Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, during the past year, the Democratic majority has passed so many bills that have done absolutely nothing to help our economy. Instead, they've raised taxes, they've exploded the deficit, and they actually have killed off jobs. Then, yesterday, the national unemployment rate went up past 10 percent-- actually, to 10.2 percent, with no end in sight.

So it is incredible that today this House may pass a job-killing, tax-hiking, deficit-exploding government takeover of our health care. And one of the most disingenuous things that has been said is that if you like your current health care, that you can keep it. Well, not so fast.

In my county, Macomb County, Michigan, the Chamber of Commerce just did a survey of all of their members. They asked them that if, rather than continuing to provide good health care plans for their employees, they would instead take the 8 percent penalty that is included in this bill, and guess what? No surprise. The overwhelming majority said they would of course dump their employees out into the public plan.

Mr. Speaker, we are going to have a complete government takeover of our health care system faster than you can say, ``This is making me sick.'' Vote ``no.''

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Res. 867, which calls on the President and the Secretary of State to oppose unequivocally any endorsement or further consideration of the Report of the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict, commonly referred to as the Goldstone Report.

President of the Human Rights Council established the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict with the mandate ``to investigate all violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law that might have been committed during military operations that were conducted in the Gaza Strip.''

The report accused Israel of ``war crimes'' and ``crimes against humanity'', while downplaying evidence of Hamas' real war crimes and largely dismissing Israel's extraordinary efforts to minimize civilian casualties.

In a turbulent part of the world, we can count on the friendship of Israel because we share the important values of freedom of religion, speech and thought--values that aren't universally shared across the Middle East.

And yet when Israel responds to defend itself, it is singled out unfairly at the United Nations and elsewhere for special condemnation and criticism. It is our responsibility, as a friend and ally to Israel, to stand up for their rights and denounce those that unreasonably target Israel for reproach. While Israel is not perfect, we must be ever watchful and steadfast because there is an unfortunate double standard.

Israel showed extraordinary restraint in response to terrorism and daily rocket attacks emanating from fanatical Hamas militants in the Gaza Strip, and yet until Israel responded militarily, the UN and the world looked away. I can think of no country in the world that would have shown such restraint in the face of direct attacks on their civilians.

Hamas launched 7,000 rocket and mortar attacks on Israeli cities between the pullout from Gaza in 2005 and 2009--Hamas' military doctrine makes no distinction between non-combatants and military targets.

During the ground fighting in Gaza, Hamas used mosques, schools and hospitals as military sites and employed civilians as human shields-- clear violations of the law of war.

Unintentional civilian deaths Israel caused during the Gaza conflict are condemned as war crimes; the intentional Hamas attacks on Israeli civilians are swept under the rug.

There can be no moral equivalency made between Hamas and Israel, and this report's biased conclusion makes it clear, once again, that the United Nations Human Rights Council is a farce.

Mr. Speaker, I come from Macomb County, Michigan. That county is also known as the home of the Reagan Democrats. It is certainly a proud heartland not only of Michigan but the heartland of America, I think. And as a mother and as a grandmother, I am incredibly concerned about the enormous amount of debt that this administration, through a number of bills and now especially this health care bill, is placing on future generations.

One of the most disingenuous claims that have been made over and over again, Mr. Speaker, is if you like your current health care plan, you can keep it.

Well, here's a headline in my local paper just the other day: ``Employers Ready to Dump Health Care.'' ``Under the House bill, paying an 8 percent penalty is cheaper than providing coverage.'' This was a survey that was done by our Macomb County Chamber of Commerce, and what they found is that an overwhelming majority of local companies stated they would drop their existing employee insurance coverage or avoid offering future health care benefits if this bill that the House is considering today passes.

This bill is a very cruel hoax. That is the reality. A business decision that is going to be made will dump these people out on the public plan.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Res. 729, to designate a National Firefighters Memorial Day to honor the courage, bravery, service and sacrifice of the Firefighters of the United States.

Firefighters are the backbone of our communities. Of the 1,000,000 firefighters in America, 71 percent are volunteer firefighters. They are often the first to respond to an emergency, whether the emergency is a fire, transportation accident, natural disaster, act of terrorism, medical emergency, or spill of hazardous materials. These great men and women respond to nearly 2 million calls each year without hesitation. They have an unwavering dedication to protecting those that are in distress.

First responders are often under-appreciated and taken for granted until crisis strikes and the public reaches out for help and rescue. Against all common sense and natural instinct, firefighters rush to the scene of an emergency and into harm's way without the slightest hesitation. While our natural instinct is to run away from the fire-- our fire fighters are running in.

Without the promise of any fame, fortune, or so much as a simple ``thank-you'', firefighters remain constantly vigilant and ready to serve. On that horrendous September day in 2001, we lost 343 firefighters in the line of duty.

In responding to approximately 1.6 million fires set each year, we see our firefighters rushing to the scene saving countless lives and sometimes giving theirs in return.

I know sometimes younger people idolize professional athletes and cheer for their favorite sports teams. And the same could be said for some adults too. But if you really want to see true teamwork search no further than your local fire station. It is here where men and women work together and count on each other to protect lives. Their service demonstrates courage, camaraderie, and bravery.

It is time that we honor those men and women who have given their lives and those that were disabled in the line of duty. I urge the President to designate a day as National Firefighters Memorial Day and I urge my colleagues to support this very important legislation.

Madam Speaker, the nation's current debt ceiling is $12.1 trillion, and the Congress is going to have to act to raise that ceiling in the next month or so. Let me be clear--the spending path we are on is unsustainable, and we cannot have 17% spending increases on appropriations bills as standard operating procedure. I would warn the majority that we should not make these large increases a regular practice.

That being said, I am willing to support the Conference Report for the Interior and Environment Appropriations bill because of the tremendous positive impact it will have on the Great Lakes.

The Great Lakes are one of the world's unparalleled natural resources. They are wholly \1/5\ of the planet's fresh water supply. They are home to a tremendously diverse ecosystem. They represent the identity and economic prowess of the region, and my home state of Michigan.

Throughout my career at the local, state, and federal levels of government, I have promoted efforts to clean up our precious Great Lakes, which have suffered from severe pollution--partly out of ignorance and partly out of indifference. Improper sewage discharges, industrial pollution, and invasive species have wrecked havoc on the Great Lakes over the decades. It takes tremendous coordinated efforts at all levels to deal with these problems.

It is the legislation before us today that gives us an opportunity to embark on a new chapter in restoring the Great Lakes. This Congress and this administration have stepped up to the plate and provided full funding for the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative--a $475 million effort that will combat invasive species, reduce non-point source pollution, and remove contaminated sediment. Through this measure, we will begin to undo the damage that has occurred, and we can take a big step forward in preserving the Great Lakes for future generations.

This conference report also includes an important policy provision that will help protect

thousands of jobs in the Great Lakes Region. Late this summer, the EPA proposed a rule that would have the effect of eliminating up to half of the U.S. flag vessels on the Great Lakes. In addition to the maritime jobs that these vessels support, the cargo on these vessels is critical for commerce including the steel and automobile industries. Losing these vessels would have meant higher costs for consumers and lost jobs for many in the Great Lakes region.

I want to commend Chairman Obey and Chairman Oberstar for their hard work on this issue. As a result of their efforts, the conference report includes language that will grandfather in 13 of these affected vessels, and provides a waiver for other vessels if economic hardships can be shown. We all want cleaner air, but the EPA went about this the wrong way by targeting these small ships that collectively produce fewer emissions than one large ocean-going vessel.

Because of the importance of this legislation to the Great Lakes environment as well as the jobs of those who live in the region, I will support this conference report and I urge my colleagues to join me.

Madam Chair, I rise as the designee of the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Ginny Brown-Waite) and I have an amendment at the desk.

Madam Chair, let me start off with a simple premise: The American economy cannot recover without small business. As such, Congress has rightly taken steps to increase the guarantee amount at the Small Business Administration. But as many business owners can tell you, this has only had a modest effect. In fact, despite these thoughtful measures, the volume of SBA loan guarantees is still only a fraction of what it was last year.

As my colleagues know, the SBA only makes loan guarantees--it does not make loans directly to small businesses. Therefore, if banks decide that even with 90 percent guaranteed, it is still not in their best interest to make a loan, then the small business is simply out of luck.

One credit union president recently pointed out that, in many cases, banks won't seriously consider a small business loan if it is less than $500,000. The interest income simply isn't worth the trouble--even with the guarantee. In these cases, the viability of the business and the value of the guarantee doesn't mean anything.

H.R. 3854 rightly introduces a new program--the Capital Backstop Program--that will authorize the SBA to make loans directly to small businesses as a last resort.

While we are deeply concerned about the Federal Government acting as a bank, the fact of the matter is that Congress has spent $700 billion to resuscitate the lending system, $800 billion trying to stimulate the economy, and yet homeowners--and small businesses especially--still can't get the loans that they need. It is very important that Congress put standards in place to ensure that SBA direct loans are only made to viable businesses.

This amendment establishes this same standard for individuals at the SBA who are directly engaged in loan application evaluation and underwriting. We can only imagine the bureaucratic nightmare that would ensue if Congress actually tried to come up with a laundry list of criteria for viable businesses. As any local banker can tell you, no two businesses are exactly the same--the people matter, the models matter, the market matters.

This amendment ensures that individuals who are evaluating businesses have both the authority and the expertise to make the best decisions for the taxpayer.

We want to thank the chairwoman and ranking member and all of their colleagues on the Small Business Committee for their efforts on this legislation. It is very important work.

Madam Chair, I urge the adoption of this amendment.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, I rise as the designee of the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Ginny Brown-Waite) and I have an amendment at the desk.

Madam Chair, this amendment makes a simple technical correction to the Capital Backstop Program, which we were just talking about.

In short, this underlying bill wisely puts restrictions on when this program can and cannot operate. The bill states two things: First of all, that the National Bureau of Economic Research, the NBER, must have declared the United States to be officially in recession. Second, the SBA loan guarantee volume must be down 30 percent from the previous year. And if these two criteria are not met, then the program is shut down.

As you know, the Federal Reserve recently stated that the recession is already likely over. The NBER is sure to follow suit soon. As well, because SBA loan volume is already down so substantially, the likelihood of another full 30 percent drop next year is very low.

This amendment simply says that the program being created in this bill is authorized to begin operation immediately upon enactment and is authorized to continue through September 2011, even if the recession has been declared technically over.

I would note personally, being from Michigan, whatever they are saying in the Nation, the recession is definitely not over in the State of Michigan.

However, our concern, Madam Chair, is that if Congress is going to take the extraordinary step of authorizing the SBA to make loans directly to small businesses, then it ought to be making these loans now, when they are needed the most.

After 2011, the restrictions that are in the underlying bill will resume. Frankly, Madam Chair, at that time we certainly hope that even stronger restrictions are in place.

Many of our colleagues are skeptical of having the SBA make loans directly to small businesses. Nevertheless, taxpayers have spent nearly $2 trillion trying to fix this situation. It hasn't worked.

If we are going to take the step of creating this program, let us at least make sure that it is helping our constituents and the taxpayers and small businesses now, when they truly need it most.

Madam Chair, I urge the adoption of this amendment.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, as Democratic leaders retreat behind closed doors to craft their government takeover of health care, American seniors are rightly concerned about what $500 billion in cuts in Medicare will mean to them.

Throughout this process, Democrats have made clear that they intend to force American seniors to carry a large share of the cost of reform, and this includes eliminating Medicare Advantage. Democrats understand how negative the reaction will be when seniors learn that they are scrapping this program, so they have placed a gag order on companies that provide this coverage, stopping them from communicating with seniors on the ramifications of this change.

That's right, the Democrats who promised transparency and accountability have gone behind closed doors to craft legislation and have used the power of government to stop dissenters from communicating with American seniors. Well, American seniors are right to be concerned.

With the job-killing tax increases the Democrats are also talking about, American workers need to be concerned as well, Mr. Speaker. Perhaps that is why the Democrat majority will not allow us to have 72 hours to read the bill before it's voted on.

Madam Speaker, our Nation currently has an unemployment rate of nearly 10 percent. In my home State of Michigan, it's actually over 15 percent. In the last fiscal year, our Federal budget deficit was over $1.4 trillion; and the Obama administration projects that over the next 10 years, our deficit will be over $9 trillion.

When dealing with our budget, difficult times like these require very decisive actions. Unfortunately, over the last year or so, as this Congress has racked up record-breaking deficits, we have seen legislation brought to the floor that forced massive new debt on the American people while giving Members little or no time to read any of the legislation.

Last fall, the Bush administration and the leadership of this House asked the House to vote on a $700 billion bailout for Wall Street with no strings attached on how the money would be spent. I was proud to vote ``no'' on that Wall Street bailout. Unfortunately, that bill did pass this House, and it became law. The result has been a program that has been widely rejected by the American people.

Then in February, President Obama asked Congress to pass an economic stimulus plan, and many on our side of the aisle were ready to help. In fact, we proposed a bill that, according to a formula used by President Obama's own economic advisers, would produce twice the jobs at half the cost. Instead, the Democrats crafted a bill behind closed doors. They filed a 1,073-page conference report in the middle of the night and asked Members of this House to vote on $787 billion of deficit spending while not one single Member of this

House, nor the American people, had the chance to read the bill before we cast our votes.

Then in June, this House voted on a cap-and-trade national energy tax that would fundamentally change our economy. This bill totaled 1,428 pages, including a 300-plus page manager's amendment. The Rules Committee and the Democratic leadership gave us about 16 hours to read the bill and the amendment before it was voted on. Only after the fact did we see a memo produced within the Obama administration that indicated that the bill would cost every single American household an average of $1,700 per year in higher energy costs.

Madam Speaker, we will soon consider health care legislation that will have a far-reaching impact on one of the most personal issues facing every American, and that is how they will protect the health of themselves and their families. Nobody knows what this legislation will look like. Nobody knows how much it will cost. Nobody knows when it will be brought to the floor. But every American has a vital stake in the outcome of the legislation.

Many Members of this House from both parties have had enough and are insisting that we bring transparency into the process before a vote is taken, and the American people are demanding the opportunity to be able to read the legislation that their Representatives will be voting on before the vote so that their voices can be heard. That is why I am proud to cosponsor H. Res. 554 which would require that all major legislation, significant amendments and conference reports be available in their entirety on the Internet so that Members can read the legislation before casting their votes and so that the American people can have some opportunity to have their voices heard. If legislation that will govern more than one-sixth of our economy comes to the floor, don't Members as well as the American people deserve a chance to at least read it?

President Obama ran last year on a platform of openness and transparency, but unfortunately, it has been business as usual in Washington. We have had limited to no transparency. We have not had a chance to read important legislation before asking for us to vote on this legislation. I would urge my fellow Members who have not signed on as cosponsors of this important resolution to join us in an effort to bring transparency to the process, to join us in demanding that we in Congress cast an informed vote on important legislation that will impact every American, to join us in allowing the American people to have their voices heard. The Members of this House and, most importantly, Madam Speaker, the American people deserve no less.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to acknowledge the Jacob Michael Davis Foundation located in Macomb County, Michigan. This non-profit organization was created in the loving memory of 7-year old Jacob Michael Davis, who sadly passed away in 2005 after a hard fought battle with acute lymphoblastic leukemia.

The organization will be hosting its 4th Annual Banquet and Fundraiser on November 14th in Shelby Township, so I want to highlight the great work the foundation has performed over the few short years since its inception.

The foundation has carried forward Jacob's legacy--his giving spirit and his unique ability to comfort other young patients while he himself was seeking medical treatment. The foundation has also picked up his torch of hope as it continues to spread his light of compassion and pass his courage on to other families who unfortunately have had to cope with childhood cancer. Although based in the State of Michigan, the Jacob Michael Davis Foundation has extended its helping hand across this great nation, from coast to coast and places in between.

The effects of any childhood illness can be devastating on a family. The emotional and financial distress can leave a mother and father feeling like they have no options, and sometimes even worse with a negative outlook on the future. With so many variables to deal with, families can easily become overwhelmed and lose focus of the primary objective--the care, treatment and recovery of the child.

But these fears and unknowns are exactly the reason why the Jacob Michael Davis Foundation was created. The foundation is a source of comfort to assist families with those unexpected financial burdens not necessarily covered by insurance. For example--travel and temporary housing expenses, medical equipment, mental health programs, academic and school tutoring support, post-treatment survivorship programs and bereavement counseling. These are just a few of the economic barriers that the foundation seeks to remove.

The Foundation's goal is to help families keep their energies focused on the recovery and the healing of the child. Amazingly, the staff, volunteers and board members of the Jacob Michael Davis Foundation do not accept any form of monetary compensation, ensuring that every possible cent is spent to assist those families in need. This certainly speaks volumes about the people who believe in the foundation's mission and the remarkable work they have achieved, continue to achieve and hope to achieve in the future. It certainly is my honor to commend all the volunteers for their charitable and dedicated work.

Furthermore, I am pleased to announce that last month I added my name as a cosponsor to H.R. 1230 which was introduced by my colleague, Representative Doris Matsui, from California. This legislation seeks to establish a National Acquired Bone Marrow Failure Disease Registry and authorize research on bone marrow diseases. I encourage other Members to support this bill and join in the fight to defeat this disease.

In conclusion, I offer my support to the Jacob Michael Davis Foundation on this special occasion. I wish everyone in attendance all the best and hope you have a very successful evening. You are helping to sustain a wonderful cause. I know that in memory of Jacob you will never lose faith in your mission and your passion will be forever alive.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the Conference Report for H.R. 2997, the Agriculture Appropriations Act of 2010.

My district is home to some of the most fertile farm land in our great nation, as well as some of the hardest working farmers.

While so many people identify Michigan with manufacturing, it can be easy to forget that agriculture is Michigan's second leading industry, and the bright spot in a struggling Michigan economy.

As you drive through my district, you will see fields full of dry beans, sugar beets, corn, wheat, soybeans, various vegetables, and other crops needed to feed our nation and the rest of the world. You will also see thriving cattle and pork industries.

This bill is important because it provides much needed funding for the Farm Services Agency which administers disaster and loan programs, farm commodities and conservation programs directed towards producers.

The bill also goes a long way in providing money for continued agriculture research which is so important in increasing harvest yields and furthering education for our producers. Agriculture research is vitally important to ensure that America remains the greatest food producer in the world.

Finally, this legislation will provide necessary money for our nation's struggling dairy farmers. In these tough economic times, dairy producers have been struggling with a steep drop in price for their product. My district is home to a large dairy industry, and it is of vital importance that we do all that we can to help these producers out.

While there are certainly challenges with this bill, it is vital that we move this important funding bill forward. The funding provided by this bill will serve as strong support for an industry that is crucial for our national economy.

I strongly urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this important legislation.

Mr. Speaker, it has become the custom of this great country to recognize the contributions made on behalf of freedom for the American people. Each year we celebrate Memorial Day to commemorate lives that have been given in service of our Nation and Veterans Day to recognize our service men and women. But occasionally, it is necessary to commemorate the actions of individuals in furthering the cause of American freedom.

In this Chamber, we feature the portrait of Marquis de Lafayette, a Frenchman who left his family and the comforts of life in Europe to fight for freedom in the colonies. Lafayette sacrificed much to serve as an adviser to General Washington, and was rewarded by witnessing the surrender of the British at the Battle of Yorktown. Among honors conferred on General Lafayette was an honorary U.S. citizenship.

But less known and appreciated for his service is Casimir Pulaski, a Polish Revolutionary War hero who fought and died for our country over 200 years ago. Pulaski was a Polish commander who fought the Russians for Polish independence, and, as a result, he was renowned in Europe for his bravery and cavalry skills. Following the recommendation of Benjamin Franklin, General Washington brought him to America to help our forces fight the British.

Pulaski was promoted to general officer by Washington after showing incredible bravery at the Battle of Brandywine. And when funding from Congress was tight, Pulaski used his own money to purchase necessary equipment for his soldiers. In 1779, after launching an assault against the British in the Battle of Savannah, Pulaski was wounded, and he died 2 days later. In his death, he fulfilled a commitment he had made to General Washington in which he stated ``I came here, where freedom is being defended, to serve it, and to live or die for it.''

I am a proud cosponsor of this joint resolution which would posthumously declare Casimir Pulaski to be an honorary citizen of the United States. This is one of the rarest honors that the Congress can bestow, and we have only done so on six previous occasions.

The concept of freedom drew patriots from across the colonies, and around the world, to our land to join in our struggle for freedom. Casimir Pulaski had the bravery, courage, and love of liberty and independence that the Polish people have been so well known for throughout history. He died for our freedom and he deserves this posthumous recognition.

Mr. Speaker, I come from the great State of Michigan where we currently have the highest unemployment in the Nation and where our citizens have suffered more than most in this economic downturn. And every week when I come to Washington, I am constantly amazed that this Congress isn't laser focused on creating jobs, because the question being asked by the American people is: Where are the jobs?

When President Obama said he wanted an economic stimulus bill principally focused on tax cuts and infrastructure investment, I was all for it. But the bill that was passed by the Democrat majority in Congress really was unrecognized from what was originally proposed. That bill focused much more on expanding the size of government than expanding jobs in the private sector. Americans were told that if this huge expansion of government were passed, that 2 to 3 million new jobs would be created and unemployment would not reach 8 percent. And what are the results actually?

Well, since that time, our economy has shed nearly 3 million jobs and the unemployment rate has now reached nearly 10 percent. In my home State of Michigan, it is in the 15 percentile.

Nine months after the passage of the failed stimulus plan, Americans are still asking: Where are the jobs?

After passing a jobs bill that did not create jobs, House Democrats passed a cap-and-trade national energy tax. This national energy tax will destroy millions of jobs in this struggling economy. Manufacturing, which is so important in my home State of Michigan, would be especially hard hit when millions more good-paying jobs are shipped overseas to nations that are not going to put this jobs-killing tax on their manufacturing companies.

Struggling American families will also be very hard hit. The Obama administration's own estimates project that this legislation would cost our economy $200 billion every year, which means an increase of $1,700 for every American household. That means hard-pressed Americans are going to pay more for energy while at the same time having their jobs put at risk.

I would ask this, Mr. Speaker, as the American people continue to do: Where are the jobs?

Congress is now considering a health care reform bill that would amount to a government takeover and would be funded with job-killing tax increases and cuts to Medicare impacting the coverage of millions of American seniors. That bill, H.R. 3200, places an 8 percent tax on payroll for every business in this Nation that does not offer health care coverage to their workers.

Well, I have talked to countless employers, and they tell you that their costs run much higher than 8 percent, so they would end the private coverage that they currently give to their employees and dump them all out on the public plan.

Republicans have been accused of being the party of no because we have stood against this job-killing agenda, but we have offered alternatives, better alternatives, and it is actually the Democrats in Congress who have said no to these ideas. Let me cite a few specific examples.

We have offered an alternative to the stimulus plan that, according to the formula created by President Obama's own economic team, would create twice the jobs at half the cost. We have offered an all-of-the- above national energy plan as an alternative to the Democrats' national energy tax. Our plan would encourage the development of clean alternative energy while allowing the development of domestic supplies, which would bring energy costs down instead of driving them up. And it would create jobs here in America, and it would make America more energy independent.

We have offered commonsense approaches to health care reforms that would provide greater competition, increase access to care, and reduce costs. We feel that individuals should be able to purchase health care across State lines, and small businesses should be able to group together to open up more options and reduce costs to protect private health care. And we believe we need to enact real medical liability reform to end junk lawsuits that drive up

costs by forcing doctors to practice defensive medicine.

I raise these points because I truly believe we have to have bipartisan consensus to address the challenges that are facing our Nation.

Mr. Speaker, the American people are way ahead of the politicians here in Washington. They understand the need for jobs. They understand that bigger government will not increase jobs but will put millions more jobs at risk.

Mr. Speaker, it is long past the time we start listening to commonsense Americans who continue to ask: Where are the jobs?

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Res. 731. The Department of Homeland Security has worked diligently to keep us safe since the devastating attacks on 9/11.

And thankfully we've not had a successful attack since then--it's not because of luck, but due to the hard work of the men and women who work every day to secure the Homeland.

The over 200,000 employees of 22 agencies that make up the Department deserve our utmost gratitude for their steadfast resolve and commitment to prevent acts of terror against our citizens.

They have worked to increase cooperation between our intelligence and defense communities.

They have strengthened our preparedness and created partnerships among Federal agencies and local and state first responders.

These employees patrol our land and sea borders, secure our airports and Ports of Entry and safeguard critical infrastructure.

Theirs is truly a 24/7 job whose successes are rarely known or acknowledged.

As the recent arrest of Najibullah Zazi, the Afghan accused of plotting to plant bombs in New York shows, we still face many challenges to stop the threat of terrorism on our shores and in our cities and towns.

Border security must be enhanced; we must remain vigilant if we are to continue to disrupt plots and attacks on our nation. Complacency isn't an option because as we have seen over and over again, the intent to commit acts of terrorism remains strong.

Defending the homeland will take more than just a Federal effort--our fire fighters, law enforcement officers, emergency medical personnel, and other first responders selflessly and repeatedly risk their lives to fulfill their mission of helping to prevent, and prepare to respond to, acts of terrorism, major disasters, and other emergencies.

All Americans should take the opportunity during National Preparedness Month this September to take steps at home, work, and school to enhance their ability to assist in preventing, protecting against, and preparing to respond to acts of terrorism.

I commend the work of our first responders and the Department of Homeland Security. I offer my full cooperation in meeting our shared goals of keeping America safe and secure.

I urge my colleagues to support this resolution.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Res. 679, Supporting the goals and Ideals of American Legion Day.

The American Legion was chartered by Congress in 1919 as a patriotic, war-time veteran's organization, devoted to mutual helpfulness.

The American Legion has been a guardian of our national ensign, and the first ``Flag Code'' was drafted during a conference called by The American Legion in Washington, D.C. The code eventually was adopted by Congress in 1942. And today, the Legion is at the forefront of efforts to gain a constitutional amendment to protect the American flag from physical desecration.

The American Legion's voice has been instrumental in establishing the Veterans Administration, then later advocated for it to become a cabinet level department, creating a GI bill, and fighting for compensation for Vietnam vets exposed to Agent Orange and for veterans diagnosed with Gulf War Syndrome.

The American Legion became the largest single contributor to the ``Vietnam Wall'' in Washington, DC--its members collectively donated $1 Million dollars.

And today, the American Legion is a strong advocate for today's servicemen and women returning from the battlefields of Iraq and Afghanistan--assisting combat wounded veterans receive compensation for their injuries and helping to create a 21st Century GI Bill.

The reason that we are free today is because brave men and women have answered our Nation's call in our time of need. They have sweated, bled and sacrificed for our freedom.

And as it is written on the Korean War Memorial in Washington, D.C, freedom isn't free--the cost is readily apparent in the rows of crosses in Arlington, where many generations of American warriors have been laid to rest.

We owe our veterans a debt that can never be fully repaid, but I personally want to thank them for your service and sacrifice. I will continue to work to ensure that our veterans get the care, help, and benefits they so richly deserve.

Let us remember our obligations to our Nation's veterans, as Abraham Lincoln said in his Second Inaugural Address, ``to care for him who shall have borne the battle, and for his widow and his orphan.''

The American Legion has been there for our Nation's veterans for over 90 years, and I'm proud to support this resolution, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, the American health care system is clearly in need of reform. Yet at the same time our system of health care continues to be the envy of the world in producing life- saving innovations in the pharmaceutical industry, in medical procedures and in treatment.

Congress certainly must act to help bring down costs and expand access to health insurance, while preserving the quality of care patients receive in this great, great Nation. I have heard many of my Democratic colleagues, and certainly the President, speak about the need to increase competition in the health insurance marketplace to help reduce costs, and I could not agree more.

But where I part company with my Democratic colleagues is in their prescription for the problem. The way they want to increase competition is to create a new government insurance company, better known as the public option, to provide this competition. They have demonized insurance companies in an effort to build support for this misguided plan, even though recent public opinion surveys have shown that over 80 percent of Americans are satisfied with their current plan. My concerns with the public option, which

are shared, I think, by huge amounts of Americans, is that it would have an unfair advantage that could crowd out private health care, and it would put huge new costs on the American taxpayers.

For months the President has said if you like what you have, you can keep it. Then just last week, the President changed that and he said, instead, there is nothing in this bill that would force you or your employer to change what you have.

Well, it may be true that nothing will force you or your employer into the public option, but the bill before the House has perverse incentives to encourage your employer to do just that. The bill mandates individuals to purchase insurance, and it requires large employers to provide care for their employees. Businesses that do not provide health care insurance will be taxed at 8 percent of their payroll as a penalty, and most employers will tell you that health care costs typically run about 14 to 16 percent of their payroll.

So businesses that are struggling to make ends meet will now face a choice, either continue to pay 15 percent of their payroll to provide coverage for their employees, or just dump them out onto the public plan and take the 8 percent penalty. Well, that is a pretty easy business decision to make. Unfortunately, it has very broad implications for their employers, and I believe this Nation will go to a government-run health care plan very, very quickly as a result of that.

Madam Speaker, there is a better way to reduce the cost of insurance at virtually no cost to the government, and that is to simply allow individuals and businesses to purchase health care insurance across State lines. Lifting this restriction would bring hundreds, if not thousands, of new competitors into the private marketplace to compete for business. This would absolutely reduce costs, and it's a simple change which we can enact immediately.

The President actually made an analogy to private auto insurance, and I would respectfully remind the President that auto insurance can be purchased across State lines, and there is no public option in auto insurance. The market regulates itself to keep costs down.

Additionally, millions of Americans today have their health care covered by a health savings account. If H.R. 3200 is enacted, health savings accounts will be gone and those who utilize them will be forced to change their coverage. So, again, this is actually less choice and less competition in the health care industry.

I was very glad last week when the President said he would look at pilot programs with regard to medical liability reform. For too long, trial attorneys have looked at doctors as ATM machines and have filed countless frivolous lawsuits.

This has driven up costs by forcing insurance companies to settle because these suits cost too much to fight, regardless of their merit, and the costs are passed along to doctors in the form of higher premiums and ultimately higher health insurance costs to consumers. It has also made it very difficult for specialty doctors like OB/GYNs to practice, and it limits access, particularly in rural areas.

Many States have enacted caps on noneconomic damages. And in every place where this has happened, doctors have moved in, lawyers have moved out, and costs have gone down.

So I was very disappointed when the President said over the weekend that he doesn't believe caps work. Respectfully, Mr. President, actually, caps on noneconomic damage is medical liability reform.

Madam Speaker, the American people are rightfully concerned about how any reform will impact out-of-control Federal spending and our exploding Federal deficit. It just stretches credibility when people are told that we can create a public option, expand access and availability of care, and we can do so without dramatically increasing taxes or adding to the Federal debt.

Well, you can't get something for nothing, particularly when the government is involved. And many seniors find it difficult to believe that we can pay for some of this by reducing spending on Medicare by $600 billion and more and not impact their level of care.

The proponents say these cuts are just waste, fraud and abuse. Well, if there is that much waste, fraud and abuse, we should be attacking that.

Madam Speaker, we can do better. And, for the sake of the American people, we must do better.