Floor Statements

I certainly will.

I thank the gentleman for his generosity with the time, and thank my colleagues on both sides of the aisle for their support of S. 3197, which will help those who served this country save their home and save what they work a lifetime for.

It is very poignant that we could come to this bill at this moment, when we understand the importance of helping those who have served this country save their homes.

Because, actually, it does lead to that larger question because we are all in tune now with the fact that millions of Americans--including those who serve this country--through no fault of their own are finding their homes at risk, millions of Americans. And unfortunately, despite the best efforts of people on both sides of the aisle, the House will have delivered to it a bill from the Senate that does not directly address that question. Because unless this country takes a controlling interest, unless the Secretary of the Treasury would take a controlling interest in these mortgage-backed securities so they can negotiate on behalf of the homeowners to reduce their exposure to losing their home, this bill will be for naught.

Let's keep in mind that a central premise of the American Dream is owning a home. We understand that for our soldiers, and we should do something here. And we also need to understand that all over this country there are people who are watching these debates and wondering, are we going to do something to help them save their home? Because that's what we ought to be doing. And the way that we can do it, Mr. Chairman, is that instead of taking a strategy that assumes that the trickle is going to get down from the top by giving $700 billion to Wall Street, we instead focus on creating a solution for the homeowners and know that then the money will begin to percolate up to the banks and back to Wall Street instead of assuming the government gives the money to Wall Street, goes to the banks, and it gets to the people. Not under the bill that the Senate is sending over here.

So, while we want to do everything we can for our soldiers--and we should--we need to understand that looming here is one of the biggest challenges we've seen in American history to the concept of homeownership: Home is core, home is central, home relates to everything that we're all about. But home is in jeopardy here in the United States of America. Millions of mortgages are headed towards default. Millions of Americans are in danger of losing their home. And this Wall Street bailout, unfortunately, does not address it.

Now, Mr. Speaker, I sent a letter over to our Speaker yesterday pointing this out to her, telling her that we need to create a change that will enable the Secretary of the Treasury to focus in on this and to give him the ability to get a controlling interest in these mortgage-backed securities because, as has been pointed out by my colleagues, we don't have that right now. And unless you address that, all this is going to be for naught. You might see the market go up for a day if the House passes the bill, but you know what's going to happen: You're still going to see millions of Americans losing their homes.

Of course I would yield to my friend.

Taking back my time, the bill has language which might be discretionary, but we in the House understand the difference between something that's discretionary and mandatory. And we also know that the way the bill is structured, unless you have a controlling interest in these mortgage pools, there's no way you can do anything because then you have to talk with 20, 30 other interests in order to be able to come to resolution. That's not going to happen.

So we need to be real about this; and, unfortunately, that isn't always the case in our Congress. And when we get real about it and connect to people's aspirations to save their homes with a real solid legislative structure to deliver on that, then the American people and then our economy can celebrate the wisdom of the Congress. Right now, that jury is still out.

I yield to my friend.

I would.

Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time I have remaining?

I yield to my friend.

To my good friend from Utah, the clarity of the Secretary will not trump the language of the legislation. And the language of the legislation does not permit him to be able to have an effective role in saving people's homes. It talks about encouraging, it talks about ``may do,'' but it is not mandatory. And he doesn't have the additional power because there is no mechanism in there to give us a controlling interest so that we can actually create a fix.

I yield to the gentlelady from California.

Reclaiming my time, and thanking the gentlelady and the gentleman, I would say that the legislation doesn't fix the problem; that is the central point. It doesn't empower the Secretary to be able to get controlling interest of the mortgage-backed

securities. And that is the central flaw of the policies that we're pursuing. And millions of Americans who are in danger of losing their homes are not going to be helped.

I want to conclude by thanking Mr. Cannon for his service to the United States Congress.

And that's all I need.

When you look at the difference in the debate here, hear these words, ``we may save the world ``or ``we shall save the world''; ``we may save people's homes'' or ``we shall save their homes.'' I want a bill that says ``we shall save their homes.'' And that's not what the bill is that we're being sent by the Senate.

Mr. Speaker and Members of the House, tomorrow this House of Representatives will take a momentous vote. It is a vote which will determine whether or not this House will be able to meet the needs of millions of homeowners who are facing foreclosure or whether or not we are simply going to go along with a $700 billion bailout to America's banks and to Wall Street, which has searched that somehow these benefits are going to trickle down.

We know that the Senate took action to pass its own version of the bill, and we in turn will have the opportunity to vote on that Senate version. I want to share with my colleagues an analysis of the Senate bill so that when we come to vote on it, we know exactly what this bill will not do.

In the bill that will be presented to the Congress, there are no stronger protections for homeowners and no changes in the language to ensure that the Secretary has the authority to compel mortgage services to modify the terms of mortgages. Now, this is significant because, as many economists agree, the central focus of the unraveling of the economy has been with people not being able to pay their mortgages for a variety of reasons. And when that happens in millions of homes, that has a percolating effect. It affects the banks and it affects Wall Street. You would think that given the fact that this is the underlying problem that we would be considering a bill that would directly address dealing with the terms of the mortgages. But this bill doesn't do that.

Let me tell you why this becomes very significant. I come from Cleveland, Ohio, a city which has been at the epicenter of the subprime mortgage crisis. But as we know, with the subprime mortgage crisis comes an entire range of bankruptcies, but also other properties start to get pulled under in terms of their value.

There is a neighborhood in my district called Forest City Park, Mr. Speaker. It is an area that I'm quite familiar with because my political career, which goes back 41 years, has had a lot to do with Forest City Park. It's a community where they had a very long-lasting civic association that came together in support of each other keeping up their community and in property. People met to improve playgrounds, to improve streets, to improve parks and properties. And people came together in a kind of sense of joy that people in communities have when they share a common goal and a common interest. And Forest City Park was one of those neighborhoods, like many neighborhoods across this country, where people took pride in their property, where people spent their whole lives trying to improve their property, and their property was their biggest investment.

Mr. Speaker, if you were to come with me to the Forest City Park area, there are still homes that are being kept up. There are still people who sweep their doorstep every morning and who even clean the streets on their own. But the good part of the neighborhood has been inundated and caught up in this subprime mortgage crisis. House after house after house has gone into foreclosure. House after house after house is being boarded up. Fires are starting in neighborhoods, taking up some of these properties that were once the pride of the community.

Now, we know how this subprime mortgage crisis started. We know it started with speculation on Wall Street where they created derivatives that came from groups of mortgage-backed securities. We know that property values were inflated deliberately, that people desperate for a home were told that they can get their home without any documentation, just sign on the dotted line. The value of it was inflated so Wall Street firms could have inflated assets on their books and then keep trading and trading and trading them, and then when property values started to drop, when there was an economic slowdown, people couldn't pay their mortgages, everything became unraveled. How many people's dreams were destroyed? Well, in Forest City Park there were many dreams destroyed. There were many people who saw a life's work disappear because of the lack of regulation.

And today they and millions of Americans like them look to Washington to try to say what are we going to do to help people who, through no fault of their own, are caught up in a colossal economic machine which has ground to a halt, putting its full physical pressure on the people at the great margins of our society and people in the middle as well? Millions of homeowners are looking to us. And yet we come up with a bailout that doesn't offer the homeowners anything. Over 300 pages of tax cuts and tax breaks that have absolutely nothing to do with the housing crisis at the center of this financial storm.

My colleague Mr. Poe earlier in the day outlined some of the tax breaks: tax breaks for litigants in the Exxon Valdez incident, wooden arrows used by school children, tax breaks and earmarks for auto racing tracks, wool research, the Virgin Islands and rum. Now, maybe we could argue that some of those breaks in and of themselves ought to be considered. But why would they be in a bailout bill? The Senate expects us to consider and pass a bill we have already defeated merely because they have added millions of dollars of tax breaks that will strain the Federal budget even more.

So let me recap. We are coming back with a bill that has no stronger protection for homeowners, no changes in the language to ensure that the Secretary has the authority to compel mortgage servicers to modify the terms of mortgages, over 300 pages of tax cuts and tax breaks that have absolutely nothing to do with the housing crisis at the center of the storm, and, get this, no stronger regulatory changes to fix the circumstances that allowed this to happen.

How did it come to be that we could see this condition occur where speculation ran wild on Wall Street and yet the very agencies that ought to be watching it have had nothing to do with stopping it? The cop at the Securities and Exchange Commission walked off the beat, did not restrain firms that they knew were speculating with derivatives to a factor of 30 and 40 times. How could this happen? How could the Federal Reserve, knowing that banks were up to their ears in these financial instruments, not look to see how that might threaten the underlying financial stability of a bank? They walked off the beat. And so it comes to this Congress to decide what to do.

The thing about this that I think is the most vexing is this condition: that our government, which is already trillions of dollars in debt, in effect is going to have to borrow $700 billion from the banks, with interest, to give the banks a $700 billion bailout. Where are we going to get the money? We're not cutting $700 billion out of the budget; we're going to borrow the money. And when we borrow the money to give to the banks, the banks in return will give us their toxic debts.

We are being told this is the only way we can solve this financial crisis. Whom are we solving this crisis for? Are we solving it for homeowners? Obviously not. We're solving it for speculators. We're solving it for foreign investors because what we find out is that, as Brad Sherman has pointed out, hundreds of billions of dollars in this bailout will be used to buy toxic assets currently held by foreign investors. How did we get to this situation?

Under this bill the administration can buy any asset from any financial institution for any price. For those of you who are thinking this is going to bail out U.S. businesses, think again. We can have banks from all over the world scouring, scouring their financial ledgers, looking at their worst debts, and then they're going to send them over to the United States, and then the taxpayers of the United States are going to pay for them.

This bill should have had a provision saying that the Treasury can only buy assets proven to come from an American investor. That way it's about America. This bill should have something about taking care of America first.

We are not even taking care of America's investors first. We are not even taking care of America's speculators first. We are not taking care of America's homeowners first. This is about foreign investors. Is our economy so weak that we can't stand up, solve our problems here at home, or is it that we are so heavily leveraged, that foreign markets have such control over us, that they can force this Congress to pass a bill to help bail them out?

Foreclosures are devastating our communities. People are losing their jobs. The price of necessities is skyrocketing. This legislation, just like the one that we defeated a few days ago, will do nothing to solve the problems plaguing American families or help them to get out from under the oppressive debt that they have been forced to take on.

We have demanded language in the legislation that would empower the Treasury to compel mortgage servicers to rework the terms of mortgage loans so homeowners could avoid foreclosure. Owning a home is at the center of the American Dream. The American Dream is threatened here. The American Dream is under attack. The American Dream needs to be protected. The American Dream needs to be restored. The American Dream needs to get some life in it from this House of Representatives. Yet, the American Dream is going to have to wait another day.

We are told that if this passes, the market may go up. The market went up 485 points a day after we defeated it. But we are told that if this passes, the market may go up.

Let me tell you what is not going to go up. The hopes of America's homeowners. Because nothing is done for them in this bill. So who's going to tell the widow whose husband may have worked a lifetime to assure them a piece of property, which got into trouble because maybe she did a reverse mortgage, who's going to tell her that there's nothing in this bill for her?

Who's going to tell the laborer, who has worked day in and day out, working himself and his fingers to the bone, and where he is behind in his mortgage payments, and the bank is telling him, No, you can't give me $500. I want the whole $1,200 or we are going to go into foreclosure. Who's going to tell them that there's nothing for him in this bill?

This is a sad day in our Republic when we see the most pressing needs of the American people sacrificed to the speculators on Wall Street. And, of course, there is another dimension to this debate, and that other dimension deals with the free-market economy. What in the world are we doing here, where we are basically interfering in the market with a $700 billion investment, and suddenly we are telling all these speculators, Don't worry about it. The government is going to use the American tax dollars to ensure your risk.

The whole basis of the market, as all of us know, has to do with risk. You invest; it is a risk. There's nothing guaranteed. And so we are telling people who are in the market, particularly those who are in the market for billions of dollars, Go ahead and take a risk. Uncle Sam will back you up. Well, if we can tell that to the speculators, why can't we tell that to America's homeowners when they are not betting.

If someone goes to Las Vegas and bets the ranch, and loses the ranch, the casino didn't give them a new ranch. Speculators bet the ranch. And we are going to help restore their position with this legislation.

We are told there's a crisis in liquidity. We have been told by Bill Isaac, the former head of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, that it's not the liquidity problem that is said to exist. That in fact banks don't want to loan to each other because of this psychology that is going on in the marketplace. They are afraid that other banks are going to go down. This is the United States of America. We should have the power to deal with this.

Ireland. Ireland. Ireland, the historic home of my mother's side of the family. Ireland figured out that they put the full faith and credit of Ireland behind the bank deposits, and they stabilized their economy. No one is losing any money.

We need innovative approaches here. We don't have them. What we have is a reward for speculation. The free-market economy, that whole idea is being shredded with this hand of the government moving in.

Now, people will say, Well, what is your plan? My plan is this. Number one. That we must have legislation that has an approach of dealing with the problem at its base. Helping the millions of homeowners. You help the many and the few will benefit. You help the few and the many will not benefit. We all know this. Trickle never gets down.

We also know this. If we can introduce a bill that can say that we can give Treasury or the FHA the ability to buy a controlling interest in these mortgage-backed securities, and work out something for the homeowners, we can have a whole new condition where the government goes to work for the homeowners of America.

Franklin Roosevelt understood the importance of coming forward with the New Deal plan that helped resurrect this country's economy. We can solve this problem of the homeowners. It could be that we create a new Homeownership Loan Corporation. But whatever it is, we have the ability to do it.

I am here to offer what I call a recovery plan for Main Street. And here's how we can prime the pump of this economy. We can prime the pump of the economy, number one, with health care for all. Insurance companies make money not providing health care. As the coauthor of H.R. 676, a universal, single-payer, not-for-profit health care system, Medicare for All, I understand that millions of Americans want health care that is accessible and affordable. Medicare for All will help businesses, large and small; will create jobs, as well as save the jobs of thousands of people, including those of doctors, nurses, and health care workers, who are currently leaving medicine because it is run by insurance companies.

One dollar out of every $3 of the $2.4 trillion spent annually in America for health care goes to the insurance companies. If we take that money, $800 billion in unproductive, wasteful spending, and put it directly into care, we will have enough money to cover everyone. We are already paying for Medicare for all, but not receiving it.

This is the way you get an economy going. This is the way you move money in the economy. Not only help people restore their homes, but also help people get the health care that they need.

Another way that you start to move money in the economy is through a prescription benefit for seniors. H.R. 6800 is the MEDS Act, which provides a fully paid prescription drug benefit under Medicare for all seniors. I wrote this bill to help alleviate the economic pressure that comes from the high cost of prescription drugs.

We can pay for it by letting the government negotiate drug prices with the pharmaceutical companies the same way that they do with the Veterans' Administration. We can also do it--pay for it with reimportation.

The third thing we can do that can help the American economy is to stop the oil companies from price gouging. I was one of the first ones to step up and challenge the corrupt price gouging and market speculation of the oil companies by proposing a windfall profits tax on oil and natural gas companies, with revenues put into tax credits for the purchase of fuel-efficient American-made cars.

However, it may be that nationalization is the only way to put an end to the oil companies' sharp practices. I mean, after all, we are nationalizing one of the largest insurance companies, with AIG. We are helping to nationalize the stock market and a lot of banks. Why don't we go for the gold, where the big money is, and nationalize the oil companies and then take the profits and give it back to the people so we can take a whole new direction in energy and not be strapped any more by these oil companies.

The fourth policy that I believe will help with the Main Street recovery plan deals with protecting the American homestead. As chairman of the Domestic Policy Oversight Subcommittee, I am working to protect people's basic right to have a roof over their head, whether as an owner or renter. It was my subcommittee which investigated and exposed the manipulation of mortgage markets. I am working to craft a new Federal policy so that neighborhoods with the highest

number of foreclosures can get the most help.

The fifth thing we can do to restore our economy is to have a program of Jobs for All. We know what Franklin Roosevelt did, the old New Deal economics, jobs for all, a new WPA program. That Jobs for All program, with the cosponsorship of Congressman LaTourette is a bipartisan New Deal-type jobs program that rebuilds America's infrastructure. It would create millions of good-paying new jobs, rebuilding our roads, bridges, water systems, and sewer systems.

The sixth thing in a plan to restore the American economy--there's an alternative to this bailout--is to have an American manufacturing policy. I am drafting legislation calling for an American Manufacturing Policy Act that, for the first time, will state that the maintenance of steel, automotive, and aerospace, is vital to our national economic security, and must be maintained through an integrated public-private rebuilding of our roads, bridges, and water systems.

I am calling for a new plan for Main Street under a Works Green Administration. It's the WGA turned into an environmental program where we focus on restoring the planet. This is one in which the government creates millions of jobs by incentivizing the design, the engineering, manufacturing, distribution, and maintenance of millions of wind and solar microtechnologies for millions of homes and businesses, dramatically lowering energy cost and reducing our dependence on oil.

We need a new trade policy, and that is the eighth plank in a plan that restores Main Street. And that is what we should be talking about here. But that is not what the bailout does. A plan that restores Main Street says we have to have fair trade. It must mean the end of NAFTA. This country has lost millions of good-paying jobs, and more jobs have been outsourced.

We must have education for all. That is the ninth plank. That is why I introduced H.R. 4060, a universal prekindergarten program to ensure that all children ages 3 to 5 have access to full quality day care.

We have to protect pensions. I am working to change bankruptcy laws so pensioners' claims will be first ahead of the banks, and that corporate executives who misuse pension workers' funds are subject to criminal penalties. We have to strengthen the Pension Benefit Guarantee Board.

Before I give the final six points in this, Mr. Speaker, and yield to my friend, Mr. Sherman, I'd like to ask the Speaker how much time is left.

I am going to yield 5 more minutes to myself, and then go to my good friend, Mr. Sherman, for as much time as he may consume.

Let it be said that there are other options here to stimulating the American economy. I just named 10 different points, and I am going to name an 11th.

We have to protect Social Security. From my first moments in Congress when I exposed Wall Street's efforts to privatize Social Security and attacked it in our own Democratic Caucus when privatization was being proposed, I have watched this effort at times to privatize Social Security.

Imagine if we had privatized Social Security. Imagine what happens when the market goes down and people begin to lose the only guarantee in some cases anyone has. We have to protect Social Security. It is rock solid through the year 2032 without any changes whatsoever. Protecting Social Security must be part of a plan to keep Main Street solid.

We have to protect bank deposits. It is a positive development that now people are talking about insuring a quarter of a million dollars of bank deposits through the FDIC. But the fact of the matter is, you can do that without being in a bailout bill.

Protecting investors. We need to bring back strong regulation to Wall Street. As chairman of domestic policy, I challenge the Wall Street hedge fund speculators who have been a threat to all investors, and I intend to keep active watch on the machinations of Wall Street.

We need a new national security policy called ``Strength Through Peace.'' I helped lead the effort against the Iraq war. We forget about the Iraq war in this debate often, but the truth of the matter is that war is going to cost the American people anywhere between $3 trillion and $5 trillion and as many lives as have been lost by our soldiers and as many lives as have been lost by innocent Iraqis.

We need a new direction in America. We have to end the war and bring our troops home. We must engage in diplomacy. We have to reduce the military budget and stop these outrageous cost overruns by firms like Halliburton.

We have to work so there is safety in America, safe neighborhoods, safe homes. I introduced a bill, H.R. 808, which creates a comprehensive plan to deal with the issues of violence in American society; domestic violence, spousal abuse, child abuse, violence in the school, racial violence, gang violence, gun violence, that exact a social and economic toll on America.

We can work our way through these dilemmas. This is America. We have unlimited ability to solve our problems and to meet challenges. But we have to realize that what we have here is not simply an economic challenge, it is a spiritual challenge.

Today we are being challenged by greed. Greed will bring down our Nation if we don't stand up for those whose prime values have been fairness, frugality and faithfulness.

We must remember who we are as Americans. We can begin to strengthen ourselves by defeating this bill. Where people are being threatened, let us rise up with courage. Where people are being told that there is no other path, let us provide alternatives. And let us reclaim the Nation that we love.

Standing above us, rising above us is an American eagle, a beautiful American eagle at the canopy of this House. This eagle, which spreads itself over the fullness of this Congress, has a left wing and a right wing. That American eagle needs two wings to fly. That American eagle was able to soar a few days ago, and hopefully it will soar again tomorrow.

The motto under that eagle, E. Pluribus Unum, out of many we are one. Let us be one for the mass of Americans. Let us be one for the homeowners. Let us be one for those who want jobs. Let us be one for those who want health care. Let us be one for those who want a country they can call their own, the people of the United States of America.

1. Health Care for All: Insurance companies make money not providing health care. As the co-author of H.R. 676, a universal, single-payer, not-for-profit health care system, Medicare for All, I understand millions of Americans want health care that is accessible and affordable.

Medicare for All will help businesses large and small, create jobs as well as save the jobs of thousands of people including those of doctors, nurses and other healthcare workers who are currently leaving medicine because it is run by the insurance companies. $1 in every 3 dollars of the $2.4 trillion spent annually in America for health care goes to the insurance companies. If we take that money ($800 billion in unproductive wasteful spending) and put it directly into care, we will have enough money to cover everyone. We are already paying for Medicare for all, but not receiving it. H.R. 676 changes that.

2. Prescription Drug Benefit for Seniors: H.R. 6800 is the MEDS Act, which provides a fully paid prescription drug benefit, under Medicare, for all seniors. I wrote this bill to help alleviate the economic pressure that comes from the high cost of prescription drugs. We can pay for it by letting the government negotiate drug prices with the pharmaceutical companies as well as by permitting re-importation.

3. Stop the Oil Companies' Price Gouging: As you know, I was the first one to step up to challenge of the corrupt price gouging and market speculation of the oil companies by proposing a windfall profits tax, on oil and natural gas companies. with revenues put into tax credits for the purchase of fuel-efficient American-made cars, However, it may be that nationalization is the only way to put an end to the oil companies' sharp practices.

4. Protecting the American Homestead: As Chairman of the Domestic Policy Oversight Subcommittee, I am working to protect your basic right to have a roof over your head, whether as an owner or renter. I have Investigated and helped to expose the manipulation of mortgage markets, and I am crafting a new federal policy so that neighborhoods with the highest number of foreclosures get the most help.

5. Jobs for All: Congressman LaTourette and I have co-authored the bi-partisan New

Deal-type jobs program, H.R. 3400, ``Rebuilding America's Infrastructure.'' It will create millions of good-paying new jobs rebuilding our roads, bridges, water systems and sewer systems.

6. American Manufacturing Policy: I am drafting the American Manufacturing Policy Act, which for the first time, will state that the maintenance of U.S. steel, automotive, and aerospace industries are vital to our national economic security and must be maintained through integrated public-private cooperation, new trade policies, and investment.

7. Works Green Administration: I am also drafting plans for a green New Deal jobs program, in which the govemment creates millions of jobs by incentivizing the design, engineering, manufacturing, distribution and maintenance of millions of wind and solar micro-technologies for millions of homes and businesses, dramatically lowering energy costs and reducing our dependence on oil.

8. Fair Trade: The U.S. has lost millions of good-paying jobs, and more jobs have been out-sourced. As you know, I have helped to lead the way in opposition to trade giveaways. I strongly urge repeal of NAFTA. We must include workers' rights, human rights and environmental quality principles in all trade pacts. We must also protect the Great Lakes' water resources from the reach of multi-national corporations.

9. Education for All: I know families need help with the rising cost of day care. That is why I introduced H.R. 4060. a universal pre- kindergarten program to ensure that all children ages 3-5 have access to full-day, quality day care.

10. Protecting Pensions: I am working to change bankruptcy laws so pensioners' claims will be first, ahead of banks, and that corporate executives who misuse workers' pension funds are subject to criminal penalties. I want to fully fund the Pension Benefit Guarantee Board.

11. Social Security: From my first moments in Congress, I have exposed Wall Street's efforts to privatize Social Security and attacked it in the Democratic Caucus when it was being proposed. Can you imagine where seniors would be today if Social Security had been turned over to the stock market? Social Security is solid through 2032 without any changes.

12. Protect Bank Deposits: I will work to make sure the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, FDIC, has sufficient funds to provide for insurance of deposits up to $200,000 at all banks and savings and loans. This is an urgent matter since so many banks are said to be vulnerable.

13. Protect Investors: Bring back strong regulation to Wall Street. As Chairman of the Domestic Policy Subcommittee, I challenged the Wall Street hedge fund speculators as a threat to small Investors. I intend to keep active watch over the machinations on Wall Street.

14. Strength through Peace: You'll remember when I led the effort against the ill-conceived Iraq war, which has now cost more than 4.100 U.S. soldiers' lives, cost U.S. taxpayers between $3 trillion and $5 trillion, and resulted in the deaths of more than a million Iraqis. We must bring our troops home and end the war. We must engage in diplomacy. We must reduce the military budget, and we must stop outrageous cost overruns by the likes of Halliburton.

16. Safety in America: I am proud of my work for peace. In July 2001, I introduced a bill, which today is H.R. 808, that for the first time creates a comprehensive plan to deal with the issues of violence in American society, particularly domestic violence, spousal abuse, child abuse, gang violence, gun violence, racial violence, and violence against gays by establishing a Cabinet-level Department of Peace and Restorative Justice. This proposal has sparked a national movement and when implemented will save taxpayers millions of dollars.

16. Monetary Policy: It is long past the time that we looked at the implications of our debt based monetary system, the privatization of money created by the 1913 Federal Reserve Act. the banks fractional reserve system and our debt-based economic system. Unless we have dramatic reform of monetary policy, the entire economic system will continue to accelerate wealth upwards. I am currently working on drafting legislation for an `American Monetary Act' to address these and other issues in order to protect the economic well-being of America.

I yield to my friend from California, who has done such a wonderful job in organizing what is called the Skeptics Caucus, at a time where skepticism is called for. Through enlightened articulation of facts, he has come forward, as has my good friend and colleague from Ohio, Representative Marcy Kaptur, who has courageously stood here day in and day out challenging this corrupt bailout.

I yield to my friends, and I thank you for your service to America and for your service to your communities.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in honor of the innovative students at St. Catharine's Academy in the Bronx, NY, who have dedicated their time to raising awareness of the plight of women in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC).

Earlier this year, students at St. Catharine's Academy read a magazine article about the conflict in the Democratic Republic of Congo and the various humanitarian issues facing women in the country. St. Catharine's Academy is a unique all-girls school that strives to teach its students responsibility, compassion, social justice, collaboration and concern for women's issues. The students brainstormed and mobilized efforts to address the humanitarian crisis in the Democratic Republic of Congo. They organized fundraising bake sales to send money to Panzi Hospital in the DRC, a hospital dedicated to treating women who are survivors of rape and abuse. Through their efforts, the students raised $5,600 to send to Panzi Hospital, which continues to treat over 60,000 women a year. The students furthered their efforts to mobilize the student body by creating a video highlighting obstacles faced by women in the DRC for the school's annual international show.

Madam Speaker and colleagues, please join me in honor of the students of St. Catharine's Academy for their work on raising awareness of the plight of women in the Democratic Republic of Congo and in recognition of their contributions to their community, their vision and their innovation. May their efforts serve as an example for all of us to follow.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in honor of Jim Mangia, distinguished philanthropist and entrepreneur, whose health centers have provided free medical, dental and mental health services to thousands of children and adults in Los Angeles for over forty years.

Jim Mangia is the President and CEO of St. John's Well Child and Family Center (SJWCFC) and a leading expert on environmental health issues faced by economically disadvantaged communities in Los Angeles, California. He recently opened his eleventh non-profit health care clinic in downtown Los Angeles, forty years after opening his first clinic. St. John's Well Child and Family Centers have grown to a family of eleven non-profit health centers providing free health services to children and adults. Since the founding of the first St. John's Well Child and Family Center, his clinics have served over sixty-thousand patients a year. According to statistics provided by St. John's, more than ninety-seven percent of the patients who have visited the clinics live below the poverty level and almost half of all residents have no health insurance. Mr. Mangia has led the effort on discourse regarding environmental health and has co-authored an article outlining the effects of slum housing on children's health.

Mr. Mangia's dedication to treating and raising awareness of environmental health issues reaches far beyond his leadership in SJWCFC. He has testified before Congress numerous times and works intimately with a number of local school boards to ensure that the health needs of children from economically disadvantaged communities are being met.

Madam Speaker and colleagues, please join me in honor of Jim Mangia, and in recognition of his tireless efforts on behalf of communities of need. May his inspiration and genius be an example for all of us to follow.

I thank the gentleman.

Today we're being told that what is good for Wall Street is good for Main Street, yet this bailout plan will fail to keep families in their homes. Treasury will own troubled assets without any control. Terms of bad mortgages cannot be changed absent controlling share of underlying securities.

If you support this legislation because you think it will keep people in their homes, think again. In fact, Treasury will not be able to change the terms of bad mortgages because the act does not require Treasury to purchase a controlling share in the underlying mortgage- backed securities and collateralized debt obligations.

The Secretary will be powerless to make any real and substantive change in the terms of mortgages. The Secretary will have no power to avoid foreclosures and keep families in their homes.

Last night, I received a letter from Frank Alexander, a professor of law at Emory University. He has testified before my subcommittee on domestic policy, on targeting Federal assistance to help neighborhoods affected by the foreclosure crisis. He is an expert on housing law.

I would like to put his letter in the Record.

Professor Alexander clearly demonstrates that the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act will not fulfill its stated goal of preserving homeownership. Unless the Secretary of the Treasury is required to prioritize assets that will give the Treasury a controlling share in the underlying home mortgage, the Secretary will hold bad assets with no power to make them solid again. So much for the homeowners.

If we had a plan which focused on saving families' homes, it would actually do more for the economy than this bill. Economist Nouriel Roubini has written that the lack of debt relief to distressed households is behind the financial crisis and the deepening recession. With $700 billion directed towards helping or towards trying to save homes, we could really stimulate the economy and could give real economic security to millions on Main Street, but that's not what this bill is about. It's about Wall Street. What is good for Wall Street is good for Main Street? Not today.

Emory School of Law,

Atlanta, Georgia, September 28, 2008.

Re Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008.

Hon. Dennis J. Kucinich,

Chairman, Domestic Policy Subcommittee, Committee on

Governmental Oversight and Reform, House of

Representatives, Rayburn House Office Building,

Washington, DC.

Dear Representative Kucinich: As the text of the Emergency

Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 approaches final

negotiations and a possible vote in Congress, I want to share

my concern over the lack of any clear connection between the

Troubled Asset Relief Program, and the provisions of this

legislation that appear to relate to Homeownership

Preservation.

This legislation, in its most recent form as of Sunday

evening, September 28, has many provisions that make it far

superior to the bill that was submitted on behalf of

Secretary Paulson eight days ago. The two dominant purposes

of the current draft of this legislation appear to be first

the desire to enhance financial market liquidity through the

acquisition (or insurance) of Troubled Assets, and second the

desire to facilitate home preservation through loan

modifications. The problem is that there is, quite simply, no

clear or necessary connection between the Troubled Assets

that may be purchased by the Secretary, and the capacity of

the Secretary to engage in or facilitate loan modification or

foreclosure avoidance strategies.

As presently drafted, the Secretary will engage in a

program of acquisition (or insurance) of Troubled Assets, the

purchase of which ``promotes financial market stability''.

The liquidity crisis primarily stems from mortgage backed

securities, or derivatives of mortgage backed securities,

which contain or are perceived to contain mortgages with high

rates of delinquencies or defaults. Mortgage related

securities that are composed of a single class of prime

mortgages are not illiquid, and are not likely to be the

target of acquisition by the Secretary. Instead, the illiquid

securities are most frequently those that are highly

subdivided and fractured into separate classes or tranches,

and often further securitized by derivatives.

The problem is that when and if the Secretary elects to

acquire the mortgage related asset of any single financial

institution, the Secretary will not be acquiring a portfolio

of whole loans, or even a controlling interest in a

securitization of loans.

If the Secretary acquires a partial interest or whole

interest in a given tranche of mortgage backed securities, or

in a derivative of a mortgage back security, the Secretary

will lack the authority to authorize, require or even permit

a program designed to encourage or facilitate homeownership

preservation or foreclosure avoidance actions. As an

owner of a minority interest in a securitization or security

derivative, there is little if anything that the Secretary

will be able to do to accomplish the professed goals of

Homeownership Preservation in this legislation.

If in fact this legislation is to have as one of its goals

that of homeownership preservation, then the Troubled Asset

Relief Program should have, at a minimum, as one of its goals

the acquisition by the Secretary of Troubled Assets which

will provide the Secretary will a controlling or majority

interest in the underlying pool of whole mortgage loans. In

such a context the Secretary will be in a position to

implement the Homeownership Preservation goals of this

legislation.

The most direct way to modify the current text of the

Emergency Economic Recovery Act of 2008 to create the

necessary tie between market liquidity and homeownership

preservation is to modify Section 101(d)(5) to add the

following:

``(5) Priority acquisition of troubled assets when such

acquisition provides the Secretary with a controlling or

majority interest in the underlying pool of whole mortgage

loans.''

In the absence of any functional tie between Troubled Asset

acquisition and control with respect to modifications of the

underlying residential mortgages, there is likely to be very

little significance to the homeownership preservations

provisions of this legislation.

Sincerely,

Frank S. Alexander,

Professor of Law, Director, Project on Affordable Housing

and Community Development.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in honor and recognition of Dave Pavlick upon the completion of his second 600-mile walk throughout Ohio to promote the ``Health Care for All Ohioans Act.'' As one of the key driving forces behind the Single Payer Action Network (SPAN), Dave is ending his 23-day quest for health care justice in Parma, Ohio.

Dave's years of unparalleled dedication and commitment to the highest-quality, uniform standard of care for all as a basic human right has garnered increased attention and support from people all over the State of Ohio. Through his walk, Dave has given his own time and energy in a profound way for the over 1 million uninsured Ohioans and the many more without adequate health care who seek an end to their plight and injustice.

As a career public servant with both the United States Marine Corps and the Cuyahoga County Sheriff, Dave learned a great deal about many ails of society, and he decided to commit himself to healing perhaps the biggest social ail in America, the lack of adequate and affordable health care for all.

Madam Speaker and colleagues, please join me in honor of Dave Pavlick, whose outstanding and persistent contributions to health care justice for all Ohioans will someday lead to care for all. I, along with SPAN, the brothers and sisters of the United Auto Workers Local 1005, and all other supporters, welcome Dave back to Parma.

Mr. Speaker, this bill will provide the necessary funding to keep federal agencies up and running through March 6, 2009. While most agencies will continue to be funding at fiscal year 2008 levels there are three agencies, the Department of Defense, Military Construction-Veterans Affairs, and the Department of Homeland Security, that will receive full-year funding at fiscal year 2009 levels.

This massive funding bill is necessary in part because Congress lacked the will to consider fiscal year 2009 funding through the regular legislative process. Had each of the 13 annual appropriations bills been deliberated separately there would have been an opportunity to debate and reform portions of federal spending. Debate and reformation are an important part of the process because they allow funding to be shifted to more accurately reflect the priorities and needs of the American people.

With our economy in crisis it is more important than ever to ensure a budget that creates jobs and improves job security for hardworking Americans, provides all citizens with healthcare and affords an exemplary education for our children that will give them the skills to compete in today and tomorrow's world. It is significant that the federal budget in fiscal year 2008 was not reflective of my constituents' needs and priorities.

Unemployment is continuing to rise. The latest unemployment statistics show that our national unemployment is at 6.1 percent and Ohio's unemployment is now 7 percent. At the same time the number of jobs vanishing in America outpaces the number of jobs being created. This net loss of jobs coupled with high unemployment is a disastrous combination. Home foreclosures continue to rise and more families are expected to fall behind. In Cleveland the foreclosure crisis continues to worsen substantially. 47 million Americans have no health insurance and another 50 million Americans remain underinsured.

Fiscal year 2008 appropriations bills dedicated only approximately 6 percent of the discretionary budget to education, training, employment and social serices. Roughly another 5 percent was dedicated to health, 4 percent for services and benefits for our veterans and approximately 5 percent was devoted to income security. The vast majority, over 50 percent, of the discretionary budget was spent on national defense. In addition, the Department of Defense budget has received a 6 percent increase between fiscal years 2008, and 2009 while the Departments of Education, Labor and Health and Human Services will continue to be funded at fiscal year 2008 spending levels.

The United States military is unmatched. We outspend the rest of the world combined two to one. Yet the bill follows a misguided strategy of buying weapons that provide Americans with no increased safety. This bill fails to match real threats to our security with appropriate defensive measures. Our foreign policy should promote economic stability worldwide, thereby eliminating the true roots of terrorism, desperation. This bill does the opposite by swelling policies of fear and aggression. H.R. 2638 contains a host of provisions that do a grave disservice to the American public.

This bill devotes $10 billion to missile defense. These funds include a third interceptor site for the Ground-Based Mid-Course Defense (GMD) program despite a lack of assurance that the system will work or is needed for the safety of our nation. Congress' continued funding of the GMD only lends credence to the Administration's misguided claims the system is necessary to defend the U.S. from a long-range ballistic missile attack from Iran despite the fact that Iran is unlikely to pose such a threat to the United States in the foreseeable future.

Furthermore, the bill appropriates $3.6 billion for the Army's future combat systems; $2.9 billion for the Air Force's next generation aircraft the F/A-22 Raptor and $3.6 billion for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter which is a next generation aircraft for use by the Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps.

The security of America lies not in defense spending but in ensuring well paid jobs for hard-working Americans, guaranteed health care and a strong education for our nation's youth. We must shift our priorities because our current spending trends are threatening our social fabric and economic security.

Another detrimental provision in the bill allows the longstanding moratorium on drilling on the outer continental shelf to expire, which is a policy that will provide virtually no relief from high gas prices in the short or long term. It will instead lock us further into an unsustainable energy future and pave the way for drilling in our precious Great Lakes, our drinking water source. If we were serious about lowering prices now, we would focus on that which can actually make a difference now, which is energy efficiency and curbing the profit seeking behavior of the oil industry.

Although the budget priorities in this bill are out of touch, it does contain important provisions that are needed by the American people and by my constituents in Ohio's tenth district. These programs and others all have merit, deserve more funding and will have a positive impact during these tough economic times. Unfortunately this bill holds these admirable initiatives hostage to our nation's bloated and often counterproductive defense spending.

For example, this bill provides an increase of $23.5 million over fiscal year 2008 for the Commodity Supplemental Food Program (CSFP). In Cleveland and around the nation families are turning to food pantries for emergency food assistance. Food pantries are continuing to experience increased demand and are finding it increasingly difficult to meet the needs of the community. As jobs continue to decline and food and fuel prices continue to rise, more middle-class families are seeking this emergency food assistance.

This bill will provide an additional $1 billion over fiscal year 2008 funding levels for the Nutrition for Women, Infants and Children (WIC) program to help combat the struggles families face with rising food costs. The bill grants $2.5 billion more than the fiscal year 2008 level for the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program to ensure that families

stay warm in the upcoming winter months. I also support the $250 million for weatherization programs that will help families lower their energy use and combat the hardships associated with increasing energy costs.

This bill contains $7.51 billion to carry out the $25 billion Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing Loan Program. These funds are critical to our domestic automobile industry because they will help manufactures to re-equip and expand U.S. facilities to produce high fuel-efficiency vehicles and parts. This program is important in Brook Park, Ohio at the Ford manufacturing plant, where the equipment currently used to manufacture the six-cylinder engines will need to be replaced to accommodate demand for fuel-efficient cars. This can help to ensure that jobs in Cleveland are secure as well as pave the way for additional jobs by transitioning to the vehicles of tomorrow such as hybrid electric cars and fuel cells.

While help for the auto industry is clearly long overdue we are allotting this money without a broader and more comprehensive strategy that addresses the problem, not the symptoms. Building the plants of tomorrow is a good step but without rethinking and reforming our flawed NAFTA-style trade policies, the U.S. automobile industry will remain under threat. Triggering surges in automotive imports into the United States while limiting the demand of U.S. made products at home and access to markets abroad exacerbates U.S. competitiveness. These faulty trade policies are responsible for enormous auto trade deficits and the loss of tens of thousands of well paid American jobs.

This body must stop passing legislation that does not reflect the real needs and priorities of the American people. We cannot continue to spend approximately half of our total federal budget dollars on the development of weapons systems and excessive military capabilities while the American people go without jobs, health care and good schools. We owe the American people better.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the life and legacy of Paul Newman, distinguished actor, entrepreneur, and philanthropist whose intelligent movie roles and dedication to promoting the common good has touched the lives of thousands of people.

Paul Newman was not only a Hollywood legend whose movie roles include ``Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid'' and ``The Hustler,'' but also an avid philanthropist who dedicated his life to creating opportunities for the economically disadvantaged and for other communities of need. He was nominated for ten Oscar Awards and won the best actor award in 1987 for his role in ``The Color of Money.'' Mr. Newman was as big of a social activist as he was a movie star. In 1988, he founded Hole in the Wall Camps--a camp for children with life- threatening illnesses. Since then, camps have been held all over the world, including in the United States, Italy, Ireland, Hungary, and the United Kingdom, as well as in parts of Africa and Asia. Almost 200,000 children with life-threatening illnesses have attended Hole in the Wall Camps, making it the largest and most successful family of camps in the world.

In 1982, he founded Newman's Own natural food company, whose motto is ``Shameless exploitation in pursuit of the common good'', a reflection of his compassion, selflessness and dedication to advocating for vulnerable communities. Since its founding over 20 years ago, Newman's Own has raised over $250 million dollars in proceeds, all of which is donated to educational and charitable causes around the world. Between the work of Hole in the Wall Camps and Newman's Own, Mr. Newman has advocated for peace, raised awareness for various social and economical issues, and has worked towards combating the HIV/AIDS epidemic.

Madam Speaker and colleagues, please join me in honoring the life of a true humanitarian and legend, Paul Newman, whose inspiration and genius will continue to touch the lives of generations to come.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the Defense Authorization bill. Despite the 2006 mandate from the American people to end the war and occupation of Iraq, this bill authorizes the funding to continue operations in Iraq well into the 2009 fiscal year. This bill authorizes $68.5 billion for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. In addition it authorizes the entirety of the administration's request of $542.5 billion for the National Defense budget. This is a grand total of $611.1 billion to continue misguided policies such as preemptive strikes, interventionism and peace through strength.

The bill includes absolutely no language calling for the withdrawal of our honorable and brave service members in Iraq, 4,170 servicemen and women have been killed in Iraq, there have been tens of thousands of injuries to our troops and over 1 million innocent Iraqi civilians have been killed as a result of the war. The true monetary cost of the war is estimated to be $3 trillion. Yet instead of keeping a commitment that we made back in 2006 to end the war, we are once again voting on a bill that will continue to fund it well into the term of the next President. Congress has the ability to end the war and bring our troops home simply by refusing to continue funding.

Additionally, I do not support the authorization for $465.8 million to continue development of the European Ground-Based Mid-Course Defense, GMD, program despite a lack of assurance that the system will work or is needed for the safety of our nation. Congress' continued funding of the European GMD only lends credence to the administration's misguided claims the system is necessary to defend the U.S. from a long-range ballistic missile attack from Iran despite the fact that Iran is unlikely to pose such a threat to the United States in the foreseeable future.

Continuing to develop the European GMD has consequences for U.S. foreign policy. This deal has exacerbated tensions between the U.S. and Russia. There has also been strong opposition by the citizens of the Czech Republic and Poland to the placement of the radar and interceptors in their respective countries.

This bill continues to reflect the wrong priorities for our nation's security. The continued proliferation of nuclear weapons does not make America safer. What will make America safer is to place a priority on cooperation with the global community on nuclear nonproliferation initiatives. This bill authorizes over $6.6 billion for the nuclear weapons activities of the National Nuclear Security Administration, and less than $2 billion for nuclear nonproliferation.

The U.S. administration has established a record of unilateralism that undercuts our nation's credibility in the eyes of other nations. The repercussions of this record include undermining our security and diplomatic integrity. In just under eight years the U.S. administration has backtracked on international treaties and conventions. The U.S. has rejected the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, refused to sign the Land Mine Treaty, withdrawn from the Anti Ballistic Missile Treaty, unsigned the Kyoto Protocol, and blocked a verification protocol for the Biological Weapons Convention.

Continuing to keep ``all options on the table'' while refusing to engage in diplomacy without preconditions leaves America devoid of any moral authority. The idea that peace (the absence of 'violence) can be brought about through violence and increasing weapons stockpiles is antithetical. The assertion that keeping our nation safe requires us to maintain a pre-emptive strike policy is built on a foundation of fear and continues to drive Americans further away from each other and the world community. The belief that the bulk of our foreign policy should be comprised of insisting other countries do what we tell them, while we fail to engage in any meaningful global cooperation is hypocritical and condescending.

The security of America lies not in defense spending but in ensuring well paid jobs for hardworking Americans, guaranteed health care and a strong education for our nation's youth. We must shift our priorities. This body must stop spending half of America's tax dollars on the funding of the military industrial complex and instead invest in economic projects that really will keep America safer. With our economy in crisis it should be clear that continuing to hemorrhage money on defense spending while our future economic stability is uncertain is not in the best interests of our citizens. Congress must wake up. In other words, I believe that Congress must reassess our current priorities and in so doing begin to provide for the traditional sense of security by first ensuring economic security, health security, and job security for all.

The $700 billion bailout for Wall Street is being driven by fear, not fact. This is too much money in too short a time going to too few people while too many questions remain unanswered.

Why aren't we having hearings on the plan we have just received? Why aren't we questioning the underlying premise of the need for a bailout with taxpayers' money? Why have we not even considered any alternatives other than to give $700 billion to Wall Street? Why aren't we asking Wall Street to clean up its own mess? Why aren't we passing new laws to stop the speculation which triggered this? Why aren't we putting up new regulatory structures to protect the investors? How do we even value the $700 billion in toxic assets? Why aren't we directly helping homeowners with their debt burden? Why aren't we helping American families faced with bankruptcies? Why aren't we reducing debts for Main Street instead of Wall Street? Isn't it time for fundamental change in our debt-based monetary system so we can free ourselves from the manipulation by the Federal Reserve and the banks? Is this the United States Congress or the board of directors of Goldman Sachs?

Wall Street is a place of bears and bulls. It's not smart to force taxpayers to dance with bears or to follow closely behind the bulls.

I thank the gentlelady for her kindness.

I rise in opposition, regretfully, to the rule and to the underlying bill. If we really wanted to protect the taxpayers, we wouldn't be paying cash for trash, $700 billion in taxpayers' funds which turns our beloved U.S. Treasury into a toxic landfill.

This plan is a $700 billion bailout of Wall Street speculators, bankers, lenders who operated for years without the oversight of the Securities and Exchange Commission, the oversight of the Federal Reserve.

This legislation doesn't do anything to punish the speculators. It rewards them by having taxpayers bail them out. It has no additional controls of speculation, no strengthening of oversight, no mention even of the implications of the Financial Modernization Act, which took down Glass-Steagall, which provided those post-depression era protections so we wouldn't be in this situation that we're in right now.

And I would predict, Mr. Speaker, that we will be right back here in a few months with the same kinds of problems because we're not solving the underlying matter here, which is a distortion of the economy because of speculation run wild on Wall Street.

Now, we've been given a plan, we haven't been given alternatives. Alternatives would have required Wall Street to pay for its own bailout. This plan doesn't suspend dividends, it doesn't force shareholders or creditors to directly contribute to the bailout. This plan rejected a .25 percent stock transfer tax that would have raised $100 billion from Wall Street.

This is legislation that is further proof that our government has been turned into an engine that accelerates the wealth upwards, taking money from the pockets of the people of this country and putting it into the hands of the few.

That is what our tax policy does. It accelerates the wealth of America upwards. That is what the war does. It accelerates the wealth of America upwards. That is what our energy policy does. It accelerates the wealth upwards into the hands of the oil companies. That is what our financial policies do. And that is what our national debt has done. It has doubled in the past 8 years, $700 billion that taxpayers are being put on the hook.

When Wall Street makes a profit, it is their profit. When Wall Street loses money, our people lose money. Seven hundred billion dollars. Why aren't we bailing out those millions of Americans who are losing their homes? Why aren't we addressing the fact that 50 million Americans don't have any health care? It is absolutely astonishing that we are talking about giving $700 billion in taxpayers' money which comes in the failure of the Fed through a quadrupling of public and private debt during the time of Mr. Greenspan, up to $43 trillion, and we have no discussion at all about the underlying monetary policy.

There has been no discussion at all in any of this about the underlying dynamic of a debt-based monetary system. As long as we're working in a debt-based monetary system with our having no control over our own money supply through the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, with the banks being able to literally make money out of thin air with their fraction reserve policies, how can we ever get to the bottom of a national debt that is building beyond our capacity to deal with it?

It is appropriate that this action of the Congress is being timed to the opening of the Asian markets. How appropriate, given the fact that we are losing control over our financial destiny. Mr. Speaker, when I was a child in Cleveland, there was a myth that if you took a shovel and dug a hole deep enough, you could get to China. We're there.

Mr. Speaker, industrial capitalism can finally be destroyed as we finish hollowing out our economy by substituting casino socialism, where the only real product is debt, where hard work in shaping raw materials into a product for a profit becomes ``so yesterday'' and we lead

Americans to the gaming tables. Work becomes denigrated and wagering becomes the road to wealth.

As Steve Zarlenga of the American Monetary Institute observed, ``You only have to make a fortune once.'' The top hedge manager in 2006 made $1.7 billion, and in 2007 some $3.7 billion. Both paid a lower tax rate for much of their earnings than people who clean the bedpans of the sick. And, of course, with that nasty ``death tax'' under attack by working families because almost 5 out of every 1,000 Americans pay it, that wealth can go on forever, just like the landed families of England and America maintain their economic status for hundreds of years.

Precious money needed to bring national health care, reindustrialization of America, the repair of our infrastructure and wider available of quality education becomes secondary to keeping this artificial real estate bubble going. Speculators are winning, and this is the system we are saving.

I thank the gentleman.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 6063, the NASA Authorization Act of 2008.

I want to thank the committee chairman, Bart Gordon, and the subcommittee chairman, Mark Udall, for putting together this effective package and my friends on the other side of the aisle for their support of it as well.

This bill authorizes funds and specifies policy guidance that will keep NASA's centers, which are the heart of the agency, healthy and financially strong.

H.R. 6063 provides $1 billion to accelerate the completion of the next generation of manned vehicles that will replace the Space Shuttle. I am proud to say the world class facility at the NASA Glenn Research Center in my district will play a lead role in maintaining key aspects of tomorrow's space program.

NASA Glenn also specializes in aeronautics basic research. This bill continues the record of excellence by providing $853 million for aeronautics, a 35 percent increase over fiscal year 2008.

But the reason for NASA's historical and continued successes are its workers. They have brought NASA unparalleled repute around the world, turning it into an icon of intelligence and innovation. That is why this bill's most important provisions are those that protect workers.

I want to thank the chairman of the Federal Workforce Subcommittee, Danny Davis, for working with me on two critical workforce provisions that are included in this bill. The most important provision is an extension of a ban on layoffs until at least 2011. Since announcing the ambitious vision for space exploration, the administration has, unfortunately, underfunded NASA. But with equal consistency in a bipartisan way, Congress has rejected these cuts and layoffs.

Layoffs undermine not only workers' lives and mission of the agency, but also the regional economy. According to researchers at Cleveland State University, NASA Glenn in Brook Park generated a demand for products and services of $955 million and was responsible for over 6,000 jobs in northeast Ohio in 2006.

This bill will also temporarily extend health care benefits for employees in transition. The sudden loss of health care coverage is a major factor currently discouraging employees from

taking a buyout. The provision would be helpful in fostering a respectful workforce transition plan during this time at NASA.

Again, this is a bipartisan bill. I want to thank the Ohio delegation for supporting our establishment as well as this Congress for the work that they have done on this.

Mr. Speaker, parliamentary inquiry. In order to protect the voting rights of the Members, the Speaker may not see this, but right behind the Speaker where the votes are recorded with the colored lights is a whole column that is blank, and I just wondered if the Members who are in that column, if their rights are going to be protected. They're turning cards in, but some may have gone off the floor.

So I'm asking you not to call this vote until every person who we know to be here today is canvassed with respect to that vote so they're not recorded as having missed a vote that they had previously cast but have lost credit for because it's been removed by the electronic system.

Mr. Speaker, parliamentary inquiry, we're now informed that some Members having voted ``yes'' have a red light by their name. Why don't we just turn off that so there is no confusion and Members will know that they're voting accurately and not rely on that particular system until they get it fixed.

How am I recorded as voting?