Floor Statements

I thank the distinguished chairman, Mr. Upton from Michigan.

Here we go again, my colleagues. We are going to spend a lot of money and here we have a huge $1.5 trillion deficit. I am a member of the Renewable Energy and Efficiency Caucus. I strongly support, obviously, providing property owners with the education, simple education, incentives for them, and resources to voluntarily improve their homes and save energy. But I have a number of significant concerns with this legislation, including the total cost; also questions about the U.S. Department of Energy, their ability to effectively implement this program; and the fact that the Federal Government will be the one picking technology winners and losers, and not the free market, is also a concern of mine.

My colleagues, at a time when we have an increasing national deficit, it's simply irresponsible to add an additional almost $7 billion in spending. Again the word billion. This spending is in addition to the more than $10 billion spent by the American taxpayers to implement a weatherization program. There are also significant concerns regarding the Department of Energy's ability to implement this program, especially under the tight deadlines required in this legislation.

In fact, the Department of Energy Inspector General recently issued a report concluding that as of February 2010, of the roughly $4.7 billion DOE, Department of Energy, has awarded in grants to the States under the Recovery Act weatherization program, only $368 million, less than 10 percent, had been used by States for this purpose, and only 30,000 homes have actually been weatherized.

This legislation also comes on the heels of the Energy Star fraud that was exposed earlier this month. Countless stories in mainstream newspapers reported the lax standards by which the Environmental Protection Agency approves ``energy efficient'' devices, allowing 15 phony products to pass inspection. Among those products approved were a gasoline-powered alarm clock and an air purifier which is nothing more than an upright fan with a feather duster taped to the top. Those are the things the Department of Energy approved, and you are going to give them almost $7 billion to go and institute and follow along this bill?

H.R. 5019 is simply another multi-billion dollar government scheme that picks winners and losers through cash handouts to mostly, in this case, unionized labor at a time when the Federal Government is already running a $1.5 trillion annual deficit. So look at this carefully. We don't need to spend more money to do this. There is a lot of fraud that exists at the Department of Energy. They are lax. So I urge a ``no'' vote.

Madam Speaker, on May 3, the people of Poland celebrated the 219-year anniversary of the passage of the Constitution of May 3, 1791. This Constitution is regarded around the world as Europe's first and the world's second modern codified national constitution, following only the ratification of the United States Constitution in 1788. This is a great day not only for the Polish people but also for freedom loving people around the world.

The United States and Poland share similar values and the two Constitutions reflect that shared commitment to liberty for all people. In fact, according to one Polish historian, the May 3 Constitution was ``founded principally on those of England and the United States of America . . . and adapted as much as possible to the local and particular circumstances of the country.'' In addition, historians have pointed out a number of similarities between the two Constitutions, including an advocacy of a separation and balance of powers and a bicameral legislature. Article V of the May 3 Constitution states that, ``the integrity of the states, civil liberty, and social order remain always in equilibrium.'' The United States and Poland share an unbreakable commitment to freedom and liberty. I congratulate the people of Poland on this momentous day.

In honor of this special day, I would like to put into the Record a speech given by the President of the European Parliament, Jerzy Buzek, in honor of Polish National Day.

Dear Ambassador, Distinguished Guests, Ladies and

Gentlemen,

I am delighted to be here in this wonderful old building,

the Renwick Gallery, in the heart of this nation's capital.

Over the past few days, in my capacity as President of the

European Parliament, I have been holding discussions here in

Washington on issues relating to the European Union. I should

therefore like to thank you, Mr. Ambassador, for holding this

reception so that we might meet and celebrate together one of

the key events in Polish history.

A few short steps away lies a park containing monuments to

great heroes of freedom and democracy. For the last century

and more, it has housed a monument to Tadeusz Kosciuszko, a

hero of two nations--Poland and the United States--and a

staunch defender of the Polish Constitution of 3 May

1791--Europe's first, and the world's second, such

document.

This year's Polish Constitution Day celebrations are

overshadowed by the tragic events of 10 April, which have

shown how important a modern constitution is to Poland, as

indeed to any democratic country. During this difficult

period, the 1997 Constitution has ensured continuity of

government and a stable Presidency in our country.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Having joined the European Union, Poland now enjoys a two-

fold partnership with the United States: both as a sovereign

state and as an important member of a unique community of 27

countries and close to half a billion people.

The European Parliament, with its more than 700 directly

elected Members, is the most democratic of the EU

institutions. I believe that the time has now come for closer

relations to be forged between our Parliament and the U.S.

Congress. Day-to-day responsibility for doing so will lie

with our newly opened office in Washington, which Piotr

Nowina-Konopka was recently appointed to head up.

In today's world, the partnership between Europe and the

United States is an alliance whose importance cannot be

overstated. And it is because we are democracies that that

alliance should have a parliamentary dimension. The

commemoration of 3 May is an appropriate occasion to draw

attention to this fact, because constitutions are the supreme

expression of parliamentary law-making in the majority of the

world's democracies.

May this anniversary inspire us, as politicians, to be ever

more effective in our efforts to ensure the good of our free

nations.

Madam Speaker, last week, the chief actuary for the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services, CMS, issued a troubling report, but it is not at all surprising to many of us who debated the health care bill. The report said that the Obamacare health care bill will increase national health expenditures by $311 billion. That is a deficit.

During the debate, many of us said on the House floor that this bill will increase the deficit and expand Federal powers. I would like to take a few minutes to outline some of the problems with the bill by government officials pointing out these problems.

First of all, it obviously increases the deficit. CBO projected the cost of the health care bill to be $940 billion and it would reduce the deficit by $138 billion. However, that has been proven to be wrong. There are budget gimmicks in place and it is unlikely that Congress will keep those gimmicks in place. For example, the bill assumes that a 21 percent cut to Medicare's physician reimbursement rate will stay in place. This won't happen.

New taxes and mandates will create economic hardship. Businesses will be forced to buy health insurance for their employees or pay a tax for every employee. This will place businesses into a very difficult position, cutting workers, reducing wages, or preventing companies from growing larger if they wish to avoid these costly penalties. With 10 percent unemployment nationwide, is this the right time to create a disincentive for a company to hire more workers?

Expanding a broken entitlement creates more problems, not real solutions. For example, in 2014, Medicaid will be expanded to all individuals making less than 133 percent of the Federal poverty level. Half the people covered under the health care bill will be covered because of Medicaid. Unfortunately, most doctors do not participate in Medicaid because the reimbursement rate is far less than the private sector and less than Medicare. So where are these 16 million people going to go to get health care?

It bankrupts State budgets through Medicaid expansion. With 16 million new individuals enrolled in Medicaid, States will be on the hook for more Medicaid spending. In the short term, the Federal Government will pay for the expansion of Medicaid, but after 2017, States will have to pick up about 10 percent of the cost. Many States do not have the ability to do this; it will make it more difficult for them.

Medicare cuts jeopardize the care of our seniors. Medicare's costs continue to grow and the Medicare Trust Fund continues to be insolvent. So, to fix this problem, the majority cut over $500 billion from Medicare, but rather than using the savings to extend the program, they immediately spent it on expanding Medicaid and creating subsidies for the health insurance exchange. CMS reports 15 percent of hospitals will be unprofitable within 10 years just because of these cuts.

It creates an inequity against low-income workers. The employer mandate requires businesses to offer a health plan that meets with the approval of HHS. This will drive up the cost of health plans, and small businesses may not be able to afford a robust insurance plan. CMS' report further points out how many small businesses may cancel their plans because it is cheaper to pay the tax than to provide health insurance.

New regulations increase government control over health care. HHS gains an incredible amount of power under this bill. They will now have the power to dictate insurance policies, insurance prices, regulate the insurance market, and control benefits offered in your health care plan.

This bill obviously violates the Constitution in the fact that the Federal Government now is mandating that all U.S. citizens purchase a health care plan from a private company as a requirement for lawful residency in this country. This is an unprecedented extension of Federal power, and this is only the beginning. The health care bill was so big and so complex that now we are only learning about the problems and flaws in the law, such as its treatment of veteran health plans or weakening the Medicaid program for new lawsuits from trial lawyers.

We need to fix this bill and rein in all the controls and power that have been provided through this bill here in Washington.

Mr. Speaker, last Friday, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filed fraud charges against investment bank Goldman Sachs for misleading and defrauding investors through their selling of a complex financial product based on toxic subprime mortgages. These charges are serious, but the SEC should have been investigating the abusive practices that contributed to our financial crisis much sooner.

American taxpayers could see past Goldman Sachs' smoke and mirrors. American taxpayers could see past Lloyd Blankfein's defense of his company when he said such things as ``We're very important.'' He went on to say, ``I'm doing God's work.'' Americans could see that there were problems on Wall Street well before the SEC was willing to publicly acknowledge it.

Now, according to the SEC, Goldman Sachs was approached by one of the world's largest hedge funds, Paulson & Co., which asked the firm to create and market collateralized debt obligations (CDOs) whose values were linked to the value of toxic home loans. With billions being offered, Goldman Sachs obliged and created ABACUS, which the hedge fund then placed bets against, knowing that this new financial instrument was certain to lose value. Then, Goldman Sachs failed to tell ABACUS investors that the very hedge fund that helped to create and assemble the toxic CDOs, was betting against it.

``The product was new and complex but the deception and conflicts are old and simple.'' That's what the SEC's Director of Division Enforcement said. ``Goldman wrongly permitted a client that was betting against the mortgage market to heavily influence which mortgage securities to include in an investment portfolio, while telling other investors that the securities were selected by an independent, objective third party.''

The Goldman Sachs-Paulson & Co. deal closed on April 26, 2007, with the hedge fund paying Goldman Sachs $15 million for structuring and marketing ABACUS to unknowing investors. Unfortunately, however, by October 24 of that same year, 83 percent of the residential mortgage- backed securities in the ABACUS portfolio had been downgraded, and 17 percent were on negative watch. Less than a year later, on January 28, 2008, 99 percent of the ABACUS portfolio had been downgraded. Those who invested in ABACUS lost more than $1 billion.

Goldman Sachs' official statement that ``the SEC charges are completely unfounded in law and fact, and we will vigorously contest them and defend the firm and its reputation,'' contrasts greatly with the words of Goldman's CEO Lloyd Blankfein when he publicly apologized in November of last year for the bank's role in some of the activities leading up to the financial crisis. This is what he said: ``We participated in things that were clearly wrong and have reason to regret. We apologize.''

Unfortunately, however, it appears the senior leadership at Goldman Sachs knew months before they even marketed ABACUS to investors that the housing market was about to crash. Goldman's vice president, Fabrice Tourre, who was said to be the man who structured the toxic financial instrument, prepared the marketing materials, and communicated directly with investors, sent an e-mail stating, ``the whole building is about to collapse anytime now.'' He is now taking a break from his position at the firm.

The allegations against Goldman Sachs are very serious, and Goldman Sachs has the right to challenge the SEC's civil fraud charges. But the SEC also has a duty to American taxpayers to get the bottom of this and continue to investigate any abusive practices employed by all financial institutions, not just Goldman Sachs.

Mr. Speaker, the American people recall that Goldman Sachs was a TARP bailout recipient and one of the few big Wall Street banks that managed to not only benefit from the taxpayer bailout but also to emerge stronger than before. Goldman Sachs received $10 billion in TARP funds, was allowed to convert to a bank holding company in order to gain additional support from the Federal Reserve, and was one of the

largest recipients from the $180 billion AIG bailout when it received 100 cents on the dollar in payouts in public funds from the insurance giant.

The American public is now an unwilling majority owner in AIG. And with Goldman having received a backdoor bailout with public funds through AIG, it would only be fair to make all of AIG's counterparties, including Goldman Sachs, buy back the CDOs at full price. Goldman Sachs could use the profits they gained from the AIG payments to pay down the billions in public debt still held by AIG.

If Goldman Sachs truly has regret for participating in activities leading up to the financial crisis that were ``clearly wrong'' as their CEO has said and apologized, then Goldman Sachs should step up to the plate and make reparations that are owed to American taxpayers.

Madam Speaker, today is Tax Day and as Americans cut yet another check to the federal government, it's time to rise up and say stop. Stop the out of control spending that will saddle our children and grandchildren with a mountain of IOUs. Stop with all the bailouts that leave the American people paying for Wall Street's greed and excess. And we must say stop to the trillion-dollar government take over of health care.

Washington spending is now $31,000 per household and in 2008, the publicly held debt was 40.8 percent of the GDP. American families are having a hard time making ends meet, and yet President Obama and congressional Democrats continue to tax and spend without regard. In fact, since January 2009, President Obama and congressional Democrats have enacted into law gross tax increases totaling more than $670 billion, more than $2,100 for every American. When will all of this madness stop?

Madam Speaker, it's Tax Day in America, and once again millions have gone through the struggle of trying to figure out our complicated tax laws. Our tax code is far too complicated and unwieldy.

The IRS' Taxpayer Advocate stated, ``The [Tax] Code has grown so long that it has become challenging even to figure out how long it is.'' A 2001 study put the number of words at 1.3 million. A 2005 report put the number of words at 2.1 million. The Taxpayer Advocate's search of the tax code turned up 3.7 million words. The tax code has more than tripled since 1975.

It is estimated that individual taxpayers spent 3.8 billion hours complying with federal income tax laws. The IRS reported that individuals spent $29 billion in 2009 for tax software, tax preparers, and other expenses to filing their returns.

We need real tax reform in our country. We need a simplified tax code that ensures that everyone pays their fair share and a tax code that is easily understood without excessive complexities.

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

I rise in strong support of this bill. As the chairman of the Telecommunications Subcommittee has indicated, this has passed twice before. We are coming here hoping that the Senate will take it up and pass it. It is a very good bill. The gentleman from New York has offered this bill.

The bill is called the Truth in Caller ID Act, and obviously it's going to pass overwhelmingly today.

Millions of Americans use caller ID to secure greater privacy for their families. Yet as new technologies continue to be developed, a very simple deceptive practice called ``caller ID spoofing'' has simply become a growing problem for consumers and also for businesses. Caller ID spoofing occurs when a caller masquerades as someone else by falsifying the number that appears on the recipient's caller ID display. Now, you say, is this difficult? No, it isn't. Caller ID spoofing can make a caller appear to come from any phone number the caller so desires.

Unfortunately, under current FCC regulations, there is no requirement that all callers transmit accurate caller ID information. In fact, there is nothing that prohibits a deceptive manipulation of caller ID. This bill will go a long way in stemming the tide of caller ID spoofing by making it illegal to transmit misleading or inaccurate caller ID information while providing reasonable exemptions for law enforcement activities.

Madam Speaker, the increasing use of Internet telephone services has made it easier for people to make any number, any number, appear as a caller ID. In addition, several Web sites have sprung up to provide caller ID spoofing services, eliminating the need for any special hardware. So think of that. Entrepreneurship of these spoofers now has sprung to such a point that they can provide it on their Web sites. Although these caller ID spoofing services promote themselves for use in prank calls or for entertainment purposes only, these services can be easily accessed and used by criminals.

Caller ID spoofing has emerged as a useful tool for identifying thieves and other scam artists. In addition, many business functions, from credit card verification to automatic call routing, simply depend on caller ID for security purposes, which spoofing can render useless. So, Madam Speaker, these nefarious actions are the target of this bill.

As you can see, this is a serious issue with far-reaching ramifications and implications for both consumers and for all businesses. This is an important bill, and I urge its passage.

I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Let me just comment a little bit further. The gentleman from New York mentioned some specific examples. There is another example that is used in political campaigns he perhaps knows about where people can use spoofing to call different homes in robo phone banking that calls and go around the congressional district as a fake and wake people up at 2 or 3 in the morning and people think this is coming from someone who it is not, and this has happened on both sides of the aisle. So this would prevent that. So I think it hits a little closer to home when you talk about it in those terms.

The other point that has been a concern is why has this bill not passed? I think the question has always been some kind of legal questions, whether there is liability involved for the phone company or anyone that transmits this information to a consumer or constituent through this illegal act of spoofing. And we are able to change that language, through bipartisanship, both sides, to try and make it--for example, if a phone company, not knowing, and how would they know, transmits the information, are they going to be liable for this, to be sued? Well, we worked it out that their not knowing, then they should not be liable for this. So I think that's important that this bill now has language that represents bipartisanship agreement so that the passage of this bill should be assured, I think, this time. So this should be the third and last time we're doing this. And in the end, I think it will be good for Americans to understand that this is an illegal activity and we want to stop it.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I also rise in support of H.R. 3125, the Radio Spectrum Inventory Act. As the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Boucher) mentioned, it's a very important bill, and I urge its passage.

This bill offers an opportunity to evaluate all of the frequency bands between 225 megahertz and 10 gigahertz and simply to determine who uses these frequency bands and the purpose for which they are being used.

While this bill requires NTIA and the FCC to recommend which spectrum, if any, should be reallocated, Congress ultimately will decide whether reallocation should occur. For Congress to make such an informed judgment, we need a solid set of facts before we do it. So it's very clear that the United States will need additional spectrum to meet the growing demand for wireless broadband, fourth-generation wireless. In fact, we are victims of our own success in this country.

The United States currently leads the world in wireless. Wireless providers have used spectrum to provide U.S. consumers with many innovative voice and data services. The number of mobile voice consumers in the United States has surpassed the number of wire line customers. Back in 1996, when we passed the Telecommunications Act, I don't think anybody would have thought that would have happened. And the number of mobile broadband consumers has increased exponentially over the past several years.

As customers increase the amount of time they spend on their mobile devices talking, emailing, surfing the net, cell sites become constrained for capacity. As a result, we are facing, in the words of FCC Chairman Genachowski, a ``looming spectrum crisis.'' For example, a voice call requires approximately 10,000 bits per second, while downloading a video requires millions of bits per second.

This bill creates a thoughtful, comprehensive process through which Congress can identify whether to reallocate spectrum that is currently underutilized. Current license holders should not fear this process. It will be open and transparent and provide all spectrum users with the opportunity to explain the purposes for which they use spectrum.

This is a beginning, Mr. Speaker, not the end of the debate over the future of the spectrum policy in the United States.

Now, this is a bill that's very important. You'd almost consider it not only for innovation and for commercial use, but long term, on behalf of national security purposes, too. So don't discount the fact that we are just asking for an inventory. It's something that should be done, and I think anybody who's interested in fiscal responsibility should realize asking for an inventory is the best way to find out what you have and how to use it better.

So I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to Mr. Pitts, the gentleman from Pennsylvania.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Scalise).

I yield myself 15 seconds to reply to the distinguished Member of Massachusetts.

I just got a tweet on Twitter notifying me that Representative Ed Markey was speaking. His fan club is so omnipresent that it just came across saying to everybody in the United States that he was on the floor speaking so eloquently. So I couldn't resist pulling it up and seeing what it said.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn).

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from Tennessee to engage in a colloquy with the chairman of the Subcommittee on Telecommunications.

I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Broun).

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

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

I am also pleased to support this resolution authorizing the use of the Emancipation Hall to celebrate the birthday of King Kamehameha of Hawaii. I think many of us have read all about this distinguished individual and the history, so it's altogether appropriate that the king, often known as Kamehameha the Great, is really, indeed, a legendary figure in Hawaiian culture and history and rightly so. He fought heroically for its unity and independence at the end of the 18th and beginning of the 19th centuries.

His law or Rule of the Splintered Paddle protecting noncombatants during wartime has been heralded for its

justness and established a human rights benchmark that would later be built upon in the Geneva Conventions.

This June 11 will mark the 94th annual King Kamehameha Day in Hawaii. His illustrious statue is part of the National Statutory Hall Collection. I urge all Members to go down and see it. It now sits in the Capitol Visitor Center, so it's visible to all, millions of Americans, as they come here to visit the Capitol.

I thank the sponsor of this resolution, Congresswoman Hirono, and I thank the chairman for bringing it to the floor. I urge my colleagues to join me in support of this great resolution.

I reserve the balance of my time, Mr. Speaker.

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

I think many of my colleagues have been to Hawaii, probably a lot of Americans have. If you go into a gift shop and you get a tourist book, and you look through and you look at some of the sites there, and then you see the unique history of Hawaii.

Kamehameha, the legendary king, is written in detail in these books and you start to realize the difficult decisions he had to make for the island when it transitioned. And I think it's part of the history of this country to celebrate his leadership and also to understand all about him and what he had to deal with. So I am delighted at this time to allow this commemoration of this legendary man and his historic role in Hawaii to be honored on this date, and I support this resolution and urge all of my colleagues to support it also.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

I would say to the chairman of the Veterans' Affairs Committee, Mr. Filner, he just did a 1-minute where he said, Let it go, let it go. So I'm a little surprised he's bringing up the health care bill and talking about it prior to these six wonderful bills we're going to pass on Veterans' Affairs. But since he brought it up, I think it's probably appropriate that I return with our side of this issue, because, as he pointed out, last night the House of Representatives passed the Senate bill, which was the government setting up exchanges-- which these exchanges include taxes, they include mandates and regulation, and it's phased in over a number of years to 2014. But there are some problems, frankly, with that bill. If there were no problems, then Ike Skelton, who's chairman of the Armed Services Committee, would not have brought it up 2 days ago, sort of furiously to try to get it in, because he voted against the health care bill.

So the chairman of the Armed Services Committee voted against the Senate health care bill last night. The day before that, he brought up the idea that we have to protect DoD veterans who are on TRICARE. That's probably one of the flaws in the bill that's being sent to the President. It has some serious ramifications for our military and dependents under TRICARE, Madam Speaker, for veterans' widows, orphans, and for children suffering from spina bifida as a result of a parent's exposure to Agent Orange during the wars in Korea and Vietnam. As deputy ranking member of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs, I joined with Ranking Member Steve Buyer, of our committee, and Armed Services Committee Ranking Member Buck McKeon to introduce

H.R. 4894 to protect the Department of Defense and the VA beneficiaries.

So I'm a little surprised that the Democrat leadership didn't take up our bill. Instead, they passed a more limited bill introduced by, as I mentioned, the chairman of the Armed Services Committee, Ike Skelton, which, after reading it, provides limited protection for TRICARE beneficiaries but not the DOD and VA health care systems and the VA health care benefits. Moreover, I was also surprised to learn from the Congressional Budget Office there could be a cost associated with our bill, the $4.4 billion, so-called, for the cost of our bill. I'm an original cosponsor.

So what are the implications for these beneficiaries? Simply, it means that the government takeover of health care could result in a savings of $4.4 billion made on the backs of servicemembers, widows, and orphans, and children suffering from spina bifida as a result of a parent's exposure to Agent Orange. I don't think the public realizes that. So I think it's important to get this information out, and I'm hopeful that we can solve this problem.

Over the weekend, there were a lot of claims made that there is no problem for TRICARE and VA health care beneficiaries under the Senate health care bill that was passed by the Democrats yesterday. Well, frankly, there is, and it's a big problem. As I mentioned earlier, Madam Speaker, if it wasn't a problem, then Ike Skelton, the Armed Services Committee chairman, would not have been here 2 days ago trying to offer a scaled-down bill to correct the problem. He would not have taken his own bill, H.R. 4887, to the floor in a quick effort to solve this issue.

So it's important to reiterate that this bill does not protect the DOD and VA health care systems. It doesn't fully address TRICARE either, as a result of the CBO score of H.R. 4887. The Ike Skelton bill does not stop $4.5 billion from being cut from TRICARE, but we think ours will. The veterans service organizations know what is happening. The American Legion, the VFW, DAV, and the National Association of Uniformed Services have all supported our bill, H.R. 4894, which they believe will protect veterans.

So, Madam Speaker, I hope that the House Democrat leadership will see fit to act as soon as possible to allay the fears of all these veteran service organizations as soon as possible to correct the measure with H.R. 4894, to stop these cuts and to protect the individuals and their families who have served and sacrificed on behalf of our Nation and, I might add, to allay the fears of men at war who think when they come back they will retire or possibly be under Champus/VA.

With those comments, let me then move to the bill that we're considering. I rise in support of H.R. 4810, End Veteran Homeless Act of 2010.

Now, my colleagues, this bill would amend Title 38 of the United States Code to make certain improvements in the services provided for homeless veterans. This important legislation represents a combination of a number of bills that moved through the Veterans' Affairs Committee, and I believe truly exemplifies the manner in which our committee can and does work together in a bipartisan fashion to bring forth legislation that improves the lives of our veterans.

It is with a deep and personal commitment that I and everybody else on the Veterans' Affairs Committee embrace and aggressively want to tackle the challenge of homelessness and veterans and forward our mutual goals of ending this chronic problem among our veterans.

Since the enactment of the Homeless Veterans Comprehensive Assistance Act back in 2001, which significantly expanded the VA's homeless program, we've seen a significant number of previously homeless veterans returning to leading productive and sober lives. H.R. 4810 continues that proactive approach by permanently extending a VA program that provides grants to entities that help low-income families that are homeless, transitioning to permanent housing, or already in permanent housing; increasing the annual amounts authorized for VA's Homeless Grant and Per Diem Program from $150 million to $200 million; and encouraging the VA to expand its promotion for homeless veterans to include programs for homeless veterans that are female or that have children.

VA's latest estimate indicates that about 107,000 veterans were homeless on any one given night last year. With the unemployment rate for veterans from Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom aged 18 to 24 standing at a staggering 21.1 percent, more simply must be done to ensure that our veterans come home not to joblessness and homelessness, but to supportive communities and meaningful employment.

I recently had the pleasure of participating in the grand opening of the new HONOR--Hope, Opportunities, Networking, Outreach, and Recovery--Center in my congressional district in Gainesville, Florida. This newly renovated comprehensive VA homeless center includes a 45-bed domiciliary to care for disabled and homeless veterans with special medical needs. The HONOR Center will also have program offices for outreach, grant and per diem, and other essential services, including a special area that's designated just for women. The HONOR Center will provide a full continuum of care and a homelike environment and will provide homeless veterans with family-style dining and special recreation areas including a nice library with a meditation room and a full-time recreational therapist.

The HONOR Center has been in development for nearly 3 years, and I was very pleased and proud to see such a wonderful resource for homeless veterans open in my congressional district in Gainesville, Florida.

So, Madam Speaker, H.R. 4810, the End Veteran Homeless Act, is one important step in achieving our goal of eliminating homelessness among veterans. But still, my colleagues, it is only one step. While I support its passage, I look forward to continuing to work hard in the future to make sure America's veterans are welcomed back from service with open arms, good jobs, and happy and healthy homes.

Madam Speaker, I have no further requests for time. I would like to thank Chairman Filner and Ranking Member Buyer, who unfortunately couldn't be here this morning, of the Veterans' Affairs Committee as well as Chairman Michaud and Ranking Member Brown of the Subcommittee on Health for bringing this bill forward. I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 4810 and do their part to ensure that not a single one of the brave men and women who fight in uniform to defend our rights come home to a life without a job and a home.

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

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1879, as amended.

This bill amends title 38 United States Code to provide for employment and reemployment rights for certain individuals ordered to full-time National Guard duty. Madam Speaker, it's well known that the National Guard and Reserve units have carried a significant load in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Many of these units have served multiple combat tours, and others have provided homeland security services, such as maintaining an airborne alert here in the D.C. area. Additionally, Guard units have performed heroically at times when natural disasters like Hurricane Katrina devastated New Orleans.

As a result of these demands, many of the members of the Guard have accumulated significant active duty time and are now in danger of exceeding the 5-year limit on active duty that is protected under the Uniform Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, or USERRA. So I'm pleased that our colleague Mike Coffman from Colorado has taken the action to recognize that active duty performed under title 32 should be added to the types of duties exempted from the 5-year limit. I also thank Chairman Herseth Sandlin and Ranking Member Boozman of the Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity for their bipartisan work, as well as Chairman Filner for bringing this bill to the floor.

With that, Madam Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to Mr. Coffman, a fellow veteran who served in the Army and the Marines in the first gulf war and second gulf war in Iraq.

Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 1879, as amended, the National Guard Employment Protection Act of 2010.

I have no further requests for time, so I yield back the balance of my time.

General Leave

Madam Speaker, not only does the BVA provide support for our Nation's blind veterans, the organization also provides inspiration and support for their family members via the Kathern F. Gruber Scholarship Awards. This worthy scholarship enables spouses and dependent children of blinded veterans to achieve their goals in higher education.

Our blinded veterans have made tremendous sacrifices on behalf of our Nation to ensure our safety and our freedom. It is altogether appropriate that we honor them this day and join the Blinded Veterans Association in celebrating its 65th anniversary.

Obviously I am a strong supporter of H.J. Res. 80, a resolution to recognize and honor the Blinded Veterans Association on its 65th anniversary of representing blinded veterans and their families. As all of us know, recovering from the tragic loss of sight is a traumatic and life-changing event. Veterans who are burdened with this loss are forced to relearn almost every task associated with normal daily activities. Such rehabilitation is a difficult but necessary challenge blinded veterans must overcome to integrate back into civilian life. The Blinded Veterans Association was established specifically to help these severely injured veterans and their families during this most difficult period.

On March 28, 1945, 100 blinded members of the Armed Forces who served in World War II formed the Blinded Veterans Association. Just a year later, in 1946, General Bradley of the Veterans Administration appointed the BVA as the first official representative for blinded veterans who were filing claims and appeals to the Veterans Administration. This made the Blinded Veterans Association the eighth veterans service organization to receive such authorization.

Chartered by Congress in 1958, the BVA has worked throughout the years assisting blind veterans in acquiring Department of Veterans Affairs disability compensation and health care benefits, as well as other Federal and local benefits. Thanks in large part to the efforts of the BVA, there are now ten blindness rehabilitation centers located at various VA medical centers across this country.

Madam Speaker, along with this legislation, which obviously you can see how important it is, we wanted to honor today these blinded veterans on their 65th anniversary. But, Madam Speaker, our committee also had requested consideration of H.R. 4360, a bill to designate the blind rehabilitation center in Long Beach, California, as the Major Charles R. Soltes, Jr., O.D. Department of Veterans Affairs Blind Rehabilitation Center. This legislation has the support of the entire California delegation and the major veterans service organizations in California and would further honor blind veterans to whom Major Soltes provided so much service and so much sacrifice.

I would like to inquire, if it is appropriate to the Speaker, or perhaps

Chairman Filner, if they could explain why this very important bill was not permitted consideration on the floor today?

I yield.

I understand he is saying that it wasn't put in the loop at the moment, it wasn't put on the schedule, but I think you are also saying that this is the type of bill that you support and you believe should be part of a vote on the floor. Can I assume you support this bill?

Well, Madam Speaker, I think it is unfortunate that this bill to honor an individual who did so much for our blind veterans community and paid the ultimate sacrifice in service to his country, this particular bill is not being considered this afternoon. Many of us are disappointed, and we will work with Ranking Member Buyer and Chairman Filner, since he is a signee on the unanimous delegation letter, to have it brought to the floor at the earliest opportunity.

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

General Leave

Madam Speaker, if I might digress, I just wanted to thank Mrs. Halvorson on H.J. Res. 80 for introducing the resolution, and the chairman and Mr. Buyer for bringing that joint resolution to the floor. I think that is important to remind all of my colleagues.

Madam Speaker, I also rise in support of H.R. 3976, as amended, a bill to extend certain expiring provisions providing enhanced protections for servicemembers relating to mortgages and mortgage foreclosure.

Madam Speaker, Public Law 110-289, the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008, extended the protections against foreclosure and related actions on servicemembers' homes contained in the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act from 90 days to 9 months following lengthy deployments. Extensions of these protections will sunset December 31, 2010.

To address the continuing lengthy deployments by our servicemembers, the Veterans Home Preservation Act of 2010 would simply extend the mortgage-related sunset days contained in Public Law 110-289 through December 31, 2015. The bill also adds a new clause that would apply these same mortgage protections to a surviving spouse of a servicemember who dies while in military service and whose death is service connected.

Madam Speaker, these are good provisions that are appropriate given the current economic climate. I thank the authors of the bill, Mr. Perriello, as well as Chairman Herseth Sandlin and Ranking Member Boozman for their fine work, and the Veterans' Affairs Committee chairman, Mr. Filner, and Mr. Buyer, the ranking member, for bringing this legislation to the floor.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 3976, as amended, a bill to extend certain expiring provisions providing enhanced protections to servicemembers relating to mortgages and mortgage foreclosure.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 4667, the Veterans' Compensation Cost-of-Living-Adjustment Act of 2010. This legislation would increase, effective December 1, 2010, the rates of compensation for veterans with service-connected disabilities and the rate of dependency and indemnity compensation for the survivors of certain disabled veterans, and for other purposes.

Now, this COLA adjustment includes veterans disability compensation, additional compensation for dependents, clothing allowance, dependency and indemnity compensation to surviving spouses and their children. This is an important annual authorization which provides much needed assistance to our Nation's veterans, and, obviously, I encourage all my colleagues to support the bill.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I'd like to thank my House colleagues, Mr. Hall of New York, chairman of the Disability Assistance and Memorial Affairs Subcommittee, and Mr. Lamborn of Colorado, the ranking member of the subcommittee, as well as the House bill sponsor, Mr. Perriello of Virginia, for their leadership on H.R. 4667. I also thank Chairman Filner and the ranking member, Mr. Buyer, for advancing this bill. I urge my colleagues to support it.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I also rise in support of H.R. 4592, as amended, a bill to provide for the establishment of a pilot program to encourage the employment of veterans in energy-related positions.

Madam Speaker, I think the final bill is better. I applaud the manner in which the bill was developed. As originally introduced by Mr. Teague, the

bill would have established a Department of Labor grant program to subsidize employers for salaries paid to newly hired veterans working in the energy sector.

The ranking member of the Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity, Mr. Boozman, Dr. Boozman, expressed some reservations, some concerns about the approach, and he offered to work with Mr. Teague to craft a bill that would pay for skilled development, providing on-the-job training for veterans in the energy sector. And to the credit of Mr. Teague, he's worked with our side in a bipartisan manner.

I believe we have a better bill that will promote greater veterans employment results in the long run. I liken it to helping a veteran, in a way, instead of perhaps giving him something for a day, we're also giving him the opportunity to learn so that it will be for a lifetime.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, once again, I thank Chairwoman Herseth Sandlin for her leadership and Ranking Member Dr. Boozman and Mr. Teague for their work to bring us a bipartisan bill. I urge my colleagues to support it, as amended, to provide for the establishment of a pilot program to encourage the employment of veterans in energy- related positions.

I yield back the balance of my time.