Help Identify Indicators of Potential Student Aggression Act of 2007

I thank the distinguished manager of this legislation and vice chairman of our caucus.

Madam Speaker, the United States, the American people asked us to act, and I'm proud today to rise and to support the kind of stimulus that provides opportunity not only for those who you would expect or those who are argued for, but the working men and women, middle-income Americans in my congressional district in Houston making less than $50,000, allowing them to get either $600 as a single person, $1,200 as a family, and $300 as a married couple.

The most important aspect is that economists estimate that each dollar of broad tax cuts leads to $1.26 in economic growth. But I hope that we will look to the addition of food stamps, summer job programs, and extension of the unemployment. And we must have the language, I hope, in the final bill, a sense of Congress that there should be a moratorium on foreclosures that are happening in America today; 2.4 million foreclosures expected in this coming year. It is imperative that we give a sense that these individuals can reconstruct their loans and survive.

This is a package that is needed for America. I ask my colleagues to support it.

Madam Speaker. I rise today in support of the Recovery Rebate and Economic Stimulus for the American People Act. I would like to thank Speaker Pelosi for her leadership on this issue, as well as my colleagues on both sides of the aisle who have worked together to overcome partisan divisions to work together to stimulate our national economy. This legislation will inject $145.9 billion into the economy in 2008, over two-thirds of which will come in the form of tax rebate checks, given directly to individuals and families.

However, while I support this legislation, I would like to express my concern about some of this bill's omissions. I requested and had hoped that this legislation would include language declaring that it is the sense of Congress that a moratorium of up to 90 days should be declared on all home foreclosures, and that it is the sense of Congress that the financial industry should allow for the reconstruction and reconfiguration of the mortgage loan market.

Madam Speaker, I would like to see the following language included in the final legislation, agreed on by both Houses and signed into law by the President:

(i) It is the sense of Congress that a moratorium of up to 90 days should be declared on all home foreclosures.

(ii) It is the sense of Congress that the financial industry should allow for the reconstruction and reconfiguration of the mortgage loan market.

It was my sincere hope, shared by many economists, that a temporary economic adjustment period would provide relief for millions of Americans, and that this added time would give them time to look for other resources. By delaying foreclosure, Congress would have declared that millions of Americans deserve to make their payments, or to get their loans restructured before they lose their homes. Those who can keep paying would continue putting money back into our economy. Madam Speaker, we must act now to prevent what could be a disaster for millions of Americans.

There are a number of additional proposals that I would like to see included in the final economic stimulus package. I believe it should include a summer job program, aimed at helping our Nation's youth gain the crucial work experience and job skills that will allow them to be competitive in today's increasingly difficult employment market. By working to provide Americans with the skills they need to successfully secure and keep employment, we cannot only help both adults and youth to develop their careers and to support themselves and their families, but we can bolster the whole economy by combating poverty and unemployment.

I would also like to see the extension and expansion of several existent programs which are already doing important work toward helping Americans. Under the strain of current financial circumstances, I believe that we must bolster these important programs. Madam Speaker, I call for the expansion of food stamps and Medicaid programs, and for the extension of unemployment benefits. Given the current economic climate, I believe that is our responsibility, as the leaders of our Nation, to do all in our power to ensure that the most vulnerable populations are protected.

Madam Speaker, now is the time for innovative leadership and concerted action. Recent data shows economic growth is slowing, and many economic analysts predict a 50 percent chance of recession. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, unemployment rose from 4.7 to 5.0 percent in November 2007 alone. This data, coupled with a struggling housing market and overall slowing economic growth, has caused a ``credit crunch'' that has reduced available funding and has caused rising prices for housing and food.

Over the past year, we have seen a crisis in subprime mortgage lending, which has threatened the stability of the housing market and the livelihoods of large numbers of Americans. During the third quarter of 2007, the Nation's home foreclosures doubled from the previous year. This Democratic Congress is committed to strengthening the housing market and stabilizing the economy, and we have passed important legislation to address this crisis.

Because of the lack of regulation by the Federal Government, many housing loans were accompanied by fraud, predatory lending, inadequate information and other failures of responsible marketing. With exceptionally high--and rising--foreclosure rates across the country, homeowners all over America are losing their homes. Homeowners are surprised to find out that their monthly payments are spiking and they are struggling to make these increasingly high payments.

The subprime mortgage crisis has impacted families and communities across the country. Home foreclosure filings rose to 1.2 million in 2006, a 42 percent jump, due to rising mortgage bills and a slowing housing market. Nationally, as many as 2.4 million subprime borrowers have either lost their homes or could lose them in the next few years.

In my home State of Texas, citizens are feeling the impact of the looming financial crisis. In November 2007 alone, there were 11,599 foreclosure filings in Texas. According to the Center for Responsible Lending, in Harris County alone 11,944 homes were lost from 2005 to 2006 through foreclosure on subprime loans. During the same time period, the average home decreased $1,355 in total value.

Madam Speaker, I firmly believe that this agreement should include a moratorium on foreclosures of at least 90 days on owner-occupied homes with subprime mortgages. Any agreement should also include a rate freeze on adjustable mortgages of at least 5 years or until the loan is converted into a fixed-rate mortgage. The freeze on foreclosures would give the housing market time to stabilize and homeowners time to build equity. It is critical that we address this crisis. The Bush administration and the mortgage industry must reach an agreement that matches the scale of the problem. The U.S. Treasury Department has been pushing the mortgage industry to agree to temporarily freeze interest rates for some borrowers who took out loans with low teaser rates that will soon be resetting much higher.

Madam Speaker, it is imperative that we address the serious underlying housing issues faced by our Nation. Seventeen million households, or one in seven, spend more than 50 percent of their income on housing. On any given night, approximately 750,000 men, women, and children are homeless. Constructing more affordable housing is necessary to help families who have lost their homes in the subprime mortgage crisis or due to a family financial crisis, such as illness or job loss. In my home district in Houston, homelessness remains a significant problem. Houston's homeless population increased to approximately 14,000 in 2005, before Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, and hurricane evacuees remaining in the Houston area could result in the homeless population increasing by some 23,000. Approximately 28 percent of homeless Americans are veterans.

In August, I, in coordination with the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs, hosted a workshop on the introductory concepts and considerations in applying for

Housing Tax Credits in Texas. This workshop was designed to create new incentives for developers to expand business opportunities in housing development, as well as to generate a significant increase in the availability of low-income and affordable housing for the residents of Houston and Harris County. I believe that an increase in affordable housing and job opportunities will help reduce the high rates of homelessness among Houston residents.

Madam Speaker, today's economic stimulus legislation will make important strides towards helping hardworking Americans who are struggling with the high costs of gas, health care, and groceries. By putting several hundred dollars directly into the hands of 117 million American families, this legislation will make important strides toward invigorating our economy, giving money to those who will quickly spend it, reinvesting this money in the American economy.

This bill provides broad-based relief for individuals and families, valued at approximately $109 billion over 10 years. The packages includes tax cuts for 117 million families, providing up to $600 per individual, $1,200 per married couple, and an additional $300 per child. On top of these recovery rebate checks, which could be sent as early as mid-May, this legislation will provide unprecedented tax relief for working families, with $28 billion in tax relief for 35 million families who work but make too little to pay income taxes, who would therefore otherwise not be included in this recovery effort. It is targeted to reach those who need the relief the most: Of these 35 million working families, over 19 million are families with children. I support provisions in this legislation providing tax relief to middle- income Americans, as well as those aspiring to the middle class, leaving out the wealthiest taxpayers. Nearly $50 billion of the rebate will go to those making less than $50,000.

Madam Speaker, family incomes and home prices are down, even as the costs of health care, energy, food, and education are on the rise. Combined with the jump in mortgage foreclosures, the American economy is struggling, with American families falling behind on their bills and consumer confidence hitting a 5-year low.

This bill also contains some provisions to help families avoid foreclosure. It increases affordable refinancing opportunities and liquidity in the housing market, increasing the Federal Housing Administration loan limits to $729,750 for 2008. This will expand affordable mortgage loan opportunities for families at risk of foreclosure. Further, it includes a 1-year increase in loan limits for single family homes from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, enhancing credit availability in the mortgage market.

While this legislation includes provisions intended to provide a short-term ``fix'' to many of the economic difficulties our economy is currently facing, I do not believe that it addresses the long-term needs of our Nation. While short-term response is critical, we must not neglect infrastructure, energy independence, and innovation needs, without which we will not be able to establish a vibrant U.S. economy. I look forward to working with House leadership, and with my fellow Members on both sides of the aisle, to look to the future, and to build innovative and long-term solutions to the underlying problems our economy faces.

Madam Speaker, this legislation is not perfect, but I believe it is an important step. I continue to advocate for a 90-day moratorium on home foreclosures to give financially troubled borrowers time to work with lenders and avoid losing their homes. I also believe we, together, must address the underlying infrastructure problems plaguing our economy. However, I do believe today's legislation will provide important benefits to millions of Americans, to the entire economy, and to our Nation as a whole. I urge my colleagues to join me in support of this legislation.

[Discussion Draft]

Parliamentary inquiry. Is my understanding correct that, as the Chair of the Financial Services Committee, I will control 20 minutes?

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 3 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, what's in this stimulus package is, A, good; B, not enough. But I believe it is important to move it. I say ``not enough'' because the Committee on Financial Services has been dealing particularly with the subprime crisis and the troubles that's generated.

We have in this stimulus package, by agreement between both sides here and the administration, some things that would be very helpful. There are further things that are important that are not in this package. No one should think that because they're not in this

package we are not going to go and deal with them.

As soon as this is done today, the staff of the Committee on Financial Services will be working closely, we've been in consultation with the Senate and others, on a broader set of measures that will both diminish the economic problems that the subprime crisis causes and also try to deal with the distress that results.

But let me talk today about what we do. We increase in this bill loan limits for the FHA and for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. We made a mistake at some point in public policy by setting as a limit for those three agencies, which deal with housing finance and facilitate housing finance, one flat nationwide dollar limit. In fact, nothing in our economy varies in the pricing area as much as house prices, because houses are immobile. Automobile prices, clothing prices, food prices, there are some regional variations; but they tend to be closer.

House prices have a very great variation, for obvious reasons; and, in fact, the limits that have been set which were intended to prevent luxury housing from benefiting from these public or public/private programs in much of the country excludes not just luxury housing but housing for people of moderate and middle incomes.

Now, that's always been a problem to many of us, but recently it's become part of an economic problem. The mortgage market, we understand, has been suffering at the lower end, at the subprime end, because people with weaker credit were charged too much with, we should always note, a racial and ethnic discriminatory factor; but, in general, there was a problem there.

What we now face, and have for some time, is a problem at the higher end. Because of the uncertainty in the mortgage market, people are unwilling to invest. People are unwilling to buy the mortgages. We have come to be dependent, unhealthily so it seems to me, on the secondary market in which the originators have to sell their loans.

People will not now invest in buying loans that are above the levels at which the FHA, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac can provide assurance. Those levels are too low.

So what we do in this stimulus bill is to raise the levels of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the FHA, not uniformly but sensibly, as a percentage of median income with a cap. And that's a very important piece in trying to unlock the mortgage market and getting money flowing again.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I now yield 2 minutes to the chairman of the Subcommittee on Capital Markets, a man who had a major role in our dealing with the structural issues going forward, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Kanjorski).

Mr. Speaker, I now yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the Chair of the Housing Subcommittee of our committee, who has played a very significant role and will be in a major role as we go forward in the necessary next steps after this, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters).

Mr. Speaker, I now yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Bean), a member of the Financial Services Committee, who has been particularly creative in trying to make sure that there are tax incentives in here that will help the business community play its most productive role.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro), the member of the leadership who has had a major role in recognizing the need for this package.

Mr. Speaker, as I listened to my friend from California, I was struck as he excoriated the President's program, that in his metaphor he seemed to think the President can't tell one body part from another, which is a troubling thing.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to our very distinguished majority leader, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to a member of the committee who has been a hard worker on this, the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Scott).

Madam Speaker, I yield now 1 minute to a member of the Financial Services Committee whose expertise in the world of business and finance has been very helpful to us, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mahoney).

Madam Speaker, I'm now going to yield to the Chair of the Financial Institution Subcommittee, who has been a very important part of our effort to try and deal with this crisis, the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney) for 1 minute.

Madam Speaker, I now yield 1 minute to a member of our committee who has been very active in trying to deal with housing and especially with the area of manufactured housing, which is such an important part of our efforts to meet the housing needs, the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Donnelly).

Madam Speaker, the argument has been made that this is just a short-term fix, and that is what we hope it will be. We have both a short-term and a long-term problem.

A recession is, by definition, a specific incident in the cycle, and what we are trying to do now is to respond to what we believe and hope to be a specific, more short-term weakness. That's why we are able to come together in a bipartisan way.

And partisanship is, I believe, a much unfairly maligned concept. Partisanship is essential to a healthy democracy. There has never been a self-governing polity in the history of the world, I believe, of any size where political parties did not emerge, because large numbers of people trying to govern themselves need an organizing principle other than the authority of the leadership.

In America today, a division between the two parties reflects serious, thoughtful differences on how the public and private sectors should interact. We're a capitalist Nation and we're all capitalists, but we differ. On the Republican side there is, I think, an unjustified belief in the essential self-sufficiency of the capitalist system.

We believe, following many who have done work on the technical ``doctrine of market failure,'' market failure in the economic sense, that the free market is a great generator of wealth, but that to achieve the quality of life we want, there must also be a vigorous public sector that interacts with it. That's partly in expenditures, because there are public goods that all of us want that the private sector does not have the capacity to produce, public safety and transportation, and including some compassion for those among us who will not live minimally decent lives unless the rest of us show some of that compassion.

There is also the need for regulation. And the biggest single problem we face today, I believe, is the consequence of too little regulation. It is possible to overregulate, but it is possible to regulate inadequately.

Innovation is very important, and innovation does not survive and grow if it doesn't meet a real need in the economy. One of the innovations of recent times was securitization made possible by large pools of money, by great liquidity that came from various places, not from depository funds, because funds that are in depository institutions are regulated. But a lot of money was generated now, not by bank deposits, but in other ways. And we've also got the ability, technically and in other ways, to sell off those loans.

The lender-borrower relationship that was at the core 30 years ago of many transactions has been essentially diluted. And it turns out that those who thought they had a way to substitute for that missing lender- borrower relationship were deluded. The relationship was diluted, but they were deluded in thinking that they had these techniques that would allow them to deal with it.

We are in a difficult situation today because the innovation and securitization, which has many advantages, was allowed to go forward without adequate regulation, without people knowing, literally, what they were doing and what they were buying and what they were selling, and keeping things off their balance sheets, and not being reserve requirements and not being careful about what loans they bought. We have differences between the parties as to how to deal with those, and we will continue to work on those.

We, however, have a short-term, we hope, shortfall that needs to be addressed. And let me talk for a minute for those who say, Well, what makes you think people are going to go out and spend more because of this? The purpose of a short-term stimulus like this is not to get people to spend more; it is to help them not to spend less. We're not talking about the need for a surge over the norm in consumer spending. We are talking about a fiscal crunch that faces many Americans, in response to which they will have to cut back spending. And people are saying, Oh, they're going to buy flat screen TVs, they're going to do this and that. We have, thanks to the leadership of Speaker Pelosi, a bill before us that will send most of the individual money to people who don't have the option of saying, Well, I think I'll buy another flat screen TV, but who need the money. Helping them avoid pain in their lives and damage to the economy is the justification for this very narrow, short-term stimulus.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I rise in support of the bipartisan economic stimulus package, and let me share with the Members a conversation I had yesterday.

I traveled to New York City, and there I met with 20 to 25 of the financial leaders of our country. The executives were from some of the largest banks and other lending institutions, insurance companies, in America. And almost to the person they told me that they had been talking to businesses all over the United States, and the message they continue to get from the majority of those business leaders is our business is good, we're making the money, we are receiving new orders, we want to expand, we want to hire people, we want to invest in new equipment, we want to invest in new technology. But we're holding back because we hear that things are getting worse, we hear that things may get worse, we're reading that in the newspaper, and we're not sure.

So I believe that what we have here in America today, and let's not minimize the problems. I'm going to speak about the housing market in a minute, and as Chairman Frank said, I'll not minimize the difficulties that we have in the housing market or subprime, but let me say to the Members, let's not talk ourselves and the American people into a recession. And I'm not saying that any of us are. This is not directed at any Member. I say it this way: I want to encourage the Members and all Americans to have confidence in this country, have confidence in our market, because I will tell you that people in New York that are looking out there in America are saying that a lot of businesses are good, they want to invest, they want to hire people.

So part of what I think is so good about this stimulus package is that I believe it will encourage people to have confidence. It will encourage people to invest or spend.

The Financial Services Committee, as Chairman Frank said, was responsible for the housing portion of the stimulus package, and I will direct some statements to those portions in a minute.

Before I do, I want to add a few words in strong support of the tax cuts contained in this stimulus package, and they are tax cuts. The stimulus package that we're considering today recognizes the basic economic reality that getting money back in the hands of people who earned it is the best way to help our economy.

The tax element of this package has been called a rebate, but in essence, it's a tax cut, a tax cut for millions of low- and middle- income Americans, those who need it the most, those with a moderate income.

I believe this will be immediate tax relief for hardworking taxpayers, and the improvement into our economy that always results from allowing taxpayers to decide how their hard-earned money will be spent will be beneficial.

Some have said not all Americans will spend this money. Some will save it. I think our answer to that ought to be, yes, some will spend it, most economists tell us that the vast majority. Some will save it, but that's their choice, not our choice. That's America. I am confident that whether they save it, whether they spend it, whether they pay down their bills, whether they invest as businesses will in new equipment, that it will all be good for America.

Hopefully, it will stimulate not only the economy but it will also prompt my colleagues to enact additional tax cuts in the future and make the Bush tax cuts that have worked so well permanent.

It is widely recognized that the troubled housing market is a significant contributor to the current downturn in our economy. It is not contributing to our economy as it has in the past. We all know housing prices are down. This stimulus package includes several provisions designed to address that lack of liquidity, that weak market in certain segments of the mortgage market. The bill increases, but only on a temporary basis, the loan limits that apply to mortgages that can be purchased by the housing GSEs, Fannie and Freddie, and by ensuring that the Federal Housing Administration and those that are insured by the Federal Housing Administration, most people refer to as FHA, it will increase the size of those mortgages and mortgages that they can insure and offer.

Greater availability of higher-cost mortgages and FHA-insured loans will help get prospective homebuyers off the sidelines and into the housing market. We're hearing that today from the national Realtors. In those markets, there have been price declines. In some they have been particularly severe.

This legislation will assist existing homeowners to refinance loans that they're struggling with. It will also allow those who want to buy and are on the sidelines now to begin making offers and to restore our housing market.

The combined changes, I believe, will help restore confidence to our economy, and we need that confidence. The higher GSE and FHA loan limits, like the other provisions of the package, are both targeted and temporary, they expire at the end of this year, thereby addressing the concerns of those who fear that expanding the eligibility for the GSEs and FHA loan products will unduly increase Federal housing subsidies. I share those concerns.

While I would have preferred that the increases be implemented as part of a comprehensive GSE and FHA reform, I'm encouraged, very encouraged, by the commitments that Chairman Frank and the chairman of the Senate Banking Committee have made to us that achievement of those broader reforms in the GSEs and FHA are a priority for them, also, and that achievement of those broader reforms will be among the highest priorities of this congressional session. I look forward to that important work.

As the GSEs purchase larger mortgages and take on more risk, it is incumbent that this Congress produce legislation that creates a world- class

regulator for these enterprises and fully protects U.S. taxpayers. We have heard from both the Treasury Secretary and the President about the need for this reform. This House has passed legislation making that reform law. I urge my colleagues in the Senate to follow our example.

Let me close by saying the bottom line, I believe, is we must not only take the measures we do today, which are going to offer real solutions, but also do whatever we can to increase and encourage optimism among Americans. That's what we need. Hope has been mentioned very often in this Presidential campaign. Our message needs to be to the American people that our economy is strong. There are businesses that are ready to hire, ready to invest, ready to buy new technology. There is a legitimate reason for optimism today, and we should promote that optimism.

Mr. Speaker, let me conclude by commending President Bush, Chairman Frank, Chairman Rangel, Ranking Member McCrery, and all the Republican and Democratic leadership of the House for coming together so quickly for this stimulus package. There is hope for America. There is reason for optimism. This package, I believe, will contribute to that optimism and that hope.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, at this time I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hensarling).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Neugebauer).

(Mr. NEUGEBAUER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Pence).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Campbell).

Mr. Speaker, at this time I yield to the gentlewoman from West Virginia (Mrs. Capito) the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, let me say this to the membership on both sides. I believe that we've come together in a bipartisan way to pass this legislation today because we have confidence in America. We have confidence in the American people. We believe the American people have a right to have confidence.

And I would say whether we're Members or Americans, I would say to all of us, you have every reason to have confidence in this country. You have every reason to have confidence in the workers of this country, their innovative ability and their ability to produce and compete in the world economy. You have every reason to be confident in the American economic system.

That's the message that I heard in New York City from many institutions that said they had money to loan. There are companies out there who are making money, that want to hire people, that want to build new plants, that want to expand, that want to buy equipment, that want to invest in new technology, but because of what they read in the paper, not because of their balance sheet, but because of what they're hearing is that things may get worse, there is a lack of confidence out there. I don't believe that it is entirely justified.

This country has challenges. This economy has weaknesses, and we've talked about those. But our underlying fundamental economic system and our financial system is sound. And I hope by us today joining together in a bipartisan way to pass this legislation we'll be saying to the American people, your Congress has confidence in you and the economy.

I thank the gentleman for his kind and generous remarks. I especially thank him for his tremendous leadership, because under his leadership we are able today to vote on something that is relevant to the lives of the American people.

I commend Leader Boehner for his leadership as well. It has been a privilege to work in a bipartisan way to help relieve the pain of the American people.

For a long time now, homemakers, homeowners, and hard workers across America have known that there is a problem in our economy. They've had a hard time making ends meet, living paycheck to paycheck, with rising costs for gasoline, for groceries, for health care, you name it. American families felt this pain early on, and they knew that our economy was facing perhaps a serious downturn, but a downturn nonetheless.

On December 7, actually, I remember because my seventh grandbaby was born that day, Thomas Vincent, on December 7 we had a meeting, a bipartisan meeting with leaders from the business community, economists, leaders of industry, of labor, the academic community, people representing workers in the diversity of our country, and we talked about what we could do to head off a serious downturn in our economy. We knew from that meeting that it would have to be timely, that we would need to act quickly; that it would have to be targeted, that it would put money in the pockets of hardworking Americans who would immediately spend the money to meet their needs, inject demand into the economy to help create jobs; and it had to be temporary. The tax incentives in the package would have to be such that they would have to be acted upon in this calendar year so that the full impact could be felt for job creation and stimulus to the economy. Previous stimulus packages have not had that. They had a 2-year period of time in which the incentives would work, and therefore they lost impact. Previous stimulus packages did not have a cap on who received the rebate, or the tax cut as Mr. Bachus calls it. And so, therefore, a lot of money went into the hands of people who never really spent it and injected it back into the economy.

But this is timely. We're acting very quickly, not hastily, but quickly and firmly in a disciplined way on a package that has as its one criterion for anything that's in the package, is it stimulus, is it stimulus, and does it meet the test of enabling us to move in a timely fashion, targeted and temporary.

I was pleased that, working with my colleague, Mr. Boehner, and with the administration under the leadership of Secretary Paulson, that we were able to come to terms on how we would proceed. We could only do that because of the extraordinary respect in which Mr. Rangel is held, and Mr. McCrery, and them working cooperatively as they have for a while. We could only include in the package those features that related to the subprime crisis because of the extraordinary reputation of the distinguished chairman of the Financial Services Committee, Mr. Frank, understanding the terms under which we wanted to proceed, and respecting his expertise in those areas and those of Mr. Bachus as well. So, this has been bipartisan in terms of committee, in terms of working together over time, and bipartisan in terms of the leadership working together a short time frame, benefiting from the work that had gone before us.

It's important in this package to have a level of discipline, because one of the features that the economists, business leaders, labor leaders, et cetera, had told us in the course of all these discussions is you don't want to do anything in a stimulus package that will hinder your ability to act in a recovery.

So, it's important that this bill not get overloaded. I have a full agenda of things I would like to have in the package, but we have to contain the price, and in doing so, you have to establish your priorities. And the priority we had was to put $28 billion in the hands of 35 million families who had never received a rebate or a child tax credit before, and to do it quickly. That was our priority. Because if you do, to do that, again, is true stimulus. All the other things, while worthy and important, again, we made a decision, because that's where we could find our common ground. But if we heap too much on top of that package, it will then take us deeply into debt.

And PAYGO is important to us. And while in recession the PAYGO law allows for us to take certain initiatives, you don't want to abuse that by again adding to the deficit for items in the package that are not strictly timely, temporary, targeted or stimulus.

So, I think we have a good product here. It's all a compromise. It's all about decisions and priorities that have to be established. But it also speaks to the fact that we really do, hopefully, we need to work in a bipartisan way, to have a very aggressive initiative for job creation in our country. And we've already laid the framework for that in a bipartisan way. We've had overwhelming votes in this Congress, for example, on SCHIP, expanding health care to many more children in America. Health care needs health-trained professionals at every aspect of the delivery of health care. So, it creates good-paying jobs in America when you expand health care accessibility to Americans.

Education, innovation, all of those are about keeping us competitive, keeping us number one; again, creating good-paying jobs in America so that we prevail in the global marketplace.

And we talk about infrastructure, that we must have a package for rebuilding our roads, our highways, mass transit, taking initiatives for new projects as well, creating good-paying jobs in America. And global warming. We, as a generation and as a Congress, will be judged by posterity as to how we deal with the issue of a global climate crisis. This affords for us a whole new world of job opportunity where we're all on the ground floor, largely, where we go into urban America and our inner cities or we go into rural America and create good-paying green jobs that are new.

It's about being entrepreneurial about this, to thinking in new and different ways about how our decisions have to be seen in the light of ``do they create good-paying jobs in America.''

So, again, while we stand ready to present a stimulus, if need be, we want to, in the long term, not that long term but longer term than a stimulus, create jobs to avoid such a downturn and, in any event, raise the living standard of the American people. And so, whether it's about this rebate and

what it means to these hardworking Americans who are facing rising costs and need help to live paycheck to paycheck, and I'm telling you, that's not just the working poor, that is the middle class in America. This is a middle-class tax rebate bill. We call it the Recovery, Rebate and Economic Stimulus for the American People Act. It targets the middle class and those who aspire to it. And for that same middle class, we must have an ongoing aggressive initiative for job creation so that across the board America's families have the confidence that they need. Because in a downturn, what you need is confidence. You need consumer confidence. You need confidence in the markets. And as Mr. Rangel always tells me, a message of confidence is given to the American people when Members of Congress can work with the administration in a bipartisan way to put the American people first.

So, I thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I thank Mr. Frank, Mr. Rangel, Mr. McCrery, and Mr. Bachus, and to my colleagues, Mr. Serrano, Ms. Velazquez, and Charlie Rangel, again, for all their leadership in terms of the territories, which is a very important part of this legislation.

I think it's a good day for us here. And let's hope that the Senate will take its lead from us and be disciplined, focused, fiscally responsible, and act in a timely, temporary, and targeted way on behalf of meeting the needs of the American people.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 5140) to provide economic stimulus through recovery rebates to individuals, incentives for business investment, and an increase in conforming and FHA loan limits.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that we extend the debate by 80 minutes, resulting in 2 hours equally divided between both sides.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to yield 20 minutes of my time to be controlled by the chairman of the Financial Services Committee, Congressman Barney Frank of Massachusetts.

Mr. Speaker, I have asked the nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation to make available to the public a technical explanation of the provisions of H.R. 5140. The technical explanation expresses the committee's understanding and legislative intent behind this important legislation. This explanation, document JCX-5-08, is currently available on the Joint Committee's Web site.

Mr. Speaker, I'll reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

First, I want to thank Mr. McCrery for getting his views and his willingness to listen to mine, with both of us understanding that, at the end of the day, that people are not concerned with our differences, but they are concerned about the United States Government responding to their needs. And to that extent, of course, I want to thank our Speaker in recognizing the legislative and political pressures as she negotiated with using the skills of Secretary of the Treasury Hank Paulson and working with the distinguished minority leader in recognizing that we were a part of trying to make certain that the American people knew that we weren't able to do everything that we wanted to do, but we did not ignore our obligations to come together with some type of a compromise. And I think it was historic as we expanded to reach people who would have been ignored had it not been for changes that were made in how we get the money to people.

So I want to thank the leadership of the House, but make it abundantly clear that all of us thought, at the time that we agreed to this agreement, that the Senate was prepared to accept our agreement without change. It's my understanding now, as we talk, that the Senate Finance Committee is marking up their own stimulus package, and I assume that it will not deviate substantially from what the leadership of this House has done. But I do hope that it's made abundantly clear that the House has done its responsibility, and that if there's anything that impedes the Senate from complying to the mandate that the President has set on our Congress, that they too have an obligation to make the type of compromises that's necessary so that we can move forward.

I also would like to add that sometimes it's very difficult in being chairman of a committee that not only do we have partisan differences, but we have differences among my own party.

And while we are reaching out to provide assistance to people who are suffering economically, I cannot help but remind myself that these people were not selected out of any compassion of wanting to help the poor and those in need.

Indeed, the main reason that these people are targeted is because economists, conservative or liberal, agree that the assistance that we are giving has to be timely, fast. It has to be targeted to people that are going to have to spend the money, and it has to be temporary so that we don't do severe additional damage to the deficit.

I submit to you, Mr. Speaker, that we are talking about the heart of America, hardworking American middle-class people that are now being targeted because they can't afford to take care of their families.

Yes, they have to spend the money to put food on the table, put shoes on their kids' feet, put clothing on their backs, to pay for shelter. And I submit that we shouldn't walk away from this House, because we give economic assistance, proud of the fact that millions of people in this country find themselves in that predicament and for that the Congress cannot be charged.

And I do hope after we finish going through this bipartisan effort, which we have to do, that we might find some way to tell these people that we are going to provide relief without considering a stimulus, but we are going to provide relief because it's the right thing to do.

And no man and woman in this country that works hard every day should have to be stigmatized that they can't afford to provide a different type of lifestyle for their family because they can't meet their obligations.

And so I hope in the way we, in a bipartisan way, have cooperated with this administration, that they recognize that the Tax Code, which is tilted toward the wealthy and therefore supposed to create the jobs of the wealth for the middle class, didn't work this time. And maybe we can think in terms of how we can bring more equity to the moneys that are available to disposable income to those people who work hard every day and not have to target them because of their inability to meet their needs, but to know that we did what we should have done, and that's to provide them with the dignity and the means to continue to contribute toward the economy of this great Nation of ours.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I would like at this time to recognize the majority whip from the sovereign State of South Carolina (Mr. Clyburn) for 2 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, as we move forward to pass this historic piece of legislation that has been requested of us, I am, indeed, honored to yield 1 minute to our Speaker, who, on December 9, called us together to decide what we should be doing if, indeed, the economy was moving the way it has. Not only did she bring us together, but she brought Republicans and Democrats together in dealing with the administration in a way that some of us never thought was possible. It's a great honor for me to support and yield 1 minute to our distinguished Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the committee has reported out a bill that reduces corporate taxes from 35 percent to 30.5. I'm not saying that we have all of the answers, but it does challenge the administration to come forward either with support, opposition, or compromise. But I agree with the last speaker.

Mr. Speaker, it's my great honor to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Larson), the vice chairman of our caucus, a leader in the Democratic Party, a leader in the Congress and in our country.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Emanuel), the Chair of our Democratic Caucus. No one has received more creative ideas of how to improve this legislation than him. But I want to thank him publicly for his leadership and directness toward this bipartisan historic legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to share with the gentleman from Indiana the fact that we should blame the Congress for this because clearly we have had no leadership from the executive branch. So I guess the blame has to fall on us. For those who are concerned about tax reform, we waited 7 years, and we have got nothing. So either accept what we have got, or ask the President to at least bring something to the Congress.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. McDermott), who is a subcommittee chairman of this committee, that has fought hard for the creation of jobs but has just as much compassion for those who, through no fault of their own, have lost their jobs. I publicly thank you for your service.

(Mr. McDERMOTT asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield 2 minutes to Mr. Levin of Michigan and congratulate him for the outstanding contribution that he makes to the committee and the Congress.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to have the remainder of my time be controlled by the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Larson).