Rep. Elijah Cummings

Enough Is Enough

2011-08-22T14:54:39-04:00

Every day, as I travel through my district in Baltimore on my way to my office, to the grocery store, or to church, people ask me one question: Cummings, can you help find me a job?

With anxiety and, often, despair in their eyes, my constituents explain that the most pressing need they have is for jobs that will enable them to pay for the basic essentials of life -- their rent, food, and medical bills -- and begin to save just a little for the future.

When I listen to the national dialogue, I know that my constituents -- and the majority of Americans who identify job creation as their top priority -- are simply not being heard.

Some 25 million Americans are unemployed or under-employed. While the national unemployment rate is 9.1%, it is nearly 16% among African Americans and more than 11% among Hispanic Americans.

Between 2005 and 2009, inflation-adjusted median wealth fell by more than 50% among African American households and by 66% among Hispanic households, according to a recent Pew Center study.

However, our sluggish economy is not affecting just communities of color or urban centers; it's permeating nearly every corner, block and neighborhood in America.

The Annie E. Casey Foundation recently released a report that found that childhood poverty rose in 38 out of 50 U.S. states in the past decade. Nearly 44 million Americans lived in poverty in 2009, an increase of more than 3.7 million over the previous year.

To say these statistics are staggering is an understatement.

What is Congress' answer?

The House leadership has prioritized the enactment of legislation that will worsen the crisis by destroying jobs.

Moody's Analytics chief economist Mark Zandi estimates that H.R. 1, legislation proposed and passed by House Republicans, would have destroyed 700,000 jobs. Zandi also estimates that Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan's budget resolution for fiscal year 2012 would have destroyed 1.7 million jobs in its first two years of implementation, primarily by slashing Medicaid, which would cut core health services for the elderly and low-income families and children already struggling to get by.

More than 200 days have passed since the Republicans took over the House and there has been no action to create jobs. No floor debates or votes on a jobs bill have been held, and few hearings designed to get America back to work have been convened.

In fact, Speaker Boehner's office recently said that he has "no plans to take up" jobs proposals.

This is exactly why the American people feel they have been ignored.

Why aren't the Republicans listening? Some have suggested this is a calculated strategy to win elections in 2012: stymie any job creation initiatives and then blame the president for high unemployment.

But I know we're better than that. We have to be better than that. Too much is at stake.

Congress has to immediately consider and enact legislation to create jobs as soon as we come back into session.

The House Oversight Committee, on which I serve as Ranking Member, would be an ideal forum in which to begin this task given its broad jurisdiction over government and industry. However, our Committee majority has thus far refused to step up to the challenge.

Back in February, I wrote to Chairman Darrell Issa requesting a hearing on a bipartisan proposal to expand infrastructure investments that was endorsed by both the Chamber of Commerce and organized labor.

Chairman Issa instead sent more than 150 letters asking industry which regulations they wanted repealed, and held more than a dozen hearings to entertain their requests.

My request, like the pleas of the American people, went unheard.

Other job creation proposals also deserve immediate consideration. The bipartisan Joint Economic Committee has introduced legislation to expand tax credits to encourage research and development to spur innovation and create jobs.

And Rep. Jan Schakowsky has developed a proposal to create more than two million jobs within the next two years building schools and roads and ensuring that communities are safe by closing tax loopholes.

Rep. John Larson has proposed legislation to create a "super committee" to spur job creation. This is an idea I fully endorse, especially since the standing House Committees have failed to act.

A great African proverb says, "If you want to go fast, go alone; if you want to go far, go together."

It's going to take real bipartisanship to get our nation's fiscal house in order and to put people back to work again. I, along with my Democratic colleagues, stand ready to work with Republicans to ensure we get moving.

Enough with the inaction, enough with the inflammatory rhetoric, and enough with the partisan gamesmanship.

The American people have spoken. It's time to listen and act.

Congressman Elijah E. Cummings is the Ranking Member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. Follow the committee Democrats on Twitter.

Edward Liddy, Come Back to Earth

2009-03-02T23:17:56-05:00

Although I am not surprised that AIG came back to beg the government for additional taxpayer assistance, I am disturbed that it happened so soon -- particularly after CEO Edward Liddy told me on January 15th that he expected to re-pay the government early. To me, this means that Mr. Liddy was either once again being less than honest or that he has no idea what is happening with his company -- and both of these scenarios are unacceptable.

American taxpayers have already invested so much in keeping AIG afloat because of the risks to our financial system posed by the obligations the company is supporting, and it is important that we continue to do everything we can to keep it from going under. However, there are still too many unanswered questions about how AIG spent its first portion of TARP assistance. We cannot allow the pattern of deception by this company to continue. Transparency and accountability are more critical than ever.

AIG's 10-K filing this morning has raised even more questions about how the company is being managed. Spending $57 million on 'retention payments' for employees expected to be terminated is ludicrous, and it tells me that this company has no respect for the aid it is receiving or for the Americans whose hard-earned taxpayer dollars are keeping the company alive.

Equally disturbing in the 10-K filing are AIG's strong complaints against the limits on executive compensation that were established by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. If it were not for TARP assistance, these executives would not be making any money at all. It is audacious to reject the commonsense accountability measures put in place to protect taxpayer dollars, and it is time for Mr. Liddy to come back from whatever planet he is on and visit us here in reality. I am puzzled by AIG's statement that it has 'embraced a pay-for-performance philosophy.' Surely this cannot be in reference to the approximately $450 million in retention payments being given to employees of the Financial Products division whose performance brought the company down in the first place.

American taxpayers now essentially own AIG, and we are thus entitled to complete disclosure of how the business is being run and where these funds are being spent. This information must include a complete review of the company's compensation policies, with particular emphasis paid to the more than $1 billion in 'retention payments' that have been distributed even while the company is failing.

We also need to seriously re-evaluate the leadership at AIG and determine whether a change would be appropriate at this point. Each passing week brings to light more recklessness and disorganization by this company. As millions of taxpayers who are footing the bill for AIG's bonuses and parties are losing their jobs and homes, we continue to see examples of profligate spending and irresponsible decision-making by the company's leadership.

A Bonus by Any Other Name Still Stinks

2008-11-27T10:59:46-05:00

I am beginning to understand why companies like AIG are so committed to spending hundreds of millions of dollars on sports sponsorships. It's because they like playing games. Since it seems that the executives at these companies did not get the memo, I am here to tell them that the fun and games are over.

I was shocked upon learning -- just one day after being told that top AIG executives would be forgoing bonuses this year -- that the company's executives will be receiving 'cash awards' as 'retention payments.' AIG can dress this money up in fancy names, but no one is fooled. A bonus by any other name still stinks.

When Mr. Liddy was appointed to try to steer AIG back on track, he was expected to be a good steward of taxpayer dollars, spending this money as effectively and efficiently as possible. Instead, he has continually chosen to reward failure and mislead the American people in the process. Now, it is time for Mr. Liddy to reward the taxpayers who are funding his company's wasteful spending by submitting his resignation.

AIG just doesn't seem to get it. These executives' bonuses are that they still have a job. If that job is not enough for them, there are hundreds of thousands of other Americans seeking employment who would be more than happy to take their place.

I welcome and encourage the CEO's of every company begging for taxpayer dollars to come spend a day in my district and meet the people whose hard-earned wages they have been throwing into the wind--the families who have lost their homes, the single mother who lost her job and isn't sure how she will pay her bills, and the young people who dream about going to college but just cannot afford it. Perhaps this dose of reality would drill in the message that it cannot be business as usual on Wall Street. Perhaps then Mr. Liddy would understand why the time has come for him to step down.

It is becoming increasingly apparent that the companies begging us for life support cannot manage the simple task of sound judgment when it comes to fiscal matters. The profligate spending must come to an end. If these companies cannot stop inappropriately spending taxpayer dollars, I will have no problem working with Speaker Pelosi and President-elect Obama next year to enact the legislation that will do it for them.

Someone Finally Gets It

2008-11-25T15:27:36-05:00

After months of headlines highlighting profligate spending by the very same companies coming to the federal government begging life support, it would appear that someone finally gets it. GM's decision to end its endorsement deal with Tiger Woods is demonstrative of the type of action that every company seeking federal assistance needs to take.

I can only hope that GM's sound judgment will be contagious to other companies seeking federal assistance -- particularly Citigroup, which within the span of one week announced that it will eliminate another 52,000 jobs, that it is 'committed' to spending $400 million to plaster its name on the new Mets stadium, and that it needs an additional $20 billion from the government to stay afloat. Similarly, I pray that AIG -- which still seems to think that the Troubled Asset Relief Program was designed to sneak executives off to the spa to relieve the stress of driving their company into the ground -- will take heed of GM's example. This type of spending is indefensible and unacceptable, and it must come to an end.

My constituents in Maryland did not turn over their hard-earned wages to fund a baseball stadium in New York, a soccer jersey in the UK, or a multi-million dollar bonus for an executive whose poor judgment helped put us here in the first place.

Until now, the institutions seeking and receiving TARP funds have adopted the attitude of business as usual, expecting the American taxpayer to subsidize their parties and favorite sports teams. It is very encouraging that GM has taken the lead in exercising fiscal responsibility. Perhaps the Citigroups and AIGs of the world will soon follow suit.

Citigroup's Spending Indefensible and Unacceptable

2008-11-24T12:30:50-05:00

After reading yesterday morning that Citigroup--which has already received $25 billion in bailout money--is adamant in maintaining its $400 million naming rights to the new New York Mets stadium, I was shocked to learn that the company came to the federal government asking for an additional multi-billion dollar lifeline. Surely, if the company has the funds to paste its name to a recreational facility, it has the money to maintain its operations and keep the 52,000 jobs it announced last week it would be eliminating.

While I understand that Citi is under a contractual obligation with the Mets, I cannot understand why the organization seems to be refusing at the very least to explore options out of that contract. This type of spending is indefensible and unacceptable to Citigroup's new partner and largest investor: the American taxpayer. My constituents in Maryland did not turn over their hard-earned wages to fund a baseball stadium in New York.

One would think that the Mets would be open to finding a new sponsor, as well. Why would any team want its new stadium, the symbol of a new era of victories, to be named after and symbolized by a company claiming to be on the brink of collapse?

I strongly urge Citigroup to find a way out of this contract and instead spend that $400 million on retaining its employees and restoring confidence in its operations. Furthermore, I encourage Citigroup and every other corporation depending on taxpayer dollars to stop the reckless spending, and I again insist that Secretary Paulson and Chairman Bernanke start holding these companies accountable. We cannot continue to pour taxpayer dollars into buckets with holes.

Restoring Baseball's Reputation In the Wake of the Mitchell Report

2007-12-13T15:03:26-05:00

Baseball, the great American pastime, has historically embodied our nation's hopes, dreams, values, and ideals. We cannot afford to sit on the sidelines while some players destroy the integrity of this sport by engaging in the culture of cheating fostered by the use of performance-enhancing drugs--breaking both the law and the public's trust.

It is my hope that Major League Baseball will approach the findings of the Mitchell Report with the seriousness that is warranted, and I urge the baseball players and players' union to cooperate with MLB management to implement the recommendations set forward in this report. Furthermore, it is my hope that all of the players who have received awards for performances that were enhanced by the use of drugs will immediately return the awards to MLB. The first step in restoring the reputation of baseball is taking all necessary actions to show players and fans that cheating will no longer be tolerated.

The most devastating impact of steroid abuse has been on our nation's most valuable resource: our children. Young athletes, emulating their professional role models with the use of performance-enhancing drugs, have paid for this poor judgment with their lives. Our children are the living messages we send to a future we will never see, and we need to ensure that they make it to that future.

I am hopeful that MLB will implement all of the recommendations in the report as well as initiate its own investigation on amphetamine use. I will be closely monitoring the response to the Mitchell report, and I am prepared to proceed with a legislative response or recommend future oversight hearings if necessary. We must ensure that when our children trade baseball cards of their heroes, they are trading players who embody the characteristics inherent in good role models rather than trading players who succeed by cheating.

Congressman Elijah E. Cummings is a senior member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee and the Co-Founder and Chair of the Congressional Caucus on Drug Policy

Read more news and blog posts on the Mitchell report on steroids in baseball here.

Optimistic for Success at Annapolis

2007-11-27T16:13:56-05:00

For decades we have witnessed countless disturbing reports and pictures of the devastating conflict and violence between the Israeli and Palestinian people. The Middle East Peace Summit taking place today in my home State of Maryland is symbolic of the hope and courage being exercised by Israelis and Palestinians as both parties try to reach a fair compromise and bring an end to this painful and emotional struggle. I commend all parties who have gathered today to offer their support to this very important cause. Stability in the Middle East -- whether in this particular conflict or the one Iraq -- hinges on the support of multilateral and bilateral initiatives in the region.

It has always been clear that any success in finding peace amidst this turmoil would depend on the unabashed support of the international community -- including a major role played by the United States. When George W. Bush assumed the presidency, he introduced a 'Road Map for Peace' in the Middle East. While this outline to find peace initially showed promise, it failed to yield substantive long-term results as President Bush neglected to assume the critical position of driving the region to the final destination on the map. In fact, he never even got into the bus. This peace process has been stalled for seven long years, in part because the Bush Administration neglected to give it the high priority that was both necessary and deserved.

Any efforts to bring together the leaders of this region for the purpose of realizing peace in this conflict are encouraging signs of progress. Such progress is worthy of the time and focus of our nation's leaders, both in an effort to advance our policies of promoting peace throughout the world and in our ability to succeed in our mission in Iraq. It should be noted that the Iraq Study Group has acknowledged that dealing directly with the Arab-Israeli conflict is essential to achieving regional stability.

In recent years, the moral authority of our nation has been greatly diminished. The importance of restoring our credibility cannot be emphasized enough. I am pleased with President Bush's apparent decision at this late hour to take the lead in bringing about a fair and lasting peace -- a move that may help put us on the path toward achieving this vital goal.

I am truly optimistic that the summit in Annapolis will result in substantive resolutions to initiate the arduous journey toward peace between the Israeli and Palestinian people. The U.S. absolutely must continue its newfound efforts to actively facilitate discussion, progress, and success on this journey. I hope that when a new President assumes office in 2009, the continuation of these efforts will begin on the first day, not the eleventh hour.

Blackwater is Still Accountable to No One

2007-10-30T12:42:50-04:00

We cannot continue to risk the lives of hundreds of thousands of American troops and spend billions of taxpayer dollars on a mission in Iraq while undermining this same mission through the sanctioning of a shadow military of mercenary forces who operate in a vacuum of any kind of law or accountability. The questionable and careless practices of Blackwater USA and other private security firms are endangering the credibility of U.S. troops during a time when cooperation with the Iraqi people and government is critical for our success. The extent of this threat cannot be underscored enough--a senior U.S. military official has even asserted that the impact of the actions of Blackwater on Iraqi attitudes toward our troops will 'hurt us badly.'

During a recent hearing of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, I questioned Erik Prince, CEO of Blackwater USA , about his company's policy of 'shoot first--and sometimes kill--and then ask questions later.' I found his responses to my questions, as well as to those posed by my colleagues, to be very unsettling. At that same hearing, I called upon officials of the State Department to start holding these private security firms accountable.

I was initially encouraged by the actions taken by the State Department in response to the controversy surrounding the shooting of 17 Iraqi civilians last month by Blackwater employees, including inviting the FBI to investigate the shooting and enacting new policies--such as installing cameras on vehicles--to help ensure responsible behavior.

It is unfortunate that these actions now appear to be nothing more than thinly-veiled steps to avoid a PR scandal, rather than the substantive actions needed to ensure the safety of U.S. troops and the integrity of our mission. I sincerely hope that this is not the case. It has come to light that the State Department granted limited immunity to the Blackwater guards involved in the September 16 th shooting, complicating any possibility that the guards will be subjected to prosecution under U.S. law or--once again--any kind of accountability.

II am deeply concerned that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who appeared before the Committee last week, did not mention that Blackwater personnel were refusing to speak with the FBI under the immunity deal offered by the State Department. It does not bode well that in such a high-profile case, the Secretary of State would omit these details, implying that she was either unaware of the circumstances or was intentionally withholding this information from Congress.

I once again call upon the State Department to enact real standards of accountability for private security contractors in Iraq. For the sake of the lives of our troops and of Iraqi civilians, we cannot continue to allow these companies to slip through the cracks of Justice.