working, but just couldn't find a job soon enough. some people tried to imply that some people were lazy and didn't want a job a had to kick them off of unemployment. and i wonder what your thoughts are about this. mrs. watson coleman: for those individualeds who without any fault of their own were victims of the trickledown economics that have failed us from 40 years ago to even today those individuals who, but

for the shift in policies and having this negative impact because of trickledown economics, which doesn't work except for perhaps on an essay paper, they struggled, they lost their homes, they lost their families, they lost their health care, they lost their health. and the people's budget recognizes the responsibility that government has to those individuals. and so to extend the unemployment benefits for the 99 weeks, i believe it is, over a two-year period gives people an opportunity as well as gives the policymakers an opportunity to create opportunities for these people to find jobs. and to have some meager form of income while they are looking. because they basically have

been left with absolutely nothing. so it's a further illustration that the people's budget is a reflection of the people's needs. and i'm so very fortunate to be associated with it. one last thing i wanted to raise as it relates to our urban centers, right now in washington, d.c., there's a conference of the urban mayors from the state of new jersey. and i'm going to have an opportunity to speak to them later on this evening. and i am very excited to talk to them about what it means to support the progressive budget, the alternative progressive caucus budget. and what it means to their communities, whether it's for education for teachers, for aides, for paraprofessionals, for police, for nurses, for hospitals, whatever they will understand that this is a budget that recognizes that we're the majority of the people -- that where the majority of the people live in

this country, there is a budget that acknowledges that their needs are paramount to the success, the collective success of our economy and our country. mr. ellison: that's right. i thank the gentlelady for yielding back to me. i just want to point out that, again, the progressive caucus budget is in dramatic contrast to the republican budget. take the republican budget, for example. the republican budget calls for repealing the affordable care act. this is a piece of legislation that has extended health care access to literally millions and millions and millions of people. the republicans want to snatch health care access out of people who now, for the first time in their life have acquired it. thearned doing it by saying, we -- and they're doing it by saying we want you to have freedom and we think obamacare infringes on your freedom, so now be free to have no access to health care except in an emergency room.

they want to partially privatize medicare. is that what we need privatization of medicare? this is one of the systems, you know, a few years ago the republicans wanted to privatize social security. they wanted to say, we'll take all the money you saved, we'll put it on wall street accounts, of course they'll be administered for a reasonable fee, i put that in quotes, but don't worry about it everything will be fine. then we see stock markets fall. and plummet. they go up, they go down. but when you talk about something like social security and medicare and medicaid these have to be stable and reliable and they want to privatize it as they have proposed through other important programs. they want to turn medicaid and food stamps into block grants for states. what does that mean? that means states, if you're in some states, maybe the govern already do the right thing. i'm pretty confident in minnesota. our governor would do the right thing. our unemployment is at a record low. our state -- our wages have

been climbing. we actually have a surplus in the state of minnesota. our next door neighbor, wisconsin, run by scott walker, they have a big ugly deficit, embarrassing given that he's supposed to be this fiscal conservative. but facts don't seem to bother some people. my point is that, you know, the republicans want to block grant these programs. if you block grant minnesota, it will be less money whenever there's a budget pinch, they'll use that money for other things other than the intended purpose. but if you send it to a state like wisconsin, you know, with a governor like scott walker the people who are intended to benefit may never, ever see it at all. so this is a very important program not to block grant these programs. tax reforms that lower rates and eliminate any taxation on profits reported abroad. come on. as a matter of fact i mean, if just cutting taxes to the bone

and cutting taxes for rich people as much as we possibly can would be good for the economy wouldn't we have avoided a recession of 2008? wouldn't we -- we should be -- we should have more jobs than we could possibly imagine. we should have never had any recession and every american should be paid, you know, i don't know, $100,000 a year. if just cutting taxes was good for the economy. but cutting taxes is good for some people. but it's not good for the economy overall. the evidence is all around us. the republicans want to turn the rest of the world into a tax haven for multinationals. the president has been trying to set the record straight. he's been trying to signal what an economy where the shared prosperity should look like. but the fact is, if you look at

the republican budget and uconn draft it with other proposal -- and you contrast it with other proposals, it certainly fail the test of being good for the american people. progressive caucus budget on the other hand passes the test. we do programs that actually help the american people. universal pre-k roll back support for title 1, debt-free -- college to make sure every child has a quality education. when uconn draft our budgets, it is -- when you contrast our budgets, it is clear which one would be most meritorious. look at the republican caucus budget, read it share it with your friends, offer your views on it. and we ask people to just do -- support the budget that they think makes a lot of sense. probably will be debating the budgets next week. probably will have a vote and we think it's important for

americans to tune into this debate. because if you're an american person and you're busy, you're trying to raise kids and get to work on time, trying to earn a live, you don't have time to be plugged into politics like some of of white house do this our whole lives -- like some of us who do this our whole lives do. i'm asking americans to slow down and say hey, what is going on in this debate? what's the republican budget look like, they want to cut taxes, some are. they don't want overseas corporations to return those profits and pay taxes on that. and the progressive caucus, oh, wait a minute, they want to let little kids go to school, let the teenagers and the young adults go to school they want to train our work force they want to invest in our nation's infrastructure. i guarantee this is what the people of this country want to see. so let me yield to the gentlelady and i think right now i'm going to have to go to another meeting but i want to thank the gentlelady for upholding the progressive caucus message. wish you very great success in

the people's budget. i yield back. mrs. watson coleman: thank you, congressman. the speaker pro tempore: 13 minutes. mrs. watson coleman: i only need five. thank you very much. i thank you for this opportunity to share the good news about the progressive budget. and to inform those who are here, as well as those who are at home, what this budget represents. one last issue that i think i'd like to address that we may not have clearly or substantively articulated has to do with our environment, environmental issues. this budget acknowledges a devastatinging impact that we've had on the environment -- devastatinging impact that we've had on the environment and -- devastating impact that we've had on the environment. eliminating fossil fuel subsidies for big oil that frankly don't need government support, and ensuring e.p.a. has the resources it needs to help reduce our carbon

footprint. we spent this last 45, 50 minutes, thank you very much for the opportunity to share the good news about the people's budget, progressive budget i hope that anyone who has -- budget. i hope that anyone who has need for additional information will seek this information out online. thank you very much, mr. speaker. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: i thank the gentlelady. under the speaker's announced policy of january 6, 2015, the gentlewoman from north carolina, ms. foxx, is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader. ms. foxx: thank you mr. speaker. mr. speaker, today too many americans struggle to realize the dream of higher education. our current system is unaffordable inflexible and outdated and it has resulted in too many students unable to

complete college saddled with loan debt, and ill-equipped to compete in our modern economy. in recent years burdensome federal regulations, a lack of transparency and a dizzying maze of student aid programs have only contributed to the problem. students and families deserve better. mr. speaker, when my husband and i were in high school and contemplating the possibility of college we were pennyless people with families -- penniless people with families with no -- in his case, his parents had no formal education. they couldn't read and write. my family had very limited

education. but we understood then that the way out of poverty was to go to college, work hard, get a good job. and folks like us, who had no resources could do that. it is very difficult for people in this day and time to do what he and i did. he graduated from college with a very small debt. i graduated from college with absolutely no debt. because of working my way through. it did take me seven years to do it. but i was able to do it. mr. speaker, we want to be able to provide an environment in this country where people with very limited resources can do

what my husband and i and millions of other young people did in the past, which is get a higher education without going deeply into debt to do so. the upcoming re-authorization of the higher education act provides congress an opportunity to help every individual, regardless of age, location or background access and complete higher education if they choose. to inform the re-authorization process, the education and work force committee has held 15 hearings over the last several years. after receiving feedback from students, institutions, innovators, administrators and researchers, the committee established a set of key principles that will guide our reform of the postsecondary education law. first, we must empower students

and families to make informed decisions when it comes to selecting the institution that meets their unique needs. today's higher education resources are incomplete inaccurate and often complicate the financial aid process. misguiding students about their had academic and financial options. developing a more streamlined and transparent system, as well as enhancing financial literacy services, will help students better understand the higher education landscape and make choices based on easy-to-understand relevant information. second, we must simplify and improve student aid. currently the federal government operates more than 10 aid programs. each with its own set of rules and requirements. many students, particularly first-generation and low-income

students, are overwhelmed by the complexity of the current system. which can ultimately deter them from accessing the aid that will help make college a reality. consolidating this patchwork of aid programs will simplify the application and eligibility process and help more students understand manage and repay their debt. . we must promote innovation, access and completion. in recent years as the post-secondary population has changed, many institutions have developed new approaches to delivering higher education, including competency-based curriculums and online classes. the federal government should make every effort to support these innovations as they have enabled more americans to earn a agree or certificate faster with less costs and without additional disruption to their

daily lives. finally we must ensure strong accountability while limiting the federal role. the current administration has subjected institutions to onerous regulations and requirements which created a costly and time-consuming process, hampered innovation and jeopardized economic freedom. eliminating in effect federal burdens will provide states and institutions the flexibility they need to deliver effectively a high-quality education to their students. we are confident that these pillars will translate into meaningful federal reforms that reflect the evolving needs of students in the work force. yesterday, the subcommittee on higher education and work force training held its first hearing of the 114th congress where we

heard policy recommendations on how we can strengthen america's higher education system to serve students families, workers and taxpayers better. former indiana governor and purdue university president mitch daniels testified, quote it's migrate hope that this congress will have the courage to see the challenges and treat re-authorization of the higher education act as an opportunity for reform, end quote. he continued, the country needs the re-authorization that will reduce the costs of higher education's regulatory burdens, simplify and improve student aid and create an environment more conducive to innovation and higher education, end quote. dr. kristin keller, vice president of the association of

public and land grant universities stressed the need for access to clear, meaningful data to answer questions and provide essential information for higher education stakeholders. for student and families to make more informed decisions about where to attend college, for policy makers to determine allocation of public resources and evaluate institutional effectiveness. and for college leaders to facilitate innovation and successful student outcomes. after outlining several opportunities for simplifying federal aid, mr. pikeal bennett associate vice president for financial aid services at st. petersburg college recommended a new repayment model that will simplify and streamline the payment system by collapsing the

various existing plans into two basic plans. simplifying repayment for students would certainly decrease default rates and the taxpayers' burden of having to shoulder the costs of defaulted loans. in the coming months there will be many conversations about what can be done to maintain the strength of our robust higher education system. we have a responsibility to act now to preserve our unique role in the world as a summit of opportunity. thank you, mr. speaker. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does does the gentlelady from north carolina seek recognition? ms. foxx: mr. speaker, i make a motion that the house do adjourn. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on the motion to adjourn. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the motion is adopted. accordingly the house

i don't think an 8% raise is enough. but 5% is even worse and will directly impact the veterans we need to serve. those are the people who will be hurt. i lost two members of my 2nd platoon since coming home. we need to fix a lot at the v.a. but taking funding away from it right now is not the right way to do it. i ask support. mr. price: the question is on agreeing to the amendment offered by mr. moulton. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion, the noes have it. mr. rokita: no. mr. garrett:

mr. diaz-balart: no mr. cole: no. mrs. black. mrs. black: no. mr. woodall: no. mrs. blackburn: no. mrs. hartzler: no. mr. cartwright: no. mr. stutzman: no. mr. womack: no. mr. brat: no. mr. blum: no. mr. mooney: no.

mr. palmer: no. mr. moolenaar: no mr. westmoreland: no. mr. buchanan: no. mr. van hollen: hi. mr. yarmuth: aye. mr. pascrell: aye mr. ryan: aye. ms. moore: aye. ms. castor: aye. mr. mcdermott: aye. ms. lee: aye. mr. pocan: aye. mrs. dingell: aye. mr. lieu: aye. mr. moulton: aye.

mr. garrett: no. stan stan no. mr. mooney:. mr. chairman? mr. price: no. mr. price: all members voted? any member wish to change their votes? the clerk will report the tally. the clerk: the ayes are 14 and the noes are 21. mr. price: the knows have it and the amendment is not agreed to. the committee will stand in recess until 5:00 p.m. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org

>> house budget committee gaveled in at 11:00 eastern and marking up the fiscal year 2016 budget proposal. and they are taking a break here. the chairman tom price saying until 5:00 eastern. so an hour or so, but he did say when beginning this morning that

the committee would be in session marking up the measure until about midnight eastern or perhaps sooner. i want to let you know the senate budget committee is doing the same thing. they came in about an hour and a half ago. they are marking up their 2016 budget proposal. president obama today in cleveland talking about the economy speaking against the republican proposal. you will see that later on the c-span networks and online on cspan.org. as the budget season is beginning, covering a number of appropriations hearings. the house armed services committee hearing from the secretary of defense, ashton carter the chairman of the joint chiefs. but a break here on the house budget committee with our coverage here on c-span and cspan.org.

>> house budget committee taking a break for the next hour to so.

they're expected to go to about midnight tonight. marking up the 2016 budget proposal. the senate budget committee's doing the same thing, not exactly sure if they're still in session. they came in at 2:30 eastern so they should be. again, as they prepare their 2016 budget measure. "the hill" in writing about the proposal that was released tuesday say that it would balance the budget, the republican plan would balance the budget in nine years. and cut $5.5 trillion in projected spending over the next decade. "the hill" writes the budget would keep spending ceilings under a 2011 budget deal in place but would provide as much as $90 billion in additional war funding. much more than the $51 billion proposed by president obama. the budget committee chair, tom price's, blueprint reveals that obamacare -- or repeals obamacare, rather, and has a premium support for medicare similar to those proposed in previous house budgets by the former chair paul ryan