Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me this time.

I rise in opposition to this bill and to the rule.

Let it be known that November 17, 2005, is the day this Congress officially forgot the heroes of 9/11. When we vote on this conference report, we will be taking away $125 million promised to sick 9/11 workers. This is money these men and women were promised by this Congress and by the President in 2001. But now, in an era of misdirected priorities, the President and this Congress are snatching the money back.

In fact, this bill is full of misdirected priorities when we consider that the Republican leadership will spend more on tax cuts this week, $70 billion, than they will on education and labor programs for the entire coming year, $68 billion.

You only start to realize how out of touch this Congress is with the priorities of the average American people. I hear daily from Members of Congress that we will never forget 9/11; but when we turn a cold shoulder to the men and women who were there for us in our

greatest hour of need, I cannot in good conscience vote for this bill.

The 9/11 responders are not asking for much. All they are asking for is to be treated with respect and dignity. They rushed to Ground Zero with no concern for their own safety. We were under attack, and America needed help. They responded; and as a result, many of them are very sick now. The government's response has been to fight these heroes every step of the way. Many have had their claims denied or wrapped up in red tape for months or years.

Then when not all of the money was spent in New York State, we are told this is justification for taking it back, even though the need is still great. This shell game would be comical if it were not so sad and so hard on the lives of these people.

I know this decision today is not the fault of the gentleman from Ohio (Chairman Regula). I understand that his hands are tied on this issue. I would also like to thank a fellow New Yorker, Mr. Walsh. He has been an absolute champion for this issue in the committee.

Despite their hard work and the work of a united New York delegation, united Democrats and Republicans, the outcome today is not what it should be. The one thing I know and I can promise is that this fight is not over. I speak for all of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, certainly in the New York delegation, that we are not going to stop until we meet the needs of the heroes of 9/11 and this promised money of $125 million is restored to the budget. Anything short is just plain wrong, and it hurts the health care of our heroes.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman, the distinguished ranking member for yielding me time.

Mr. Speaker, we know that the reconciliation package the Republicans have put together before us tonight is unfair and will increase the deficit. We have an analysis documenting that unfairness by the Democratic staff of the Joint Economic Committee which I will be placing in the Record.

The spending cuts hit programs that benefit middle and lower income families while the tax cuts go overwhelmingly to very high income people. For example, families in the bottom fifth of the income distribution receive only 3 percent of family income, but they are being asked to absorb 22 percent of the cuts in spending for individuals. When you put together the tax cuts and the spending cuts, you see that the richest 20 percent of the income distribution receives benefits from tax cuts that far outweigh their losses from the spending cuts.

In contrast, middle and lower income families, the remaining 80 percent of all families in our country, lose more from program cuts than they gain from tax cuts. This is terribly unfair. This plan does not reflect American values. We can do better.

The Impact on Families of the House Budget Reconciliation Package

Joint Economic Committee Democrats

Senator Jack Reed (D-RI)--Ranking Democrat

Representative Carolyn Maloney (D-NY)--Senior House Democrat

November 17, 2005

Summary

The FY 2006 House budget reconciliation plan will increase

the federal budget deficit and is unfair in its impact on

families.

The deficit will increase because reconciled spending cuts

of $50 billion are not sufficient to offset reconciled tax

cuts of nearly $60 billion, which could rise to $70 billion

in a future conference agreement.

The plan is unfair because the spending cuts affect

programs that benefit middle and lower-income families, while

the tax cuts go mainly to very high-income people.

Spending Cuts

Of the $50 billion in reconciled spending cuts, about $22

billion are in payments for individuals that can be allocated

by family income group (Table 1).

That $22 billion is spread relatively evenly across

families in all income groups. But because income is so

unevenly distributed, the share of spending cuts borne by

low-income families is substantially larger than their share

of total income (Table 2). For example, families in the

bottom fifth of the income distribution receive only about 3

percent of total income, but they bear 22 percent of the

total cuts in spending on payments for individuals.

The remaining reconciled cuts and offsetting receipts do

not directly reduce payments for individuals, such as the

proceeds from auctioning electromagnetic spectrum licenses.

Nevertheless, some of the additional cuts will hurt

vulnerable families. For example, the roughly $5 billion in

cuts to child support enforcement efforts will reduce

payments to single parents and their children by over $7

billion.

Tax Cuts

Of the $57 billion in tax cuts, $28 billion are in taxes on

individuals that are allocable by income group (Table 3).

By far the largest amount ($23 billion) of the tax cuts for

individuals that can be allocated by family income group

accrue to the richest 20 percent of families (Chart 1).

Most of the taxes that are not directly allocated in this

analysis are business tax cuts that would also end up

benefiting high-income taxpayers.

Net Impact

The top 20 percent of the income distribution receives

benefits from the tax cuts that far offset losses from the

spending cuts (Chart 1).

Middle and lower income families (the bottom 80 percent of

all families) lose more from program cuts than they gain from

tax cuts.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in tribute to a remarkable individual whose record of service to the women's movement across this country and around the world is second to none. For the past thirty years, Dr. Martha Burk has devoted her life to advancing equality for women. I ask all of my colleagues to join me in saluting Dr. Burk's record of advocacy, activism and achievement.

Martha Burk was born in 1941 to Ivan Lee Burk and Dorothy May Dean, who owned a retail clothing store in the small east Texas town of Pasadena. She married while still an undergraduate and earned a BS from the University of Houston in 1962. She spent the next few years at home raising her two sons, Mark and Ed Talley. Refusing to accept the limited career options then open to women, she earned a PhD in psychology from the University of Texas in 1974.

After her first marriage ended, Dr. Burk moved to Kansas and became active in the Wichita chapter of the National Organization for Women (NOW). She gradually built her resume as a political psychologist and women's equity expert through work as a university research director, management professor, and adviser, consultant, or board member for an array of political campaigns and organizations including NOW's national board. Dr. Burk and her husband, Dr. Ralph Estes, moved to Washington, D.C. in 1990 and founded the Center for Advancement of Public Policy (CAPP). Dr. Burk is president of CAPP and recently completed a five- year tenure as Chair of the National Council of Women's Organizations (NCWO), a network of over 200 national women's groups collectively representing ten million women.

Under Dr. Burk's leadership, NCWO's membership more than doubled as she brought new energy, inspiration, and resources to the largest network of women's organizations in the nation. Over the past five years, Dr. Burk has focused on involving the next generation of American women in feminist politics. Under her leadership, young women at NCWO launched the Younger Women's Task Force, an exciting nationwide grassroots effort to engage women in their twenties and thirties in women's issues and the public policy debate. Dr. Burk has also developed and invigorated NCWO's summer internship program, New Faces More Voices, a unique program that trains college students to engage in effective advocacy and organizing around feminist social justice issues.

In addition to her extensive work promoting women's equality in the U.S., Dr. Burk has also worked internationally to advance women's rights. She has organized training workshops with women's NGOs internationally in Macedonia and Kuwait, under the sponsorship of USAID, and has conducted training in the U.S. for delegations from Russia, Botswana, Korea, Romania, Bulgaria, and the Middle East. She has recently been a member of official U.S. Delegations to international conferences in Iceland, Lithuania, Estonia, and China. Named one of Ms. Magazine's women of the year in 2003, Dr. Burk's syndicated columns have been published in major newspapers and magazines around the globe, and she has appeared on news shows around the nation.

A former board member of the National Committee on Pay Equity, Dr. Burk has fought throughout her career to end sex discrimination in the workplace. Citing the taxpayer-financed advantages business leaders enjoy at the exclusive Augusta National Golf Club, she led the effort to open membership to women. The power elite's response to this controversy exposed how deeply sex discrimination is ingrained in the culture of corporate America. Her recent book, Cult of Power: Sex Discrimination in Corporate America and What Can Be Done About It, explores how systemic barriers of social injustice were put in place and how they can be brought down. Currently, Dr. Burk is focusing her energies full time on furthering women's progress in the workplace as the director of NCWO's Corporate Accountability Project.

Mr. Speaker, it is an honor to pay tribute to Dr. Martha Burk and to recognize her three decades of heroic commitment to women's progress. I am confident that her work will continue to influence and inspire this generation and future generations to fight for equality. I ask all of my colleagues to join me in thanking Dr. Martha Burk for her unparalleled contribution to her country.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to manage debate on Leader Pelosi's bill for the Democratic side. Since the bill has over 291 bipartisan co- sponsors, my task is a pleasure.

This bill commemorates the historic San Francisco Old Mint Building which housed the San Francisco Mint from 1874 to 1937 and is a national historic landmark.

The San Francisco Mint was established in the 1850s because it did not make sense to transport the gold being produced by the California Gold Rush all the way to Philadelphia for coinage. Called the ``Granite Lady,'' the building was designed by A.B. Mullet, the architect of the two buildings that flank the White House, the U.S. Treasury Building and the Old Executive Office Building. In fact, the Old Mint looks quite a bit like our Treasury Building.

The Granite Lady survived both the earthquake and fire of 1906 and served as the treasury for the disaster relief funds afterwards since no other financial institution was operational. The Mint outgrew the building by 1937 and moved to a new facility.

Today, the San Francisco Mint only produces commemorative coins, so if you find a circulating coin with the S for San Francisco on it, it is a curiosity and a collector's item.

The Granite Lady is now owned by the City of San Francisco which is converting it to a museum. I find it particularly appropriate that we are honoring this landmark with a commemorative coin 100 years after the great fire. The bill requires the Treasury Department to mint and issue gold and silver coins in 2006 only. To the extent possible, they are to be minted at the San Francisco Mint. The profit from the sales of the coins is to be given to the San Francisco Museum and Historical Society to convert the old building into a museum which will house exhibits on the Gold Rush and coinage, among other important city themes.

I note that in a bipartisan spirit, at the request of the administration, the bill corrects a technical problem so as to ensure that collectable coin sets including nickel coins can be available to collectors beyond the original period which was mistakenly limited. The Senate has informed us they have no objection to this addition.

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), the sponsor of this bill and the House Democratic leader.

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos).

Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from South Carolina for his leadership on this issue.

After 5 years of record debts and deficits, the other side of the aisle is demanding cuts to the programs that help Americans most in need. We showed in the 1990s that this government can be fiscally disciplined and compassionate to our neighbors most in need at the same time. The cuts before us now will not restore fiscal sanity; and they certainly are not compassionate, not even to the people who are suffering now from the recent hurricanes.

After five years of record debt and deficits, the other side of the aisle is demanding cuts to the programs that help Americans most in need.

We showed in the 1990s that this government can be fiscally disciplined and compassionate to our neighbors most in need at the same time.

The cuts before us now will not magically restore fiscal sanity, and they certainly are not compassionate, not even to the people devastated by recent hurricanes.

Our friends on the other side of the aisle may be selling these cuts as a matter of budget principle, but the fact remains that their

budget will still increase the deficit by more than 100 billion.

Even more outrageous is that these cuts would make our government-- which is meant to be of the people and for the people--less responsive to the people who need its help most.

Fewer food stamps. Reduced student loans. Less aid for foster care. Reduced Medicaid access.

And we all saw how Katrina disproportionately devastated low-income Americans.

Those Americans already lost their homes and their livelihoods, now they are in line to lose the federal aid that could help them the most.

It isn't surprising--this same Congress that gives no-strings aid to Iraq also demands that residents of the Gulf Coast repay emergency disaster assistance.

I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the budget reconciliation-- it's an uncompassionate and misguided bill.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize the extraordinary achievements of an important member of the Astoria, NY community, Mr. Demetris Kastanas.

On February 18, 1968, Mr. Kastanas emigrated from his homeland Greece to the United States, looking for a better life and future in this country. Having worked a number of different jobs, including pumping gas and selling insurance, Mr. Kastanas managed to save enough money to open his first restaurant. A second restaurant soon followed.

As a successful businessman in his adopted country, Mr. Kastanas felt that he had to serve the community that had served him so well.

He was particularly interested in finding ways for Greek Americans to maintain a sense of connection to their motherland. On September 15, 1975, Mr. Kastanas launched National Greek Television, a weekly Greek television program on channel 47 WNJU. This is the longest running Greek television program outside Greece. In July 1983, Mr. Kastanas expanded to the Chicago area. It now airs in Boston, Atlanta, New Jersey, and other markets. In late 1999, NGTV bought its own Electronic News Gathering van to provide live coverage of important events.

As the expansion of cable channels created new opportunities for niche markets, Mr. Kastanas began to explore the possibility of an all- Greek cable station. His dream became a reality. In 1987, the Greek Channel began airing on the Time-Warner Cable system in Queens and Brooklyn. This channel was the first Greek cable channel in the United States.

Seeking new ways to cover issues of interest to Hellenes, Mr. Kastanas became interested in other media formats. He founded `Eseis,' a biweekly magazine to address the interests of the Hellenic-American community. Eseis is the plural form of `you' in Greek, reflecting the magazine's emphasis on serving the entire Hellenic community.

Through his television programs, cable channel, and magazine, Demetris Kastanas has given Greek and Hellenic-Americans a voice in the United States that might otherwise not have been heard. His tremendous leadership has been evident through his ability to organize rallies and demonstrations on the Cyprus issue that have communicated clearly the Hellenic-American community's strong feelings on this subject.

Mr. Kastanas's work has provided Hellenic-Americans with a connection to their homeland, through Hellenic news, folklore, music, and more. His programming has also helped new Hellenic immigrants assimilate into life in the United States.

He and his wife, Nomiki, continue to work and instill the best of the Hellenic American culture in their community, but especially in the youngest generation of their family: Matina and George.

Mr. Speaker, I request that my distinguished colleagues rise and pay tribute to a great New Yorker, Demetris Kastanas, for his 30 years of accomplishments. His many successes are a reflection of the vibrant and thriving community he so faithfully serves.

Mr. Speaker, November 1, 2005, I missed rollcall votes numbered 557 and 558. Rollcall vote No. 557 was on the motion to suspend the rules and pass H.R. 3548, a bill to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located on Franklin Avenue in Pearl River, New York, as the ``Heinz Ahlmeyer, Jr. Post Office Building.'' Rollcall vote No. 558 was on the motion to suspend the rules and pass, as amended H.R. 3989, a bill to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 37598 Goodhue Avenue in Dennison, Minnesota, as the ``Albert Harold Quie Post Office.''

Had I been present I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall votes Nos. 557 and 558.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life and work of Rosa Parks, a pioneer of the civil rights movement, who passed away on October 24, 2005. She will not soon be forgotten. In a moment of defiance, America's history forever changed. On one December day in 1955, Rosa Parks defied the social injustices that were plaguing the United States and made a statement by refusing to surrender her bus seat to a white man. This historic day in Montgomery, Alabama gave a spark to the civil rights movement. In a time and place of great danger, Rosa Parks was a leader among those brave individuals who sought to overcome racial discrimination and bigotry.

Rosa Parks knew the dangers and potential consequences of her actions, but she also had a greater sense of what was right and what was just. Her passion for freedom and equality should serve as an inspiration for generations to come, just as it did during the uncertain times of the 1950s and 1960s. When she refused to give away her seat, Mrs. Parks was not looking for any sort of attention or fame. She was simply asserting her fundamental rights as a woman and an American that serve as the foundation of the United States.

Today, and forever, we will honor the memory of Rosa Parks. History will remember her as one of the greatest Americans. Rosa Parks will forever walk among the heroes of justice and freedom.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to join the Hellenic-Americans and Philhellenes in my district and throughout the country in celebrating ``OXI Day (No Day),'' which falls on the 28th of October. This year marks the 65th 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.

On October 28, 1940, a terrifying sound went up throughout all Greek cities and towns, the sound of sirens and klaxons announcing the invasion of Greece by the Nazis. Walls that before had echoed only with the tolling of church bells now reverberated with the din of alarms.

At a time when Europe was descending into the inferno of another world war, the people of Greece did not panic. 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. With level-headed determination and steadfast resolve, the citizenry of Greece mobilized against the coming invaders and delivered their resounding ``NO!'' to the Axis aggressors.

On OXI Day, the people of Greece chose the harder path, the path of resistance. If they had opened their gates to the invaders, much bloodshed and many deprivations might have been avoided. That brave generation of Hellenes, refused to submit to oppression, even at the cost of their homes, their land, and their lives. They chose to fight and even to die so that their children and the children of other nations might live in liberty. Theirs was an act of self-sacrifice that clearly proclaimed the humanitarian ideals of their Orthodox Christian faith and their ethnic heritage.

Demonstrating poise under pressure, the heroes of that period fought against tyranny and delayed the Axis onslaught in the Balkan Peninsula. The Greek nation which said ``OXI'' contributed to the eventual downfall of the Fascist powers in Europe.

This year the Hellenic community is celebrating another great moment in their history, having successfully hosted a magnificent and peaceful Olympics at a time when terrorism imperils every public gathering. The smallest nation to ever host the Olympics, Greeks once again showed that they always rise to the occasion.

Mr. Speaker, 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, we as a Nation can do much better in protecting the American people with our limited homeland security dollars.

Recently I released a report on the status of the FIRE Act program, the only homeland security program specifically for firefighters, and we know it was the firefighters on 9/11 who were the true heroes and heroines. The statistics in this report, which can be found on my Web site, would be absolutely laughable if the threats to New York City and other areas in America were not so serious.

In 2004, the FIRE Act program was capped at $750,000 regardless of threat and size; yet we know that the 9/11 Commission report says that all of our homeland dollars should be targeted specifically and only for high threat and risk. In this report, as the Members can see, Montana gets over $7.84 per person, while high-threat, number one threat city, New York City gets a mere 12 cents per person.

This is unfair. This is wrong. We can do better.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support for the underlying bipartisan bill on GSEs, but in strong opposition to the rule that was put in at the last minute, a provision that prevents any nonprofit recipient of a housing grant from conducting nonpartisan civic voter registration.

This is an outrageous, undemocratic provision that imposes restrictions on promoting the most fundamental of our civil liberties, the right to vote. Of all our rights, this is the one that our Founding Fathers held most dear. What in the world are we doing today in this Congress in an attempt to limit this great right on which our country was founded?

Restricting the right of nonprofits in this way violates these organizations' first amendment rights. Voter ID, civic awareness, civic activities are protected by the first amendment. Yet this provision forbids any nonprofits from even applying for a grant if they have encouraged voting in the recent past.

There is absolutely no justification for preventing nonprofits' efforts to encourage civic activities such as voting. Many faith-based organizations, including the Catholic Church, the Presbyterian Church, the American Jesuit Conference, have come out in opposition to this provision; and I will place in the Record at this point a list of these organizations that have come out in opposition to this provision.

The Episcopal Church,

Office of Government Relations,

Washington, DC, October 20, 2005.

Hon. Dennis Hastert,

House of Representatives,

Washington, DC.

Dear Speaker Hastert. The Episcopal Church supports the

Affordable Housing Fund as part of the Federal Housing

Finance Reform Act of 2005 (H.R. 1461). However, we are

strongly opposed to the inclusion of language in H.R. 1461

that restricts non-profits--including religious

organizations--from receiving Affordable Housing Funds if

they have engaged in any voter registration, voter

identification, get-out-the-vote, and other nonpartisan voter

participation activities or voter encouragement efforts

within 12 months of the application. They very people in need

of affordable housing are those who often need the most help

in fully participating in our democracy as voters. It is

highly ironic that at the very moment when we have seen in

the starkest of terms the great need for affordable housing,

important legislation to meet that need is encumbered with

language that undermines our democracy.

The Episcopal Church, through Jubilee Ministries and

Episcopal service providers, offers housing assistance to

many of our nation's poor. Jubilee Ministries administers

grants to over 70 Jubilee Centers throughout the United

States as well as the wider Anglican Communion. Including a

provision that would prohibit Episcopal organizations that

encourage democratic engagement from participating in

Affordable Housing Fund programs would limit our response to

God's call to serve the least among us and severely restrict

our efforts to provide safe, decent, and affordable housing.

In supporting the Affordable Housing Fund in H.R. 1461, we

are acting upon a resolution passed at our 2003 General

Convention that reaffirmed our commitment to providing

affordable housing for the poor. The resolution calls for the

legislative branches of the federal government to provide

``rental and owner-occupied housing that is safe, accessible,

and affordable for low-income and moderate-income persons and

their families including persons with disabilities'' and ``to

ensure that housing assistance programs are adequately funded

to address the growing gap between the number of affordable

housing units available and the number of renter households

in the bottom quartile of income in this nation.''

As a church we have also acknowledged ``the use of the

political process as an act of Christian stewardship'' and

recognized that a ``faithful commitment to voting is an

extension of our baptismal covenant to `strive for justice

and peace and the dignity of every human being.' '' We have

asked ``all Episcopalians to actively engage in advocating

for voter rights, encouraging voter registration, getting out

the vote, and volunteering to assist voters at the polls.''

Mr. Speaker, we ask that you do all in your power to see

that the provisions related to voter participation are

removed from H.R. 1461. No organization should be asked to

choose between providing homes for those in need or enabling

citizens to fully participate fully in our democracy.

Sincerely,

Rev. Kwasi A. Thornell,

Chair, National Concerns Committee of the Executive

Council.

Rt. Rev. John Bryson Chane, D.D.,

Bishop of Washington.

Mr. Chairman, when this bill left the Financial Services Committee on a 65 to 5 vote, I felt we were on the way to a great accomplishment. I was truly impressed with the hard work that Chairman Oxley, Ranking Member Frank, Congressman Baker, and others had done to bring the GSEs into this century.

It is no less than tragic that the majority leadership and the administration have deep sixed this bipartisan legislation.

The bill creates the sort of regulator that the GSEs have long lacked and that they demonstrably need, without destroying their housing mission.

I was particularly excited by the Affordable Housing Fund provided by this bill. The Fund is a critical and long-overdue step toward addressing the very real housing crisis that confronts low-income families.

It would be the first concrete step the Congress has taken in support of housing in this administration.

We know that without Federal assistance, housing for low-income families does not get built or made available. Yet each year this administration has cut its support for housing. In this bill, we found a bipartisan way to support housing using a new funding source.

The GSEs were chartered by the Federal government for the purpose of providing housing to more Americans, and they enjoy a benefit as a result of their Federal charter. Thus, it is uniquely appropriate that they plow a percentage of their profits--up to 5 percent--back into the low-income end of the housing market.

This would be $500 million or more annually. That is serious money.

We built on success: the Fund is modelled after the successful Affordable Housing Program of the Federal Home Loan Bank Program.

We wanted all players involved. Funds would be awarded through a competitive process to for profit builders, State housing organizations, and non-profits.

We put in place safeguards to prevent abuse. The funds must be used for low-income housing. They may not be used to lobby or to conduct partisan political activities. Recipients who misuse funds will not be allowed to participate again.

This bill is the best thing that has come along for housing in a very long time.

Therefore it is particularly tragic that the majority has injected a poison pill into the bipartisan bill that left our Committee: the provision that prevents any nonprofit recipient of a housing grant from conducting nonpartisan voter registration or get-out-the-vote activities.

This is an outrageously bad provision that imposes unconstitutional restrictions on promoting the most fundamental of our civil liberties: the right to vote.

It is profoundly disturbing that the majority and the administration are willing to use any tool available to kill this bill and prevent the Housing Fund from becoming a reality.

I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to repudiate these provisions that strike at faith based organizations and the fundamental right to vote.

I cannot in good conscience vote for this bill with this provision in it. Even the promise of housing money comes at too high a price when we must compromise the principles on which this Nation is built.

Madam Chairman, I rise in opposition to the Garrett amendment. This amendment would take out of the bill a provision that I strongly support which raises the permissible loan limits for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac up to the median home price in high cost areas such as New York City.

This is a simple and common-sense amendment which recognizes that home prices in some parts of the country are higher than in most of the nation.

In these areas middle class families cannot use lower rate GSE loans to buy a median price home, because the price will exceed the nationwide GSE limit. Simple fairness requires that we solve this problem and give middle class families in these areas the same opportunity to use a lower-cost GSE loan as those in other areas enjoy.

This is about whether New York's policemen, firefighters, school teachers, government workers and other middle-class workers can aspire to home ownership.

I strongly supported raising the loan limit in high cost areas and I strongly oppose taking this provision out.

This amendment is critical to New York and other high cost areas. But it does not come at a cost to other areas. This is not a zero sum situation.

So I urge my colleagues from these areas that are not affected by this amendment to join me in voting against it so that middle class workers across this nation will have a chance at the American Dream of owning your own home.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to salute the American Red Cross in Greater New York (ARC/GNY), which held its centennial celebration on October 20, 2005. At this wonderful event, the ARC/GNY honored former President Bill Clinton for his leadership of humanitarian efforts in war and disease-ravaged areas throughout the world. I trust that the members of this chamber will join me in recognizing the tremendous efforts of both the New York Red Cross and our former President to relieve suffering both here in the United States and in the international community.

Though the International Red Cross has roots that stretch back to the mid-nineteenth century, the first Red Cross Chapter in New York City was established in Brooklyn in 1905. Since its founding, the New York Red Cross has played a leadership role in many of the most significant events of our time. In 1911, a fire destroyed the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory in Manhattan, killing 145 workers. Fortunately, the New York Red Cross was there to provide support and financial assistance to victims and their families. The following year, Red Cross volunteers assisted hundreds of survivors of the Titanic disaster, as well.

New York Red Cross volunteers also played important roles in both World Wars, feeding soldiers traveling to Europe and the Pacific, recruiting nurses and doctors, supplying medical equipment and clothing, and, perhaps most significantly, organizing and staffing hospitals overseas in support of the Army's medical program. In 1959, the American Red Cross in Greater New York was founded,

bringing together Red Cross chapters from each of New York City's five boroughs.

This year, the American Red Cross is leading much-needed efforts to assist those whose lives were upended by Hurricane Katrina. Since the hurricane made landfall, the Red Cross has provided shelter, food and more than $300 million to nearly 500,000 families. The ARC/GNY, for its part, has sent more than 100 trained staff members and volunteers to the Gulf Coast region, operated the largest Red Cross call center in the nation and sheltered nearly a thousand displaced families. All the while, the ARC/GNY continues to respond to tragedies closer to home: On average, the organization helps New Yorkers recover from eight fires, floods, building collapses and other disasters each day.

It is fitting that the staff, friends and volunteers of the New York Red Cross have chosen to honor another devoted humanitarian, President Bill Clinton. Since leaving office, President Clinton has devoted himself to helping underprivileged people around the world, in particular assisting those afflicted by the HIV/AIDS pandemic in Africa and the Asian tsunami disaster. During his tenure in the White House, Clinton presided over an economy that added 22 million jobs, worked with allies to put an end to ethnic cleansing in Bosnia and Kosovo, and played a major role in securing a meaningful and lasting peace in Northern Ireland.

Mr. Speaker, I request that my colleagues join me in recognizing the work of both the Red Cross in Greater New York and President Bill Clinton to help families displaced by disasters, war and disease. I am delighted to offer the ARC/GNY and President Clinton my very best wishes for many more decades of service to the neediest.

Mr. Speaker, today Representatives Charlie Melancon, William Jefferson and I are introducing the Whatever It Takes to Rebuild Act, Part II.

On September 15, 2005, President Bush addressed the nation from Jackson Square in New Orleans, LA and offered the following pledge on behalf of the American people:

Tonight I also offer this pledge of the American people:

Throughout the area hit by the hurricane, we will do what it

takes, we will stay as long as it takes, to help citizens

rebuild their communities and their lives.--President Bush,

September 15, 2005, New Orleans, LA.

Just three weeks later, on October 7, 2005, Congress and the President broke this pledge by adding a clause to Public Law 109-88, the Community Disaster Loan Act of 2005, that requires Gulf Coast Communities who receive assistance from the federal government for lost tax revenues (to assist in the payment for police officers, firefighters, school teachers and other essential services) to pay back the

aid with interest. Never before has Congress or the President required the repayment of this aid. That is why we are introducing the ``Whatever It Takes to Rebuild Act, Part II.''

The ``Whatever It Takes to Rebuild Act, Part II'' would repeal the provision in Public Law 109-88 that requires Gulf Coast Communities to repay the assistance they receive under the Community Disaster Loan Program. This legislation would permanently repeal the $5 million cap on these loans, would make states eligible for this assistance, repeal the cap that limits loans to 25 percent of a municipalities operating expenses, and would provide this assistance as grants when a disaster has been declared an ``Incident of National Significance'' under the National Response plan (Hurricanes Katrina and Rita were both declared ``Incidents of National Significance'').

This legislation is similar to H.R. 1795, the ``Whatever it Takes to Rebuild Act'', which would provide federal assistance for lost tax revenues to New York following the terrorist attacks of 9/11. Following 9/11, President Bush also promised New York and the country that we will do whatever it takes to rebuild.

I urge all of my colleagues to support this important legislation to provide real relief to the Gulf Coast and let's do what it takes to rebuild.

Mr. Speaker, today, I introduce legislation, the ``Preventing Sexual Assaults in the Military Act of 2005,'' which would appropriate such funds as are necessary for fiscal years 2006 through 2008 to eliminate the backlog in processing DNA evidence, to ensure that testing takes place in a timely manner, to provide an adequate supply of forensic evidence collection kits at all domestic and overseas U.S. military installations, military academies, and theaters of operation, and to ensure that at least one military medical personnel member, who is trained as a Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner (SANE) or Sexual Assault Forensic Examiner (SAFE), is on duty at all times in the health care facility at a military academy, domestic military base, overseas military base, and theaters of operation, except where a memorandum of understanding is issued between the military installation and a local civilian hospital.

Rapes and sexual assaults are far too common in both civilian life and in the military. As the April 2004 report issued by the Pentagon states, among other findings, current DoD policies and standards do not focus on sexual assault and ``the military services' policies lack integration for effective prevention and response.''

This legislation will help bring justice to the victims and survivors of sexual assault by ensuring that DNA evidence is used to identify perpetrators and bring them to justice. Additionally, it will provide servicemembers who are raped with the necessary medical care.

As our soldiers are fighting for those who have long been denied basic rights, we should do everything possible to ensure that we are protecting their rights, too.