Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding and for his extraordinary leadership on this important bill.

The economy has shed nearly 1 million private sector jobs this year and 9.5 million workers are unemployed, 2.2 million more than a year ago. As this chart shows, unemployment is particularly high in nearly half of the States. The red shows where unemployment is over 6 percent, the orange is where it is 5 percent.

In high unemployment States, over a third of the workers who have lost their jobs, through no fault of their own, are exhausting even their extended unemployment benefits. Nearly 800,000 workers will be left without additional Federal jobless benefits starting next week when their extension is set to run out. Over half of these workers live in high unemployment States.

Congress has extended benefits to the States hardest hit by unemployment in every other downturn in the past 25 years. This bill will bring relief to families struggling to find work and make ends meet and also boost our sagging economy.

In light of today's jobless numbers, I urge a strong yes vote on this important bill.

Madam Speaker, over fifteen years ago, President Clinton signed into law the Family and Medical Leave Act (PL 103-3), legislation that allows employees to take time off from work to care for a new baby or sick family member. Because of this landmark legislation, millions of Americans have been able to take unpaid leave without the risk of losing their jobs.

Today, I am introducing the Family and Medical Leave Enhancement Act. Building upon the success of the 1993 Family and Medical Leave Act, FMLA, this legislation would allow more people to benefit from FMLA by allowing employees in companies with more than 25 employees to take Family and Medical Leave and would extend employee leave for workers to meet their family's needs. The legislation includes 24 hours of leave (during any 12-month period) for parents and grandparents to go to parent-teacher conferences or to take their children, grandchildren or other family members to the doctor for regular medical or dental appointments.

Currently, the FMLA allows qualified workers to take up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave to care for newborns, seek emergency medical care for themselves, parents, children under 18 or legal spouse. My legislation would add commonsense enhancements to FMLA.

In 1997, this legislative measure was supported by President Bill Clinton. In February 1997, President Clinton said, ``I call upon Congress to expand the family leave law to give parents an additional 24 hours of unpaid leave each year to take a child or an elderly relative to a regular doctor's appointment or to attend parent-teacher conferences at school. In so doing, we'll make our families stronger and our workers more productive, building the kind of country and economy we all want for our children.''

On behalf of America's families, I urge my fellow colleagues to join me in support of the Family and Medical Leave Enhancement Act.

Madam Speaker, this is a difficult vote. This bill is not popular, but it is necessary. A wholesale failure of the banking system would be the financial equivalent of an economic heart attack, the consequences of which could severely affect the lives and livelihoods of millions of ordinary American citizens.

The bill before us endeavors to prevent such a calamity. I do not pretend that it is a perfect bill, and taxpayers are rightfully outraged at the prospect of bailing out irresponsible banks and those that lead them.

Speaker Pelosi and Chairman Frank have made improvements in this bill. We have imposed stronger oversight, allowed judicial review, and mandated transparency through the publication of asset purchase prices. We have directed the Treasury to safeguard taxpayer interest while reducing foreclosure, allowed the government to obtain equity warrants so taxpayers may participate in the upside of rescued banks. We have created a system under which the banks themselves will pay to insure each other's assets.

Perhaps most importantly, half the funds, $350 billion, will not be made available until after a 4-month cooling off period, during which time we in Congress can use that transparent reporting to examine the prices paid for the assets, the warrants obtained, and the program's effectiveness in stabilizing the financial system and aiding American taxpayers and homeowners.

We will continue our work on October 6 in hearings before the Government Reform and Oversight Committee in ways to reform the financial system and stabilize our economy.

I urge a ``yes'' vote.

Madam Speaker, today, I reintroduce legislation, the Revitalizing Cities Through Parks Enhancement, RECIPE, Act, that would establish a $10 million grant program for qualified, nonprofit, community groups, allowing them to lease municipally-owned vacant lots and transform these areas into parks. Parks and gardens created with the grants will not only provide safe places to gather, but will increase property values as well. The grants will be available from the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development to groups who have met standards of financial security, and who have histories of serving their communities. To further ensure that these grants are used to make lasting positive changes, land improved and made into open community space under this legislation must be available for use as open space from the government for at least 7 years.

Mr. Speaker, today we recognize and salute the contribution of Mike McNulty as he prepares to retire as one of our best.

Since I arrived in the House, I have been proud to stand with Mike, as he fights for New York's working families.

He has carried on his family's tradition of public service since 1969 when he first won office--at age 22--as Green Island Town Supervisor. Elected to Congress in 1988, he has distinguished himself as a member of this House over the past 20 years, fighting for the needs of his Albany-based district.

As Chair of the Social Security Subcommittee of the Ways and Means Committee, he has protected Social Security from misguided attempts to privatize it, putting the retirement of millions at risk.

I'm glad to have had the honor to serve with Mike McNulty, and wish him a long and happy retirement away from the House.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 6983, the Paul Wellstone and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act. I stand with

millions of families, caregivers, healthcare professionals, and individuals in gratitude to this Congress, led by chief sponsor, Representative Patrick Kennedy, who have joined forces in a bipartisan manner to help those suffering from mental illness. Today, we tell Americans from all walks of life that we understand that mental illness is just like any physical illness, we understand the difficulties you have been facing, and we are here to end discrimination against patients seeking treatment for mental illnesses.

One out of every five adults in the United State suffers from mental or substance abuse disorders, which according to the Wall Street Journal, cost our economy $550 billion last year. Of course, treating mental illness is not about dollars and cents. It's about lives which are ruined and lives which are lost. Last year one, more than 30,000 Americans committed suicide from untreated depression and 150,000 Americans died as the direct result of chemical addiction. When people are not properly treated, or not treated at all, our Nation as a whole suffers.

H.R. 6983 permanently reauthorizes and expands the Mental Health Parity Act of 1996 to provide for equity in the coverage of mental and substance use disorders compared to medical and surgical disorders. The legislation ensures that group health plans do not charge higher copayments, coinsurance, deductibles, and impose maximum out-of-pocket limits and lower day and visit limits on mental health and addiction care than for medical and surgical benefits. As under current law, the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of Labor, and the Internal Revenue Service may penalize health plans for discriminatory practices under the bill and individuals may bring a private right of action to receive covered benefits.

Discrimination on all counts must be eliminated in this country. This bill takes a giant step in the right direction. I am grateful to our leadership for moving this bill which is sure to help millions of Americans.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding and for his extraordinary leadership on so many important issues before this body, including the Debbie Smith Act, which I rise today in strong support of, H.R. 5057, the Debbie Smith Reauthorization Act that I introduced to ensure that the nationwide backlog of DNA evidence is processed.

I want to thank the bill's supporters in the Senate, especially Senators Biden, Leahy, Kyl and Specter, for their assistance in getting this legislation through the Senate and back to the House before we adjourn.

I also want to commend Chairman Conyers for his leadership, Ranking Member Smith, Chairman Scott and Ranking Member Gohmert, along with Anthony Weiner and so many of my colleagues for their support and commitment to this issue.

Advocates have called the Debbie Smith Act one of the most important anti-crime bills that has ever passed Congress and one of the most important anti-violence against women and anti-rape pieces of legislation ever.

I first introduced the grant program in 2001 after a rape victim whose attacker was later identified through DNA analysis testified before a hearing in Congress. The long, bipartisan effort to pass the original legislation was made into a Lifetime movie entitled ``A Life Interrupted: The Debbie Smith Story.'' I thank Lifetime and Oprah for having championed the passage of this important legislation.

I have been working on this issue since 2001, when I organized a hearing in the Government Reform and Oversight Committee to examine the use of DNA to both convict and to exonerate. We reached out to many victims to testify. Only one would come before Congress, Debbie Smith.

She told her horrifying story, how an intruder broke into her suburban home in Williamsburg, Virginia, in 1989 and raped her repeatedly in nearby woods while her police officer husband slept upstairs. He rushed her to the police station. DNA was taken, but in many ways her life was destroyed, as she believed he would come back as he said he would and kill her if she had told anybody what happened.

Six years later, after an assailant was charged with her rape, because DNA processing techniques had produced a cold hit with a State prisoner's DNA sample, that match gave Debbie her first moment of closure and security. Since then, Debbie and her husband, Robert, have lobbied Congress, traveled the country and started a not-for-profit to help victims of rape.

It was unconscionable that hundreds of thousands of rape kits with DNA evidence already collected were gathering dust in police stations and crime labs all over this country, and it is still unconscionable that according to the U.S. Department of Justice, there are over 221,000 untested rape kits on shelves and evidence cabinets in States across our country.

It was for Debbie and rape survivors like her that in 2001 I authored the Debbie Smith Act to provide Federal funding to process the backlog of DNA evidence. The bill helped standardize the evidence collection of kits for sexual assaults, making it easier to enter the information into State and national databases.

It also helped forensic labs process the data evidence and compare the DNA samples with those taken from criminals. It funded the SANE nurse program that taught them how to process and maintain the information and to go into court to help the police with convictions. The law also allows law enforcement greater leeway to indict John Doe or an unnamed individual using their DNA profile.

The Justice for All Act accomplished several critical objectives, including authorizing the necessary funding, $151 million in each fiscal year from 2005 through 2009, to process the backlog of DNA evidence through the creation of the State grant program.

Since 2004, millions of dollars in funding have been appropriated to States across our country to attack this backlog grant program. Each unprocessed kit represents an innocent life like Debbie Smith, and a rapist who may commit multiple rapes before he is caught.

The FBI has characterized rape as the worst crime, preceded only by murder in terms of the destruction to one's life. They have said that a rapist, a sick person, will attack seven times. So at least, if you process these kits, you can put people in jail and prevent innocent victims from having the horror in their lives that Debbie experienced.

The Debbie Smith Reauthorization Act extends the program through 2014 and also reauthorizes programs for training, education and sexual assault forensic exam grants.

DNA is remarkable evidence. It doesn't forget, it can't be confused, it is not intimidated, and it does not lie.

While an eyewitness can easily get mixed up about height, weight, hair color, DNA never changes its story.

Debbie's bravery and dedication and working with me and others to pass the Debbie Smith Act, which was a very difficult thing to accomplish, has already made a tremendous impact on our justice system.

I also want to acknowledge the RAINN program for its steadfast support of the Debbie Smith Reauthorization Act and for its efforts on behalf of sexual assault victims and survivors. Tragically, only 6 percent of rapists will ever spend any time in jail. Congress must continue to support programs like the Debbie Smith DNA Backlog Grant Program and help to put to rapists in prison, reduce the violence against women and solve other violent crimes.

I urge my colleagues to join me in important bipartisan, hopefully unanimous support for this reauthorization.

Madam Speaker, today I am introducing a bill with my colleagues Mr. Gonzalez, Mr. Clay, Mr. Honda, and Mr. Waxman to establish an independent Census agency. It is indispensable to the basic principles of democratic representation that the decennial census is seen by the American public to be completely independent and nonpartisan. Elevating the Census Bureau to the status of an independent agency is a powerful statement to the American people and their leaders that the decennial census and the other critical surveys conducted by the Census Bureau are protected, and that our Government will summon the best demographers, statisticians, scientists and managers we can find to lead this vital agency.

Madam Speaker, I rise to join Hellenic- Americans and Philhellenes everywhere to celebrate ``OXI Day (No Day),'' which falls on the 28th of October. This year marks the 68th anniversary of a very important day in Hellenic history, the day on which brave Greek patriots said ``No'' to fascism, ``No'' to injustice, and ``No'' to slavery. For those individuals who lived through that momentous period and their descendants, many of whom live in the 14th Congressional District of New York, ``OXI Day'' is more than a memory: it is the embodiment of Hellenism and its highest ideals.

At dawn on October 28, 1940, General Ionnas Metaxas was confronted with an ultimatum. An Italian ambassador delivered a message directly from General Mussolini demanding that Greece allow Axis forces to enter Greek territory and occupy certain unspecified ``strategic locations'' or face war.

General Metaxas simply replied ``No'' and committed the brave people of Greece to resistance against Axis oppression. With level-headed determination and steadfast resolve, the citizenry of Greece mobilized. Men went calmly to their closets and retrieved their military uniforms and weapons. Women went about their necessary tasks, and the children assisted as they were able.

On OXI Day, the people of Greece chose the harder path, the path of resistance. That brave generation of Hellenes refused to submit to oppression even at the cost of their homes, their land, and their lives. Theirs was an act of self-sacrifice that clearly proclaimed the humanitarian ideals of their Orthodox Christian faith and their ethnic heritage. The Greeks' brave defense of their land was a crucial turning point in the Axis eastern advances. Dogged resistance by Greek patriots weakened Axis morale and derailed the Nazi war effort by delaying the eventual attack on Soviet Union. The Greeks' sacrifice will forever be remembered and honored by the free nations of the world.

I ask my colleagues to join me in saluting the heroes of OXI Day. In their brave words and deeds we see all of the highest virtues of Hellenic heritage: passion for justice, courage at a time of trial, unity in the midst of conflict, and willingness to sacrifice one's life for the good of others. On this day, we thank Greece for saying ``OXI.''

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the 48th Anniversary of the Republic of Cyprus. It was on October 1, 1960, that Cyprus became an independent republic after decades of British colonial rule.

I am honored to represent Astoria, Queens--one of the largest and most vibrant communities of Greek and Cypriot Americans in this country. I truly enjoy participating in the life of this community and treasure the wonderful and vital Cypriot friends that I have come to know. Cyprus has long been a key partner for the United States, and our friendship rests on the bedrock of shared democratic values.

As a member of the European Union, Cyprus is playing a vital role in European affairs while also strengthening relations with the United States. Unfortunately, the commemoration of Cyprus' Independence Day this year, as in the past, is clouded by the fact that Turkish military forces continue illegally to occupy Cyprus, in violation of U.N. Security Council resolutions. On July 20, 1974, Turkey invaded Cyprus, and to this day continues to maintain an estimated 40,000 heavily armed troops on the island.

I have introduced H. Res. 407, which expresses the strong support of the House for the positive actions by the Government of the Republic of Cyprus aimed at opening additional crossing points along the cease-fire line. On April 3, the border crossing at Ledra Street in Nicosia was opened, and for the first time in decades, people could walk the full length of the street. I hope that more positive steps will be taken to end the division of Cyprus and to bring people together.

On March 21, 2008, President Christofias and Turkish-Cypriot leader Talat agreed to establish working groups and technical committees as stipulated in the July 8, 2006, agreement for which the House of Representatives expressed its full support by passing H. Res. 405 last year. I am pleased that new comprehensive negotiations regarding the unification of Cyprus within a bizonal, bi-communal federation have recently begun.

I believe that the United States must play an active role in the resolution of the serious issues facing Cyprus. The relationship between Cyprus and the United States is strong and enduring, and we stand together celebrating democracy and freedom.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R.

928, the ``Inspector General Reform Act'' This legislation includes provisions of a bill that I introduced last year, along with Ranking Member Tom Davis, which will provide for the enhanced protection of the Internal Revenue Service and its employees.

In 1998, Congress passed the Internal Revenue Service Restructuring and Reform Act, which created the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA). The legislation gave TIGTA the responsibility for protecting the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) against external attempts to corrupt or threaten IRS employees. At the same time, it excluded the provision of providing ``physical security'' from TIGTA's responsibilities

Prior to the enactment of this law, the former IRS Inspection Service had been responsible for protecting the IRS against external attempts to corrupt or threaten IRS employees. The IRS Inspection Service was responsible for providing armed escorts for IRS employees who were specifically threatened or who were contacting individuals designated as ``Potentially Dangerous Taxpayers.'' The law transferred most of those duties to the new Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration. Inexplicably, ``physical security'' was excluded from TIGTA's statutory responsibilities.

In its current statutory mission, TIGTA investigates all allegations of threats or assaults involving IRS employees and assists U.S. Attorneys' offices with appropriate prosecutions. However, if TIGTA determines that any of the threats or assaults it investigates call for the provision of physical security, the language of the 1998 law precludes TIGTA from taking action.

Authorizing TIGTA to have armed escort authority would be both more efficient and more effective in advancing tax administration and ensuring the safety of IRS employees.

I am pleased that upon passage of H.R. 928 today, this bill will be sent to the president for his signature. I want to thank Chairman Waxman and Ranking Member Davis for their support of this provision, and I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 928.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of S. 3001, the ``The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009.'' This legislation gives critical assistance to our troops including providing equipment and training, providing all servicemembers with a pay raise of 3.9 percent, and improving health care.

I also want to note provisions in the bill based on legislation, H.R. 3033, the ``Contractors and Federal Spending Accountability Act,'' that I have been introducing since the 107th Congress to bring integrity back to the federal procurement system. S. 3001 will establish a comprehensive, centralized database that will keep track of the integrity and performance of certain persons awarded federal contracts and grants, more efficiently monitor the federal procurement system, and help protect U.S. taxpayer dollars. Any person awarded a federal agency contract or grant in excess of $500,000 would be included in the database including information related to any civil, criminal, or administrative proceedings involving the person. Currently, no central database exists to help procurement officials track fraudulent contractors who do business with the federal government.

As a City Councilwoman, I successfully led an effort to implement a similar system. This system has aided the City of New York tremendously, and it has prevented habitual bad actors and felons from being awarded city contracts.

Such a system is badly needed at the federal level. The contract officers and the federal government's watchdogs, the federal suspension and debarment officials, currently lack the information they need to protect our business interests. We have no central way of accounting for the performance of our purchases. Beyond a listing of currently debarred or suspended persons, officials are limited to their individual agency's knowledge of an entity's track record, press reports and personal contacts with other agencies. The American public's knowledge is limited even further. Often times this allows federal contractors and assistance recipients to repeatedly violate federal law yet still receive millions of dollars from the federal government.

The federal government spends more than $417 billion annually on goods and services. We owe it to the American people to be a model consumer. Today, we are taking an important step toward bringing greater transparency to the federal contracting process.

I want to thank Chairman Waxman, Ranking Member Tom Davis, Chairman Towns, and their staffs, particularly Mark Stephenson, for working with me on this issue. I also want to acknowledge the efforts of Senator McCaskill who championed the database provisions in the Senate as well as Representative Mark Udall who joined me in support of a contracting reform amendment when the House considered the Defense Authorization legislation earlier this year.

I urge my colleagues to support S. 3001.

Madam Speaker, later today, this House will consider H.R. 5244, the Credit Cardholders' Bill of Rights. It is landmark reform that will level the playing field between credit card companies and consumers.

For too long, card issuers have been able to do anything they want any time they want, and cardholders can take it or leave it. But credit cards have become an essential part of most households, and when rates are hiked retroactively, double-cycle billing charges interest on balances already paid, and when multiple over-limit fees are charged for just one over-limit transaction, something has gone haywire and consumers on Main Street often face the same kind of credit crunch that Wall Street is now coping with. Even the Federal Reserve calls these credit card practices ``unfair, deceptive, and anti-competitive.''

Every game needs an umpire, and today the House can help ``backstop''

American consumers with these reforms by passing the Credit Cardholders' Bill of Rights. I urge support for this important legislation.

I thank the gentleman for yielding and for his leadership.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the rule on H.R. 5244, the Credit Cardholders' Bill of Rights. The rule before us gives the House an opportunity to have a clear up-or-down vote on meaningful credit card reforms that will level the playing field between cardholders and credit card companies.

This legislation passed the House Financial Services Committee on July 31 on a vote of 39-27 and has the support of 155 cosponsors in this House.

For too long our constituents have found themselves on the wrong side of a very uneven playing field between them and their credit card companies. This bill restores fairness to credit cards and brings back the notion that a deal is a deal.

The bill that this rule will allow for consideration represents a work product that the committee and I started at the beginning of this Congress. We met with the stakeholders, issuers, consumer groups and the regulators and economists. We listened to real consumers and experts in consumer law and economics. We held six hearings in my subcommittee on the reforms contained in this bill and the reforms that are proposed by the Federal Reserve.

A year ago I held a round table which produced gold standard principles to guide voluntary issuer action. Several issuers announced changes in policy consistent with the principles, and I applaud their efforts.

In May, the Federal Reserve, the Office of Thrift Supervision, and the National Credit Union Administrator released proposed rules to prohibit unfair and deceptive acts and practices that track the key provisions of my legislation. These regulations have received an astonishing, record-breaking 56,000 comments from consumers in support, the largest ever in history.

But without legislation, regulations can be stopped or scaled back, and lucrative abuse of practices will continue, and issuers who gave them up will lose profits and their market share. We need legislation to level the playing field for consumers and issuers so that the normal forces of the free market can work together again.

The bill has been endorsed by 12 consumer groups. I would like to place their names in the Record and applaud their hard work. Labor unions, including the AFL-CIO, and especially the SEIU, and civil rights organizations, the Leadership Council on Civil Rights, the NAACP, and the National Council of La Raza. Editorials and op-eds endorsing the need for credit card reform have run in more than 55 newspapers across the Nation, and these editorials can be seen on my Website. Commentators from Pat Robertson of Christian broadcasters and Lou Dobbs of CNN have consistently supported this effort. Senator Barack Obama has called for a Credit Cardholder's Bill of Rights, and Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin has said that Republicans should get on this issue and not leave it to Democrats. So it is a bipartisan effort.

Even four of the five banking regulators have called for the specific reforms contained in this bill. I say this because some on the other side may argue against this rule. But I want the American people to understand all of the work that has gone into this work product. This bill, this process has been open and bipartisan.

Today, with the rule now before us, we get to preserve the core principles of this legislation, and this rule gives us a chance to have a clean up-or-down vote on meaningful credit card reform. I support this rule and look forward to the underlying debate.

I would like to conclude by saying that it is now clear that in the area of consumer credit, the same lack of reasonable regulations, transparency and prudent lending has led to a level of pain on Main Street that matches or exceeds the pain on Wall Street. This is our chance to do something about it.

We are called upon to come forward with a $700 billion backstop for Wall Street. This legislation gives a backstop and support to Main Street.

I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

H.R. 5244--The Credit Cardholders' Bill of Rights

There are 155 Cosponsors, 153 Democrats, 2 Republicans.

Passed House Financial Services Committee on July 31st on

vote of 39-27.

Endorsed by consumer groups, labor unions, civil rights

organizations and editorial boards from across the nation.

Consumer Groups: U.S. Public Interest Research Group,

Consumers Union, Consumer Action, Center for Responsible

Lending, National Consumer Law Center, Demos: A Network for

Ideas & Action, Consumer Federation of America, ACORN,

National Association of Consumer Advocates, National

Association of Neighborhoods, and National Fair Housing

Alliance.

Labor Unions: American Federation of Labor and Congress of

Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) and Service Employees

International Union.

Civil Rights Organizations: Leadership Conference on Civil

Rights, National Association for the Advancement of Colored

People (NAACP), National Council of La Raza.

Editorial Boards: New York Times, Frederick News Post,

Detroit Free Press, Minneapolis Star Tribune, Staten Island

Advance, The Miami Herald, The Philadelphia Inquirer, San

Gabriel Valley Tribune (California), Sun-Sentinel (Fort

Lauderdale, Florida), The Boston Globe, The Herald (SC),

Buffalo News (New York), Knoxville News-Sentinel (TN), The

Columbus Dispatch (OH), The St. Petersburg Times (FL), Daily

and Sunday Review (PA), The Lebanon Daily News

(Pennsylvania), Asbury Park Press (New Jersey), Newsday (NY),

The Charleston Gazette (W. VA), The Dallas Morning News, The

Baltimore Sun, The Times Union (Albany, NY), The Toledo Blade

(OH), The Burlington Free Press (Vermont), St. Paul Pioneer

Press (Minnesota), Brattleboro Reformer (Vermont), The Ithaca

Journal (New York), The Macon Telegraph (Georgia), The Kansas

City Star, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette (Pennsylvania), The Denver

Post, The Record (Bergen County, NJ), Lowell Sun

(Massachusetts), The Oregonian (Portland, Oregon), The

Columbus Dispatch (Ohio), St. Louis Post-Dispatch (Missouri),

San Diego Union Tribune, Albuquerque Journal (New Mexico),

Portland Press Herald (Maine), USA Today, The News & Observer

(Raleigh, North Carolina), The Olympian (Washington), Morning

Call (Allentown, Pennsylvania), The Cincinnati Enquirer

(Ohio), The Seattle

Post-Intelligencer, Grand Rapid Press (Michigan), The

Providence Journal (Rhode Island), The Detroit News

(Michigan), The Roanoke Times (Virginia), Lancaster New Era

(Pennsylvania), The Myrtle Beach Sun-News (South Carolina),

and The State Journal-Register (Springfield, IL).

Madam Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1476, I call up the bill (H.R. 5244) to amend the Truth in Lending Act to establish fair and transparent practices relating to the extension of credit under an open end consumer credit plan, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that

all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on H.R. 5244 and to insert extraneous material thereon.

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

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 5244, the Credit Cardholders' Bill of Rights. I introduced this bill, together with Chairman Frank. This important legislation has 155 cosponsors. A dozen national consumer groups have not only endorsed this legislation, but have made it one of their top priorities. The AFL-CIO and especially the SEIU have strongly supported the bill. Major civil rights groups saw this bill as necessary to stop abuses to their constituents.

Over 50 newspapers from all over the Nation published editorials and op-eds in support of credit card reform, from California to Florida and even my own hometown paper, The New York Times.

The Federal Reserve, whose first priority is protecting the safety and soundness of our financial institutions and our economy, has called the credit card practices addressed in this bill ``anticompetitive for markets and unfair and deceptive to consumers.'' Some 56,000 Americans wrote in in support of the proposed Federal rule, more than any in the history of the Fed, commenting in support of this bill.

Rarely do we get an opportunity to vote for legislation with such deep and widespread support. In the midst of the financial turmoil in our markets, Congress has been asked to provide $700 billion for Wall Street. Now we have a chance with this bill to do something for Main Street.

Credit cards are an essential part of our economy, but for too long card issuers have been allowed to do whatever they want, any time, for any reason. A deal is a deal, but what sort of a deal is it when one side gets to make all the decisions? This bill will get credit card practices back to basic principles of contractual fairness.

No other industry is allowed to raise the price of a product after the consumer has bought it.

Also, the credit card bill of rights bans ``any time any reason'' rate increases on existing card balances. It bans double cycle billing which charges interest on debt already paid.

It gives consumers 45 days notice of any rate increases so cardholders can decide whether to pay off their balances and shop for another card. The bill makes sure that consumers who borrow high rate balances such as emergency cash advances can pay them off by requiring issuers to credit some part of the payments to the high rate balances.

The bill stops due date gimmicks that trick cardholders into paying late and racking up unjustified fees. It prevents subprime cards from trapping the most vulnerable cardholders in a cycle of debt, and it prohibits issuing cards to vulnerable minors.

The bill will demonstrate, once and for all, that Congress is protecting working Americans, as well as large institutions, from the current financial storm. Unfair credit card debt is as toxic to ordinary citizens as subprime debt obligations are to investment banks.

This is an issue that cuts across social and economic groups. Everyone has a credit card, and too many have a credit card story of getting hit with an unfair or deceptive practice.

I expect opponents of reform will argue that we should wait for the Federal Reserve to act or, as they put it, Congress should defer to the Fed; but this Congress and this majority cannot abdicate our responsibilities. This country cannot afford to wait for this administration and its regulators any longer. We need to take action now on this critical issue.

I urge my colleagues to support this bill. Enough is enough. It is time to help consumers.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

I would say to my good friend on the other side of the aisle, doing nothing and hoping that the Fed will act is an abdication of our responsibility, and that is not the way of this Congress. The Fed has called it unfair and deceptive practices, they have called it anticompetitive, and we should act to correct these abuses.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to my friend and colleague, Keith Ellison, the gentleman from Minnesota, who is cochair of the Consumer Justice Caucus and has had a leadership role in passing this bill.

I yield such time as he may consume to the Chair of the Committee on Financial Services, Barney Frank, and congratulate him on his hard work on this piece of legislation and so many other areas.

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his comments, but I introduced my bill in February after many legislative hearings and meetings that involved Members on the other side of the aisle, stakeholders, consumers, and everyone concerned about this problem. We drafted and put in our bill in February. In May, the Federal Reserve came back with recommendations that mirrored our bill almost completely.

I would like to point out to him that the Federal Reserve is not in the Constitution, and we didn't leave it up to the regulators in the foreclosure crisis. We passed a bill to help homeowners stay in their homes. As we have seen Wall Street under attack, we are not leaving things up to the regulators. We passed legislation giving new direction to the Treasury to help the GSEs, investment banks, and insurers. So you are very selective on your comments that we should step back and let the Fed do everything.

I now recognize an outstanding member of our committee, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hinojosa) who is co-chair of the Literacy Caucus on the Financial Services Committee.

Madam Speaker, I recognize the gentleman from North Carolina, Walter Jones, for 1 minute, an outstanding member of the Committee on Financial Services.

Madam Speaker, I recognize the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Price) for 3 minutes.

I thank the gentleman for his comments. I have been a supporter of transparency and fairness for consumers in the financial services area since I came to Congress. I believe consumers should have complete information so they can decide how to manage their money more efficiently and better.

I commend the gentleman from North Carolina for his efforts to provide consumers with robust information, and I would be happy to work with him on including these provisions.

Madam Speaker, in response to my good friend's comments, the bill is very close to the rule, and opponents of the bill also oppose the rule. Industry opposes my bill and has filed arguments opposing the rule. The OCC opposes the bill and also opposes the Fed rule. The Federal Reserve and two other regulators support the substance of the bill. The administration opposes provisions of my bill that are identical to the Fed rule.

So it would be one thing if you supported the regulations you so passionately argue we should be waiting for; it is another thing to argue that we should wait for something that those who oppose protecting consumers, giving them information and providing fairness in the contractual agreement between credit card issuers and consumers.

I now yield 2 minutes to my good friend from the great State of Colorado, Mark Udall, who has been a leader in this debate and has had constituents who have come before the committee to testify. We thank him for his leadership.

(Mr. UDALL of Colorado asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to Loretta Sanchez, who has been involved in the drafting and the movement of this bill. I congratulate her on her leadership.

May I inquire as to how much time remains.

I yield 1 minute to Keith Ellison, Congressman Ellison from Minnesota.

In response to my good friend and colleague, there is no evidence to support that claim. The argument that this will raise the cost of credit and restrict access to credit is an assertion that has absolutely no basis in fact. We asked the industry, at our six hearings, for some evidence to support this claim, and they had none.

The Federal Reserve and the General Accounting Office have said in reports that there is no evidence to support the argument that these abuses have lowered rates or increased access to credit. And these reports are on my Web site and also on the industry's Web site.

Getting rid of anticompetitive practices will increase access to credit. The Federal Reserve has called these practices anticompetitive. Getting rid of them will not hurt the market. Getting rid of these practices will help competition and increase, not decrease, access to credit.

As I mentioned earlier, we had a roundtable where many of the issuers participated, and some of them voluntarily started following the proposals, voluntarily. And they tried to move to the higher goal standards, and they were turning their backs on these unfair and deceptive practices. But they found that they were losing profit and market share. So we need to level the playing field not only for consumers, but for the industry itself.

I would now like to yield 2 minutes to my distinguished colleague from Connecticut, Christopher Shays, who is a member of the Financial Services Committee.

I yield 1 minute to my colleague, Congressman Ellison.

In response to my good friend on the other side of the aisle, this has not been a rush to judgment. Democrats have been working on this bill for well over 2 years. My subcommittee has held 6 hearings, numerous meetings, roundtable discussions with consumers and issuers. The gentlelady claims that Reg Z is the bill. Reg Z is not at all the same as this bill. Reg Z from the Federal Reserve deals just with disclosure, and the Federal Reserve has said disclosure is not enough. They have called the practices unfair, deceptive, and anti-competitive, and have come forward with recommendations that, in many ways, resemble the bill that is before us today.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I have no further speakers. Does the gentleman from California have any further speakers?

Madam Speaker, I would like to respond to my good friend and colleague on the other side of the aisle, Mr. Castle, for whom I have great respect, and we have worked together productively in many ways. If you support these reforms, as you have so stated, then you should vote for them, and you should not vote for delay and weakening by waiting for some action that may happen in the future. If you support these reforms that have been called unfair and deceptive, then I hope you will join us in a bipartisan effort to correct the system.

Now many of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have said that we should not act. But how in the world can we not act now? We are providing a $700 billion rescue for banks. How can we not provide basic fairness to consumers and some help and rescue to Main Street?

These practices have been called by the Fed unfair and deceptive and anticompetitive. We are helping consumers and the market by getting rid of them. The current situation makes it more urgent that we do so, not less.

Many, many people worked long and hard on this bill, and I would like to first and foremost thank the chairman of this committee, Barney Frank, for his consistent support and input; the 155 cosponsors of this legislation; other members of the Financial Services Committee that took a leadership role, Keith Ellison, Emanuel Cleaver, Lincoln Davis; also Mark Udall, Peter Welch, and Louise Slaughter for their leadership on the issue; Walter Jones and Chris Shays who were supportive from the beginning; the many consumer groups without whom we could not have gotten the broad base of support for this legislation; the labor unions, the AFL-CIO, especially the SCIU, which made this a top priority, civil rights groups; and certainly, the staff: my own staff, Eleni Constantine and Edward Mills, who have poured their heart and intelligence into this effort for 2 years; and the staff of the full committee, Michael Beresik, Patience Singleton, Charles Yi and Rick Maurano. Thank you for your efforts.

I urge very, very strong support for this long overdue reform.

Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to the motion.

Madam Speaker, I would like to ask the gentleman on the other side of the aisle if he would be open to a UC change to change the term ``promptly'' in the bill to ``forthwith.'' If this UC is agreed to, I would support it and accept the motion.

I yield to the gentleman from Delaware.

Then regretfully I oppose your motion to recommit because it would effectively kill the bill because we are in the last week of session, and it is yet another delay tactic. If this was a serious concern, you would have raised this in the committee, and it is obviously just another effort to kill the bill.

We are being called upon to help Wall Street. We should also help Main Street, and I would urge my colleagues to understand that this bill has been supported not only by 155 of their colleagues but over 52 major publications across this country in editorials or op-eds, every single consumer organization in this country, and three of the regulators, including the Federal Reserve.

Rarely are my colleagues on the other side of the aisle given an opportunity to vote against stopping unfair, deceptive, and anticompetitive practices that have been endorsed and called upon by many in this country to stop.

I urge a ``no'' vote on this motion to recommit. It is an effort to kill the bill. It is an effort not to help consumers, and it is an effort that would roll us backwards. They say they're for it. Well, we're giving them an opportunity to vote for consumers with this bill.

I urge a ``no'' vote on the motion to recommit. It kills the bill.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.