[Congressional Record Volume 168, Number 12 (Wednesday, January 19, 2022)]
[House]
[Pages H249-H251]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
{time} 1545
ISSUES OF THE DAY
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of
January 4, 2021, the Chair recognizes the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr.
Grothman) for 30 minutes.
Mr. GROTHMAN. Madam Speaker, there are several issues of importance
that I don't feel this body has spent enough time discussing, and
unless
[[Page H250]]
they are addressed could result in a great deal of discomfort for a lot
of Americans.
The first is the issue concerning sheltered workshops, also known as
work centers or community rehabilitation programs.
Perhaps you folks are familiar with them. They are places where
people of different abilities frequently work, frequently doing
packaging, maybe light manufacturing.
Because of the different abilities that some people have, they have
to get what are called 14(c) certificates and may work for less than
minimum wage. Disabilities they may have would include things like
perhaps spina bifida or similar things that make it a little bit more
difficult for them to work.
Nevertheless, throughout my political career I have always enjoyed
touring the sheltered workshops in part because the employees that work
there are so proud of the work they are doing and so proud of the fact
that they are able to earn a paycheck and purchase some of their own
clothes, perhaps purchase gifts for their relatives.
Right now these sheltered workshops are under attack in the Build
Back Better bill, and that bill may easily pass some time in the next
year. I am afraid even the majority of Democrats who voted for the bill
are unaware that these sheltered workshops are under attack.
There are two reasons why people want to get rid of sheltered
workshops. There are people who feel under no circumstances should
somebody make less than minimum wage. This is ignoring the economic
reality and ignoring the reality of the type of jobs that are available
for these folks.
The second concern they have is they feel that these people are
segregated from the rest of society working in a sheltered workshop.
That is, of course, not true. There are people of all sorts of
abilities in these workshops; and in my opinion, people who work in
these workshops frequently work there for 25 or 30 years. And people in
management also work there for an extended period of time.
Nevertheless, there is an extreme group which feels that we are
taking advantage of people by having them work in the workshop.
I will point out that in addition to the ability to have some of your
own economic independence, you develop lifelong friends in these
workshops that you wouldn't develop if you were looking for other jobs
out in the community.
One of the concerns for people with different abilities is that it is
important that they develop friendships other than just their parents
or immediate family. It is something that is always of great concern
for parents of people in situations like this, and insofar as the
sheltered workshops were shut down, you wouldn't have this natural
grouping of friends or lifelong coworkers that you are going to be able
to interact with.
It is time for the sheltered workshop community to wake up and
realize in this bill of thousands of pages the radical group that wants
to shut down the sheltered workshops may finally get their dream. And
if they get their dream, they will find that some of these folks are
going to find jobs in the community, but they are not going to find 35
or 40 hour a week jobs in the community. They may find 3 or 4 hour a
week jobs in the community. They will lose the pride that comes with
having a full-time job. They will no longer feel they are like their
siblings or friends who go to work every day and earn a paycheck. It
will be devastating for these folks. Some folks have been working in
these sheltered workshops for 25 or 30 years and have years left to go.
It is tragic that some people want to take this freedom away from them.
I should also point out that nobody forces anybody to work in these
sheltered workshops. If there were other jobs in the community they or
their guardians could take them out and have them work fast food or
have them work light retail or have them work in some light
manufacturing. But what these people who are trying to get rid of these
sheltered workshops are doing is they are taking away the choice that
these folks have made for themselves, the choice that makes them feel
so happy, makes them feel so good.
So I strongly encourage people who know someone in these workshops to
get politically involved before these folks' lives are devastated.
And insofar as we have any of the Democrats paying attention to what
I am saying right now, I beg you to go in your district and tour one of
the sheltered workshops yourself because they will make you feel so
good.
There are very few things in this job that make me feel as good as
touring these workshops because you see how happy and productive people
can be that on the face of it seem to be dealt a tough hand in life.
But they have made what they can of themselves. They are very happy.
And I beg the majority party not to take away this right.
The second issue that I would like to talk about a little bit today
is with regard to COVID.
One of the frustrating things about the establishment--and I think
this goes back even before the Biden administration--is there has not
been enough discussion of the correlation of inadequate amounts of
Vitamin D and getting severe cases of COVID.
Right now in this country, all Americans should be aiming at having
30 nanograms per milliliter of Vitamin D. People who fail to get that
30 nanograms disproportionately wind up getting COVID and getting COVID
severely.
There are other things that make you more likely to get COVID. If you
have diabetes, if you are overweight, these are other things that
correlate with getting COVID. And we know that if you lose a little
weight, your situation would improve.
Vitamin D or a lack of having 30 nanograms per milliliter of Vitamin
D does correlate with problems. Right now in our society, sadly, 96
percent of Black Americans are insufficient to that level, 88 percent
of Hispanics, 65 percent of Whites. It is not something that has been
talked about anywhere near enough, and it is a question as to why the
public health establishment has not done a better job of explaining the
correlation between bad Vitamin D outcomes and bad COVID outcomes.
Some people feel it is not something that is talked about enough
because there is no money to be made. And, of course, a lot of people
are making a lot of money on COVID; but if you solve your Vitamin D
levels by just going to the local drugstore and buying 20 or $40 worth
of Vitamin D pills, there is not the possibility of people to make
billions of dollars.
Nevertheless, if you are out there, I strongly encourage all
Americans to get a hold of Vitamin D. Vitamin C and zinc are good, as
well, but today I try one more time to beg my friends back home to go
get some Vitamin D, and I beg the medical community who right now does
not test for Vitamin D like they should; I am told it is because there
is not enough reimbursement in Medicare, and we don't want to lose
money on what we are doing, but the medical community ought to be
testing everybody for Vitamin D if they come in for their annual
checkup. All Americans should be looking to get that level above 30
nanograms per milliliter.
There are other things, as well, that could be done to reduce the
high number of deaths from COVID. Fenofibrate is a drug which some
Israeli researchers had success with. It is a generic drug, and as a
result, it is very reasonable to get a hold of. The same thing is true
with hydroxychloroquine. And there are doctors I know who have had
success with that. I don't think it is quite as successful with the
omicron variant, but it was very successful with the alpha variant. And
there is ivermectin, and I have known doctors who have used that, and
they have had success curing people there. But for whatever reason, on
some of these cheaper alternatives that I think could have saved
hundreds of thousands of people, the public health establishment and
the medical establishment has not been as outspoken as they should.
Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Cline.)
Mr. CLINE. Madam Speaker, I thank my friend from Wisconsin for
yielding on this very important subject. I was unfortunate to catch
COVID a couple weeks ago, and I think that the Vitamin D supplements I
was taking in addition to Vitamin C, in addition to zinc definitely
helped to minimize the length and the severity of the illness.
Madam Speaker, today marks 1 year since Joe Biden was sworn in as
President, meaning it has been a year since
[[Page H251]]
Democrats took unified control of the Federal Government.
And at this point there is no denying that Americans are worse off
today than they were 12 months ago.
Consumer prices have risen 7 percent since Democrats won
congressional majorities and the White House, marking a 40-year high
rate of inflation.
Gas prices reached $3.28 a gallon last month, a 49.6 percent increase
from a year ago.
1.7 illegal immigrants were encountered unlawfully crossing the
border in FY21, the highest number ever recorded.
Sixteen major U.S. cities set new homicide records this past year.
And just last week, COVID hospitalizations hit a record high.
Thirteen American servicemembers tragically lost their lives, and the
Taliban captured Afghanistan as a result of this administration's
disastrous withdrawal plan.
Madam Speaker, Democrats are certainly setting records, just not the
records that they want to be breaking. Their party has utterly failed
the American people.
Mr. GROTHMAN. Madam Speaker, I would like to address another, perhaps
inadvertent, perhaps not so inadvertent, group of provisions in the
Build Back Better bill.
As we look across the country, when one compares to where America is
today compared to where America was 50 years ago, certainly one area
that I think most Americans would think is a step in the wrong
direction is the breakdown of the traditional family. However, not all
people consider the breakdown in the so-called western prescribed
nuclear family structure as a bad thing.
Black Lives Matter, which played such a big role in the elections
last November, on their website came out saying we want to disrupt the
western prescribed nuclear family structure.
They are not the only ones who don't like the western family. We know
Karl Marx felt that as he wanted to work his way towards paradise, we
had to get rid of the traditional family.
I don't know whether it is a coincidence or not, but our current
welfare system with all of the programs that are part of it, be it the
education grants, be it the medical grants, be it the food stamps, be
it the low-income housing, are all set not to benefit families in which
there are two parents at home to raise the children.
In other words, the United States for years and years has been trying
to get rid of the nuclear family. It is like Karl Marx himself were
writing the welfare policies.
In the Build Back Better bill, we are going further on down this
line. I don't know that this is exactly supposed to be a pay back to
Black Lives Matter, but the reconciliation bill will more than double
the earned income tax credit marriage penalty. It has provisions for
greatly increasing the number of low-income housing units. And I feel
that the way those units are doled out, again, very difficult to get
those units if you have a mom and dad at home. But there are people who
want to get rid of that sort of family.
I would strongly encourage the majority party, before they push this
bill any further, to have a study done on who benefits from these new
provisions and who doesn't, and is it one more time a situation which
we are bribing people not to have old-fashioned nuclear families.
{time} 1600
I am afraid, like I said, right now, this looks like another victory
for the hard leftwing of the Democratic Party that embraces the idea
that we ought to get rid of the nuclear family. It is not a
coincidence. It is in the bill.
In any event, these are things I will leave our audience with as we
break for the following week. If you know somebody who works in a
sheltered workshop or work center, or know a Congressman, invite them
to the sheltered workshops to see what they are in danger of shutting
down.
If you know people who do not yet have COVID, remind them to get more
vitamin D. If there are any doctors out there--I know sometimes you
can't be reimbursed for everything, but you guys make enough money--
make sure you begin to do some testing of vitamin D levels so that if
people are below 30 nanograms per milliliter, they know it and they
know that they should go to the drugstore and begin to get more vitamin
D, together with zinc and vitamin C.
Finally, I encourage the majority party, before they do any more with
Build Back Better, to have some work done and see whether you really
want to go ahead and further steepen the penalty for married couples
who have children, which already, like I said, is like the policy of
the United States: We don't want to have old-fashioned nuclear
families.
Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
____________________