The chair will alternate recognition between the parties with each party limited to one hour and each member other than the majority and minority leaders and the minority whip but in to five minutes, no event shall debate continue beyond past 11 50 a. M. The chair recognizes the gentleman from illinois, mr. Quigley, for five minutes. Mr. Quigley thank you, mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, since the Clean Air Act was enacted into law more than 40 years ago, weve seen tremendous progress in cleaning up our air and protecting thousands of communities around the country. Unfortunately, Many Americans are still living in communities where poor air quality puts them and their loved ones health at risk. Thats why im proud to support the e. P. A. Standard ground level for air pollution. Wh we work outdoors or simply want our children to play outside, the ozone pollution standards bring us one step closer to cleaner, healthier communities for everyone to enjoy. This proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion to a standard in the range of 65 to 75 parts per billion while taking Public Comments on a level as low as 60. Despite what many of my colleagues seem to believe, successful Public Health protection depends on the latest scientific data, and as many members are going to point out, we are not scientists. All we can do is rely on the best data out there from experts in the field, and in this case, the data is quite clear. A significantly expanded body of scientific evidence, including more than 1,000 new studies since the last review of the standards, show that ozone can cause harmful effects to health and the environment. Health experts, epidemiologists and numerous medical organizations have clorle stated that the existing clearly stated that the smog standard of 75 parts per billion is not adequate to protect Public Health. Particularly for vulnerable populations such as children, the elderly, outdoor workers and those with chronic medical conditions, like asthma. In all, 147 Million People in the u. S. , almost half of the country are breathing unhealthy air. Earlier this year the American LungAssociation State of the air 2014 ranked chicago as the 14th most polluted city in the nation for shortterm particle pollution. The city also ranked 20th for most ozone polluted and for year round particle pollution. In fact, nearly half of all americans live in counties where ozone or particle pollution levels make the air unhealthy to breathe. Studies have linked breathing ozone to an increased risk of premature deaths and difficulty breathing as well as other serious illnesses. In the u. S. Today, one children in 10 already suffers from asthma and ozone pollution only makes things worse. When asked what steps need to be taken to reduce the air pollution, the American Lung association said the federal action, including the e. P. A. Setting strong healthbased standards to limit ozone pollution is one of the most important action steps we can take. When we update our National Ozone pollution standards we are not only cleaning up our air but also protecting those most at risk. These changes would have a lasting and positive impact on my home state of illinois where 1. 2 million adults and 13 of children suffer from smogrelated asthma, well above the national average. President Theodore Roosevelt once said, in any moment of decision, the best thing you can do is the right thing. The worst thing you can do is nothing. Knowing the tremendous impacts ozone pollution has on our environment and community health, the decision to do othing is not a viable option. There are those here attacking this proposal with claims of job loss and economic harm. According to science deniers and special interests, this proposal would cause the sky to fall. The facts, however, state otherwise. Since 1970, we have cut harmful air pollution by almost 70 , while the u. S. Economy has more than tripled. While an ozone standard in the proposed range of 65 to 70 parts per billion has Public Health benefits worth billions of dollars. Reducing ozone and particle pollution nationwide will avoid countless premature deaths and thousands of asthma reason related emergency room visits, not to mention fewer missed school and work days. The impact of ozone on agriculture workers is also important in its own right. A reduction in the ozone standard would translate into an annual cost savings of approximately 1 billion in labor expenditure. We have countless scientific studies that clearly display the negative Health Risks Associated with unregulated ozone pollution. Nevertheless, critics continue to play a dangerous role in denouncing the science and the law e. P. A. Has used for more than 40 years. The science cannot be ignored. Now is the time to protect the most vulnerable among us. Now is the time to fight for better air quality across the country. Now is the time for action to protect American Health and the environment. We cannot afford to wait. Clean air is an essential to a Healthy Community and a strong economy. Thank you and i yield back. The speaker pro tempore the gentlemans time has expired. The chair recognizes the gentleman from california, mr. Mick colon to be, for five minutes mr. Mcclintock, for five minutes. Mr. Speaker, the genius of our constitution can be found in the separation of powers that has preserved our freedom for 225 years. The american founders recognized that what had gone so terribly wrong in europe was that the same organ of government that made the law also enforced that law and adjudicated it. All the powers were in the same hands. They wanted to protect their new nation from such a fate. So they divided the powers of government, congress and congress alone makes the law. All legislative power herein granted shall be vested in a congress of the United States. You want many voices in that decisionmaking process. You want a great, big, messy debate. Thats the congress. Once that decision is made, it needs to be carried out by a single will, a Single Branch headed by one individual whom the constitution commands to take care that the laws be faithfully executed. One person does not get to make the law in this republic. The president is called upon to enforce the law. Fundamentally, that means he does not get to pick and choose which laws hell enforce and which laws hell ignore. He does not get to pick and choose who must obey the law and who gets to live above the law, and he does not get to change laws or make laws by decree. That is the difference between the American Republic that prides itself on being a nation of laws and not of men and the european despots of old who boasted that the law was in their mouths. Mr. Speaker, last week the president asserted an entirely unconstitutional power to nullify existing Immigration Law by ordering the executive branch simply to ignore it. Further, hes ordered 34 million green cards to allow businesses to hire Illegal Immigrants despite federal law that explicitly forbids their employment. Throughout our nations history, executives have tested the limits of their power, but is act crosses a very bright line. Fortunately, the american founders anticipated that someday a president might attempt to subvert the constitution in this manner and they provided a variety of defenses available to both the legislative and the judicial branches. Legislative branch has the power of the purse, but that powers temporarily constrained by the partisan division between the house and the senate. Fortunately, the American People have acted to end that division in january. But i fear that any confrontation between the executive and the legislative branches could ultimately end in stalemate. The third branch of government, the judiciary, must be brought into this process. Since our earliest days, the Supreme Court has guarded our nation from unconstitutional acts by both the legislative and executive branches, and that role is desperately needed now. I believe theres no substitute for congress doing everything within its power to invoke judicial intervention. I cannot believe that even the most devoted liberals on the bench can be comfortable with is brazen act of yuesurpation. The president would have no choice but to back down or face a catastrophic and congressional backlash. Whether we choose to recognize it, this is a fullfledged constitutional crisis. If allowed to stand, this president renders meaningless the separation of powers and the checks and balances that comprise the fundamental architecture of our constitution. If it stands, every future president , republican and democrat, will cite it as justification for lawmaking by decree. The seize your of legislative authority by the the seizure of legislative authority by this and it was julius sees ars legislative prerogatives that brought down the Roman Republic and brought down years of dictatorship. Its a very difficult thing to stop. Now, unlike every law thats passed under our constitution, the constitution itself has no penalties for those who break it. The reason is that the constitution was written to be selfenforcing, but that only happens if the powers of government are evenly balanced. The founders relied on each branch acting to keep those powers in balance, now in our time that responsibility is ours. I yield back. The speaker pro tempore the gentleman yields back. The chair recognizes the gentlewoman from oregon, ms. Bonamici, is recognized for five minutes. Ms. Bonamici thank you, mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, im here this morning to discuss an important issue that we hear about when we talk with teachers, parents, students and school administrators. In conversation after conversation theyve expressed concern about what seems like an endless stream of tests that in many cases do little, if anything, to improve learning or classroom instruction. Of course, assessments play an Important Role in education and highquality assessments are valuable for informing meaningful instruction. Nonetheless, too much time is devoted to redundant, lowquality or unnecessary tests. In many cases teachers administrator tests but the results arent made available for months and hardworking educators have little opportunity to design individualized support based on the results of those tests. Furthermore, some of the tests are redundant. They take up time that could be used on meaningful instruction. Used resources best spent elsewhere and cause students undo stress. In other schools, too much time is dedicated to preparing tests not aligned with state standards. Simply put, unnecessary assessments have hindered our progress as a Global Leader in education. We know that federal government mandates several tests each year, and states and School Districts often require even more tests. Does this all make sense . Do all of these tests improve instruction, improve Public Education . Today i rise to discuss legislation that im working on to help states and local districts implement good, reliable assessments aligned to standards and importantly eliminate redundant poor quality assessments that take valuable time from teachers and students, time that could be used on meaningful instruction. We dont need more tests. We need better tests. My bill will use an existing grant to provide states with funding to develop assessment systems that ensure the best use of students test results, and that align assessments with college and career ready standards. The transition to rigorous content standards is hard work, and my bill will support states that as they implement high quality assessments linked to those standards. Working with local education agencies, states will create assessment plans outlining how they will improve the quality of their tests, how they will use the assessment data and how they will make the data more accessible to educators, students and parents. This legislation will also support states and local districts that want to lead the way on developing more sensible assessment systems. States will be able to volunteer to audit their assessment systems and use the results to design plans to eliminate unnecessary and redundant testing. Many States School chiefs and superintendents have recently made a commitment to this effort. My legislation will need muchneeded federal support. The focus in the classroom should be on the student. This bill will help states, will help them implement and improve assessments and make better use of the results so they can draw valuable conclusions about students and give educators the data they need so they can do what they do best, teach. Ultimately, we must address the culture of testing that has created stress for students, parents and teachers. This bill is a strong first step. It keeps control in the hands of the states and School Districts and provides the funding to streamline assessment systems and make sure that the remaining assessments are high quality and useful. My bill offers the support to through an existing funding stream and help put the focus back on our students. I urge my colleagues to support this bill. Thank you very much, mr. Speaker, and i yield back the balance of my time. The speaker pro tempore the gentlelady yields back. The chair recognizes the gentlewoman from florida, ms. Roslehtinen, is recognized for five minutes. Ms. Roslehtinen thank you, mr. Speaker. I rise to speak against the push by the administration and its allies here in congress to ignore u. S. Law, this time to ignore the legal prohibition on using u. S. Taxpayer dollars to fund unesco. Frankly its an indictment against the administration and some of our colleagues that we have to go through this song and dance every year or whenever a funding measure is set to come to the floor. Yet here we are again as some in Congress Want to help president obama circumvent and undermine u. S. Law and restore at least partial funding for unesco so that that body can continue to push its antiu. S. , antiisrael agenda. Time and again the president has taken unilateral action meant to get around congressional opposition and has openly stated that he will continue to do so. Since 1990, u. S. Law has prohibited any funding to the u. N. Or any u. N. Agency that gives the p. L. O. Membership status and recognizes the nonexistent state of palestine. Unesco was well aware of our laws when its members voted to include this socalled palestine among its ranks. Triggering the u. S. Funding prohibition. President obama knew this when he cut off unescos funding in response because it is the law. However, since then he has sought ways to undermine and circumvent this law to not only restore funding to unesco, but to also pay dues rears which now would amount to over 300 million in u. S. Taxpayer dollars. This is the very same body that allows the likes of cuba, the antithesis of freedom and respect for human rights and the rule of law, on its executive board. When unesco admitted a nonexistent palestine, it undermined the Peace Process and only emboldened them further to move forward with the unilateral push for statehood at the u. N. There cannot be a legitimate palestinian state unless it comes about as a result of direct negotiations between the israelis and the palestinians. This unilateral scheme by abu mazen is a way for him to use that u. N. Body to gain de facto statehood without having to first come to an agreement with israel. And if president obama and his enablers in congress have their way, and u. S. Funding for unesco is restored, it will signal that the u. S. Supports this unilateral push for statehood and we will have sold out our closest friend and ally, the democratic jewish state of israel. We must make it clear to the administration in no Uncertain Terms that congress will not allow it to continue to circumvent and undermine Congressional Authority or the law and that we will not allow it once again to fund unesco. Giving the administration the authority it seeks to fund unesco would not only set a dangerous precedent by showing those with an antiisrael agenda at the u. N. That the u. S. Does not have the courage of its convictions or the fortitude to enforce our own laws, but would also give the green light to the rest of the bodies at the u. N. To follow unescos lead and also admit palestine. Abu mazen has already signaled that he will seek further recognition at the u. N. And unless we make it absolutely certain to the entire u. N. System that admitting palestine has very real and tangible negative consequences, the bodies at the u. N. Will fall in line with this dangerous scheme, and that would cause irreparable harm to the Peace Process. Instead of president obama looking for ways to spend hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars at an antiu. S. , antiisrael body at the u. N. In violation of u. S. Law, the president should perhaps instead focus on institutions at the u. N. That do work and that are affected. This month, for example, the world food program, w. F. P. , was forced to suspend its assistance to millions of refugees who fled the crisis in syria and went to jordan, to lebanon, to iraq, to turkey as a result millions could go hungry as they are set to face the harsh winter. Our money would be better spent helping an institution we know works because it relies on voluntary contributions only. And we should be doing more to ensure that the w. F. P. , world food program, can continue its good work to assist these millions of refugees around the world. Thank you, mr. Speaker. I yield back. The speaker pro tempore the gentlelady yields back. The chair recognizes the gentleman from massachusetts, mr. Mcgovern, for five minutes. Mr. Mcgovern i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. The speaker pro tempore without objection, the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. Mr. Mcgovern 00 i rise today to express my great frustration and anger that this congress, the 113th congress, continues to ignore its