(Washington, D.C.) – U.S. Rep. Rush Holt (NJ-12) today released the following statement about reports that the U.S. Postal Service intends to end mail delivery on Saturdays later this year:

“For more than 200 years, the U.S. Postal Service has done far more than sell stamps and deliver letters.  It has built communities, united citizens, and bound together our vast and diverse country.

“I am deeply concerned that, if the Postal Service were to follow through on this plan to slash services in the pursuit of short-term financial gain, it would sacrifice its most crucial long-term competitive edge:  its renowned and respected status as a core American institution.

“The USPS is not just another delivery service.  Only the USPS goes, in effect, every day to every address, rich or poor, rural or urban, commercial or residential.”

In the U.S. House of Representatives, Holt is a cosponsor of H.Res. 30, which expresses the sense of the House of Representatives that the U.S. Postal Service should maintain a six-day delivery schedule.

(Washington, D.C.) – U.S. Senator Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ) and Rep. Rush Holt (NJ-12) today reintroduced the Tyler Clementi Higher Education Anti-Harassment Act, legislation that for the first time would require colleges and universities to have in place anti-harassment policies.  The bills, introduced separately in the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives, also would provide funding for schools to establish or expand programs to prevent harassment of students.

“The tragic impact of bullying on college campuses has damaged too many young adults, and it is time for our colleges to put policies on the books that would protect students from harassment,” Lautenberg said.  “While there is no way to eliminate the cruelty that some students choose to inflict on their peers, there should be a clear code of conduct that prohibits harassment.  It is vitally important that all students have the opportunity to learn in a safe and secure environment.”
 
“It is not enough simply to denounce cruelty, bullying, and harassment.  We must create meaningful policies to bar this toxic behavior from our college campuses,” Holt said.  “I thank Tyler’s family for their inspiring efforts to end bullying and, through their work with Rutgers, to promote conversations and research about preventing harassment.”

The legislation is named in honor of Tyler Clementi, an 18-year-old freshman at Rutgers University who took his life in 2010 after his roommate and another student harassed him and violated his privacy over the Internet.

Holt announced the legislation’s reintroduction at an event at Rutgers University to launch the Tyler Clementi Center, a collaborative effort between Rutgers and the Tyler Clementi Foundation that will offer lectures, symposia, and seminars on topics including the impact of technologies on youth and emerging adults, especially social media, cyber-bullying, and privacy.

(Milltown, NJ) – U.S. Rep. Rush Holt (NJ-12) today joined Milltown Mayor Eric Steeber and USPS officials for a ribbon-cutting ceremony at the Milltown Post Office to formally re-open the facility.

“Today is a very good day that has been too long in coming,” Holt said.  “I am pleased and grateful that, more than a year after Hurricane Irene shut down the Milltown Post Office, the USPS has done the hard and important work necessary to restore full postal services to the community.”

The Milltown Post Office had been closed ever since it was damaged in flooding after Hurricane Irene in 2011, and residents were forced to rely on minimal postal operations running out of a trailer.  The post office’s reopening is the result of more than a year of advocacy by Holt, Steeber, and the Milltown Borough Council.

It was one of those great cosmic coincidences that, on Monday, our first black president took his oath of office on a day set aside to honor one of America’s greatest black leaders.

Much has been said about the ties that bind together Barack Obama and Martin Luther King, Jr.:  not only their race and their soaring oratory, but also their fervent pursuit of seemingly impossible change, and their belief that the arc of our moral universe – however long – bends toward justice.

As then-Senator Barack Obama said when he spoke from the pulpit of Dr. King’s church, Ebenezer Baptist in Atlanta, in early 2008:

“What Dr. King understood is that if just one person chose to walk instead of ride the bus, those walls of oppression would not be moved.  But maybe if a few more walked, the foundation might start to shake.

“If a few more women were willing to do what Rosa Parks had done, maybe the cracks would start to show.  If teenagers took freedom rides from North to South, maybe a few bricks would come loose.  Maybe if white folks marched because they had come to understand that their freedom too was at stake in the impending battle, the wall would begin to sway.

“And if enough Americans were awakened to the injustice; if they joined together, North and South, rich and poor, Christian and Jew, then perhaps that wall would come tumbling down, and justice would flow like water, and righteousness like a mighty stream.”

Martin Luther King, Jr. believed that people working together can accomplish far more than any of us can achieve alone.  He believed in the willingness of all Americans, even those in a position of privilege, to open their eyes to the unconscionable wrong happening around them if they are challenged to do so – especially, and most effectively, by non-violent action.  This belief, somewhat counter to normal intuition, produced results because of basic human decency.

(Washington, D.C.) – U.S. Rep. Rush Holt (NJ-12) today delivered the following statement on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives in recognition of the 40th anniversary of the Supreme Court’s decision in Roe v. Wade:

“Mr. Speaker, 40 years ago today, the Supreme Court affirmed the dignity and independence of each American woman.

“The result of the decision [in Roe v. Wade] was an understanding that our Constitution guaranteed decisions about a woman’s own body should be left up to that woman, in consultation with her doctor, her family, and her religion – not the federal government.

“There is now a generation of women who do not remember the time before Roe v. Wade, a time when men assumed they could say what women could and could not do about their personal, private health care and reproduction.

“We still have a lot of work to do.  Unfortunately, over the past 40 years, there have been numerous legislative attempts to deny this right to women and treat women who exercise control over their own bodies as criminals.  We have to make sure that we defend also Title X, maternal and child health care programs, public access to reproductive health care, and that we reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act.

“But we must remember the time before Roe v. Wade and what is at stake.”

Mr. Speaker, 40 years ago today the Supreme Court affirmed the dignity and independence of each American woman. The result of the decision was an understanding that our Constitution guaranteed decisions about a woman's own body should be left up to that woman, in consultation with her doctor, her family, and her religion, not the Federal Government.

There is now a generation of women who do not remember the time before Roe v. Wade, a time when men assumed they could say what women could and could not do about their personal private health care and reproduction.

We still have a lot of work to do. Unfortunately, over the past 40 years there have been numerous legislative attempts to deny this right to women and treat women who exercise control over their own bodies as criminals.

We have to make sure that we defend also Title X, maternal and child health care programs, public access to reproductive health care, and that we reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act. But we must remember the time before Roe v. Wade and what is at stake.

On Tuesday evening, the House finally passed a $50.4 billion disaster relief bill that will help New Jersey and other states rebuild after Hurricane Sandy.

That’s the good news – and it is, to be sure, very good news.  For the tens of thousands of New Jerseyans still working hard to recover from the storm, this bill will make a real difference.  It provides significant emergency support to FEMA and the Small Business Administration, and it invests wisely in preventing future disasters.

But the vote also reflects a deeply troubling trend in our politics.  It is troubling that Congress would hesitate and debate for months whether we would rebuild after a hurricane.  It is alarming that, when Congress finally decided to act, the bill passed mostly along party lines, with small Republican support and that small Republican support coming almost entirely from northeastern states or from states usually affected by hurricanes.

Does this mean disaster relief has become a partisan or regional issue, rather than a shared commitment to aid our fellow citizens who fall victim to nature’s wrath?  Congress seems to be losing its belief in a great America,  a country that doesn't for a moment think that natural disaster or hardship will set us back.

(Washington, D.C.) – U.S. Rep. Rush Holt (NJ-12) released the following statement today following President Obama’s announcement of new executive orders and policy recommendations to reduce gun violence:

“For decades, too many in Washington have stood inactive as our schoolchildren and moviegoers and worshippers and police officers and so many others have been gunned down.  This shameful, tragic inaction must end.

“President Obama has acted quickly and intelligently to identify steps that he can take on his own to reduce gun violence.  But he is right to say that real progress will require Congress to act.

(Washington, D.C.) – U.S. Rep. Rush Holt (NJ-12) today supported a $50.4 billion disaster relief bill that will to help New Jersey and other states rebuild after Hurricane Sandy, but he sharply criticized the months-long delay in passing the legislation and the politicization of the disaster relief process.

“For tens of thousands of New Jerseyans still struggling to recover from Hurricane Sandy, today’s bill will make a real difference,” Holt said.  “But make no mistake:  the process by which this bill was brought to a vote was needlessly prolonged and painful.  At every step, Republican leaders bent over backwards to accommodate Tea Party radicals who believe that government should not help the victims of natural disasters.”

The House passage of the disaster relief bill concludes a long and arduous legislative saga.  On December 28, 2012, the Senate passed a $60.4 billion disaster relief package by a bipartisan vote of 62 to 32.  At the time, House Republican leadership promised Members of Congress from the affected region that the House would consider Sandy disaster relief on January 1 or January 2, before the 112th Congress adjourned.  However, late on January 1, Speaker Boehner cancelled votes on the legislation, and the 112th Congress adjourned without passing any disaster relief bill.

After the 113th Congress convened, House Republican leadership chose to divide the disaster relief package into two pieces.  The first was H.R. 41, which was enacted on January 6 and which provided $9.7 billion to the National Flood Insurance Program.  The second was H.R. 152, which passed the House today and included $50.4 billion in funding.  In total, the two bills will provide $60.1 billion in disaster relief funding – nearly the full amount requested by President Obama.

Holt added, “I’m pleased and relieved that this bill has finally passed the House, but we should all be deeply troubled that it passed only over the objections of most House Republicans.  For generations, America’s fundamental social contract has held that we help those who, through no fault of their own, fall victim to natural disasters.  Today, most House Republicans voted to void that contract.”

(Washington, D.C.) – U.S. Rep. Rush Holt (NJ-12) today spoke on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives in opposition to two Republican amendments that would strip funding for hurricane prediction and research from a disaster relief bill intended to respond to Hurricane Sandy.

Holt, who is a research scientist and the co-chair of the Congressional Research and Development Caucus, has long highlighted the importance of federal support for R&D to America’s ability to predict and prepare for major storms.

Madam Chair, I rise in support of the Disaster Relief Act. This bill brings much needed aid to the residents of central New Jersey.

I am concerned that several amendments to H.R. 152 would impair the ability of money in the bill to be spent wisely. The amended bill includes a provision that would block funding that enables coastal communities to develop mitigation plans for future hurricanes and other severe weather events. We should not be limiting NOAA's ability to forecast and respond to hurricanes in an emergency appropriations bill that is designed to respond to a hurricane.

I intended to offer to H.R. 152 an amendment that would have lifted the $250,000 cap on Community Development Block Grant Funds (CDBG) that can be used by towns and municipalities to finance critically need infrastructure projects. There are towns in my district that would benefit from upgrades to existing flood management infrastructure, yet are unable to afford the costs associated with these projects. Unfortunately, my amendment was not made in order by the House Leadership.

While I support strongly passage of H.R. 152, I want to reiterate that our fellow citizens affected by Hurricane Sandy have already waited far too long for help from Congress. In other natural disasters, such as Hurricane Katrina, Congress acted swiftly, and aid reached those in need. And yet, the 112th Congress adjourned before passing a much-needed disaster relief package. The Senate had already acted to pass a well-constructed aid package bill. The only reason that this bill is not law today is that House leadership refused to act.

This devastating storm has left many people hurting in many different ways--shopkeepers, homeowners, fishermen, hotel and restaurant owners--and has damaged the entire economy. H.R. 152 responds to this variety of needs and concerns. I urge my colleagues to support the bill.

I try to make the ceremony of my oath of office inspiring for my constituents who come to Washington that day and for myself.  On January 4 I was joined by several eloquent speakers, including Anthony Appiah, a philosopher at Princeton University, who shared his thoughts on bridging party lines in these divisive times:

“Ben Franklin, one of the wisest of our founding spirits, told in his autobiography about how we can deal rationally but also humanely with the problems of political division.

“Franklin tells how he got the help of a legislator who disagreed with him on policy, not by being nice to him—that was too obvious—but by asking him to lend him a book. From then on they were friends.

“‘He that has once done you a kindness will be more ready to do you another,’ Franklin wrote, ‘than he whom you yourself have obliged.’

“So I think that one thing we could all do is ask a few kindnesses from Republicans, if we’re Democrats, and from Democrats, if we’re Republicans, and see if we can’t do more to get along. President Obama did just that when he asked Jim Leach, a retired Republican congressman, to head up the National Endowment for the Humanities. And Chris Christie, our governor, did it when he asked President Obama for help after Hurricane Sandy.

“In a democracy we’re all dependent on each other, because we need the good sense of our fellow voters to get us good legislators. Recognizing that we need one another, and that there’s more to be gained by admitting that than there is by badmouthing each other, would be a fine application of Ben Franklin’s humane lesson. And it would also be scientific, too. Because social psychologists have a name for what happens when someone you ask for a favor comes to like you: it’s called the Ben Franklin Effect.”

(Washington, D.C.) – U.S. Rep. Rush Holt (NJ-12) today released the following statement about reports that the U.S. Postal Service intends to end mail delivery on Saturdays later this year:

“For more than 200 years, the U.S. Postal Service has done far more than sell stamps and deliver letters.  It has built communities, united citizens, and bound together our vast and diverse country.

“I am deeply concerned that, if the Postal Service were to follow through on this plan to slash services in the pursuit of short-term financial gain, it would sacrifice its most crucial long-term competitive edge:  its renowned and respected status as a core American institution.

“The USPS is not just another delivery service.  Only the USPS goes, in effect, every day to every address, rich or poor, rural or urban, commercial or residential.”

In the U.S. House of Representatives, Holt is a cosponsor of H.Res. 30, which expresses the sense of the House of Representatives that the U.S. Postal Service should maintain a six-day delivery schedule.

(Washington, D.C.) – U.S. Senator Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ) and Rep. Rush Holt (NJ-12) today reintroduced the Tyler Clementi Higher Education Anti-Harassment Act, legislation that for the first time would require colleges and universities to have in place anti-harassment policies.  The bills, introduced separately in the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives, also would provide funding for schools to establish or expand programs to prevent harassment of students.

“The tragic impact of bullying on college campuses has damaged too many young adults, and it is time for our colleges to put policies on the books that would protect students from harassment,” Lautenberg said.  “While there is no way to eliminate the cruelty that some students choose to inflict on their peers, there should be a clear code of conduct that prohibits harassment.  It is vitally important that all students have the opportunity to learn in a safe and secure environment.”
 
“It is not enough simply to denounce cruelty, bullying, and harassment.  We must create meaningful policies to bar this toxic behavior from our college campuses,” Holt said.  “I thank Tyler’s family for their inspiring efforts to end bullying and, through their work with Rutgers, to promote conversations and research about preventing harassment.”

The legislation is named in honor of Tyler Clementi, an 18-year-old freshman at Rutgers University who took his life in 2010 after his roommate and another student harassed him and violated his privacy over the Internet.

Holt announced the legislation’s reintroduction at an event at Rutgers University to launch the Tyler Clementi Center, a collaborative effort between Rutgers and the Tyler Clementi Foundation that will offer lectures, symposia, and seminars on topics including the impact of technologies on youth and emerging adults, especially social media, cyber-bullying, and privacy.

(Milltown, NJ) – U.S. Rep. Rush Holt (NJ-12) today joined Milltown Mayor Eric Steeber and USPS officials for a ribbon-cutting ceremony at the Milltown Post Office to formally re-open the facility.

“Today is a very good day that has been too long in coming,” Holt said.  “I am pleased and grateful that, more than a year after Hurricane Irene shut down the Milltown Post Office, the USPS has done the hard and important work necessary to restore full postal services to the community.”

The Milltown Post Office had been closed ever since it was damaged in flooding after Hurricane Irene in 2011, and residents were forced to rely on minimal postal operations running out of a trailer.  The post office’s reopening is the result of more than a year of advocacy by Holt, Steeber, and the Milltown Borough Council.

(Washington, D.C.) – U.S. Rep. Rush Holt (NJ-12) today delivered the following statement on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives in recognition of the 40th anniversary of the Supreme Court’s decision in Roe v. Wade:

“Mr. Speaker, 40 years ago today, the Supreme Court affirmed the dignity and independence of each American woman.

“The result of the decision [in Roe v. Wade] was an understanding that our Constitution guaranteed decisions about a woman’s own body should be left up to that woman, in consultation with her doctor, her family, and her religion – not the federal government.

“There is now a generation of women who do not remember the time before Roe v. Wade, a time when men assumed they could say what women could and could not do about their personal, private health care and reproduction.

“We still have a lot of work to do.  Unfortunately, over the past 40 years, there have been numerous legislative attempts to deny this right to women and treat women who exercise control over their own bodies as criminals.  We have to make sure that we defend also Title X, maternal and child health care programs, public access to reproductive health care, and that we reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act.

“But we must remember the time before Roe v. Wade and what is at stake.”

(Washington, D.C.) – U.S. Rep. Rush Holt (NJ-12) released the following statement today following President Obama’s announcement of new executive orders and policy recommendations to reduce gun violence:

“For decades, too many in Washington have stood inactive as our schoolchildren and moviegoers and worshippers and police officers and so many others have been gunned down.  This shameful, tragic inaction must end.

“President Obama has acted quickly and intelligently to identify steps that he can take on his own to reduce gun violence.  But he is right to say that real progress will require Congress to act.

Mr. Speaker, 40 years ago today the Supreme Court affirmed the dignity and independence of each American woman. The result of the decision was an understanding that our Constitution guaranteed decisions about a woman's own body should be left up to that woman, in consultation with her doctor, her family, and her religion, not the Federal Government.

There is now a generation of women who do not remember the time before Roe v. Wade, a time when men assumed they could say what women could and could not do about their personal private health care and reproduction.

We still have a lot of work to do. Unfortunately, over the past 40 years there have been numerous legislative attempts to deny this right to women and treat women who exercise control over their own bodies as criminals.

We have to make sure that we defend also Title X, maternal and child health care programs, public access to reproductive health care, and that we reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act. But we must remember the time before Roe v. Wade and what is at stake.

Madam Chair, I rise in support of the Disaster Relief Act. This bill brings much needed aid to the residents of central New Jersey.

I am concerned that several amendments to H.R. 152 would impair the ability of money in the bill to be spent wisely. The amended bill includes a provision that would block funding that enables coastal communities to develop mitigation plans for future hurricanes and other severe weather events. We should not be limiting NOAA's ability to forecast and respond to hurricanes in an emergency appropriations bill that is designed to respond to a hurricane.

I intended to offer to H.R. 152 an amendment that would have lifted the $250,000 cap on Community Development Block Grant Funds (CDBG) that can be used by towns and municipalities to finance critically need infrastructure projects. There are towns in my district that would benefit from upgrades to existing flood management infrastructure, yet are unable to afford the costs associated with these projects. Unfortunately, my amendment was not made in order by the House Leadership.

While I support strongly passage of H.R. 152, I want to reiterate that our fellow citizens affected by Hurricane Sandy have already waited far too long for help from Congress. In other natural disasters, such as Hurricane Katrina, Congress acted swiftly, and aid reached those in need. And yet, the 112th Congress adjourned before passing a much-needed disaster relief package. The Senate had already acted to pass a well-constructed aid package bill. The only reason that this bill is not law today is that House leadership refused to act.

This devastating storm has left many people hurting in many different ways--shopkeepers, homeowners, fishermen, hotel and restaurant owners--and has damaged the entire economy. H.R. 152 responds to this variety of needs and concerns. I urge my colleagues to support the bill.

Madam Speaker, I thank my friend from the District, and I commend the work of my colleagues on this bill. It has some good features and should help smooth the way for recovery from Hurricane Sandy.

The delay in getting this bill and, more importantly, the delay in getting the supplemental appropriations bill for Hurricane Sandy to the floor has only compounded problems for Sandy's victims in New Jersey and elsewhere. And I wish that this bill had included language removing a real impediment faced by our towns.

I'm told that the appropriators, in the legislation coming to the floor tomorrow, are showing unusual respect for House rules and won't use their supplemental appropriations bill to change legislation but only to appropriate funds, so that the standard 65/35 Army Corps of Engineers formula will

not be changed. In other words, towns must put up 35 percent of the project cost for the Corps of Engineers to make the repairs that they would make. The construction costs are high. Many towns in my State will not be able to come up with the 35 percent cost share match for a multimillion dollar construction project. But the appropriators aren't authorizers, they say. Well, what we have before us now is coming from the authorizing committee. They could have fixed this, and I wish this bill had been brought up in such a way that we could fix this match, as the President had asked in his request for the emergency funds.

This bill should streamline the process, but we should have a 90/10 match so that these towns that are strapped for funds because of the damage of Hurricane Sandy and because they've exceeded their borrowing limits would be able to come up with a smaller amount of money so that the construction by the Corps of Engineers could get underway.

I'm happy to see this streamlined process that will get aid to individuals and municipalities in the wake of future storms like Hurricane Sandy. I wish that we could have used this opportunity to fix the 65/35 match and make it a 90/10 match, as the President had requested. That certainly would have helped the towns in New Jersey and Connecticut and New York.

I thank the gentlelady for yielding me the time.

Well, you've heard it. Our constituents' lives were devastated by the Sandy disaster. It has now been about 9 weeks since Hurricane Sandy brought the winds and the tidal surges.

In central New Jersey and Connecticut, in New York, people are hurting. Towns have exhausted their emergency funds and exhausted their borrowing capacity. In other disasters, such as the disaster associated with Katrina or with wildfires or with any number of other natural disasters, this body has acted and aid has been provided quickly.

And yet today, the Speaker is going to allow the 112th Congress to adjourn before passing the much-needed disaster relief package. The Senate acted on this bill. The aid package here was well constructed. It was ready. All we needed was a vote. And the delay is significant. It adds significantly to the hurt. It is not an exaggeration to say that lives are on the line. People are living wherever they can. They don't have the shelter. They don't have the businesses. They don't have their lives. And the Speaker just walks away. That compounds the disaster. The delay compounds the disaster.

It has been said: Well, FEMA has some money already in their account that will last for many weeks. But we're not just talking about FEMA, we're talking about HUD. More than a billion dollars, actually billions of housing aid. The Army Corps of Engineers, the National Oceanic and Atmosphere Administration, the Department of Interior, the Agriculture Department for food and emergency watershed protection, the EPA for safe drinking water--all of this was in this well-constructed package.

Now, it has often been said that the governing principle of the Republican leadership is ``you're on your own.'' That might actually be a conscientious principle if they really believe in their hearts that your Social Security should be privately invested or you should pay for a college without government help. But this, to say you're on your own after a disaster is inconsiderate. It breaks our trust. It violates an understanding, and it hurts people.

E pluribus unum: one out of many.

We help each other. We always have. My district and many around were badly affected by one of the largest storms, by one of the most expensive storms, by one of the worst storms in history. There are thousands of people who are not going back to their homes. They deserve our help. I wish I could speak as articulately and in such a measured manner as our leader did and as others have, but I'm afraid my anger is going to get the better of me.

Some weeks ago, someone said to me, You know, you're not going to get help from the House of Representatives because these are blue States. They voted for a Democrat for President.

Now, I would like to think--and Mr. King and Mr. LoBiondo and Mr. Smith and Governor Christie would like to think--that this is not a partisan matter, but I have to wonder what could be going on here. Why would we not help each other as this House has always done?

It was one of those great cosmic coincidences that, on Monday, our first black president took his oath of office on a day set aside to honor one of America’s greatest black leaders.

Much has been said about the ties that bind together Barack Obama and Martin Luther King, Jr.:  not only their race and their soaring oratory, but also their fervent pursuit of seemingly impossible change, and their belief that the arc of our moral universe – however long – bends toward justice.

As then-Senator Barack Obama said when he spoke from the pulpit of Dr. King’s church, Ebenezer Baptist in Atlanta, in early 2008:

“What Dr. King understood is that if just one person chose to walk instead of ride the bus, those walls of oppression would not be moved.  But maybe if a few more walked, the foundation might start to shake.

“If a few more women were willing to do what Rosa Parks had done, maybe the cracks would start to show.  If teenagers took freedom rides from North to South, maybe a few bricks would come loose.  Maybe if white folks marched because they had come to understand that their freedom too was at stake in the impending battle, the wall would begin to sway.

“And if enough Americans were awakened to the injustice; if they joined together, North and South, rich and poor, Christian and Jew, then perhaps that wall would come tumbling down, and justice would flow like water, and righteousness like a mighty stream.”

Martin Luther King, Jr. believed that people working together can accomplish far more than any of us can achieve alone.  He believed in the willingness of all Americans, even those in a position of privilege, to open their eyes to the unconscionable wrong happening around them if they are challenged to do so – especially, and most effectively, by non-violent action.  This belief, somewhat counter to normal intuition, produced results because of basic human decency.

On Tuesday evening, the House finally passed a $50.4 billion disaster relief bill that will help New Jersey and other states rebuild after Hurricane Sandy.

That’s the good news – and it is, to be sure, very good news.  For the tens of thousands of New Jerseyans still working hard to recover from the storm, this bill will make a real difference.  It provides significant emergency support to FEMA and the Small Business Administration, and it invests wisely in preventing future disasters.

But the vote also reflects a deeply troubling trend in our politics.  It is troubling that Congress would hesitate and debate for months whether we would rebuild after a hurricane.  It is alarming that, when Congress finally decided to act, the bill passed mostly along party lines, with small Republican support and that small Republican support coming almost entirely from northeastern states or from states usually affected by hurricanes.

Does this mean disaster relief has become a partisan or regional issue, rather than a shared commitment to aid our fellow citizens who fall victim to nature’s wrath?  Congress seems to be losing its belief in a great America,  a country that doesn't for a moment think that natural disaster or hardship will set us back.

I try to make the ceremony of my oath of office inspiring for my constituents who come to Washington that day and for myself.  On January 4 I was joined by several eloquent speakers, including Anthony Appiah, a philosopher at Princeton University, who shared his thoughts on bridging party lines in these divisive times:

“Ben Franklin, one of the wisest of our founding spirits, told in his autobiography about how we can deal rationally but also humanely with the problems of political division.

“Franklin tells how he got the help of a legislator who disagreed with him on policy, not by being nice to him—that was too obvious—but by asking him to lend him a book. From then on they were friends.

“‘He that has once done you a kindness will be more ready to do you another,’ Franklin wrote, ‘than he whom you yourself have obliged.’

“So I think that one thing we could all do is ask a few kindnesses from Republicans, if we’re Democrats, and from Democrats, if we’re Republicans, and see if we can’t do more to get along. President Obama did just that when he asked Jim Leach, a retired Republican congressman, to head up the National Endowment for the Humanities. And Chris Christie, our governor, did it when he asked President Obama for help after Hurricane Sandy.

“In a democracy we’re all dependent on each other, because we need the good sense of our fellow voters to get us good legislators. Recognizing that we need one another, and that there’s more to be gained by admitting that than there is by badmouthing each other, would be a fine application of Ben Franklin’s humane lesson. And it would also be scientific, too. Because social psychologists have a name for what happens when someone you ask for a favor comes to like you: it’s called the Ben Franklin Effect.”

As Congress lurches from self-imposed crisis to self-imposed crisis – most recently in the debacle regarding the fiscal cliff – it is easy to understand why members of the public shake their heads in disgust at the inability of the government to do the important work of America to help Americans.

Of course, for long-term economic stability and growth, we must have greater balance between revenue and expenditures.  That means Congress should pay close attention day to day, month to month, to revenue and to spending and should bring them more into line.  That should always be true, though, not just whenever someone invokes a crisis.

And say what you will, there was no good reason for a crisis at the end of 2012.  The “cliff” deadline was artificial, the result of a deal agreed to in August 2011 when some Congressional members who dislike government tried to prevent the U.S. from paying our bills, and the White House and Congressional leaders allowed them to hold the government hostage and then to impose automatic spending cuts and tax increases in the most thoughtless, ham-handed way.

As I see it, the big problem with the fiscal package that Congress passed earlier this week is that it was debated and negotiated on the terms set by the hostage-takers in 2011.  The negotiators came up with a solution, barely acceptable, but it was a solution to the wrong problem. Instead of talking about what our government needs to do put people to work; to reduce unemployment; to educate Americans; to rebuild our roads and bridges; to stimulate vibrant and innovative industry; to tend to the nourishment, the housing, the cultural well-being of all Americans – and then doing those things – Congress and Administration spent several months neglecting all the important work in front of us.  Instead they focused on such things as whether the marginal tax rate should be 36 percent or 39.6 percent for income earned above $250,000 or $450,000. The sad irony is that meeting the needs of Americans and doing things to bring about growth would do more to remove the debt problem and to make the U.S. the kind of country we can be proud of than all the tinkering with marginal tax rates. 

This deal was done wrong.  The postponed crisis will reappear with the debt crisis and sequestration and tax increases in March, and the President will be in a weaker, not stronger, position to deal with the crisis then.

However, it seemed to me that if the deal failed to get the approval of Congress, we would not get back to what we should be doing.  Because I did not want to make the situation worse by weakening the President's hand and weakening the economy by allowing the government, so to speak, to fall off the cliff,  I voted with great reluctance in favor of the McConnell-Biden deal, and Congress passed it earlier this week.

On New Year’s Day, America will recognize the sesquicentennial of the Emancipation Proclamation, which abolished slavery within the states attempting to secede from the U.S. and marked a step toward fulfilling our founding vision of a nation where all people are created equal.

It is worth pausing to reflect upon how far America has come since that January day in 1863.  One hundred and fifty years is, within the long span of human existence, barely the blink of an eye – only two lifespans.  In fact, my own grandfather could remember that day (yes, my grandfather). Yet in that time the Civil War has faded into the history books, the descendants of former slaves have risen to fill nearly every rank and role in American life, and the scourge of racism has diminished greatly. It required not only the leadership of a great man, President Lincoln, but also the personal involvement of millions of Americans rededicating themselves to the great unfinished work of the nation. 

Indeed, history often reveals a remarkable human capacity to overcome division and hatred.  I was born a few years after the United States concluded a horrific war against Germany, Japan, and Italy.  Tens of millions had died.  One might have imagined that the bitterness arising from such bloodshed could never be overcome – and yet now, only a handful of decades later, we count these former enemies as friends and allies.

Even during my time in Congress, I have seen progress that many thought impossible.  In 2004, a president called upon Congress to amend our constitution to deny gay men and women the right to marry.  Earlier this year, a different president announced his personal support for gay marriage.

Today, as America stands on the verge of a new year in which our challenges seem as great and our differences as stark as ever, I am encouraged to remember these lessons from our nation’s past.  If history is any guide, the years ahead will once again bring the healing of deep scars, the bridging of great divisions, and the surmounting of insurmountable obstacles. 

Twenty elementary school children and six adults were murdered last week at a school in Newtown, Connecticut.

Just a few months earlier, six Sikhs were murdered at their place of worship in Oak Creek, Wisconsin.

Just a few weeks before that, 12 moviegoers were murdered in Aurora, Colorado.

These unspeakable tragedies are just the tip of the iceberg.  Each day, more than 80 people die by gunfire in homicides, suicides, and accidents.

We can’t just keep saying, “Our hearts ache for the victims and their families.”  We have to bring gun violence under control.

In the aftermath of these horrific events, there are, as always, those who warn us against “politicizing” this tragedy by discussing gun safety.  These claims are ideologically motivated, and they are profoundly wrong.

When, after a hurricane strikes, we advocate for funding to mitigate future floods, that is not “politicizing” a tragedy.  When, after a terrorist attack, we advocate for better measures to prevent future deaths, that is not “politicizing” a tragedy.  The notion that gun violence is somehow different, that it deserves unique immunity from serious conversation in our political dialogue, is nonsensical.

Policymakers have an obligation to respond to problems by finding solutions.  The solution to gun violence is, in part, to address gun safety – as well as to address mental health care, school security, and more.  Toward this end, I will soon introduce legislation to require handgun registration and to strengthen school safety, and I remain committed to improving mental health care throughout this country.

Since last August, more than 300,000 of America’s young immigrants have emerged from the shadows to apply for a new program that provides temporary protection from deportation.

The program, known as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, asserted by the President because Congress would not act, has strict eligibility rules.  It is open only to immigrants who were brought into this country as children, who have grown into law-abiding adults, and who have worked hard to better themselves through education or military service.

By offering a legally recognized status to these immigrants, many of whom have never known any other home than America, the Childhood Arrivals program has made our immigration system more humane and just.  This partial solution reminds us how much more remains to be done to create an immigration system that benefits our society and our economy at large and treats individuals and families humanely and justly.

I expect that one of the major issues of the early 113^th Congress will be the consideration of more comprehensive immigration legislation.  To guide this process, the Congressional Hispanic Caucus and the Congressional Progressive Caucus have set forth nine principles for immigration reform.

The principles call for requiring undocumented immigrants to register with the federal government, submit to a background check, learn English and American civics, and pay taxes.  In return, these new Americans would earn a path to permanent residency and eventual citizenship.  The principles also emphasize the importance of attracting highly educated immigrants, protecting the border, and ending the exploitation of immigrant workers.

These principles are sensible, straightforward ideas that should guide America’s conversation about immigration reform in the new year.

Sitting on Governor Christie’s desk is legislation to increase New Jersey’s minimum wage by $1.25 to $8.50, the first increase since 2005.  Governor Christie should sign the bill today and, in the process, lift many thousands of struggling New Jersey residents out of poverty.

According to New Jersey Policy Perspective, if the minimum wage were increased to $8.50 per hour, about 537,535 New Jersey workers would receive an average raise of $816.  Increasing take-home pay is one simple way to help grow our economy and ensure that hard-working families and individuals are not living in or near poverty. 

In 2007, after a decade of stagnant wages for working families, I successfully fought to increase the minimum wage nationwide to $7.25.   But five years have since passed, and we now need to take further steps to encourage broad-based wage growth, which will ensure that our economy takes advantage of the talents of the entire population.

The bill now on Governor Christie’s desk would mark an important step forward for New Jersey workers, but it would apply only within our state’s borders.  Congress should also act at the federal level to raise the minimum wage nationwide.  I am an original cosponsor of Fair Minimum Wage Act to increase the federal minimum wage over three years from $7.25 to $9.80 per hour.

Washington and the talk shows are captivated by talk of the “fiscal cliff”:  the combination of automatic spending cuts and revenue increases scheduled to take effect at the end of the year.  Unfortunately, this is the wrong conversation for America to be having.

The fiscal cliff is an artificial crisis created by renegades who used America’s statutory debt limit to hold the nation hostage in August of 2011.  (How absurdly irresponsible to say we will teach ourselves a lesson by not paying our debts!) Just as the cliff was created by a vote of Congress then, it could be dispensed with by a vote of Congress today.  Yet negotiators in Congress and at the White House are continuing to operate within the narrow, artificial framework imposed by last year’s hostage-taking:  debating, for example, whether cuts to Medicare should be balanced with an appropriate increase in marginal tax rates to 39.5 percent.

We would do better to put today’s challenges in their proper context.  From time to time in our history America has faced very large public debts before, most notably after the end of Word War II.  Each time, we got to work, worked hard as Americans always do, and built the economy by building and doing things.  We did not wring our hands over what America cannot do, but rather set about doing what we can do. There’s no question that the debt is an important problem – but the United States is not, as some would have us believe, defined by its debt.  It is defined by its people, its infrastructure, its creativity, its innovation, its drive. We are not a "poor debtor nation," as one might think listening to the debate this month.  Our budget deficit is not an existential crisis.

Remember that, as recently as a decade ago, the United States had a balanced budget and was paying down the debt – not because of a gimmick or a response to a perceived crisis or a constitutional balanced-budget amendment, but because of rational lawmaking and policies that led to a thriving economy.  We are still the richest, most productive, most capable country in the world.  We should be asking how we will set about making certain that all Americans have food, housing, schooling, jobs, and vibrant culture.  If we do those things, the resulting growing economy will make our fixation on a phony fiscal crisis recede into the past.

Those renegades held us hostage in 2011; we shouldn't hold ourselves hostage today by arguing within the false framework they set then.

As you may know, the next presidential inauguration will be held on Monday, January 21, 2013, on the Capitol grounds in Washington, D.C.   If you are interested in attending, I encourage you to begin your travel plans now, as hotels, airlines, and Amtrak all sell out quickly.

You do not need a ticket to attend the inauguration.  The National Mall will be open and equipped with large projection screens and sound systems so you can see and hear the festivities from as far as a mile away.  You may also attend, without a ticket, the inaugural parade, which runs up Pennsylvania Avenue from the Capitol to the White House shortly after the swearing-in ceremony.

Certain areas around the Capitol will be open to ticket-holders only.  As your representative in Congress, I have received a small allotment of tickets to these areas, and to ensure their fair distribution, my office will conduct a random lottery.  All requests from the 12th Congressional District – including those from elected officials, friends, community leaders, and even my staff – will go through the lottery. 

If you are interested in entering the ticket lottery, please e-mail your name, address, telephone number, and e-mail address to Andrew Black of my staff at andrew.black@mail.house.gov.  Each lottery entry is limited to two tickets, and all requests must be submitted by 6 p.m. on Tuesday, December 18.  If you enter the lottery, I will let you know in late December whether or not you have received tickets.

Further information on the inauguration is available on the website of the Joint Congressional Committee on Inaugural Ceremonies.