- Share on WeChat
-
Jan Schakowsky
DTo be claimed
Member, Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus
Member, Congressional Caucus on Womens Issues
Member, Congressional Human Rights Caucus
Vice Chair, Congressional Progressive Caucus
Co-Chair, Democratic Seniors Task Force
Former Ranking Member, Digital Commerce and Consumer Protection Subcommittee, United States House of Representatives
Founding Member, Equality Caucus
Former Member, Health Subcommittee, United States House of Representatives
Chair, International Workers Rights Caucus
Member, Manufacturing Caucus
Founding Member, Out of Iraq Caucus
Member, Populist Caucus
Former Member, Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing and Trade, United States House of Representatives
Delegate, White House Conference on Aging
Vice Chair, Women's Caucus
Member, Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus
Member, Congressional Caucus on Womens Issues
Member, Congressional Human Rights Caucus
Vice Chair, Congressional Progressive Caucus
Co-Chair, Democratic Seniors Task Force
Former Ranking Member, Digital Commerce and Consumer Protection Subcommittee, United States House of Representatives
Founding Member, Equality Caucus
Former Member, Health Subcommittee, United States House of Representatives
Chair, International Workers Rights Caucus
Member, Manufacturing Caucus
Founding Member, Out of Iraq Caucus
Member, Populist Caucus
Delegate, White House Conference on Aging
Vice Chair, Women's Caucus
Member, Committee on Energy and Commerce
Member, Committee on the Budget
Chair, Subcommittee on Consumer Protection & Commerce
Member, Subcommittee on Environment & Climate Change
Member, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations (Energy and Commerce)
Astrological Sign:
Gemini
Names of Grandchildren:
Isabel, Eve, Lucy, and William
— Number of Grandchildren:
1. Do you generally support pro-choice or pro-life legislation?
- Pro-choice
1. In order to balance the budget, do you support an income tax increase on any tax bracket?
- Yes
2. Do you support expanding federal funding to support entitlement programs such as Social Security and Medicare?
- Yes
1. Do you support the regulation of indirect campaign contributions from corporations and unions?
- Yes
Do you support the protection of government officials, including law enforcement officers, from personal liability in civil lawsuits concerning alleged misconduct?
- No
Do you support increasing defense spending?
- No
1. Do you support federal spending as a means of promoting economic growth?
- Yes
2. Do you support lowering corporate taxes as a means of promoting economic growth?
- No
3. Do you support providing financial relief to businesses AND/OR corporations negatively impacted by the state of national emergency for COVID-19?
- Yes
1. Do you support requiring states to adopt federal education standards?
- No
1. Do you support government funding for the development of renewable energy (e.g. solar, wind, geo-thermal)?
- Yes
2. Do you support the federal regulation of greenhouse gas emissions?
- Yes
1. Do you generally support gun-control legislation?
- Yes
1. Do you support repealing the 2010 Affordable Care Act ("Obamacare")?
- No
2. Do you support requiring businesses to provide paid medical leave during public health crises, such as COVID-19?
- Yes
1. Do you support the construction of a wall along the Mexican border?
- No
2. Do you support requiring immigrants who are unlawfully present to return to their country of origin before they are eligible for citizenship?
- No
1. Should the United States use military force to prevent governments hostile to the U.S. from possessing a weapon of mass destruction (for example: nuclear, biological, chemical)?
- Unknown Position
2. Do you support reducing military intervention in Middle East conflicts?
- Yes
Do you generally support removing barriers to international trade (for example: tariffs, quotas, etc.)?
- No
1. Do you generally support pro-choice or pro-life legislation?
- Pro-choice
1. In order to balance the budget, do you support an income tax increase on any tax bracket?
- Yes
2. In order to balance the budget, do you support reducing defense spending?
- Yes
1. Do you support the regulation of indirect campaign contributions from corporations and unions?
- Yes
1. Do you support federal spending as a means of promoting economic growth?
- Yes
2. Federal investment initiatives like green energy, repairing pipes and bridges, and providing safe drinking water create good jobs and help our economy. It also allows us to ensure workers share in the benefits. Experience shows the across-the-board lowering taxes for corporations all too often results in stock buybacks and higher CEO compensation, not increases in workers' wages and benefits or significant investments in national priorities. While I support targeted tax incentives -- for example, tax credits to promote renewable energy -- I do not support "trickle-down" tax policies that mostly just reduce taxes for the wealthy and profitable corporations.
- Rated 8% by National Tax Limitation Committee. https://votesmart.org/candidate/evaluations/6387/jan-schakowsky#.XbsQtEE3kfI (votesmart.org)
"And I believe that we should raise additional revenues by reforming the corporate tax code and ending tax breaks for off-shoring jobs and profits." https://votesmart.org/public-statement/1028237/issue-position-fair-taxation (votesmart.org)
"Cutting taxes for millionaires, billionaires, and large corporations by trillions of dollars leaves no revenue to invest in the middle class. This tax plan means fewer resources to sustain Medicare, invest in infrastructure, make college more affordable, and protect our environment. We need to build an economy that works for all Americans -- not just President Trump and the Mar-a-Lago crowd." https://votesmart.org/public-statement/1162747/schakowsky-statement-on-president-trumps-tax-proposal#.WnTKSHXLAfI (votesmart.org)
"Shame on Republicans for supporting this monstrosity. There is no excuse for voting in favor of a bill that gives 83% of its benefits to the top 1% while ripping health care away from 13 million people, robbing $25 billion from Medicare, and raising taxes on 86 million middle class families. The Republican bill makes life even better for millionaires, billionaires, and corporate special interests at the expense of everyone else." https://votesmart.org/public-statement/1214565/schakowsky-statement-on-house-passage-of-the-gop-tax-scam#.WnTKFXXLAfI (votesmart.org)
"Cutting taxes for millionaires, billionaires, and large corporations by trillions of dollars leaves no revenue to invest in the middle class. This tax plan means fewer resources to sustain Medicare, invest in infrastructure, make college more affordable, and protect our environment. We need to build an economy that works for all Americans -- not just President Trump and the Mar-a-Lago crowd." https://votesmart.org/public-statement/1162747/schakowsky-statement-on-president-trumps-tax-proposal#.WnTKSHXLAfI (votesmart.org)
"Shame on Republicans for supporting this monstrosity. There is no excuse for voting in favor of a bill that gives 83% of its benefits to the top 1% while ripping health care away from 13 million people, robbing $25 billion from Medicare, and raising taxes on 86 million middle class families. The Republican bill makes life even better for millionaires, billionaires, and corporate special interests at the expense of everyone else." https://votesmart.org/public-statement/1214565/schakowsky-statement-on-house-passage-of-the-gop-tax-scam#.WnTKFXXLAfI (votesmart.org)
1. While I believe there is a federal role in promoting public education, assisting teachers, and improving neighborhood schools, I opposed the testing requirements in No Child Left Behind and voted for changes in the new ESEA reauthorization, the Every Student Succeeds Act. My response to the question would depend on what type of education reforms are being required and for which grants.
- "I opposed the testing requirements in No Child Left Behind and voted for changes in the new ESEA reauthorization, the Every Student Succeeds Act. My response to the question would depend on what type of education reforms are being required and for which grants." https://votesmart.org/candidate/political-courage-test/6387/jan-schakowsky/#.WjP0HWe3wfJ (votesmart.org)
"The Race to the Top competition has created an incentive for school districts and local organizations to partner with one another to implement new ideas. A number of people have raised serious questions about certain aspects of the President's agenda for education, such as the move towards charter schools or the use of competitive grants. That said, the Race to the Top program has jumpstarted the national conversation about how to make education work better for this country's children and has already begun to implement real change." http://votesmart.org/candidate/political-courage-test/6387/jan-schakowsky/ (votesmart.org)
"I opposed the testing requirements in No Child Left Behind and voted for changes in the new ESEA reauthorization, the Every Student Succeeds Act. My response to the question would depend on what type of education reforms are being required and for which grants." https://votesmart.org/candidate/political-courage-test/6387/jan-schakowsky/#.WjP0HWe3wfJ (votesmart.org)
"The Race to the Top competition has created an incentive for school districts and local organizations to partner with one another to implement new ideas. A number of people have raised serious questions about certain aspects of the President's agenda for education, such as the move towards charter schools or the use of competitive grants. That said, the Race to the Top program has jumpstarted the national conversation about how to make education work better for this country's children and has already begun to implement real change." http://votesmart.org/candidate/political-courage-test/6387/jan-schakowsky/ (votesmart.org)
"While I believe there is a federal role in promoting public education, assisting teachers, and improving neighborhood schools, I opposed the testing requirements in No Child Left Behind and voted for changes in the new ESEA reauthorization, the Every Student Succeeds Act. My response to the question would depend on what type of education reforms are being required and for which grants." https://votesmart.org/candidate/political-courage-test/6387/jan-schakowsky (votesmart.org)
"As we consider reauthorization and changes in ESEA, currently known as No Child Left Behind, we must do everything possible to ensure that every child receives a quality public education by eliminating funding disparities, increasing academic performance, improving accountability and student support systems, and promoting school policies that ensure a positive school climate that is conducive to learning." https://votesmart.org/public-statement/1028204/issue-position-increased-educational-funding." https://votesmart.org/public-statement/1028204/issue-position-increased-educational-funding (votesmart.org)
1. Do you support government funding for the development of renewable energy (e.g. solar, wind, thermal)?
- Yes
2. Do you support the federal regulation of greenhouse gas emissions?
- Yes
1. Do you generally support gun-control legislation?
- Yes
1. Do you support repealing the 2010 Affordable Care Act ("Obamacare")?
- No
1. Do you support the construction of a wall along the Mexican border?
- No
2. Do you support requiring immigrants who are unlawfully present to return to their country of origin before they are eligible for citizenship?
- No
Do you support the legalization of marijuana for recreational purposes?
- Yes
1. We must reduce -- and hopefully eliminate -- the existence of nuclear weapons. I believe diplomacy is always the preferred option over military force, which is why I was a leader in mustering votes for the Iran nuclear deal in Congress and so strongly oppose President Trump's decision to pull out of that agreement. I believe that any military intervention in Syria and elsewhere in the Middle East requires Congressional approval through a specific and time-limited authorization for the use of military force (AUMF).
- "As a country and as a Congress, we need to fully debate how we use military force in the Middle East. [â?¦] We face a different world than we did in 2001, one with intricacies and complexities that require a new debate and a new AUMF." https://votesmart.org/public-statement/1162995/schakowsky-statement-on-opposition-to-the-national-defense-authorization-act/?search=middle%20east#.WjP5JGe3wfI (votesmart.org)
"As a country and as a Congress, we need to fully debate how we use military force in the Middle East. [â?¦] We face a different world than we did in 2001, one with intricacies and complexities that require a new debate and a new AUMF." https://votesmart.org/public-statement/1162995/schakowsky-statement-on-opposition-to-the-national-defense-authorization-act/?search=middle%20east#.WjP5JGe3wfI (votesmart.org)
"The President reiterated that any additional American troops will not have a combat role on the ground. [â?¦] I deeply appreciate the Administration's outreach to me and other members of Congress on this issue, and I look forward to the opportunity to further collaborate with my colleagues to meet the ISIS threat in a responsible and effective manner." https://votesmart.org/public-statement/931222/schakowsky-statement-in-response-to-presidents-speech-on-isis/?search=Islamic%20state#.WjP5eWe3wfI (votesmart.org)
"The President reiterated that any additional American troops will not have a combat role on the ground. [â?¦] I deeply appreciate the Administration's outreach to me and other members of Congress on this issue, and I look forward to the opportunity to further collaborate with my colleagues to meet the ISIS threat in a responsible and effective manner." https://votesmart.org/public-statement/931222/schakowsky-statement-in-response-to-presidents-speech-on-isis/?search=Islamic%20state#.WjP5eWe3wfI (votesmart.org)
Latest Action: House - 06/21/2019 Referred to the House Committee on Education and Labor.
Tracker:Latest Action: House - 06/20/2019 Referred to the House Committee on Education and Labor.
Tracker:Latest Action: House - 06/20/2019 Referred to the House Committee on Education and Labor.
Tracker:By Jan Schakowsky Amazon describes Prime Day as a "special once-a-year savings event included with your Prime membership." This event is meant to deliver savings to reward consumers who are Prime members, and attract new ones along the way. Jeff Bezos, founder and CEO of Amazon, is worth more than $200 billion, and yet he has let another Prime Day pass without providing the pay and protection his employees need, nor has he taken meaningful steps to protect ALL consumers from unsafe and counterfeit products. 20,000 Amazon workers have contracted COVID-19, and Donald Trump has paid more in taxes ($750.00) than Amazon ($0). That's 1 in 72 Amazon employees (who by the way all also paid more in taxes than their multinational employer). It shouldn't surprise anyone that Amazon continues to prioritize power and profit over workers -- after all, they recently deployed communications technology to employees for the sole purpose of creepy surveillance and union-busting. The sad truth behind Amazon's persistent pattern of abuse of its workers was thought to be that at the end of the day, consumers benefit from convenience and pricing. However, as Amazon has grown larger and gobbled up more competitors, its commitment to consumers continues to wane. Recall last summer, when questioned by my colleagues Hank Johnson and Lucy McBath on unsafe, counterfeit, and stolen products sold on Amazon, Bezos feigned surprise and called on Congress to combat counterfeits. At the exact same time, his lobbying team here in Washington was working around the clock to defeat legislation that would do just that. So here we are, as another Prime Day has passed, and Amazon once again missed an important opportunity to support legislation that will protect consumers from counterfeit and stolen goods that are flooding online marketplaces. As a leading online retailer, Amazon ought to play a central role in ensuring Americans are safe this holiday season when shopping online. As a result of the pandemic more and more consumers are shopping online. According to press reports, about two-thirds of consumers indicate they planned to shop on Amazon during Prime Day, and I suspect even more did. That's why it is critical for Amazon to step up and protect consumers and workers alike. Guarding consumers from counterfeit, stolen, and dangerous products while protecting its workers must be Amazon's primary objective, especially given their size, power, and market share. A recent survey showed 65 percent of customers believe they may have previously purchased a counterfeit good on Amazon and 90 percent of consumers surveyed said they would not purchase something if they knew it had been stolen and was being resold on Amazon's marketplace. The INFORM Consumers Act, which I introduced in the House earlier this year, would protect consumers by requiring online marketplaces to collect and verify a seller's information and provide that information to consumers. Allowing sellers to create accounts, without providing such information, makes it easier for criminals to hide behind anonymous profiles and dupe unsuspecting consumers into buying their illicit goods. I hope Amazon will join me in putting these sensible protections in place by publicly supporting and working to enact the INFORM Consumers Act. The INFORM Consumers Act is supported by the Buy Safe America Coalition, which represents a very diverse group of consumer protection advocates, retailers and manufacturers which include the health, beauty, apparel, footwear, toy, jewelry, automotive and other important sectors. In the meantime, consumers ought to do the following, or ask themselves these questions, when they shop online to assure they aren't buying illicit goods: · Know the Seller · Examine the Packaging · Is the Price too Good to be True? · Does the Item Description Seem Off? · Study the Consumer Reviews and Look Closely at the Imagery Protecting consumers is what we all strive for and if consumers feel they have purchased a stolen or counterfeit good they should file a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission at FTC.gov. But it shouldn't be on consumers to have to go above and beyond in order to know what they buy is safe for their families. Shame on Amazon for opposing common-sense legislation to protect consumers and ensure they can hold sellers accountable when they are sold counterfeit and unsafe products. That's why I boycotted another Prime Day. I remain hopeful that next year Amazon will treat its workers and its customers with the dignity they deserve, but I know I'll have to fight like hell to make that happen.
By Jan Schakowsky President Donald Trump has turned his back on Americans, delaying and at times walking away from negotiations to send much needed pandemic relief to our families, communities and businesses. There are several important, and necessary, pieces to this package -- direct stimulus payments, unemployment assistance, aid for local and state governments and the front-line workers they employ, safe child care for working parents, and funding to keep millions at work at airlines and other industries. There is one piece of the negotiations that Republicans want to include that most Americans do not need or want -- corporate immunity from coronavirus-related lawsuits, not just during the pandemic, but through 2024. This immunity would shield all companies from any responsibility should their workers, and even customers, contract COVID-19 because those businesses failed to take preventative measures. Many customer-facing businesses have made great efforts to protect the public and staff from the virus. From plexiglass shields to spacing between tables, from capacity limits to free personal protective equipment and hand sanitizer, businesses are going the extra mile to protect their employees and others. Imagine what some of these companies would do if they knew they would never be held accountable. We must stand up against this push for blanket corporate immunity and instead ensure that we protect everyone's private right to action. A worker who becomes critically ill after being forced to work in unsafe conditions, a single mom who is denied COVID-19 testing and treatment, a small-business owner improperly denied a recovery loan to stay afloat, and an airline employee whose hours have been unilaterally cut all deserve their day in court. Earlier this year, I introduced the COVID Accountability and Justice Act to ensure that these individuals have access to justice and that people who take illegal advantage of the pandemic are held accountable. With the Trump administration's government regulators and watchdogs not doing their part to protect Americans and prevent the further spread of the coronavirus, we must protect an individual's private right to action. At the beginning of the pandemic, we saw fears about the conditions at meatpacking plants, and whether the employees and the product were being properly protected from the virus. We later learned that many of the safety measures that were to be mandated by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention were watered down to mere suggestions. We've since seen over 200 deaths of meatpacking workers and over 40,000 have tested positive for COVID-19. And we now have confirmation that the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration is not cracking down on corporations that put their workers at risk of contracting the virus. A recent report shows that OSHA has issued no penalties for a vast majority of complaints received and investigated. And the few that did get fined didn't have to pay more than $30,000; companies are still raking in millions while putting their workers at risk. From the moment we passed the CARES Act in March, we said it was a down payment to the American people. As the White House has failed to lead a national response to help steer the nation on a road to recovery, the urgent need for additional relief for working families has grown exponentially. Families are facing evictions, laid-off workers have run out of unemployment and small businesses have permanently shuttered. And as assistance provided in the CARES Act has run out or expired, more industries are now seeing increased layoffs and closures, especially in the airline and hospitality industries. House Democrats passed the HEROES Act to provide more of that much-needed relief, and then updated it and passed it again to get closer to the GOP's numbers. It's time for Trump, Mitch McConnell and Republicans in Congress to be honest. They won't pass another relief package until we give a license to their corporate backers to sacrifice the health and safety of their employees and customers for the sake of making a profit. Trump and his enablers have already made clear they want to ignore the virus for the sake of "saving the economy" to benefit Wall Street and the billionaires, while sacrificing the most vulnerable in our communities. Now they want to enshrine that thinking into our next relief package, as we see the evidence of public gatherings, open night clubs, political rallies and even Supreme Court nomination ceremonies creating super-spreading events. Without mandating preventive measures and ensuring the safety of employees, Republicans are denying relief and assistance for working families because they would rather allow every store front and restaurant, office space and warehouse, and any other work environment to become a breeding ground to spread the deadly coronavirus.
Tue 11:00 AM – 11:30 AM CDT
Wed 5:00 PM – 6:00 PM CDT
