Wakefield Act

I thank the distinguished whip for yielding.

On Monday, the House is not in session. On Tuesday, the House will meet at 12:30 for morning hour and 2 p.m. for legislative business, with votes postponed until 6:30 p.m.

On Wednesday and Thursday, the House will meet at 10 a.m. for legislative business. On Friday, no votes are expected.

We will consider several bills under suspension of the rules, including several important public health bills, H.R. 2464, the Wakefield Act, and H.R. 1237, the Cytology Proficiency Improvement Act. The final list of bills under suspension of the rules will be announced by the close of business tomorrow.

In addition, we will consider H.R. 2016, the National Landscape Conservation System Act, and H.R. 2537, a bill to amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act relating to beach monitoring.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

It's our expectation that, following the testimony of General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker, the committees will be meeting to not only discuss substantive policy, but also to discuss the supplemental appropriation bill. It would be my expectation that that bill would be on the floor either the end of April or the first week in May. We are cognizant, as the gentleman indicated, of the June period, and so we want to move this significantly before that debate so that there will not be any lag.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Well, there are obviously needs in addition to Iraq that are being discussed, and I would tell my friend that those discussions are ongoing. A decision on what may or may not be added in addition to the supplemental that may be necessary for Iraq, there may be other things, that decision has not been made at this point in time. But I do want to let the gentleman know that that is under discussion.

As the gentleman will recall, last year, when we passed the supplemental, there were domestic priorities that were also addressed, in particular, Katrina, as the gentleman will recall, and some other matters as well. So, that's under discussion.

As you know, we are strong proponents of the PAYGO rule and have adhered to that in all but one instance last year. We did not adhere to it, as you know, with the stimulus package. There was concern, and obviously we didn't want to stimulate and depress at the same point in time, so that was under discussion. But I will tell you on the housing bill itself, Mr. Frank has been working on that with his committee, Maxine Waters and others, and with Mr. Bachus and others on the committee. And we would certainly hope to move a housing bill in the near term, certainly no later than the latter part of this month or the very first days of the next month, so that we can pass a bill that would give relief to those who have either been foreclosed upon or are on the brink of foreclosure. We believe that it is essential for us to try to address what is a national problem and a very serious one. And so, that will also go into the consideration, I think, of how much money is needed, how that will be paid for.

Thank you very much for yielding.

I will say that over the last 7 years, the President has told us things are pretty good. There was never a right time for revenues to be increased. Even in the times when the President was telling us the economy was robust, we were growing, we still weren't paying our bills.

We feel very strongly on this side of the aisle, and Mr. Bernanke, in a telephone conversation with me, said one of the things we didn't want to do, when you and I and Mr. Boehner and Ms. Pelosi were talking about the stimulus package, one thing we did not want to do is exacerbate the long-term debt that confronts us. Mr. Bernanke is very concerned about that. But certainly in the context of wanting to move quickly in an emergency way where we have an economy now that Mr. Bernanke, although he didn't say it was a recession, he certainly gave the implication that we were on the brink of that, we're very concerned about the economic policies, very frankly, that we think have led to that.

But I will say that we have two concerns: Number one, paying for what we buy, not exacerbating the deficit. But clearly we're concerned about getting relief to people that need it in the short term. But my discussions with Mr. Bernanke were, yes, tax increases in the short term he thought were not helpful, but he wanted to make it very clear that he thought making the debt worse over the long term, whether it's for international expenses or domestic expenses, was not helpful to the economy in the long term.

I thank my friend for yielding.

I won't debate that now, but I would be interested in discussing it at some point in time because, as you know, in those years revenues fell short of the administration's projections in the previous years. So that, although revenues did increase, you're absolutely correct, as revenues have every year over the last 50 except for 2, they increased less than the administration had projected.

I thank the gentleman for the question.

We all agree this is an important agreement, but as you know, there are still major long-standing issues to be resolved, violence being one of them, labor rights being another, trade adjustment assistance, which the gentleman referred to, as another. If the White House does choose to send up the agreement, we will discuss the full range of options available to us under the TPA and the House rules.

Madam Speaker, during the week of February 25-29, 2008, I was unavoidably absent from rollcall votes 69-87.

Had I been present I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall vote 69, H. Res. 978, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 70, H. Res. 930, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 71, H. Res. 944, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 74, H. Res. 974, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 75, H.R. 3521 the Sires of New Jersey Amendment, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 76, H.R. 3521 the Meek of Florida Amendment, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 81, H. Res. 1001, ``nay'' on rollcall vote 83, H.R. 5351 on Motion to Recommit with Instructions, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 84, H.R. 5351, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 85, S. 2272, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 86, H.R. 4454, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 87, H.R. 4454.

Madam Speaker, during the week of March 3-7, 2008, I was unavoidably absent from rollcall votes 88-106.

Had I been present I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall vote 88, H.R. 1143, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 89, H.R. 1311, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 90, H.R. 816, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 91, H.R. 4191, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 92, H. Con. Res. 278, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 93, H. Res. 951, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 96, H. Res. 1014, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 97, H.R. 4774, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 98, H. Con. Res. 286, ``nay'' on rolicall vote 100, H.R. 1424 the Motion to Recommit with Instructions, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 101, H.R. 1424, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 102, H.R. 5400, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 104, H. Res. 1015, ``nay'' on rollcall vote 105, H.R. 2857 the Flake of Arizona Amendment, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 106, H.R. 2857 the Inslee of Washington Amendment.

Madam Speaker, during the week of March 10-14, 2008, I was unavoidably absent from rollcall votes 108-145.

Had I been present I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall vote 108, H. Res. 537, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 109, H.R. 3196, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 110, H.R. 4166, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 115, H. Res. 924, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 116, Motion, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 117, H.R. 2082, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 118, H. Res. 948, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 119, H. Res. 493, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 122, H. Res. 1031, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 130, H. Res. 1036, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 131, H.R. 5563, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 132, H. Con. Res. 316, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 133, H. Res. 936, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 134, S. 2733, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 137, H. Con. Res. 312 Kilpatrick of Michigan Amendment, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 138, H. Con. Res. 312 Lee of California Amendment, ``nay'' on rollcall vote 140, H. Con. Res. 312 Ryan of Wisconsin Amendment, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 141, H. Con. Res. 312, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 142, H. Res. 991, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 143, H. Res. 1041 On Ordering the Previous Question, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 144, H. Res. 1041 On Agreeing to the Resolution, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 145, H.R. 3773.

Madam Speaker, during the week of March 31-April 4, 2008, I was unavoidably absent from rolicall votes 147-160.

Had I been present I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall vote 147, H.R. 3352, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 148, H.R. 2675, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 149, H. Con. Res. 302, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 150, H. Con. Res. 310, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 151, H. Res. 1005, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 152, H. Res. 1021, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 154, H. Res. 1065 On Ordering the Previous Question, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 155, H. Res. 1065 On Agreeing to the Resolution, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 156, H.R. 5501 Carson of Indiana Amendment, ``nay'' on rollcall vote 157, H.R. 5501 On Motion to Recommit with Instructions, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 158, H.R. 5501 On Passage, ``nay'' on rollcall vote 159, H.R. 4847 On Motion to Recommit with Instructions, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 160, H.R. 4847 On Passage.

Madam Speaker, during the week of April 7-11, 2008, I was unavoidably absent from rollcall votes 161-182.

Had I been present I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall vote 161, H.J. Res. 70, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 162, H.R. 2464, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 163, S. 793, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 164, H. Res. 1084 On Ordering the Previous Question, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 165, H. Res.

1084 On Agreeing to the Resolution, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 166, H. Res. 1077, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 167, H.R. 2016 the Grijalva of Arizona Amendment, ``nay'' on rollcall vote 168, H.R. 2016 the Bishop of Utah Amendment, ``nay'' on rollcall vote 169, H.R. 2016 the Bishop of Utah Amendment, ``nay'' on rollcall vote 170, H.R. 2016 the Bishop of Utah Amendment, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 171, H.R. 2016 the Altmire of Pennsylvania Amendment, ``nay'' on rollcall vote 172, H.R. 2016 the Pearce of New Mexico Amendment, ``nay'' on rollcall vote 173, H.R. 2016 On Motion to Recommit with Instructions, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 174, H.R. 2016 On Passage, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 175, H.R. 2419, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 176, H.R. 5489, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 177, H.R. 5472, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 179, H. Res. 1083, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 180, H. Res. 1038, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 181, H. Res. 1092, ``nay'' on rollcall vote 182, H.R. 2537 the Flake of Arizona Amendment.

Madam Speaker, for the information of our colleagues and my constituents, I want the Record to reflect how I would have voted on the following votes I missed this session.

On rollcall 134, to pass S. 2733, to temporarily extend the programs under the Higher Education Act of 1965, 1 would have voted ``yes.''

On rollcall 154, on ordering the previous question on H. Res. 1605, providing for the consideration of H.R. 5501, the Tom Lantos and Henry J. Hyde United States Global Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Reauthorization Act, I would have voted ``no.''

I would have done so because defeating the previous question would have allowed the House to consider an amendment dealing with the appropriations earmark process. I support reforming that process and think that the House should at least debate changes to it, although I reserve judgment on whether I would have supported the specific language of the amendment since it was not debated.

On rollcall 158, passage of H.R. 5501, Tom Lantos and Henry J. Hyde United States Global Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Reauthorization Act of 2008, I would have voted ``yes.''

On rollcall 162, passage of H.R. 2464, The Wakefield Act--I would have voted ``yes.''

On rollcall 163, passage of S. 793, Reauthorization of the Traumatic Brain Injury Act--I would have voted ``yes.''

On rollcall 182, on the Flake amendment to H.R. 2537, to bar use of funds provided under that bill for Congressional earmarks, I would have voted ``yes.''

On rollcall 183, to suspend the rules and pass H. Res. 886, Expressing sympathy to the victims and families of the tragic acts of violence in Colorado Springs, Colorado and Arvada, Colorado, as a cosponsor of the resolution I would have voted ``yes.''

As the resolution reminds us all, on Sunday, December 9, 2007, a troubled individual was responsible for killing several innocent people and injuring others at, first, the Youth With a Mission facility in Arvada and, a few hours later, at the New Life Church in the Colorado Springs area--where he was fatally shot by Jeanne Assam, a volunteer private security guard.

The resolution rightly commends Ms. Assam and the quick response of local first responders in the city of Arvada and in Jefferson County as well as those in EI Paso County and Colorado Springs who, assisted by Federal authorities and medical professionals limited the danger to the church and local community. And it offers the heartfelt condolences of the House of Representatives to the victims and families of these tragic acts of violence in Colorado and coveys our gratitude to Jeanne Assam, city and county officials, as well as the police, fire, sheriff, Federal authorities, and

emergency medical teams whose quick response saved lives.

On rollcall number 185, to suspend the rules and pass H.R. 3548, as amended, the Plain Language in Government Communications Act, as a cosponsor of that measure I would have voted ``yes.''

H.R. 3548 requires Federal agencies to use plain language in Government documents related to obtaining a service or a benefit. It responds to the fact that Government documents often are complex and difficult to understand, particularly when they are not written clearly. To address this problem, President Clinton in 1998 issued a memorandum that, in part, required Federal agencies to use plain language in all documents that explain how to obtain a benefit or service. However, while a few agencies still maintain plain language programs, efforts to promote plain language have waned. H.R. 3548 defines plain language and requires agencies to use plain language in any new document that explains how to obtain a service or a benefit or that is relevant to obtaining a service or a benefit. The bill ensures that many of the letters, forms, and other documents that people receive from the Government will be written in a clear, understandable way. Under this bill, for example, the Social Security Administration would be required to use plain language in letters that provide beneficiaries information about Social Security.

I joined in cosponsoring the bill because I think it is important for those of us in Government to do more to communicate clearly with our employers, the American people, and I hope that the Senate will join the House in giving prompt approval to the legislation.

On rollcall number 331, to pass H.R. 6081, the Heroes Earnings Assistance and Relief Tax Act, I would have voted ``yes.''

On rollcall number 332, to pass H.R. 6074, the Gas Price Relief for Consumers Act, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, I ask to address the House for one minute for the purpose of inquiring about next week's schedule.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to my friend, the majority leader, for information about the schedule for next week.

I thank the gentleman for that.

I have a couple of questions on things that we haven't discussed. First of all, the supplemental budget, I know General Petraeus is in Washington next week, and I believe Ambassador Crocker. The President sent up a supplemental request in February of last year. By approximately June of this year we're told that the Army will run out of money, and that by July, their ability to use transfer authority will be exhausted. I wonder at what point, in conjunction with or following the Petraeus visits next week, does the leader think we will be talking about that supplemental request.

And I yield.

I thank the gentleman for that. I think that date is important, and we need to be sure and be aware of it as we move through this process, as you are.

The spending bill, I know as this administration comes to an end, I'm confident that the White House has had lots of requests from the administration side for additional spending, which I believe they have held the line on. Does the gentleman have a sense of whether this bill will be able to be contained to the defense supplemental, or will it possibly get bigger than that?

And I would yield.

Well, I do appreciate that. And I just say for my friend's information that we've certainly discouraged the White House, we're hoping, not only discouraged them from moving forward with any new additions, and I think they have decided not to do that and will be concerned about this going as quickly as possible and meeting these defense needs rather than being tied down.

Another topic is housing. On the other side of the building they've been talking about housing this week. I know that Chairman Frank has some proposals on housing. I really have two questions there: One, when do you anticipate some housing legislation on the floor? And two would be, do you expect that that housing legislation will follow the PAYGO rules of this Congress, or will those rules be suspended for that housing discussion?

And I would yield.

I think in that time frame there is a chance there will be some administrative actions taken as well, and that may be an important part of that debate.

I do know that this week Mr. Bernanke testified before the Joint Economic Committee, and part of his testimony was that he thought that this would be the wrong time for any tax increases. And I would hope we could maintain some openness on that PAYGO discussion as it relates to this housing concern that people are facing.

I would yield.

Well, I wouldn't quarrel with the gentleman about not having a good time for tax increases since '01 and '03, but revenue actually has increased during that period of time. I think in '05, '06 and '07 we may have set records of increased revenues, percentage over last year. So, you used the term revenue, and I think you meant taxes, because we did see some revenue increases during that time, and they were significant. I think over 14 percent in FY05, and double digits in the next 2 years.

I would yield.

Well, while we don't want to enter into this debate too fully, on the projections, even though

we still had deficits in those years, which I regret for a number of reasons, those deficits were always less at the end of the year than we had thought they were going to be at the beginning of the year because revenues exceeded projections. That's why the deficit was less.

The third topic, I think my last topic today, is, we're at a point in the congressional calendar where it's at least possible that, under the TPA, the Trade Promotion Authority rules, the President will send the Colombia Trade Agreement up because of the number of days left that under TPA would require a vote during the calendar we've put in place. And I wonder if the gentleman has a sense of whether the Colombia Trade Agreement process will go through the normal Trade Promotion Authority process, or if that process could possibly be shut off.

And I would yield.

I thank the gentleman, and I yield back.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to speak in support of H.R. 2464, the Wakefield Act. I am the lead sponsor of this legislation, along with Representative Peter T. King on the other side of the aisle.

Today, the hospital emergency department is such a fundamental part of our health system that it's easy to forget that emergency medicine is a relatively new specialty. Emergency rooms were first established in the 1970s as medical personnel returned from the Vietnam War. The skills developed to save soldiers' lives on the battlefield were being put to use saving victims of car crashes and other traumas.

However, the bodies of adult soldiers are very different from those of kids. By the early 1980s, doctors were seeing marked disparities in survival rates among adults and children with similar injuries. In fact, kids had twice the death rate in emergencies as adults.

In 1984, the Emergency Medical Services for Children program was first created. This unique act has driven fundamental changes in America's emergency medical system. Since it was established, child injury death rates have dropped 40 percent. The research that resulted from this legislation helped establish pediatric emergency medicine as its own specialty.

Program grants have provided seed money to every State and territory to help first responders and hospitals improve children's emergency care. In the mid-1980s, emergency personnel received little training in caring for children. Now, thanks to this program, paramedics can be exclusively trained, and their ambulances are stocked with the equipment and supplies needed by seriously injured kids.

Nowhere has this been more critical than in rural areas where the closest emergency room is often many miles from the scene of an accident. Getting it right for these small patients in the first critical minutes often means the difference between life and death.

Data collection and training seminars offered under this program, including from the Emergency Medical Services for Children Data Analysis Resource Center based in my district at the University of Utah, help ensure that best practices are developed and disseminated across the country.

The Emergency Medical Services for Children program's authorization expired in September 2005. In the summer of 2006, the Institutes of Medicine released a report which documented the value of this program. It noted the gaps that still remain in providing quality emergency care for children. And there is still a serious gap between the percentage of kids who end up in the emergency room and the percentage of emergency rooms staffed, trained and equipped to respond appropriately. The report said this program is ``well positioned to assume a leadership role'' in closing this gap.

I am pleased that H.R. 2464, the Wakefield Act, has bipartisan and bicameral support, including support from 75 of my colleagues in the House of Representatives. The bill is endorsed by over 50 organizations, including the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American College of Emergency Physicians, the American Medical Association, the Emergency Nurses Association, and many more.

Madam Speaker, this legislation enhances the program by authorizing the appropriate funding needed to ensure

the program can drive improvements in emergency and disaster care for children.

Madam Speaker, I want to acknowledge the bipartisan nature in which this bill moved through our committee, working on both sides of the aisle within the Energy and Commerce Committee. We worked together to make this bill as good as it can be.

Madam Speaker, nobody likes to see a child get hurt. Together, we can assure that when that happens, children have the best possible chance for recovery and a good outcome. I strongly urge the adoption of this legislation.

Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.