Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2018
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. Chairman, I am doing this on behalf of Ms. DeLauro. As we know, her mother passed this weekend, and she is in our thoughts.
Mr. Chairman, this also incorporates two other amendments that we would have otherwise taken up separately under my name, but they are all-inclusive in here. So let me talk about what the amendment does.
This amendment would restore funding to worker protection programs to keep to the fiscal year 2017 levels. The bill, as it stands, has a cut of $59 million to worker protection agencies, including a cut of $21 million to OSHA, the elimination of the Susan Harwood training grants, and a cut of $14 million to the Mine Safety and Health Administration.
This is the lowest budget OSHA has seen since 2009. We need OSHA. It saves lives. Since 1970, occupational deaths have been cut in half, saving over 80 million lives. But there is plenty of work left to do.
Last year alone, 4,800 workers were killed on the job, and over 3 million were seriously injured. An average of 15 workers die every day from job injuries, costing U.S. businesses over $170 billion.
The proposed budget would further reduce enforcement personnel by 140 investigators. That is 2,318 fewer
workplace investigations. In addition, in the bill under consideration, safety training grants to reach workers in the highest risk jobs are eliminated, despite being a core OSHA program through every administration, Republican and Democrat, since 1978.
OSHA has only enough funding to inspect every workplace under its jurisdiction every 159 years. Why would this bill eliminate funding for Susan Harwood training grants that protect and educate workers in the most dangerous jobs?
This program costs less than one-tenth of 1 percent of the Department of Labor's budget. This cut is irresponsible and reckless. We cannot cut NIOSH occupational health research, the primary Federal agency that conducts research to prevent work-related illness and injury. This research is a critical defense against tragedy. We must fund MSHA to keep our Nation's mines safe. There is too much on the line to neglect this sector.
This amendment would restore funding to the Bureau of International Labor Affairs, which is tasked with enforcing labor provisions of free trade agreements that are intended to protect American workers.
Finally, this amendment would restore funding to the National Labor Relations Board, which protects the rights of workers under the National Labor Relations Act.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. Chairman, I will close by saying that I have been an employer for nearly 30 years; and on behalf of the vast majority of employers who have very responsible workplaces and care for their workers and take care of their workers, it is the irresponsible businesses that hurt all of the other businesses.
When we don't inspect companies that could have workplace violations, when we can only get around every 159 years to every workplace that is under the jurisdiction, when we don't enforce wage laws, we hurt the responsible businesses in this country, and that is why it is important to do this.
Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. Chairman, I rise in reluctant opposition to this amendment. I strongly support additional funding for the CDC, the National Cancer Institute, and the National Institute on Aging. I have spent my time in Congress fighting for those agencies.
In fact, over the past 2 years, Democrats on the Labor-HHS Subcommittee have worked closely with Chairman Tom Cole to increase the NIH budgets by $2 billion annually, and I hope we are able to do it again this year.
But this amendment is fundamentally flawed because it slashes $120 million from the CMS Program Management. Keep in mind that the CMS Program Management account is already cut by a $524 million in the underlying bill. That is a 13 percent cut. This amendment would increase that cut to more than 16 percent.
According to HHS, over 143 million Americans will rely on programs administered by CMS, including Medicare, Medicaid, CHIP, and the Federal health insurance exchanges.
Why would my colleagues in the majority support more than $600 million in cuts to the Medicare, Medicaid, and CHIP programs? Slashing their administrative budgets by 16 percent is certain to harm services that impact Americans on a daily basis. These cuts will directly harm America's seniors, the blind, low- and middle-income families, children with disabilities, and Americans with chronic conditions like end-stage renal disease, as well as pregnant mothers and newborns.
CMS programs face historic growth in the years to come. A cut of $644 million to its administrative budget would open up the program to mismanagement, fraud, and abuse.
Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to oppose the amendment.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source