Floor Statements

I want to thank my colleagues for having this hour to talk about, really, the real issues and certainly hopefully break up some of the myths that are out there on what we're hearing, not only in the papers but certainly from some NRA members.

I've been battling this, and many of us have been battling this issue for many, many years. I think that what happened just about 2 months ago today, that Newtown shooting happened. And that went through everybody's heart to think in this day and age that we could have a shooting that totally rips apart 20 children is unacceptable to the American people--unacceptable to the American people.

Since that, being that we're trying to give as much information as possible to the American people what's happened since that day, over 2,000 people have been killed. Two thousand Americans have been murdered in episodes of gun violence.

There are a number of us here, Members of Congress, that have gone through this kind of violence, either with a loved one, our colleague from California, Jackie Speier, we know what this can mean to a family. Last night, we had 25, 30, unfortunately, victims. And yet here we are debating, hoping, even after what the President said, give us a vote. Give us a vote. This isn't about us. This is about what our job is. We can have people disagree, and I know it's a lot of tough votes for some Democrats and certainly some Republicans. I believe that when we came here and got elected and we swore to uphold the Constitution, we knew we'd be facing tough votes. Who said this was going to be an easy job? It's never been an easy job. But it is a job that the majority of us here want to do.

When the President spoke last night, and listening to the aftermath late last night on what some of the pundits were saying about what the President was actually trying to do, we heard the NRA say that the reason they're against some of the things that we want to do as far as Members of Congress and our task force that we want to really take everybody's gun away. Do you know that program that we were talking about, the buy-back? What they were saying was it's not really just a buy-back. It's confiscating every single one of the guns. Well, I don't think that would hold up constitutionally. And I think that we have put together, in my opinion, a reasonable, very practical way of reducing gun violence in this country.

I also heard last night that assault weapons, long guns, and it only adds up to 8 percent of the people that are killed every year--8 percent. Can we stop putting numbers on everything and remember the faces that were here? Can we remember the people and the families that have lost their loved ones? They are not a number.

Then they had another chart out that talked about handguns. Well, let me tell you something about handguns that affects almost everybody in our communities. Legislation that we are putting forward, the background checks, preventing straw purchasers, which basically is someone else is buying a gun for someone that is legally barred from buying a gun, think about how many handguns would not be sold to criminals. Think about how many lives will be saved.

But, also, let's think about those who have survived gun violence. But many of them, if you think about a lot of the young people in Aurora that had no health care insurance--and I can talk about my own son who was 26 when he was shot with five others, and, unfortunately, his father was murdered that day. I can tell you his medical bills to this day--to this day--they have cost this country millions of dollars.

Now I will say to you that we were very, very lucky; and I have been very, very blessed that he survived. But even back then, the doctors said that we would see changes in him as he got older because of the brain injury. And Kevin--God, I can't tell you how proud I was of my son. Two years of intensive therapy and they said he would never walk. He learned how to walk. Yes, he

is still partially paralyzed, but he learned how to walk.

They said he would never talk. And when I talk about those days and somebody asks how is Kevin doing, I say, ``Well, you know, he just said.''

I spent my life as a nurse before I came here. And a lot of times when we think of patients who have had strokes and we're teaching them how to speak again, when we say they were talking, trying to get the words out is so hard. Every word becomes so difficult, but he had the power to do that.

Our friend Gabby Giffords, who was here last night, to watch, in my opinion, her long struggle reminded me so much of what Kevin had to go through. I will say that Kevin went back to work, and he worked for many years. Unfortunately, he has reached the point now where he can't work, and he had to go on to Social Security disability.

That has hurt his pride so much because of the work that he has done. All they want to be is looked upon and seen as just a regular person. There are thousands and thousands and thousands of Kevin McCarthys across this country. We are trying to prevent those kinds of injuries.

Background checks, why should anybody be afraid of a background check? Why? Why should anybody--again, as was brought up in an earlier poster--when you go to a gun show--I remember when we closed the gun show loopholes in New York. Gosh, we had the NRA all over us basically saying it's going to ruin the business. I say to you, go to New York and see the gun shows that are held on weekends. There's a big difference, though. Nobody can go into that gun show without buying a gun from a licensed Federal dealer.

By the way, the Federal licensed dealers, the gun shop owners in this country, they want everybody to go through a background check because you do have less than 2 percent of gun stores that are selling these illegal guns or guns disappear. It's ruining their reputations. These are honest businessowners. We're actually protecting them.

There is so much that we can go on about. When it was talked about the people that are on the terrorist list, do people know that they can actually buy a gun without a problem? God forbid we should put them on background check. I mean, they're on the terrorist list, but they can go and buy a gun.

I want to thank my colleagues, and I want to give them an opportunity to speak because I know we all care passionately about this. And I certainly will sit here and listen to my colleagues. If we have time, hopefully, we can all speak again.

It's exactly two months since the shooting in Newtown and since then up to 2,000 Americans have been murdered in episodes of gun violence in our country.

I know that ours is a country that believes in safety and in protecting innocent people.

That's why we've instituted some of the most thorough auto safety laws in the world, and why we regulate access to medicine, and why we inspect food.

It's also why we should be looking at the most dangerous consumer products in the world and seeing how we can make their use safer for Americans.

When it comes to reducing gun violence, the president has already said everything he could possibly say.

There can't be any more excuses--the ball is in our court here in Congress.

The president was right in his State of the Union Address that gun violence victims ``Deserve a Vote.''

There's no shortage of options--I'm the sponsor of a bill to ban assault weapons, a bill to ban high-capacity magazines, a bill for universal background checks and a bill to limit online ammunition sales.

Another bipartisan bill by my colleagues cracks down on illegal gun trafficking.

Here in the House of Representatives, too many members of the Majority have been completely silent on these bills. They haven't even held a simple hearing to discuss the topic, and that's shameful.

I would ask my friends on the other side of the aisle--what are you afraid of?

I would tell them--you don't have to be afraid.

Poll after poll after poll since Newtown--national polls--show that the majority of Americans want their lawmakers to take action to reduce gun violence.

The majority of Americans support banning assault weapons. The majority of Americans support banning high-capacity magazines. And over 90 percent of Americans support universal background checks.

Even three-quarters of all NRA members support universal background checks.

So I would tell my friends across the aisle--I know this is a tough issue, but you were elected to make tough decisions.

Tell us where you stand on these measures to reduce gun violence--the American people deserve to know where you stand.

And then, have the courage to hold votes on the measures that are out there.

This is a democracy--it's our job to represent the American people.

If we don't hold votes on this issue that the American people are screaming out about every single day since that awful shooting in Connecticut, then this body will have failed in its duties and in its purpose.

I will say to my friends across the aisle--let the people speak, and let their voices be heard.

Over 30 Americans are being killed by gun violence every single day and it would be shameful to turn a blind eye to that fact.

Thank you for doing this.

I appreciate the time.

Mr. Speaker, I also want to say thank you to Tom Cole for bringing this forward. And I want to say also to Congressman Sessions I appreciate his words.

We always fight down here; but I always knew that, in my heart, we would come together to help our constituents. We've heard from Republicans and Democrats Hurricane Sandy was not discriminating against whether you were a Republican or a Democrat. And we as New Yorkers, and people in Jersey and Connecticut, we've always been there for other parts of the country.

I think people have to understand; and by the way, a number of Republicans came into the district and they saw the disaster.

One of your Members came and looked at Long Beach Hospital, which was underwater and will not be able to open for months. You have to understand, Long Beach was one of the areas that was hit the hardest. Thousands of people there are without their homes. I can't even tell you what these homes looked like.

I know we always hear at times that New Yorkers are rich. Let me tell you, these are little cottages. These are regular homes, blue-collar workers, hard workers, and because of this storm, their lives have been torn apart. I have seen the pain within my constituents and my small businesses, and, by the way, my health care workers, because not only were they taking care of everybody during and after the storm, they're taking care of people today because they're coming in with upper respiratory illnesses because of the mold that's in this area.

We need to do everything we can. We don't ask for much--we're pretty tough people--but we do need the help of the American people right now. We here in this body, we are representing the American people.

I just want to say thank you to everybody. I truly, truly do mean that. I always knew that we would come together. But I'm saying thank you from my constituents, because the pain that they are all suffering is unbearable for us as Members of Congress.

Mr, Speaker, I rise today to express my absolute shock that the House Republican leadership has adjourned the 112th Congress without addressing the needs of the victims of Superstorm Sandy.

Like most Members whose constituents were affected by Sandy, we expected, and were all but assured, that there would be consideration of a supplemental appropriations bill before this House adjourned. It is utterly unacceptable to leave millions of Americans across the most densely populated part of the nation, including my Long Island district, on the hook for the unexpected costs of a natural disaster.

The House Republican leadership had plenty of time to act--let's review the timeline. In November, Governors from affected states acted to give preliminary assessments of the damage caused to their cities and towns. In early December, the President submitted to Speaker Boehner a detailed supplemental package. By the end of December, the Senate passed a bipartisan supplemental providing sixty billion dollars in federal resources to Sandy victims. And yesterday, House Republican leadership chose to give Members an extra day of vacation rather than take up the Senate-passed bill or, at the very least, even attempt to address the needs of millions because of this natural disaster. All the House leadership did was tell storm victims to wait until the next Congress. Excuse me for being cynical, but I don't have much faith that this House leadership can keep its word and deliver for the people in a timely manner. Midnight hour deals on fiscal cliffs, pending dysfunction with the debt ceiling situation in two months--I just don't believe it.

Ladies and gentlemen, this represents an unprecedented action in the Congress. Never before has the United States Congress turned its back on its citizens after a natural disaster. Members of this Congress whose constituents were affected by Sandy have time and time again supported supplemental appropriations bills for other areas of the country affected by natural disaster. We were there with funding after Katrina, and we were there after the floods in the Midwest. Nowwe need to be there for millions in the Northeast. How come when it is our constituents' unfortunate circumstance to be in need of similar funding we are told to wait?

It's shameful.

I am pleased that both my Republican and Democratic colleagues have expressed their shock and disappointment in House leadership for not allowing a vote on a Sandy aid package. I will not rest until I can deliver this funding to my constituents on Long Island and to the millions who live throughout the Northeast. The Senate passed a good bill, a bipartisan bill, a bill that includes much needed mitigation funding as well. Nine weeks is already far too long for folks to wait to be helped by our federal government after a disaster of this magnitude. FEMA alone cannot provide all the necessary funding until this House acts. The Small Business Administration, the Army Corps of Engineers, other vital federal agencies and our state and local governments NEED the additional resources to help stem the hurt Sandy caused.

I am ashamed of the actions of this House Republican leadership and I remain committed to getting Long Islanders and those across the Northeast the federal assistance they deserve.

I want to thank my colleague. I know what you're going through. I know what your district is going through. And I want you to know that the people of the United States of America are saying their prayers for all of your constituents and certainly for the children.

I rise in support of H. Res. 833. As someone whose family has been a victim of gun violence, my heart goes out to the victims and the families of this

horrific tragedy. I know what it's like to lose someone you love, and I offer my deepest sympathies and our prayers for those who have been affected. To be very honest with you, I know that victims across this country that have been affected by gun violence, they are with you and they will be with you.

It breaks my heart to think of the holidays coming up, and Christmas, and the children not going to be there to open up their gifts, the parents going to their bedrooms and not seeing anybody there.

I know there are an awful lot of unanswered questions right now, and those answers will come soon. But I have to say, as some of my colleagues have said: Enough. Enough. More people have died in the last several years than the whole Vietnam war. More people are injured.

I will just say the first responders, the police officers, our prayers will be there. And I swear to God I will do everything in my power to make this a safer country for our children.

Mr. Speaker, I wish to extend my sincere gratitude for the relief funds donated by Taiwan which have been designated to aid in the United States' recovery after Superstorm Sandy. This generous donation comes at a time when collaboration and unity among people is the most important step toward recovery, and it is humbling to witness a global effort for relief.

As my colleagues may know, many citizens, including many of my own constituents in Long Island, are still struggling to rebuild their lives after the devastation caused by Superstorm Sandy. The aid offered by Taiwan will directly assist in repairing the coastal region and our nation, both in short term and long term efforts. From a pledge of $1.3 million, $100,000 will be given to New York City, New York State and New Jersey each. The additional $1 million will be split between Washington charities the United Way and Habitat for Humanity, which have been working tirelessly to aid and rebuild the hardest hit areas.

Again, I thank Taiwan for the generosity they have shown to the United States during these difficult times. Relief funds are one of the most important ways in which help can be brought to the storm-stricken areas. I stand alongside the victims of this storm, as well as those who have already dedicated so much time and effort to rebuilding the region, in thanking Taiwan. These resilient people, with the assistance of the relief funds, will see a steady, efficient, and full recovery.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to raise awareness of group A strep infection. A series of tragic events within my district have brought this pressing health situation to my attention. One of my constituents, Stephen Sweetman, a dedicated fireman, contacted my office after the deaths of his mother and his 2- year-old son.

Sean died just days after originally presenting with invasive strep A symptoms last February. After flying to New York for Sean's wake, Mr. Sweetman's mother died of group A strep infection just 14 days after her grandson. Both were originally misdiagnosed with a stomach bug.

While medical diagnosis presents enormous challenges, especially for rare diseases, I am deeply concerned with the medical misidentifications which led to these terrible deaths. Recently, several of my colleagues and I sent a letter to the Appropriations Committee asking that we focus on this issue.

I hope that we can come together to raise awareness for group A strep infections.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize and honor my friend, John P. Broder, upon his retirement from Winthrop- University Hospital.

Mr. Broder has been in the marketing, public affairs and development profession for 42 years. For the past 20 years, he has been the Vice President for External Affairs and Development at Winthrop-University Hospital. He was responsible for government relations and development programs and has been instrumental in establishing the marketing, advertising and public affairs department at the Hospital.

Mr. Broder received his degree in business administration from the St. Michael's College in Vermont and earned his MBA in Marketing from the Hagen Graduate School of Business at Iona College. In addition, Mr. Broder was honorably discharged from the U.S. Army after serving a combat tour in the Republic of Vietnam. He began his career with the United Way of Tri-State before moving to the Columbia Presbyterian Medical Center where he was responsible for the hospital's successful $110 million capital campaign. Prior to joining the team at Winthrop, Mr. Broder was the Vice President in charge of the development programs at Long Island Jewish Medical Center.

In addition to his impressive career, Mr. Broder has made time to serve the community through a variety of organizations. He is the Vice President of the Mineola Chamber of Commerce, a board member and past President of the Mineola Lions Club, Director of the Fair Media Council, works with the Mineola Community Planning Committee, and is a member of the Corporate Advisory Committee of Literacy Nassau, to name a few.

For more than 30 years Mr. Broder has been a resident of Long Island and through his work and his volunteer service he has done a great deal to help improve our communities.

Mr. Speaker, it is with admiration and respect that I offer my thanks and recognition to my friend John P. Broder for his many years of hard work and friendship.

Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably absent for a vote on June 26th 2012. Had I been present, I would have voted in the following manner:

Rollcall No. 416--On Agreeing to the Amendment (Connolly of Virginia Amendment) ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably absent on June 18, 2012. If I were present, I would have voted on the following:

S. 684, To provide for the conveyance of certain parcels of land to the town of Alta, Utah--rollcall No. 379: ``yea.''

S. 404, To modify a land grant patent issued by the Secretary of the Interior--rollcall No. 380: ``yea.''

Mr. Speaker, as has just been mentioned by my colleague from California, tomorrow, June 1, is the official start of the 2012 Atlantic hurricane season, which would potentially mean bad news for areas across the Nation, including folks on Long Island in my congressional district.

Last year, Hurricane Irene and the earthquake felt along the east coast reminded us of the importance of the Nation's first responders, specifically, the importance of our broadcasters.

Emergency plans are only effective if they are able to be communicated to the folks in need. This fact underscores the importance of our broadcasters.

With that in mind, I have constantly supported efforts for both the Department of Homeland Security and the Federal Communications Commission to explore the potential benefits of including radio tuners in mobile telephones. Since technology would ensure that folks have an outlet to receive critical information in times of need, I encourage this Congress to act swiftly to consider any and all opportunities that would facilitate communication during emergencies.

As we embark on hurricane season, let's take this moment to recognize the importance of broadcasters and all of our first responders that selflessly provide services in our time of need.

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

I rise today in support of H.R. 2072, the Export-Import Bank Reauthorization Act of 2012. I would also like to thank Majority Leader Cantor and Minority Whip Hoyer for their leadership on this bill, as well as full committee Chairman Bachus and Ranking Member Frank, and certainly my chairman on the subcommittee, Mr. Miller.

But I also would like to thank all of the staff for their hard work on this important legislation, especially Lesli Gooch from Chairman Miller's staff and Georgette Sierra from my staff, who worked on this for over a year.

I'm very proud to be supporting the bill before us today. Our Nation is at a crossroads. One job at a time, we are gradually emerging from one of the worst recessions in living memory. At this moment we can either stand in the way of America's ongoing recovery or speed it up. American businesses have recently watched their counterparts in other countries, like China, become world leaders in exporting. I believe strongly that now it's America's turn. It's America's turn to put our workers, the best workers in the world, to work in selling their goods and services to an untapped global market. It's America's turn to see its innovative businesses reach their full potential to grow and create local jobs in communities across this country. I'm confident with the help from the Export-Import Bank, American businesses can help make our Nation an unrivaled world economic leader once again.

But the clock is ticking, and we must act now.

The legislation before us brings certainty to many U.S. businesses that are anxiously awaiting Congress to reauthorize the bank before the May 31 deadline. H.R. 2072 provides a 3-year reauthorization and an incremental increase in the bank's exposure limit, allowing the bank to meet the increased demand from U.S. export companies. The bill includes provisions to enhance the bank's accountability by allotting

funds for much-needed technology upgrades, requiring the bank to submit a business plan and to monitor and report to Congress if their default rate goes above 2 percent.

The Export-Import Bank is the export credit agency of the United States, and it provides export financing for American companies when private financing isn't available. The bank is critical for helping U.S. companies create American jobs and compete in global markets by selling their goods and services to foreign buyers. Throughout the financial crisis, the bank played a crucial role in ensuring that American companies were able to continue exporting when private trade financing options were not available. The bank has allowed the United States to remain competitive in the global economy by fulfilling its mission of creating or sustaining U.S. jobs across the 50 States through exports.

In fiscal year 2011, the bank provided over $30 billion in financing to 3,600 companies in the USA which supported nearly 290,000 American jobs. Over 80 percent of those transactions were for small businesses, like Aerolyusa, Inc., which sells aerospace parts in my own district in New York.

It is important to note that the work of the bank is done at no cost to the American taxpayer, as the bank is self-sustaining, funding its finance programs and administrative costs from fees and the returns on its investments. In fact, the bank returns money to the Treasury, and since 2008, it has returned almost $2 billion to the Treasury.

Foreign governments are aggressively supporting their own exporters so that they can dominate new markets and be world leaders in exporting. Through the Export-Import Bank's assistance, we will ensure that American companies have the tools to be globally competitive and will continue to create jobs in the United States and move our economy forward. Prominent business organizations such as the National Association of Manufacturers, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the Business Roundtable, and labor understand the important role of the bank and support its reauthorization. It shows how we have all worked together, with Mr. Miller's help, to bring this bill to the floor.

In just a few weeks, the bank's charter will expire. Without Congress quickly enacting a long-term reauthorization and cap increase, thousands--thousands--of American jobs will be lost, and the U.S. businesses that rely on bank financing will be in jeopardy.

I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 2072, which provides the certainty that businesses around our country need that rely on the bank in order to continue growing and creating jobs here at home through exports.

I yield 5 minutes to the minority whip, Mr. Hoyer, and thank him again for his leadership on this issue.

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

Mr. Speaker, I wish to engage the chairman of the subcommittee in a colloquy regarding section 9 of the bill relating to a new notice and comment period for bank transactions over $100 million. Specifically, I wish to inquire of the chairman the scope of the bank's ability to exclude from the notice required to be published in the Federal Register information that is proprietary or confidential that would violate the Trade Secrets Act or would jeopardize jobs in the U.S. by supplying information which competitors could use to compete with companies in the U.S.A.

Mr. Speaker, if I may, I would like to inquire of the chairman further.

What is the expectation with respect to the amount of time transactions might be delayed as a result of the new notice and comment period?

I thank the chairman.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Neal).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Larsen).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin), the ranking member of the Ways and Means Committee.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Dicks), the ranking member of the Appropriations Committee.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to my colleague, the gentlelady from New York (Mrs. Maloney).

I yield 1 minute to my colleague, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Fattah).

Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind everybody that in the Fourth Congressional District in California, $752 million in financing support came from the Export-Import Bank.

With that, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the remaining time.

Number one, I want to say how wonderful it has been working with you, and certainly your staff. Over the last past year we have worked together, and I think that's a great example for the rest of this Chamber, to be very honest with you.

We certainly care about this bill passionately. I think it's important for the American people. It comes back to American jobs. And that's what it is. I think the majority of our Members here in Congress will see that. This is something that's important for our workers and our companies--to be able to have the ability to compete with those countries that are doing exporting. We need to stand behind our businesses. We need to stand behind, certainly, our workers.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I thank, again, everybody that has been involved in this, and I yield back the balance of my time.

The Small Business Exporters

Association of the United States,

Washington, DC.

House of Representatives,

Washington, DC.

Dear Representatives: NSBA and its international trade

arm--the Small Business Exporters Association--has been

outspoken advocates for a long-term reauthorization and

increased exposure cap for the U.S. Export-Import (ExIm)

Bank. On behalf of the small businesses that rely on Ex-Im

for much-needed financing and credit insurance, I urge

members to support the bi-partisan bill, H.R. 2072, the

Securing American Jobs Through Exports Act of 2011, when it

is considered under the suspension calendar later this week.

Ex-Im Bank is an independent federal agency that helps

create and maintain U.S. jobs by filling gaps in private

export financing at no cost to American taxpayers. The Bank

provides a variety of financing mechanisms, including working

capital financing, export-credit insurance and financial

guarantees to help foreign buyers purchase U.S. goods and

services.

We applaud House Majority Leader Eric Cantor and House

Minority Whip Steny Hoyer for their dedication and bipartisan

efforts to settle on a compromise to reauthorize Ex-Im's

charter to 2014 and raise its loan exposure cap incrementally

to $140 billion. The three-year extension cap gradually

increases from $120 billion for the remainder of 2012, to

$130 billion in 2013 and ultimately reaches $140 billion for

2014, provided certain default requirements are met.

Ex-Im Bank remains a catalyst for the expansion of small-

business exports while continuing to support businesses

confronting aggressive foreign competition. In fact, for FY

2011, Ex-Im Bank set a record in its support of small

business at $6 billion--an increase of more than 20 percent

since 2010. Furthermore, in 2011 alone, Ex-Im Bank supported

290,000 jobs and $41 billion in exports.

Absent Congressional action, the Bank's authorization will

not only expire at the end of this month but it will have

bumped up against its $100 billion cap and be unable to take

on further transactions in the pipeline. Any uncertainty

could have a devastating effect on small businesses' ability

to follow through on sales even though there are buyers who

want their products.

Ex-Im Bank enables U.S. companies--large and small--to turn

export opportunities into real sales, thus maintaining and

creating U.S. jobs and contributing to a stronger national

economy. We strongly urge you to support H.R. 2072 and

approve this compromise legislation without further delay.

Sincerely,

Todd McCracken,

President and CEO.

Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably absent on March 26, 2012. If I were present, I would have voted on the following:

H.R. 2779--To exempt inter-affiliate swaps from certain regulatory requirements put in place by Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, rollcall No. 127: ``yea.''

H.R. 2682--Business Risk mitigation and Price Stabilization Act of 2011, rollcall No. 128: ``yea.''

On Approving the Journal, rollcall No. 129: ``aye.''

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak about the importance of ensuring coverage for contraceptives and the impact this has on women's health.

For centuries, important aspects of women's health care have been treated as a political football by advocates on all sides of the issue. In politicians' efforts to score political points, women suffer because of a lack of access to coverage, a lack of reliable information about health care choices, and because many women are vilified for some of the health care choices they make.

It's time to take politics out of women's health, and it's time to ensure that women's health coverage includes full access to contraception. Birth control can have significant health care benefits for women and their families. It can significantly reduce health care costs. And it's one of the most commonly taken drugs in the United States.

We need to stop playing games with people's health and instead live up to our responsibilities to protect the right of women to make the health care choices that are right for them. I look forward to working every Wednesday to talk about women's health.

Mr. Speaker, I'd like to thank, certainly, Mr. Kelly from Pennsylvania and Mr. Clay from Missouri for helping me get this through the committee, and I appreciate that.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Mr. John J. Cook, a World War II veteran, a model American postal worker, and an integral member of the East Rockaway community. I also want to thank senior Councilman Anthony Santino for bringing this to my attention.

Mr. Cook, a resident of my district, began working for the East Rockaway Post Office on January 8, 1944. For the next 60 years he served our East Rockaway community as a letter carrier who exemplified the American work ethic, displaying professionalism, courtesy and tireless dedication.

After serving in World War II in the Pacific theater, Mr. Cook began working for the local post office and quickly became an integral part of the East Rockaway community. Day in and day out, for more than 60 years, Mr. Cook took pride in his work, delivering the mail to the East Rockaway community in a timely and efficient manner.

He tailored his deliveries to the wishes of each individual customer. For example, he would make sure that important messages such as a wedding invitation or college acceptance letters were placed on the top of the day's mail for that customer.

Mr. Cook would go above and beyond his expected duties. At times, he even would cancel his family vacations because the post office needed him for a last-minute shift.

As public servants, we can recognize the importance of dedication, hard work, and service to one's community. It is only fitting and proper that the United States Government and Postal Service take the opportunity to honor a great man like Mr. Cook. He truly was a great American.

Mr. Cook exemplified these values on a daily basis and became an esteemed member of our East Rockaway community. He watched the children of his customers grow up and marry and have their own children.

To rename the post office in Mr. Cook's honor will be a well-deserved tribute to a World War II veteran and a model public servant; and I hope my colleagues join me in supporting H.R. 2079 in honor of Mr. John J. Cook.

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

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

I rise today to offer an amendment to the deeply flawed bill before us right now.

Today we continue the majority's politically motivated attacks on regulations. For the past 2 weeks, we have considered bills designed to slow down and stop the regulatory process.

The bill before us today doesn't target just the rules that the majority might like you to believe are problematic; it would hamper all rulemaking, even those rules that are essential to public health and safety.

My amendment today seeks to address that issue by exempting the REINS Act regulations relating to food safety, workplace safety, air quality, consumer product safety, or water quality.

These issue areas are too important to be impeded by the majority's need to generate political talking points. Consumers can't be put at risk because one House of Congress can't get its act together to pass food safety regulations.

Children at risk from being exposed to toxic substances in toys can't wait for 535 new regulators to weigh in--that's us, the Members of Congress. People getting sick from tainted water supplies shouldn't be put further at risk by a legislative vote from one half of one-third of the branches of the government.

Today's bill, the REINS Act, would amend the Congressional Review Act to prohibit a majority rule from going into effect unless Congress enacts a joint resolution of approval, specifically approving the rule.

This is a bizarre, backwards, and unnecessary piece of legislation. The majority claims to be aiming to streamline the regulatory process and reduce the negative effects of a bureaucracy on the American people and on American businesses.

Ironically, however, this bill has the effect of growing the regulatory process by effectively adding 535 of us additional regulators to the process. Each Member of Congress will now have to perform the role of a regulator. Congress will be forced to review the rules and regulations regarding highly technical matters currently handled by subject area experts.

This technical complexity is precisely why we have professionals in the executive branch with subject matter expertise to work on these rules and regulations. This divide has been the fundamental cornerstone of the principal of separation of powers.

But Congress is intended to represent the people and enact laws. The executive branch is intended to implement those laws. That implementation takes the form of issuing rules, regulations, and specific guidance on how the law will be implemented.

The REINS Act inappropriately puts Congress into duties that should be carried out only by the executive branch. Congress does have oversight responsibility and a duty to monitor implementation, but we currently have methods to address the problems when they do occur, and we do not need this bill. The bill also will lead to confusion, uncertainty, and more gridlock.

Thanks to the REINS Act requirement that Congress affirmatively approve of every major rule, one House of

Congress will essentially have a legislative veto over any major regulation issued.

The worst time for businesses is uncertainty, and the REINS Act increases it in the regulatory process. After engaging in the process of helping to shape the regulations through the rulemaking process, citizens will have to wonder what actions will Congress take. What legislative deal-making will occur? Will Congress approve of the regulation? When will Congress approve the regulation?

This uncertainty keeps businesses from investing and from hiring new workers. More uncertainty under the REINS Act is the opposite of what we need. Congress should spend more of its time thoroughly considering enacting legislation. We should have the implementation where it belongs, in the executive branch. We should continue to monitor implementation and exercise proper oversight. And in the cases where correction is needed, use the current legislative tools that we have at our disposal to address those issues.

I do urge all of our Members to vote for my amendment to protect the American people.

We don't need more gridlock here in Washington. That's why everybody back at home is mad at everybody. We need to go on with our work. We have to make sure that there is a streamlined process so that we can get small businesses growing again, get people back to work. That's what the American people want from all of us.

I urge my colleagues to vote for this amendment.

With that, I yield back the balance of my time.

I demand a recorded vote.