Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I hereby submit, for the Record, the text of my report to you on the activities of the U.S. Delegation to the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly, held in early July in Astana, Kazakhstan. I want to thank you for allowing me to serve as the head of this delegation, and to express my gratitude to our colleague in the other chamber, Senator Ben Cardin, for serving as the deputy head of the delegation.

I will refrain from repeating here the details of our trip, which can be found in the report, but I would like to make three brief points.

First, I want to praise the work of my 10 colleagues who participated on the delegation, namely Mr. Aderholt, Mr. McIntyre, Ms. Solis and Mr. Butterfield who serve with me on the Helsinki Commission, as well as Mr. Wamp, Ms. Loretta Sanchez, Ms. Watson, Ms. Bordallo and Ms. Moore. All were active at the meeting, either speaking or introducing resolutions on issues of concern or making amendments to the initiatives of other delegations. Our colleague Hilda Solis deserves special praise for seeking and being elected to chair a committee in the OSCE PA this coming year, as does Gwen Moore for her many initiatives that kept her busy.

Second, I want to stress to all my colleagues how useful engagement in world affairs is, and the degree to which it advances U.S. interests by being out there, ready to discuss, to debate and ultimately to cooperate in making this a better world. In the framework of the Organization for Security and Cooperation for Europe, or the OSCE as it is often known, there is a strong parliamentary dimension that allows us to engage our allies and friends in Europe and Canada, and including the countries of the Caucasus and Central Asia. We discuss everything from human rights and democracy, to energy and the environment, to regional security and terrorism. I invite my colleagues to consider joining me for next year's session of the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly in Vilnius, Lithuania.

Third, I want to say a word about Kazakhstan, which served as this year's host. Kazakhstan is a large, resource-rich and strategically located country, and a country that wishes to play a stronger role in the OSCE and in world affairs generally. The U.S. delegation used its presence in Astana to welcome that fact, and to express our willingness to work with Kazakhstan to that end. At the same time, the Assembly meeting provided an opportunity to stress the need for Kazakhstan to make greater progress regarding human rights and political reforms, in line with its OSCE commitments but also with specific promises its leaders made when the OSCE designated Kazakhstan to chair the organization in 2010.

The final declaration of the OSCE PA Annual Session can be found on the Assembly's website or by contacting the Helsinki Commission, which I chair. Again, thank you Madam Speaker, for giving me the opportunity to lead this delegation, which accomplished a great deal.

July 21, 2008.

Hon. Nancy Pelosi,

Speaker of the House of Representatives,

Washington, DC.

Dear Madam Speaker: I write to thank you for designating me

Head of the U.S. Delegation to the Seventeenth Annual Session

of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Organization for

Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE PA), and to report

to you on the work of our bipartisan delegation. The

delegation participated fully in the activity of the

Assembly's Standing Committee, the plenary sessions and the

Assembly's three General Committees,

Joining me in leading the delegation was the Helsinki

Commission Co-Chairman, Senator Benjamin L. Cardin. Other

Helsinki Commissioners who also participated include

Representatives Robert B. Aderholt, Mike McIntyre, Hilda L.

Solis and G.K. Butterfield. They were joined by

Representatives Zach Wamp, Loretta Sanchez, Diane Watson,

Madeleine Z. Bordallo and Gwen S. Moore.

This year's Annual Session, hosted by the Parliament of

Kazakhstan from June 29 to July 3, brought together 227

parliamentarians from 50 of the 56 OSCE States. The

designated theme for this year's gathering was ``Transparency

in the OSCE.''

The Standing Committee, which is the leadership body of the

Assembly composed of the Heads of Delegations representing

the OSCE participating States and the elected officers, met

prior to the Annual Session. Chaired by the OSCE PA

President, Swedish parliamentarian Goran Lennmarker, the

committee heard reports from the Assembly's Treasurer, German

parliamentarian Hans Raidel, and from the Secretary General,

R. Spencer Oliver of the United States. The Assembly

continues to operate well within its overall budget

guidelines and to receive positive assessments from auditors

on financial management. The Standing Committee unanimously

approved the proposed budget for 2008/2009, which provides

for increased expenditures of just under seven percent to

cover inflation and a small increase in secretariat staff.

The Standing Committee also heard reports from the Special

Representatives of the OSCE PA on a variety of issues of

concern. I presented a summary of my activities as Special

Representative on Mediterranean Affairs, which included a

recent Commission hearing, a briefing on the plight of Iraqi

refugees and my participation on the congressional visit you

led to Israel in May, marking that country's 60th

anniversary. Similarly, Rep. Solis spoke in her capacity as

the Special Representative on Migration, highlighting recent

Commission hearings on women migrants and on regional impacts

and opportunities for migrants. Rep. Christopher H. Smith,

the Special Representative on Human Trafficking Issues, was

unable to be present in Astana and asked that his written

report be circulated to delegations. It highlights visits to

Bosnia, Romania, Russia and Ukraine as well as a recent

Commission hearing on combating the sexual exploitation of

children. Senator Cardin attended the Standing Committee in

his capacity as an OSCE PA Vice President.

In my capacity as Head of the U.S. Delegation at the

Standing Committee, I welcomed the decision of the Assembly

to hold an event in Washington on the upcoming U.S. elections

immediately following a September meeting of the OSCE PA in

Toronto, Canada.

With the Standing Committee's business concluded, Assembly

President Lennmarker opened the Inaugural Plenary Session,

noting the importance of holding its first Annual Session in

the Central Asian region. The delegates were, in turn,

welcomed by Kazakhstan's President, Nursultan Nazarbayev, who

noted the importance of parliamentary diplomacy in democracy-

building and further humanitarian and legal norms. The two

Speakers of the Kazakhstan Parliament, Kassym-Jomart Tokayev

of the Senate and Aslan Mussin of the Mazhilis, also

addressed the delegates. OSCE Secretary General Marc Perrin

de Brichambaut of France reviewed the work of the OSCE and

took questions from the parliamentarians.

Members of the U.S. Delegation actively participated in the

work of the Assembly's three General Committees: Political

Affairs and Security; Economic Affairs, Science, Technology

and Environment; and Democracy, Human Rights and Humanitarian

Questions. Each committee considered a draft resolution as

well as 18 supplementary items circulated by delegates prior

to the opening of the Astana meeting. One additional

supplementary item was considered during the opening plenary.

Five of the supplementary items were resolutions proposed

by members of the U.S. Delegation: Encouraging Transparency

in the Extractive Industries, by Senator Cardin; Recognizing

the Economic, Civic and Social Contributions of Mirgrants, by

Rep. Solis; Strengthening Efforts to Combat Trafficking in

Human Beings and Addressing the Special Needs of Child

Victims by Rep. Smith (and, in his absence, Rep. Wamp);

Urging Adoption of the Paris Club Commitment Regarding

Vulture Funds by Rep. Moore; and my own resolution Expressing

Concern Over the Security Environment in Georgia. All were

adopted with few if any amendments.

Parliamentarians from Russia, I should note, very strongly

opposed my resolution on Georgia, as did some European

parliamentarians, but I remained firm, pointing to the

moderately worded text and noting past willingness of U.S.

delegates to consider and support as warranted resolutions

critical of U.S. policies. Recent Russian action in the

Caucasus was of sufficient concern to a majority of the

delegates present that the resolution was ultimately adopted.

U.S. delegates were also instrumental in garnering support

for Supplementary items by others, including a Canadian

resolution on Afghanistan, a Ukrainian resolution on

Holodomor (Ukrainian Famine-Genocide), and a Belgian

resolution on Combating the Sexual Exploitation of Children.

In addition, the U.S. Delegation introduced 20 amendments to

various resolutions, covering issues from pollinator decline

to religious freedom. Virtually all of them were adopted, and

by dividing our work almost every member of the U.S.

Delegation managed at least one resolution or amendment in

committee. I would like to particularly note the

exceptionally strong effort made by Rep. Moore, who had her

own supplementary item and numerous amendments, including

those calling for international action to reduce maternal

mortality which were agreed to be a basis for a resolution at

next year's Annual Session.

Belgian Senator Anne-Marie Lizin presented a report in

committee on her latest activity as the OSCE PA Special

Representative on Guantanamo Bay. Rep. Butterfield responded

for the U.S. Delegation, expressing appreciation for her work

and describing the latest Supreme Court, congressional and

non-governmental efforts dealing with this stain on the U.S.

human rights record.

Rep. Solis served as Acting Chair of the General Committee

on Democracy, Human Rights and Humanitarian Questions during

the Annual Session, and she was subsequently elected to be

the committee chair for the coming year. Rep. Solis is the

first female Member of the U.S. Congress to hold a leadership

position in the OSCE PA.

The OSCE PA Special Representative on Gender Issues, Tone

Tingsgaard (Sweden), hosted a working lunch to discuss gender

issues during which she presented her thoughts for future

action in the OSCE PA on these issues. The U.S. Delegation

was well represented at this event.

The final Astana Declaration, attached, was adopted by the

participants at the Assembly's closing plenary and reflects

the initiatives and input of the U.S. Delegation. In line

with the theme for the session, it calls for greater

transparency in numerous fields, such as political or

historical archives and the use of private military

contractors, as well as within the OSCE itself. The

declaration also calls for concrete steps to address global

climate change, improve waste management and prepare for

potential nuclear accidents and natural disasters.

Mr. Joao Soares, a parliamentarian from Portugal, was

elected to serve as OSCE PA President for the coming year.

Soares brings to the office extensive experience, having been

a member of the Portuguese parliament from 1987 to 1990 and

again since 2002, formerly a member of the European

Parliament and of the Bureau of the European Parliament, and

the mayor of Lisbon from 1995 to 2002. The delegates at the

Annual Session also re-elected Pia Christmas-Moeller of

Denmark, as a Vice president of the Assembly along with three

new Vice Presidents: Kassym-Jomart Tokayev of Kazakhstan;

Wolfgang Grossruck of Austria and Oleh Bilorus of Ukraine.

The OSCE Chair-in-Office, Finnish Foreign Minister

Alexander Stubb, addressed the delegates during the closing

plenary. He urged movement from managing unresolved conflicts

in Georgia and Moldova to solving them. He also asked for

continued support for OSCE border-management training in

Central Asia as well as for bolstering cooperative security

in the Euro-Atlantic region.

While the Delegation's work focused heavily on OSCE PA

matters, the venue presented an opportunity to advance U.S.

interests and express U.S. concerns with our Kazakhstani

hosts. The U.S. Delegation had meetings with President

Nursultan Nazarbayev, Prime Minister Karim Masimov and

Secretary of State Kanat Saudabayev as well as with prominent

Kazakh human rights activists and opposition leaders. Members

of the delegation also visited Beit Rachel, the largest

synagogue in Central Asia, and met with the chief rabbi and

the deputy imam from the Islamic community to discuss inter-

faith tolerance and protection of religious freedom in

Kazakhstan, especially for religious minorities.

The U.S. delegation held a press conference in Astana,

during which we conveyed our willingness to work with

Kazakhstan throughout its OSCE chairmanship in 2010. We

strongly urged, however, greater progress regarding human

rights and political reforms in keeping with the commitments

Kazakhstan made at the Madrid OSCE Ministerial in November

2007, where the decision on the 2010 chairmanship was made.

Senator Cardin also used the visit to Kazakhstan as an

opportunity to visit nearby Pakistan. He was joined by fellow

Commissioners McIntyre and Aderholt as well as

Representatives Wamp and Sanchez. The delegation met with

President Pervez Musharraf, Prime Minister Syed Yousaf Raza

Gillani, and U.S. Ambassador to Pakistan Anne W. Patterson.

During the meetings, the delegation focused on U.S.-Pakistan

relations, regional security, as well as human rights and

democratic development.

I hope this summary of the U.S. Delegation's activity is

useful to you, and let me thank you and your staff again for

making this trip possible. The Eighteenth Annual Session of

the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly will be held early next July

in Vilnius, Lithuania, and I hope we can count on your

continued support in ensuring that U.S. interests abroad are

advanced through active congressional participation in the

Madam Speaker, I rise today to introduce a resolution memorializing the 80th anniversary of the Okeechobee Hurricane and the tragic losses of life from the catastrophic event. The experience of the Okeechobee Hurricane touches the lives of so many of my constituents and those throughout the Florida delegation, as well as my colleagues representing territories throughout the Caribbean.

This September marks 80 years since the Okeechobee Hurricane, also known as Hurricane San Felipe Segundo, ravaged Florida, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, the Bahamas, and numerous islands of the Caribbean. At this point in 1928, a number of factors contributed to this hurricane having the second largest death toll in United States history ever recorded by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Tragically, over 4,000 lives were lost along the path of the Okeechobee Hurricane.

Madam Speaker, Floridians living near Lake Okeechobee in communities that I now represent experienced a devastating loss of life when the hurricane led to extensive breaches of the levees surrounding the lake. Of the more than 3,000 casualties in the continental United States, more than 75 percent were migrant workers near Lake Okeechobee who were overwhelmingly African American. The lack of capacity to respond to the devastation of the storm and racial overtures of the era led to extensive disparities in the treatment of victims of this hurricane. Many African Americans were buried in poorly marked mass graves, including one site in West Palm Beach where over 670 unfortunate souls were laid to rest. Similar graves for white victims of the tragedy were visibly memorialized, whereas many African American graves were forgotten and only recognized many years later. When considering the development of a community, neglecting these darker moments of our history can overlook important lessons, as we saw with the devastation of Hurricane Katrina. Beyond recognition for all victims of the Okeechobee Hurricane tragedy, their loss should inform us how to prevent future injustices in disaster response and mitigation.

The potential for devastation due to failing infrastructure following similar natural disasters exists in many places throughout our nation. Thus, it is absolutely vital that we learn from the past and invest in strengthening our vulnerable water management infrastructure to prevent future tragic losses. We must also prioritize initiatives to educate migrant workers, economically disadvantaged communities, and others who may be disproportionately impacted by hurricanes and other natural disasters.

Madam Speaker, I call on my colleagues to join me memorializing the tragic loss of the Okeechobee Hurricane and reaffirming our commitment to protecting all inhabitants of the United States from the devastation of hurricanes. This resolution is the first step to encouraging our respective localities to prioritize natural disaster preparedness and education economically disadvantaged communities. I look forward to working with my colleagues toward its expeditious passage.

Madam Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 1362 and ask for its immediate consideration.

For the purpose of debate only, Madam Speaker, I yield the customary 30 minutes to my colleague, classmate and good friend, Representative Diaz-Balart. All time yielded during consideration of the rule is for debate only. I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I also ask unanimous consent that all Members be given 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on House Resolution 1362.

Madam Speaker, House Resolution 1362 provides for consideration of the Senate amendment to H.R. 5501, the Tom Lantos and Henry J. Hyde United States Global Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Reauthorization Act of 2008.

The rule provides 1 hour of general debate on the motion controlled by the Committee on Foreign Affairs.

Madam Speaker, the Global Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria Reauthorization Act is a comprehensive and fiscally responsible way to continue and advance America's leadership in the global fight against HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria.

I might add that the two persons for whom this act is named were persons that exemplified and manifested throughout their careers the need for the Foreign Affairs Committee to proceed in a comprehensive and responsible manner.

The bill authorizes $48 billion to combat HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria for fiscal year 09 through fiscal year 2013, and includes guidelines and goals for reducing the burden of these diseases.

The bill supports culturally competent prevention and treatment measures that are based on empirical evidence rather than ideology.

Additionally, the underlying bill includes provisions that support a multi-faceted approach to treating and preventing the three diseases, and encourages foreign and domestic health care entities to collaborate.

The bill prevents foreign governments from unjustly profiting from U.S. aid and prohibits them from taxing the funds that the bill authorizes.

Lastly, the bill seeks to improve oversight, transparency and accountability in assessing the progress of United States global HIV/ AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria programs.

Madam Speaker, the United States has become an important player in combating these global epidemics. However, although the underlying bill has bipartisan support, some have argued that it is imprudent to invest in global health programs while we are experiencing so many problems domestically. Nothing, in my opinion, could be further from the truth. Investing in global health ultimately leads to communities and countries that are more economically, socially and politically stable. In this globally connected era, it is imperative that we address health and development in foreign countries.

Malaria was virtually eradicated in most of the West more than 50 years ago. In fact, the Washington D.C. area was particularly vulnerable to this disease. Effectively resolving this health threat undoubtedly contributed to the ability of our country and other Western countries to thrive and prosper. Therefore, it comes as no surprise that the 40 percent of men, women and children who are at risk for contracting malaria live in poorer countries, with less access to education, preventative health care, and treatment.

As we consider this important bill, we would be remiss if we did not look at it as an opportunity to think about how we can improve our response to HIV/AIDS and other debilitating diseases that affect people in this country.

The fight against HIV/AIDS is also a fight against the health, economic and educational disparities that continue to exist in communities that have been historically underprivileged.

Nearly three decades after the first national reports on HIV/AIDS, the disease has reached every corner of the world and has claimed an estimated 25 million lives.

Although the scope of HIV/AIDS has changed, the link between socioeconomic disparity and those who contract and die from the disease remains consistent around the world. In our hemisphere alone, whether you're talking about Honduras or Haiti or my home State of Florida, people of African, indigenous, and Hispanic ancestry are disproportionately contracting and dying from HIV/AIDS.

Madam Speaker, this issue hits close to home for me, as Florida has consistently ranked third in the Nation in the number of reported cases of HIV/AIDS. In 2006, blacks accounted for 45 percent of all AIDS cases in men and 69 percent in women, which is more than any other racial or ethnic group in the State of Florida. Sadly, in that same year, the HIV/AIDS case rate among black women was 17 times higher than among white women.

In the absence of a cure, education and increased access to medication are the most powerful and cost-effective ways to treat and prevent the spread of HIV/AIDS around the world. Yet the resistance of antiretroviral drugs and other treatment has not translated into accessibility. Less than 25 percent of patients in developing countries and 30 percent of patients domestically receive antiretroviral treatment. Even more, the consequences of allowing people to remain ignorant about HIV/AIDS has proven to be just as deadly as the virus itself.

Consider this: Political leaders of countries particularly stricken by HIV/AIDS have told their citizens that HIV/AIDS can be controlled by consuming garlic, lemon juice, and beet root. Such a statement sounds unquestionably absurd to most. However, around the world, people continue to be misinformed about preventing and treating this disease. They allow fear to halt open and honest discussions about this disease.

Personally, I have hosted three town hall meetings in the last year and a half in the congressional district that I'm privileged to represent. At each of them, activists, specialists, religious leaders and the general public have openly discussed and asked questions about how to address HIV/AIDS in their community. These fora have been educational and meaningful tools in fighting this disease, and more are needed.

I might add that at those fora, Madam Speaker, some courageous young women that are HIV/AIDS infected appeared and gave their testimonies, compelling in respect to their own issues, and informative as to those that were in the audience to hear people who are living with this disease actually put forward ideas about the need for greater education, information and treatment.

As a leader in global health and human rights, Madam Speaker, this country, all of us, must not allow ignorance, stigmatization, and unequal access to medication to continue in this country or abroad. By supporting this bill and the underlying bill, we're investing in global health, the global economy, and our global community as a whole.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 3 minutes to my good friend and fellow Rules Committee member, the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern).

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to my good friend, the gentlewoman from South Dakota (Ms. Herseth Sandlin).

Madam Speaker, I would like to compliment the speaker, Ms. Herseth Sandlin, for pointing out the needs that Native Americans have. It is extremely important, the issues that she spoke to. And at another point in time, I am hopeful that we will address the diabetes question with greater strength in this body's involvement.

At this time, Madam Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 2 minutes to my good friend from the Virgin Islands, Dr. Donna Christensen, who has been involved in not just this particular issue but all of our health care issues in a fashion that few Members are involved in this body.

Madam Speaker, at this time I am very pleased to yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters), my good friend who on yesterday and days previous led the fight on having us get relief in this country in foreclosure and cities having an opportunity to participate in a meaningful way in trying to help those in the need area of affordable housing.

I yield the gentlelady 30 additional seconds.

I would inquire of the gentleman from Florida if he has any remaining speakers.

I'm the last speaker for this side, Madam Speaker, and I'll reserve my time until the gentleman from Florida has closed for his side and has yielded back his time.

Madam Speaker, this is a good rule for a critically important bill. The sooner that the House approves this rule, the sooner the U.S. can continue to save and improve millions of lives around the world and here at home.

The Global Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria Reauthorization Act has received overwhelming support across the political spectrum because it balances fiscal responsibility, oversight and comprehensive health care programs.

I commend my colleagues on both sides of the aisle for supporting a bill that uses scientifically proven strategies, international cooperation and cultural competence to combat some of the most devastating diseases in recent history.

We executed an aggressive response to the tuberculosis and malaria epidemics in this country because we understood that it would allow us to be a stronger and better Nation. Although we have made tremendous progress in our country, the battle is far from over.

As the richest nation in the world, we now have the privilege of helping other countries on their road to development. We must use the knowledge that we gain from these partnerships to address the disparities that continue to deprive countless men, women and children in this country and abroad of a healthy and productive life.

I urge a ``yes'' vote on the previous question and on the rule that brings the underlying bill to the House.

Madam Speaker, before I close, I want to address this request of my good friend and colleague from Florida about energy. What he is saying is, and the people on his side of the aisle, is immediately upon the adoption of this resolution, the House shall, without intervention of any point of order, consider in the House the bill, H.R. 6107, to direct the Secretary of the Interior to establish and implement a competitive oil and gas leasing program that will result in an environmentally sound program for the exploration, development, and production of the oil and gas resources of the Coastal Plain of Alaska, and for other purposes.

Now this bill that we're here on, Madam Speaker, is named after two of the most distinguished persons that have ever served in this body. My colleague from Florida and all of us that are here knew both of these men and

knew their seriousness when they came to this floor about matters. We commemorate their memory with this bill. But what we do is we denigrate their memory by bringing up political hyperbole, political grandstanding, exhausting political hyperbole and bumper stickerism. Enough of this.

Everybody knows that we have put forward, on the side that I am privileged to represent as Democrats, numerous measures dealing with these matters. We all know that there are 68 million acres off the shore that are leased already to oil companies. Footnote. Has anybody asked any of these oil companies whether or not they want to drill in these areas? And in ANWR there are 23 million acres that are available.

How dare we come here with this pitiful excuse for a previous question and say to the American people that on a matter of this consequence, on a matter of dealing with malaria, tuberculosis and HIV/ AIDS that we would come here and denigrate the name of the two persons that we commemorate with such a foolish proposition. It makes absolutely no sense.

Now we will hear, obviously from now until the time that we're out of session, from my Republican colleagues about energy. And I have said to them repeatedly and over and over and over again, that all the hyperbole, switchgrass, deed exhaustion, coal, shale, offshore, ANWR, all of those things, geothermal, I can name them. All of us in here can name them. Many of those are things in the future. All of us know that we have a crisis in this country. Every man and woman in the House of Representatives and in the United States would like to solve that crisis. We know that speculators are involved in this. We put forward energy legislation. Nancy Pelosi led with energy legislation. Markey and Dingell have been on the floor repeatedly with energy legislation. We are here about AIDS, and someone would dare come here and talk about energy. That's crazy.

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

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 1368 and ask for its immediate consideration.

For the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to my good friend, the ranking Republican of the Rules Committee, Representative Dreier.

All time yielded during consideration of the rule is for debate only. I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I also ask unanimous consent, Mr. Speaker, that all Members be given 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on House Resolution 1368.

Mr. Speaker, as the Clerk just read, House Resolution 1368 provides that section 803 of the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 shall not apply during the remainder of the 110th Congress.

This resolution is needed today because of a procedural gimmick which was stuck into the Republican Medicare prescription drug bill in the dead of night shortly before the bill found its way to the floor back in 2003. The provision was a way for Republicans to get conservatives in their party to support an unpopular bill that may very well be the largest campaign donor payback program in the history of this institution. However, even this provision failed to prevent one of the most shameful nights in the history of this institution as arms were twisted and threats delivered into the wee hours of the morning to get the votes needed to pass this bill.

Under current law, when the Medicare trustees project in two consecutive trustee reports that general revenues will exceed 45 percent of Medicare spending within a 7-year window, an expedited process is triggered to reduce the percentage. This expedited process, however, bypasses regular order in the House, as well as the Rules Committee. Once the percentage of Medicare funding coming from general revenues reaches 45 percent, the President is required to send legislation to the House and Senate that will address the matter. That bill must then be introduced by the House majority and minority leaders and referred to the appropriate committees.

The process by which that bill, or any bill meeting the requirements of the trigger, moves through the committee process and is discharged to the floor includes a privileged motion. The privileged motion requires only one-fifth of the House, or just 87 Members, to second the motion and force a vote on that motion that would bring the bill itself to the floor for a vote. Under the trigger, if this small minority of the House is successful and the motion passes the House, the bill would come to the floor within 3 legislative days and can be debated with up to 5 hours of general debate and 10 hours of debate on amendments.

Adding to the unprecedented nature of this provision, amendments are given blanket waivers with the only requirement being certification by the

Budget Committee that the bill will eliminate excess Medicare spending from general revenues. Astonishingly, the trigger waives the rules of the House and blocks Members from raising points of orders against the bill for earmark, PAYGO, or any other violation of House rules. All that a Member needs to do to force a vote on discharging a bill is introduce a bill titled ``To Respond to a Medicare Funding Warning.'' As long as that bill meets the requirements of the Budget Committee, then anyone, Democrat or Republican, may seek to disrupt the proceedings of the House. Realize, if the House fails to pass this resolution today, it will leave itself vulnerable to chaos and extraordinary political gamesmanship.

We will lay the groundwork to effectively becoming the Senate, stalled and unable to act as a victim of its own rules and procedures. Every moment of every day here in session, under the guise of trying to fix Medicare, a Member could move to discharge a bill which includes provisions that have nothing to do with Medicare. The only way to avoid this chaos and potential shutdown of the House in the 110th Congress is for the House to pass this resolution today.

What is perhaps most troubling about this entire process, Mr. Speaker, is that Congress fixed the revenue problem in a more comprehensive manner last week when the House and Senate both voted to override the President's veto on the Medicare Improvements for Patients and Providers Act. In that bill, Democrats, in a bipartisan fashion, removed waste, fraud and abuse in the Medicare advantage plan without hurting seniors. Under our leadership, seniors continue to have access to their doctors and prescription drugs without having their premiums raised or coverage reduced.

Very occasionally, Mr. Speaker, many of us talk with different people in our constituency. Last week I had an opportunity to talk with a physician in this city named Stern. And Dr. Stern indicated to me that I should, among other things, fight real hard to have people understand how effective Medicare is and what a single payer plan could do for this Nation. We talked considerably about this, and I'm delighted that I had an opportunity to be edified by someone that is in this profession.

But because of this Medicare trigger provision, a provision which was not in the House or Senate bill and was slipped in the conference, I will repeat, slipped in the conference during the dead of night, and I was here, Pete Stark and David Dreier, all of us were here when this happened, forced to deal with the legacy of, in my opinion, the misguided former majority.

I urge my colleagues, Mr. Speaker, to do the right thing and support this resolution.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds.

I want to say to my friend, the ranking member, everything debated in this House doesn't have to be a battle. Turning off this provision is the correct thing to do, and I will tell you why.

The perceived problem with Medicare funding has already been addressed. Let me repeat that. The perceived problem with Medicare funding has already been addressed. The recently enacted Medicare Improvements for Patients and Providers Act fixed the funding of Medicare to keep it below the 45 percent trigger.

Let me refresh your memory. On July 15, the House voted to override the President's veto of this important legislation. Every single member of the Rules Committee, Democrat and Republican, voted to override.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone), a member of the Energy and Commerce Committee and a champion of SCHIP, which required overriding twice a veto by the President.

Announcement By the Speaker Pro Tempore

Mr. Speaker, before I yield to the next speaker, I won't respond to the distinguished minority leader, but I would like to submit the statements of the AARP and the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare in support of this resolution.

National Committee To Preserve Social Security and

Medicare,

Washington, DC, July 24, 2008.

House of Representatives,

Washington, DC.

Dear Representative: On behalf of the millions of members

and supporters of the National Committee to Preserve Social

Security and Medicare, we strongly urge you to support H.

Res. 1368 when it comes to the House Floor. H. Res. 1368

would suspend section 803 of the Medicare Modernization Act

of 2003 (known as the Medicare ``trigger'') for the remainder

of the 110th Congress.

The Medicare ``trigger'' requires the Medicare Trustees to

include a finding in their annual report whenever they

project that general revenues will make up more than 45

percent of total Medicare funding within the first seven

years of the 75 year valuation period. This finding was made

in the two most recent annual reports, thus requiring the

President to submit legislation to Congress to bring the

federal contribution to Medicare down below the 45 percent

threshold. The legislation is subject to expedited procedures

designed to hasten its consideration. H. Res. 1368 would

suspend the Medicare ``trigger'' through the remainder of the

110th Congress.

The 45 percent threshold at which the ``trigger'' is set

was a completely arbitrary limit included in the Medicare

Modernization Act. There has never been a public debate on

whether it is appropriate to establish a cap on the federal

revenue contribution to the Medicare program at any level,

nor has any policy rationale been identified for selecting 45

percent as that federal contribution limit. The fact that

more than 45 percent of Medicare financing may come from

general revenues poses no more of a problem in itself than

the fact that 100 percent of the financing for defense,

veterans' benefits, education or most other federal programs

comes from general revenues. The problem facing Medicare is

the cost of health care, not how the cost is allocated

between revenue sources.

Limiting the federal government's contribution to the

Medicare program ignores Medicare's financing structure,

which was designed to rely on general revenues to finance

about 75 percent of Part B and Part D. This structure allows

the revenue raised by income taxes to shoulder a higher

portion of the responsibility for Medicare's funding, placing

the burden on a revenue source which is relatively

progressive and taxes all income.

If general revenue contributions are limited, the burden

would shift to beneficiaries, who are typically retirees on

fixed incomes or the disabled, generally the least able to

shoulder the burden of increased costs. In fact, about 70

percent of Medicare beneficiaries have incomes under $25,000

and 85 percent have incomes under $40,000. Nearly two-thirds

of older households have incomes under $20,000, and they are

already spending 30-50 percent of their incomes on health

care.

Arbitrarily cutting Medicare without getting at the root of

the continuing upward trend of health care costs is a

strategy for failure. It has real impacts on real people--

most of whom have nowhere else to go for coverage and limited

ability to pay higher medical costs, accounting for rising

senior bankruptcies.

Measuring Medicare's financial health solely by considering

the percentage of general revenues contributed to the program

produces a meaningless number, which will nonetheless be used

as a catalyst for policy decisions that could have a

devastating effect on the health care of seniors and people

with disabilities. For example, the 45 percent limit has been

triggered, in part, because more beneficiaries are being

treated in outpatient settings than in hospitals. While this

shift may disproportionately increase costs for Medicare Part

B, which accelerates the date at which the cap will be

reached, when compared with Part A, which is not counted in

the limit, it is generally considered a positive development

in health care.

A second major reason the cap was triggered is the Part D

prescription drug program. Although Part D is providing

needed drugs to millions of seniors, the cost of these drugs

is still rising much faster than general inflation. We

believe this is the result of the lack of a traditional

Medicare drug option, which the Medicare Modernization Act

specifically prohibited. In addition, the Act provided

billions of dollars in subsidies in order to entice private

insurance and drug companies into the Medicare program. While

passage last week of H.R. 6331 helped trim some of the most

egregious overpayments, billions in subsidies continue to

flow to private companies. Both the rising cost of drugs and

the private sector subsidies provide little or no benefit to

Medicare enrollees, yet they contribute to the rise in costs

both for beneficiaries and the federal government--and

accelerated the date at which the cap was reached.

Finally, the legislation submitted by the President in

response to the ``trigger'' could have devastating

consequences to Medicare beneficiaries with little oversight

by Congress. For example, Section 101(d) of the implementing

legislation directs the Secretary of the Department of Health

and Human Services to design and implement a new performance-

based reimbursement system for all Medicare providers as well

as a new ``incentive'' program intended to drive Medicare

beneficiaries to selected providers under this new system.

With this one provision, Congress would delegate to the

Secretary unprecedented authority to change the way the

Medicare program operates through the regulatory process,

rather than reserving such important decisions for Congress

and the Committees of jurisdiction.

The President's legislation also would dramatically expand

Medicare means-testing through a provision that has been

proposed repeatedly as part of the President's budget

submission only to be rejected by Congress. Section 301 of

the President's bill would expand means-testing to include

the Part D program, a policy which many experts believe would

be extremely difficult to administer, and further would not

allow the income limits to rise to reflect inflation. Income

limits that are not indexed ultimately affect far more people

than the ``wealthy'' they are originally designed to cover--a

fact well demonstrated by the current reach of the

Alternative Minimum Tax.

Medicare faces challenges in the future, but they are not

unique to the Medicare program--they reflect the same

pressures driving health care costs for those under age 65.

Addressing these challenges will not be advanced by a

contentious debate on the share of program costs funded

through general revenues. In fact, such a debate will

distract from the true challenge of Medicare: determining how

to provide high-quality health care for an aging population

in an era of rising health care costs.

We strongly urge the House to suspend the Medicare

``trigger'' by passing H. Res. 1368 and focus instead on

making health care affordable for all Americans.

Cordially,

Barbara B. Kennelly,

President & CEO.

Mr. Speaker, at this time I am very pleased to yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from North Dakota, a friend of mine and classmate, a member of the Committee on Ways and Means, Mr. Pomeroy.

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased at this time to yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from South Carolina, who is the chairperson of the Budget Committee, my good friend, Mr. Spratt.

I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. Speaker, at this time I am very pleased to yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from California, who is the chairman of the Health Subcommittee, Mr. Stark.

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

I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. Speaker, at this time I would yield to my good friend, the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Thompson), who is a member of the Ways and Means Committee, 2 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, at this time I am very pleased and privileged to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York, who I feel knows as much or more about this issue than anyone, the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means, Mr. Rangel.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 1 minute to the very distinguished gentleman from Texas, a member of my class and a member of the Committee on Ways and Means, Mr. Doggett.

I yield the gentleman an additional 1 minute.

I do not yield for that purpose.

I object.

I am going to be the last speaker.

Mr. Speaker, at this time I did have an additional speaker, and I would ask to yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Stark).

Mr. Speaker, I would inquire of my friend from California if he has any remaining speakers. I am the last speaker for our side, and I'm going to reserve my time until you have closed for your side.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of the time.

Mr. Speaker, I have sat and stood here with great amusement as my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have come to the floor to oppose this resolution. After all, if it were not for their actions, this resolution wouldn't even be necessary.

The ``45 percent Medicare trigger'' was nothing more than a gimmick designed to gain the votes of conservative

Republicans for their Medicare prescription drug bill. It was drafted behind closed doors. I was here, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Rangel tried to get into their conference. They locked the doors without any consultation with Mr. Rangel of the Ways and Means Committee, members that were in the minority without any involvement or notification to the minority. It was then slipped into the conference at the last minute and had not passed the House or the Senate.

It's amazing, Mr. Speaker. My friends on the other side agreed to this trigger and preach fiscal responsibility and are now supporting a process which could force the House to allow legislation to the floor in clear violation of its PAYGO and earmark rules.

I was really amused that the distinguished gentleman that is head of the Republican Study Committee came in here as much as he talks about earmarks and is going to come here and talk about fiscal responsibility.

I was also amused that the last lady speaker who took it upon herself to talk about this measure but forgot, I guess, that she voted to override the President's veto last week.

But now they come to the floor to complain because their Members bought a pig in a poke. Give me a break.

The last time I checked, they were the dealer with all the cards in 2003.

Mr. Speaker, next Wednesday, Medicare will turn 43 years old. Since its founding, the program has provided health care to hundreds of millions of seniors, including my momma and my grandpapa.

Almost 35 percent of the people living in my district are senior citizens, and the overwhelming majority of them depend on Medicare.

Members have a choice today between reviving the Republican legacy of political and procedural gimmickry or standing up for seniors and sound public policy.

While Republicans choose to play games and engage in political hyperbole, my Democratic colleagues and I have chosen America's seniors.

I urge my colleagues to support this resolution.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

The previous question was ordered.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize one achievement of my former intern, Anu Ambikaipalan who participated in the Australian Uni-Capitol Washington Internship Program, UCWIP. After an experience in Washington, she returned to Deakin University in Melbourne, Australia where she will soon graduate and pursue a career in law at a prestigious local firm.

Ms. Ambikaipalan was recently distinguished as a leader in her academic pursuits and was asked to deliver a keynote speech at a breakfast reception honoring ``Women in the Law.'' I commend to your attention the insightful text of her speech to reiterate the importance of providing professional development opportunities for youth on Capitol Hill and how these experiences can translate into successful contributions to communities, even on the other side of the world. As Members of Congress, we must continue to support initiatives like the UCWIP which not only improve the lives of our constituents, but engage the global community. The text of her speech follows:

Good morning Ladies and Gentlemen. It's great to see so

many people here today, and especially university students.

Being able to sleep in till 12 noon is one of the prized

possessions of a university student, so I'm glad you could

all make it.

It is indeed a privilege to be able to speak in front of so

many accomplished women and men in the law here. I'd like to

thank the Victorian Council of Law Students' Society and the

convener of today's breakfast, Katie Elder, for asking me to

speak to you this morning on my experience as an Intern in

Congress in Washington, D.C., through the Uni-Capitol

Washington Internship Program or the UCWIP.

In the summer of 2007, I along with 11 other Australian

university students, were fortunate enough to receive the

opportunity to work as Interns in the U.S. Congress.

As exciting as this was, I was brought back to reality when

the response given by my friends to my impending internship

was--`So, is it like the West Wing?' or `An Intern? . . .

Like Monica Lewinsky?'

The UCWIP is a program run by Mr. Eric Federing, who

directs and manages the program pro bono. It is now in its

tenth year and includes 8 participating Australian

universities from around Australia with approximately 60

applicants a year.

Applicants are required to choose from 13 Congressional

offices which participated in the program. My first

preference was an African American Congressman, Mr. Alcee

Hastings, who represented the 23rd district of Florida. I

chose Congressman Hastings because of his strong stance on

racial equality and social justice. Having been in Congress

for almost 18 years, the Congressman is an important member

of the Democrat party's leadership and often champions the

rights of minority groups.

When I arrived in Washington, D.C., in January 2007, I had

no idea that the next two months would be a life changing

experience.

I remember walking through the hallowed halls of Congress

on the first day, nervous but also in complete and utter

wonderment. As the weeks went on, I tried not to become too

complacent as to where I was. Every morning I would take the

long route to my office so I could see the Capitol Building

and remind myself that I was working at the centre of global

politics.

When we arrived on Capitol Hill, the U.S. was witnessing

monumental changes, with the Democrats regaining the majority

in the House of Representatives and the Senate. The highlight

for me personally, was when my Congressman gave me his only

ticket to the historical swearing in of the first female

Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi.

The biggest talking point in Congress with the change in

power was the Iraq War and the troop surge.

We were fortunate enough to see both Secretary of State

Condoleezza Rice and Former Secretary of State Madeleine

Albright give testimonies before the House Foreign Affairs

Committee in relation to the troop surge.

As my Congressman sits on the Intelligence Committee, I was

lucky enough to attend one of the very rare open Intelligence

Committee hearings with Hon. John Negroponte, Director of

National Intelligence and General Michael Hayden, Director of

the CIA as witnesses.

However, the UCWIP was not all about work and serious

political issues. The program is established to allow

participants to gain a well-rounded appreciation of American

culture and history. We were given a guided tour of the

battlefields of Gettysburg, visited Philadelphia and met

extraordinary individuals such as Mr. Joe Ichiuji, a

Japanese-American who fought for the U.S. army in World War

II, while his family were detained in concentration camps in

America because of their Japanese descent.

We also attended major social events such as the inaugural

ball for the new mayor of Washington, D.C., Adrian Fenty and

the annual Roe v. Wade dinner run by the National Abortion

Rights Action League, Pro-Choice America.

The most significant part of my internship was the

opportunity to develop legislation to combat gang violence

which the Congressman could introduce into this Congress.

This issue came to the forefront after the rapid increase

in deaths resulting from gang violence in the Congressman's

district. By the 5th January 2007, 8 people had been killed

from gang violence. That was more than one person a day. One

of those killed was a 2 year old boy who was left in the car

as his parents fled from a drive-by shooting.

Since I had very little knowledge of gang violence, I

decided to put my years of researching for law assignments

into good use. I jumped onto Google. As I scrawled through

pages of information, I realized that I had just opened

Pandora's Box. Gang violence in America is one of the

deadliest and most dangerous activities on the streets, and

its scourge has permeated into mainstream American culture

through music, movies and television.

Through my research, I discovered that the two problem

areas were: (1) trying to deter youths from entering gangs

and (2) the high rate of re-offending by youths once they

were released from juvenile detention.

Looking through the limited legislation that had already

been put through Congress, it was evident a fresh new

approach was required. Clearly, the problem will never be

solved by middle-aged, college educated, men and women from

privileged backgrounds sitting on Capitol Hill, who are so

far dissociated from the unemployed, impoverished and

generally black young men who roam the streets, searching for

drugs and money in order to survive. A connection has to be

established between those making the law and the young people

on American streets who live day by day in fear of their

lives and in the shadows of gang violence.

So, it was a stroke of luck when a group called `Exhoodus'

was holding a briefing on the Hill encouraging Congress to

take action combating gang violence. The forum was hosted by

Bill Cosby with a panel made up of ex-gang members who had

all spent time in jail for murder and drug related crimes.

The group traveled around America to speak to youths and

deter them from entering gangs. They informed us that gangs

were now recruiting from primary school, with gang members

being as young as 8 years old.

Inspired by the work of this group, I figured that the only

way to find out what to put in the legislation was to ask

those directly affected by the issue. As such, we organized

to visit the Northern Virginia Juvenile Detention Home to

have a tour of the facilities and speak to some of the

children incarcerated there.

It was the most significant part of my internship and one

of the most confronting experiences of my life. Some of these

kids were 10 or 11 and had already spent 2 or 3 years in

detention. As we spent time with these kids, I realized that

they were just normal kids who had made one mistake. Most of

these children came from broken homes, with violent,

alcoholic fathers or mothers prostituting themselves to

support their drug addiction. Being in a gang not only

provided them with a family unit, but also provided them with

money to support their families. They too had dreams of

becoming a chef, journalist or an NBA basketballer, but were

victims of the streets and of a society that couldn't provide

the security and safety that they felt came from being in a

gang.

When we told these kids that we wanted them to help us

create this piece of legislation to combat gang violence,

their reaction was something I can still picture today. They

were bursting with ideas on how to improve their local

communities and get gangs off their streets and kids back

into school.

As we continued to work on the legislation, I was given the

opportunity to travel to Florida to visit the Congressman's

district and finally experience some resemblance of a summer.

I visited both of the Congressman's district offices--in

Ft. Lauderdale and West Palm Beach. His staff took me around

the streets of Ft. Lauderdale and I couldn't believe my eyes.

I was driving through the ghetto. There was rubbish littering

the streets, police officers outside houses questioning

people and young men dealing drugs openly on street corners.

Actually seeing the district and understanding where the

Congressman came from made me fully appreciate his fight

against racial discrimination and injustice. His policies

began to make more sense and I gained a lot more motivation

for my gang violence work.

After discussing the issue of gang violence with local

officials and police, it became evident, and quite

frustrating, that nobody wanted to take responsibility for

fixing the problem. It was only when we visited a community

university that we discovered a possible idea for legislation

that would assist with gang violence.

We organized for community colleges to work with local

prisons to create reintroduction programs for those who had

spent time in juvenile detention. Our purpose was to deter

them from falling back into gang activity. The legislation,

entitled `Path to Success' promotes initiatives to provide

at-risk youths with counseling and academic and vocational

training. Ultimately, this program is based on a principle

that is a central tenet of law all over the world

reintegrating offenders as a means of rehabilitation.

Last week to my delight, I received an email from the

Congressman's office. It was to inform me that the Bill had

passed through Congress and the Senate. The ``Path to

Success'' program was finally becoming law in the United

States.

My experience in Congress has made me realize that we

should never feel too small or powerless to make a

difference. Upon reflection, after working with people like

Congressman Hastings and Eric Federing, if we all took the

most valuable commodity we have--our time, and use that for

the benefit of others, in a personal way, imagine what a

difference we could make.

Although, throughout the internship, I was acting as an

Ambassador for my university and Australia, at times we felt

like we were acting as ambassadors for those kids who were

stuck on the streets of America. Helping the Congressman to

produce this piece of legislation was one of the most

rewarding and proudest moments of my life.

Being a final year law student from Deakin University, I

was given the chance to make a small, yet tangible

contribution in the most powerful Government in the world.

Through this, I discovered that the opportunity to make a

difference is out there for each and every one of us. As the

playwright, George Bernard Shaw once wrote, `Dream things

that never were and say, why not?'

Mr. Speaker, I move to lay the motion to reconsider on the table.

Madam Speaker, it is my sad duty to note the death last week of former Polish Foreign Minister and OSCE Chair-in Office Bronislaw Geremek, who was killed in a car crash in Poland. I am honored to pay tribute to a Polish patriot who had an impact far beyond the borders of his native country.

Born in 1932 to a Jewish family in Warsaw, Bronislaw Geremek was fated to confront the two great evils of the twentieth century: Nazism and communism. Having survived the first as a child, he later played an instrumental role in defeating the second.

Mr. Geremek trained as an historian a serious scholar specializing in the history of medieval France. Indeed, as many obituaries have observed, he was the very image of the professional academic, complete with pipe and tweeds.

But it was in politics and political life that he truly made his mark and where he has left his legacy. Bronislaw Geremek was a great Polish patriot who knew that his country deserved better than the communist oppression of the post-war period.

He protested the Warsaw Pact invasion of Czechoslovakia; he stayed in Poland when anti-Semitic purges drove thousands of other Jews away; and most of all, he helped build necessary bridges between workers and intellectuals. That bond, between these two segments of Polish society, enabled Solidarity to become the mass movement it was.

His imprisonment after the imposition of Martial Law on December 13, 1981, did not deter him from his struggle to build a truly free and democratic Poland. In 1989, he was a member of the historic ``Round Table'' that negotiated the peaceful transition of power. In fact, a delegation from the Helsinki Commission, that included my good friend, and now-House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, was in Poland in August 1989, and watched from the gallery of the Polish parliament when Tadeusz Mazowiecki was elected the first non-communist Prime Minister in more than four decades. Bronislaw Geremek played a singular role in bringing that democratic transition to Poland and the democratic transition in Poland helped bring democracy to all of Eastern Europe.

Bronislaw Geremek subsequently served his country in many ways: as a member of Parliament, not only as a Foreign Minister but the Foreign Minister who signed the treaty bringing Poland into NATO, and then as a member of the European Union Parliament.

As chairman of the Helsinki Commission, I would especially like to note the important role Bronislaw Geremek played when, as Foreign Minister, he served as chair-in-office of the OSCE in 1998. Few people understood as well the historical role of the Helsinki Accords and he brought to that mission an unmatched moral leadership.

Perhaps most of all, however, Bronislaw Geremek personified the best of Eastern Europe's intelligentsia intellectually curious and accomplished, outraged by injustice and impelled to resist it despite the risks, and possessed of a wry sense of humor that endeared him to his colleagues.

Bronislaw Geremek's time on this earth was not merely full, but profoundly consequential. The world is a better place for his having lived. We, in the postcommunist-era, are all the beneficiaries of his passion, labor and achievements.

Madam Speaker, may Bronislaw Geremek rest in peace, honored by his countrymen and women, remembered fondly and missed by those fortunate enough to have been his friends, and invoked as a role model wherever brains and courage are sorely needed to face down tyranny.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the 60th anniversary of the integration of the United States Armed Forces.

On July 26, 1948, President Harry Truman signed Executive Order 9981 which stated that the Armed Services must extend equal opportunity to everyone who served in the military. Although the true fulfillment of this vision finally occurred 15 years after President Truman signed this Executive Order, July 26, 1948 remains a defining moment in our Nation's history because the leader of the Free World made it known that a united Nation needed a united military.

This extraordinary document was signed shortly after World War II when American troops and their allies restored hope, justice, and life to millions of people who were suffering under horrific dictatorship and terror. In the deadliest and most wide spread war in human history, the world had seen the valor, fortitude, and humility of the American military. Upon returning home, however, more than 400,000 African American World War II veterans were faced with the bitter reminder that they did not receive equal rights in the military in which they served and in the country that they loved.

Mr. Speaker, from the Revolutionary War to the present wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, blacks and other people of color have fought and died. In the years prior to desegregation, many black soldiers fought with the hope that if they demonstrated their bravery and dedication in battle, they could obtain the respect and opportunity in the military and civilian sector. Unfortunately, formal and informal practices of segregation and discrimination in the military and in our country prevented this hope from becoming and reality.

In the years leading to an unprecedented time of prosperity, growth, and development in the United States, President Truman dared to sign a document that would position our military and country in a new direction. At last, America would have laws that would ensure

that people would have the right to serve their country and be treated equally regardless of their race, color, religion, or national origin.

Sixty years after Executive Order 9981 was signed and 45 years after the proclamations in this document were implemented, the U.S. military now includes the full spectrum of our great country. More than 1.4 million men and women make up America's active and reserve forces. They can serve with the knowledge that there are laws to ensure that they receive the same rights and liberties that they fought to secure for others.

Mr. Speaker, as we celebrate the 60th anniversary of the initial call to integrate our nation's Armed Forces, we must remember to continue the legacy of eliminating discrimination and bigotry from the institutions that represent our country and make it great. I urge my colleagues to cosponsor this resolution and demonstrate our continued commitment to laws that promote liberty, equality and justice in every sector of our society.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to introduce a concurrent resolution calling on Congress to support the goal of increased and sustainable homeownership in the United States. It is absolutely vital that Congress recommit itself to the importance of homeownership programs, fair lending laws, and fair housing laws in achieving the goal of homeownership.

My legislation has been updated from its previous introduction as H. Con. Res. 107 of the 109th Congress to reflect the current status of the housing market and the enduring need to improve access to homeownership. Once again, this resolution would put Congress on record recognizing fair lending and housing laws enacted to prevent and combat discriminatory practices which undermine homeownership efforts for all Americans.

Today, the current foreclosure crisis is a major stumbling block on the road to homeownership. Many are finding it increasingly difficult to achieve the American Dream of homeownership, which was beyond reach even before the emergence of our current crisis. When it comes to the health and vitality of America's communities, affordable housing is key. Congress has a responsibility to foster and promote an active, growing, and fair housing market in light of the significant stress this market experienced in 2007 and 2008. Most Americans' primary investment is in their home, and homeownership is the most common way for families to build and pass on wealth from one generation to another.

This resolution recognizes how important the establishment of homeownership programs and fair lending and housing laws have been to equalizing access to homeownership for all Americans. In particular, eliminating the disparities in homeownership rates between white families and minority families continues to be a goal of critical importance. In 2008, the homeownership rate for white Americans was 72 percent, but the rate was only 47.2 percent for African Americans and 49.7 percent for Hispanic Americans. With almost 4,000,000 fair housing violations occurring annually, we must continue to support efforts aimed at ensuring that all Americans have the opportunity to own a home.

This resolution also recognizes the detriment of predatory lending practices, which principally occur in the subprime market, and their contribution to the housing market's worst slump in 16 years. As many as 2 million Americans will see their mortgage rates increase in the next 2 years. We must address the plight of borrowers victimized by predatory lenders and high priced mortgage alternatives by advocating consumer protections against abusive practices.

Madam Speaker, I first introduced this legislation with a number of my colleagues in 2005 and eventually garnered the support of 31 cosponsors. To once again express the commitment of Congress to promoting homeownership, I have made a few key updates to this legislation. They reflect the current status of the housing market marred by the residual impacts of predatory lending practices, primarily in the sub-prime loan market. This legislation has also been updated to recognize specific initiatives to stem the rise of foreclosures.

Madam Speaker, I thank my friends who have joined me today to introduce this legislation, as well as the National Fair Housing Alliance, Fair Housing Center of the Greater Palm Beaches, and the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation, all of which have endorsed the resolution. I encourage my colleagues to support this necessary legislation and look forward to its expedient passage.

Madam Speaker, as Chairman of the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe and Special Representative on Mediterranean Affairs of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe Parliamentary Assembly, I rise today in strong support of The Iraqi Refugee and Internally Displaced Persons Humanitarian Assistance, Resettlement, and Security Act of 2008 (H.R. 6496), a bill which I reintroduced yesterday with a group of 11 bipartisan original cosponsors.

The bill I am introducing today addresses the impending humanitarian crisis and potential security break-down as a result of the mass influx of Iraqi refugees into neighboring countries, and the growing internally displaced population in Iraq. The bill increases accountable assistance to these populations and their host countries, as well as seeking to facilitate the resettlement of Iraqis at risk.

The plight of Iraqi refugees and Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) is worsening by the day. It is heartbreaking to hear the stories of families who fled for their safety, are now unable to work and have subsequently depleted their savings in order to survive.

Madam Speaker, I would like to announce the support that I have received for this very important legislation from prominent non- governmental organizations (NGOs) and religious groups. To date, the following organizations have endorsed this legislation: The Campaign for Innocent Victims of Conflict (CIVIC), Church World Service, Congregation of Divine Providence of San Antonio, Education for Peace in Iraq (EPIC), International Rescue Committee, the Leadership Conference on Women Religious, the Maryknoll Office for Global Concerns, Mercy Center, Mercy Corps, NETWORK, Open Society Policy Center, Pax Christi USA: National Catholic Peace Movement, the Presbyterian Church (USA), Refugees International, Sisters of Charity of New York, Sisters of Mercy of the Americas, Sisters of St. Joseph NW PA, and Save the Children.

I thank all of these organizations who have endorsed my legislation and who every single day work tirelessly to make this world a better place. Without their commitment to helping the people devastated by this crisis, the situation in the region would be even worse.

Finally, I would like to thank Congressman Dingell for his continued leadership in the House of Representatives on this issue and for his help in drafting this legislation as well as the other original co- sponsors supporting this bill. As I have said on many occasions, this must not be a partisan issue, but rather Congress and the Administration have an obligation to work together before the Iraqi refugee crisis further destabilizes the region.

I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation, which will provide much needed relief for Iraqi refugees and IDPs. I urge the leadership of the House to support this bill and bring it to the floor for its expeditious consideration.

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 1343 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to my good friend, the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Hastings). All time yielded during consideration of the rule is for debate only.

General Leave

I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and insert extraneous materials into the Record.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 1343 provides for consideration of H.R. 5959, the Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009, under a structured rule. The rule provides 1 hour of debate controlled by the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and makes in order seven amendments.

Three amendments are to be offered by my colleagues in the minority, including one by the Republican whip and one by the ranking Republican of the Intelligence Committee. Three are to be offered by Democrats, and the last one by two bipartisan sponsors. This is a fair rule, and I urge my colleagues to support it.

Mr. Speaker, today, more than ever, strengthening our intelligence apparatus and giving it the flexibility it needs to meet continuing threats should be one of this body's highest priorities. The resurgence of al Qaeda and increasing global threats underscore the importance of the authorization bill before us today.

The Intelligence Authorization Act authorizes funding for 16 United States intelligence agencies and intelligence-related activities of the United States Government for fiscal year 2009.

Due to the classified nature of this bill, I wish to point out that Members can view the classified portions of the bill by making an appointment with the Intelligence Committee in H-405 of the Capitol.

Despite the House's best efforts, for the past 3 years an intelligence authorization bill has not become law. Therefore, I am very pleased today with this well-balanced, bipartisan bill. I am hopeful that this great work will continue, concluding with the President's signature of the underlying legislation into law.

This year's intelligence authorization bill adds crucial funding to enhance human intelligence collection, as well as for other enduring and emerging global security challenges we face in Asia, Africa, and Latin America. The bill also provides funding to address the impact of climate change on our national and energy security.

Mr. Speaker, in recent years, we have seen the devastating costs that flawed intelligence and a misinformed Congress can have on national security. This bill enhances accountability and transparency through long overdue oversight and monitoring.

The underlying bill increases reporting requirements to the House and Senate Intelligence Committees on the nuclear capabilities of North Korea, Iran, and Syria.

The bill also amends the National Security Act to require the executive branch to provide Congress with the necessary information about our intelligence operations to ensure proper oversight.

As someone who sat through countless hours of Intelligence Committee hearings and briefings, I have been appalled by the unwillingness and outright stonewalling of the Bush administration when Members have asked even the most basic of questions about our intelligence community policies and practices.

Additionally, the underlying legislation helps restore our Nation's global credibility by ensuring that we meet our international obligations. The reporting requirements on compliance with the Detainee Treatment Act and the Military Commissions Act regarding detentions and interrogations bring credibility and security to our Nation for future generations.

The bill also furthers our commitment to improving the intelligence community's security and clearance process. It increases pay for intelligence officers--and I would underscore much-needed increases-- and enhances oversight and accountability through the creation of an intelligence community Inspector General.

Moreover, the underlying legislation includes a provision that would require reporting on plans to enhance diversity within the intelligence community, and a lot of effort has gone into this particular measure, beginning with our former colleague, Louis Stokes, and our departed colleague, Julian Dixon, and the work of my colleague, Sanford Bishop, and myself, as well as the Chair and countless members of the committee in trying to ensure that we have appropriate diversity in the intelligence community.

The diversity of our Nation should be directly reflected in our intelligence community's workforce. We cannot, and will not, appropriately meet our security challenges without ensuring this. I appreciate and support these efforts, as the issue, as I expressed, was one of my top concerns when I served on the Intelligence Committee.

Finally, I would like to thank Chairman Reyes for including in his amendment a provision written by my colleague on the Rules Committee, Representative Peter Welch, that addresses the employment needs of resettled Iraqi and Afghani interpreters.

Our government has a moral responsibility to provide proper resources for these allies who risked their lives to assist our efforts to fight global terrorist threats. This measure will help fill gaps in our intelligence-gathering activities and is a start toward fulfilling our obligations to our Iraqi and Afghani allies.

Mr. Speaker, the threats posed to our Nation are only intensifying. To keep pace, America's intelligence community requires the most robust and modern tools to identify and disrupt such attacks. This Intelligence Authorization Act does just that.

I urge my colleagues to support this rule and the underlying legislation.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 5 minutes to my good friend from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern) with whom I serve on the Rules Committee.

I thank my distinguished friend from Massachusetts, who came here to discuss what I thought I came here to vote on, and that is the Flood Insurance Reform and Modernization Act of 2008.

Lest we lose sight of the importance of flood insurance, coming from an area where that is a continuing critical problem and knowing that those in the Midwest and certain portions of the South are presently suffering in that regard, it is regrettable that we are not focusing on the importance of that particular legislation.

Now, let me also add my voice to the voices of my colleagues on the other side who continue to say that they want to do something about the continuing increase in the price of gasoline.

I recently was before an editorial board, the Sun Sentinel Newspaper, in my hometown, and I was asked the question: What are you all in Congress going to do about gas prices?

A footnote right here. I would that my colleagues would stop the folly of using the words of an aide in a congressional office as the strategy of the Democratic Party. What I said to my newspaper was we were going to use an awful lot of hyperbole between now--we, meaning the Congress; we, meaning the U.S. House and Senate; we, meaning Democrats and Republicans; we, meaning liberals and conservatives.

What we were going to do between now and the election, I said to them, was talk a lot about things that are likely to take place in the future but that cost an immense amount of money in order to accomplish. And I said to them, let me give you the hyperbole. We are going to use the language geothermal. We are going to say biomass. You are going to hear alternative energy, solar or wind. You are going to hear all of those things, and many of those things are certainly going to be a part of our energy production at some point in the future.

I also rather suspect that what is going to happen is those companies that supply energy today are more likely than not to be involved in that research and production of the alternative energy sources. But to say that the Democrats have done nothing, and I am now here 15 years and I have seen 12 years of the Republicans' attempts to do something about energy which amounted obviously to nothing.

So the Democrats are in charge 1\1/2\ years, and we are told with a White House that is more than involved in the energy issues of this Nation and this world, and with a Senate that won't move a single solitary thing that is productive coming from the House of Representatives; we still have managed to enact into law the Energy Independence and Security Act in 2007, the Strategic Petroleum Reserve Fill Suspension and Consumer Protection Act.

We enacted into law the Food Conservation and Energy Act of 2008, and I won't go into all of the details. There is more coming, reducing transit fares, cracking down on price gouging, use or lose it, which my colleagues on the other side of the aisle seem to have forgotten that we just voted on before we left here, and that we are likely, just so I give them a heads-up, give you another chance not to go with use it or lose it, which compels the oil industry to start drilling or lose permits on 68 million acres of undeveloped Federal oil reserves which they are currently warehousing, keeping domestic supply lower and prices higher. We need to further close the Enron loophole which was also a part of that legislation.

We have also passed the Renewable Energy and Job Creation Act. We passed the Gas Price Relief For Consumers Act. We passed the Energy Gouging Prevention Act.

So I continue with what I said to my newspaper, we were going to say switch grass. We were going to say algae. We were going to say use cane as Brazil does. We were going to say all of those things, and then when we finish, we are not going to do one single solitary thing that is going to cause Jane Lunchbucket, when she goes to the gas pump next Thursday, to witness a reduction in her gas prices.

We have tried as best we can to deal with speculators that we know have driven up some of these prices. We are doing everything that we can to try to ensure that the 200,000 acres of oil shale that are already under the control of six companies are utilized.

We allow that people need to understand that if we drill off the coast of Florida, and let it be clearly understood by everybody in this House of Representatives that I will be the last man standing saying that you will not drill off the shore of Florida beyond the limits of the law that all of us agreed to until such time you change that law. Florida's beaches are pristine. Florida's tourism depends upon them, and I am astounded that my California colleagues would come here and say that they want that kind of drilling. We own that opportunity. Sixty-eight million acres are already leased; as well as 23 million acres in the Arctic. What in the world are you talking about? Why are the oil companies not doing that drilling at this point?

And you come down here with some simplistic solution saying that some child in an office back there said drive small cars and wait for the wind. We aren't going to wait for the wind. T. Boone Pickens is not waiting for the wind. He has been an oil man all of his life, and he has decided that among the things that he is going to do is get involved in wind research.

I go to Denmark frequently in an organization that I work with. Denmark is supplying more than 30 percent of their energy with wind. And most of the windmills that you see come from that Denmark area. Assuredly at some point wind is going to be a major source, as is geothermal, as is gasification.

All of us know the buzz words, but let's stop kidding Americans. The solutions are costly, and the energy companies are the ones that are more likely to do this rather than us sitting around here with some mumbo-jumbo and a bunch of people running down here so that they can have a bumper sticker.

Everybody goes home, everybody buys gas, everybody knows it is high, and none of us in this place are going to do one doggone thing between now and the time that we leave here that is going to cause it to come down that much that it will be dramatic.

I have one more proposal: A tax credit for Jane Lunchbucket and Joe Lunchbucket. Give them a tax credit. When I was a child, we had oil coupons because oil was cheap, not cheap, but at the same time was not plentiful. So during the Second World War, we did what was necessary, and I would ask all of my colleagues in this body, just ask yourself the question: What would Roosevelt do? I think what he would do is say that we have a national crisis and that we owe it to ourselves to focus on what it will take, worldwide, in this global economy that we live in and in our Nation to undertake to do what is necessary for the American public.

I thank my colleague for yielding me this time.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to introduce legislation which will continue my efforts of previous Congresses to work toward better representation for our constituents. My legislation will form a commission to examine how we, the people, may be best served by our representational democracy. This commission would analyze the current size of the membership of the House of Representatives and examine alternatives to the current method of electing Representatives.

Madam Speaker, as Chairman of the Committee on Rules Legislative and Budget Subcommittee, I find it absolutely necessary to continually update our mechanisms for representation and governance to best serve those constituents who have trusted us with representing them.

The legislation I offer today will counter the unfortunate truth that, ironically, our land of the free is one of the most under- representative democracies in the world. When considering elected federal representation per capita, many other countries throughout the world have parliaments which can more closely serve their constituents. Smaller ratios of elected officials to constituents allow for better engagement to more effectively address the needs of their districts. As a country that holds itself up as the standard bearer for the democratic process, we must be critical of our own standards to guarantee that we continue to give all citizens an equal and meaningful voice in our government.

We have encountered an electoral crisis in recent years with low voter turnout and diminishing faith in the effectiveness of our electoral process. However, the energy of this current election cycle has exponentially increased voter registration. We owe it to our constituents to ensure that this increase in civic engagement is met with the most effective mechanism of representation possible. The Commission proposed in the legislation I introduce today will meet that need by determining the best way to ensure maximum participation in this great democracy by every American citizen.

I urge my colleagues to support this legislation and look forward to its expedient passage.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor a true friend and leader who is widely respected, and much loved by the citizens of Pompano Beach, Florida, The Honorable E. Pat Larkins. Pat was born in Pompano Beach in 1942. He graduated Blanche Ely High School in 1960 and enrolled in Tennessee State University. In 1962, he was hired as housing director for the local community action agency, and in 1969, he was one of only two Florida recipients of a Ford Foundation fellowship to attend the National Housing Institute in Washington, DC.

Pat was subsequently certified by HUD as a housing development specialist, and in 1970, he went to work for the Foundation for Co-Op Housing in Chicago, Illinois. In 1972, he returned to Florida and created the Broward County Minority Builders Coalition, Inc. where he still serves as C.E.O. He is also currently president and partner of Malar Construction, State licensed general contractors.

In addition to these accomplishments, Pat has also had a long career in the public sector and has, helped to change the face of local politics. He was the first chairperson of the City of Pompano Beach Community Development Committee. In 1982, he was the second African- American elected to the Pompano Beach City Commission. He was just the eighth African-American local elected official in Broward County and served 19 consecutive years as city commissioner. In that time, he served a record seven terms as mayor and three terms as vice-mayor, positions to which he was elected by his fellow Commissioners. He also served an unprecedented 14 consecutive years on the Broward County Planning Council and was the first African-American chair of that body.

After an unsuccessful run for Broward County Commission in 2001, Pat Larkins was reelected to the Pompano Beach City Commission in 2003 where he presently serves as vice-mayor. Pat is sometimes referred to as the dean of Broward black elected officials because of his remarkable leadership and role as one of the founders of that group.

He is also recognized throughout the State as a leader and spokesperson for minority involvement in government and business. During his time as mayor of Pompano Beach, the city hired the first black fire chief and first black city clerk in Broward County. Pat initiated the city ordinance to promote minority small business concerns, and along with two others, helped to create the first minority business enterprise program for Broward County government.

In addition to his many professional achievements, Pat Larkins has also taken an active role in countless public service, social, and religious organizations. He is a life member of the NAACP, serves on the Broward County Boys and Girls Club corporate board, the Juvenile Justice Intensive Halfway House, and the Florida black caucus local elected officials, and is a longtime member of Hopewell Baptist Church. He is a founding member of the Urban League board, as well as a leader in the Superintendents' Commission on Public Education, National Black Mayors' Conference, and U.S. Conference of Mayors.

Madam Speaker, Pat Larkins has had an indelible impact on the well- being of his community, as he has worked tirelessly to ensure that every individual has access to safe and adequate housing. Under his leadership, Pompano Beach recently demolished a 140-home development that had been rundown and falling apart and relocated the owners to a modern development of affordable homes on an even swap arrangement at a considerable cost savings to the city. Over the past 5 years, he has led his city in providing financial and other assistance that has resulted in the erection of more than 800 affordable multifamily units.

Pat has often said that he wants to be remembered not for his personal longevity, but most of all for helping to improve the lives of others. In this, he has certainly succeeded. Few people I have known have accomplished so much for the good of their fellow citizens and their community. I am fortunate to call him my friend.