Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I rise today in recognition of James Henley's 41 years of public service as Sacramento's city historian. Mr. Henley leaves a lasting legacy in Sacramento and he will be deeply missed.

In 1965, the then city historian and Sacramento State professor Aubrey Neasham asked Mr. Henley to read archived blueprints. As a graduate student in the pursuit of a masters degree in history, James was inspired to not only teach history but to also work with it. Mr. Henley's career began in a three-person city department that focused on the Old Sacramento Historic District, now known as Old Sacramento. Designated as a State Historic Park, Old Sacramento portrays the time of the Gold Rush with cobblestone streets and wooden sidewalks, shops, restaurants and museums that attract 5 million visitors annually. Upon the retirement of Ms. Neasham, only one person could truly continue her work, and Mr. Henley took over the department. Under his leadership, the Sacramento Archives and Museum Collection Center, also known as, SAMCC, was born.

The SAMCC acquires, preserves, and promotes the study of Sacramento's history through city and county historical records. These collections include personal manuscripts, business records, official records of the city and county, photographs and other artifacts relating to the region's history. The records are the heart of Sacramento's history as James has preserved them for future generations to enjoy.

The preservation achievements of Mr. Henley and his staff are evident in the 5\1/2\ miles of movable shelves that house objects, photographs and documents at SAMCC. This includes parts of a Gutenberg Bible, negatives from The Sacramento Bee, and archived news film shot by KCRA 3. All in all, the records that Mr. Henley has preserved make the SAMCC collection the largest city archives in California and second only to the state archive. This has been a truly wonderful achievement.

Mr. Henley has not only served as a strong leader in preserving the history of the great Sacramento region, but also is a champion for the conservation of the City of Sacramento. He oversaw the publishing of Vanishing Victorians; a book that led to preservation efforts of Sacramento's historic Victorians in the 1960s and 1970s, when many were destroyed for redevelopment projects. His preservation efforts also contributed to the restoration of the historic Memorial Auditorium, the B.F. Hastings Building, as well as establishing the California State Railroad Museum. That museum is now a crown jewel in Old Sacramento and attracts thousands of families each year.

Madam Speaker, I am honored to pay tribute to Mr. James Henley's distinguished commitment to the preservation of Sacramento's distinguished history. Mr. Henley always has stood as an instrumental force behind the protection of Sacramento's history for generations to come. We all are thankful for his efforts. As James Henley's colleagues and friends gather to honor his service for the city, I ask all my colleagues to join me in wishing him continued good fortune in his future endeavors.

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 683 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for purposes of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sessions). All time yielded during consideration of the rule is for debate only.

I yield myself such time as I may consume. I also ask unanimous consent that all Members be given 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on House Resolution 683.

Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 683 provides for consideration of H.R. 3121, the Flood Insurance Reform and Modernization Act of 2007, under a structured rule. As the Clerk reported, the rule provides 1 hour of general debate controlled by the Committee on Financial Services.

The rule waives all points of order against consideration of the bill, except clauses 9 and 10 of rule XXI. The rule also makes in order a substitute reported by the Committee on Financial Services modified by the amendment in part A of the Rules Committee report as an original bill for the purpose of amendment. The self-executing amendment in part A would ensure that the bill complies with the new PAYGO requirements.

The rule makes in order the 13 amendments printed in the Rules Committee report, with each amendment debatable for 10 minutes.

As yesterday's debate in the Rules Committee demonstrated, Members on both sides of the aisle are focused on getting this bill to conference and onto the President's desk, and this bill reflects that consensus.

As a Representative of a district in a floodplain, I understand the need for a healthy flood insurance program. My hometown of Sacramento is the most at-risk river city in the Nation. Whenever I talk about our efforts to improve Sacramento's level of flood protection, I also mention the importance of flood insurance. If you live behind a levee, you should have flood insurance. And the Federal Government has the responsibility to promote this kind of coverage.

I also recognize that to accomplish this, we need a healthy and robust national flood insurance program. That is why legislation we debate today, the Flood Insurance Reform and Modernization Act, is so significant. Through this legislation, we will meet our responsibilities, we will ensure coverage is available to those at risk, and we will educate those same individuals as to the benefits of flood insurance. This bill, which was reported out of the Financial Services Committee by a bipartisan majority of 38-29, takes us in that positive direction.

In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, the deficiencies in the program were laid bare. What remained was a program $25 million in debt with a questionable future. It is imperative that we rebuild and reform the Federal flood insurance program.

For many Americans, owning insurance to protect against a flood is more valuable than coverage in case of fire. That is because homes in a designated special flood hazard area are almost three times as likely to be destroyed by a flood as by fire, and this is a case for almost three-fourths of all homes in Sacramento. This is an important program that must be reformed to ensure its long-term stability and solvency.

The bill we are considering today makes reasonable reforms and lays the foundation for a stronger and improved flood insurance program, and for that I would like to thank Chairman Barney Frank and Chairwoman Waters for their leadership on the bill.

This bill takes important steps to modernize the flood insurance program. It raises maximum coverage limits to keep up with inflation. It provides new coverage for living expenses if you have to vacate your home. And it also provides optional coverage for basements and business interruption coverage for commercial properties. These are all positive steps that will allow the program to continue to provide peace of mind to those impacted when a flood occurs.

In moving forward, Congress is also making the flood insurance program sustainable. The bill tightens enforcement of purchase requirements and adds subsidies on vacation homes, second homes, and businesses. While these actions may not be popular, this will help invigorate the program in the long run.

In addition to helping homeowners, this measure will also benefit taxpayers nationwide by preventing insurance companies from putting their liability on the Federal Government at the expense of the American public.

By identifying flood hazards, managing floodplains via land use controls and building requirements, and providing insurance protections, this essential program reduces flood loss expenses to the Federal Government, saving taxpayers an estimated $1 billion a year.

This measure provides much-needed reforms to restore solvency to a program that has faced unprecedented financial strain in the wake of the 2005 hurricanes. This bill increases accountability of federally regulated lenders by imposing stricter penalties on those lenders that fail to enforce mandatory flood insurance purchase requirements on mortgage holders. This takes our country in the right direction by encouraging individuals to purchase flood insurance, while also addressing the needs of the program.

I would also like to express my sincere thanks for Chairman Frank for working with me this past year on issues that I believe make this a stronger overall bill. I appreciate the chairman including my legislation, the Flood Insurance Community Outreach Grant Program Act of 2007, in this bill.

This grant program works. A little over two years ago, with the support of a $162,000 FEMA grant, my local flood protection body, the Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency, conducted just a flood insurance outreach initiative. SAFCA reached out to more than 45,000 NFIP policyholders in the American River floodplain with impressive results. After a year, 74 percent maintained their flood insurance policies. Of this group, 43 percent now carry preferred risk flood insurance. Preferred risk policies provide property owners who are protected by a levee or other flood mitigation method with full flood insurance at a reduced price. Because of their lower price, these preferred-risk policies have a higher level of policy retention.

To put this success in perspective, FEMA more than recouped its investment. SAFCA exceeded its target for policies retained more than 20 times over, adding millions to the flood insurance program's bottom line.

Extending these grants to other floodplains will only strengthen and build the solvency of the National Flood Insurance Program.

In short, I truly believe we must encourage greater participation in NFIP rather than providing loopholes for people not to participate. On that note, I would also like to thank the chairman for including language that authorizes a study for future participation of low-income individuals who live in a floodplain. We have an obligation to make sure that everyone has an opportunity to be insured and has access to affordable flood insurance. This is an important issue that I look forward to working on with the chairman, the committee, and many of my colleagues in further addressing this policy issue.

I think it is important that we continue to modernize our flood insurance program. I am pleased that the committee kept the amendment from last Congress' flood insurance bill, language that simply asks that FEMA utilize emerging weather forecasting technology as they update our national flood maps. Moving forward, we must make the investment in weather forecasting technology so that we have the tools to adjust to the changing climate. FEMA needs to be prepared to utilize this technology as it becomes available to us. We must ensure that FEMA has the highest quality information when it works to determine the level of risk for vulnerable geographies. This policy initiative takes us in a positive direction.

Finally, the bill we are debating today is a vital tool to be used after a flooding incident occurs. We need this bill; however, I want to close by saying that flood insurance is one piece of what should be a national comprehensive flood protection approach. Congress must continue to provide the tools and policy for prevention. We must continue to provide the funding for our flood protection infrastructure projects, and we must continue to provide the authorization for the projects that provide the protection for our communities.

With these policies of prevention in place, it will make communities safer and reduce the likelihood of our communities having to utilize their flood insurance policies.

Mr. Speaker, I strongly urge my colleagues to support this rule and final passage of the underlying Flood Insurance Reform and Modernization Act of 2007.

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

Mr. Speaker, I just want to point out that the Rules Committee made 13 amendments in order that we believe will benefit the discussion and debate on this very important issue. I would like to point out that three of these amendments were, in fact, bipartisan amendments.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve my time.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve my time.

I would just like to comment that we had a discussion yesterday. I must say that the Rules Committee is different this year than it was last year. I was in the minority last year. We have vigorous discussions in our committee. We have made in order 13 amendments.

Mr. Speaker, we made amendments in order last night, and I stand by the Rules Committee product. It might be that later on down the road you may want to work with the Financial Services Committee; but at this point in time, we did make 13 amendments in order.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve my time.

Mr. Speaker, I just want to make clear that of these 13 amendments, three are bipartisan amendments.

With that, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

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

Yes, I have.

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

I want to point out, Mr. Speaker, the earmark rule is not waived in this rule despite the claims of my colleagues. I urge them to read page 2, lines 6 and 7, that the earmark rule specifically excludes the earmark rule from the waiver. Any suggestion otherwise is simply untrue.

Additionally, the Rules Committee took testimony yesterday on this bill. Unfortunately, some of the Members who spoke today didn't even come to testify on their amendments.

Mr. Speaker, this bill takes the National Flood Insurance Program in a positive direction. This bill takes important steps to modernize the flood insurance program. This bill has bipartisan support. It raises maximum coverage limits to keep up with inflation; it provides new coverage for living expenses if you have to vacate your home; and, moving forward, Congress is making the flood insurance program sustainable in the long run.

Mr. Speaker, these are all positive steps that allow the program to continue to provide peace of mind to those impacted when a flood event occurs.

I urge a ``yes'' vote on the previous question and on the rule.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this rule and the underlying legislation, even though it does not do as much as I would like. In fact, less than 2 months ago I voted with a majority of this body for a bill that covered more children. It strengthened health care for millions of American citizens and restored fairness to our Medicare system and invested in preventive health.

Unfortunately, that bill cannot pass the Senate. And sometimes, in order to make change, we must compromise. Compromise is why we are here today,

Mr. Speaker. And though the bill before is us is not ideal, it is a step in the right direction.

It is rare that Members of Congress have the chance to provide health care to 4 million more children with one vote, but that is the opportunity we have today.

My district is like many others in this country. In my hometown of Sacramento, there are children who can see a doctor when they get sick. They go to a pediatrician and get a checkup or have their ear infection examined or their teeth cleaned regularly.

But there are also thousands of children in Sacramento who do not have this access, thousands of kids whose families cannot afford the huge cost of health insurance. These are children who cannot see a doctor until they're seriously ill, children who do not get the medical attention until they get to an emergency room. It is for these children, the thousands in Sacramento and the millions across the country, that we must pass this legislation today.

It is for these children that the President must sign this bill. If he vetoes it, he turns his back on 4 million more children in need. He will disregard the will of a clear majority of the American people.

Mr. Speaker, I stand before this House today as a colleague, but also as a proud grandmother. My two grandchildren are named Anna and Robby. Most of what I do in Congress is colored by how it will affect them and their generation.

Anna and Robby are fortunate. They have stable reliable health insurance. Millions of other children are not so lucky. Anna and Robby's peers are the reason I support this compromise bill, Mr. Speaker, even though it ignores many of the problems that the CHAMP Act addressed. Anna and Robby's peers are still the reason we should all support this bill, and they are the reason the President must sign it.

We'll return to this issue soon, Mr. Speaker. We'll finish what we began with the CHAMP Act. But for now, for the sake of millions of children in this country, I urge all my colleagues to support this rule and the underlying legislation.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to introduce a resolution that is designed to give comfort to the millions of American families who struggle with prostate cancer.

September is National Prostate Cancer Awareness Month. Because of the way prostate cancer affects our society, awareness is one of the most powerful tools we have to combat and defeat it. With this resolution, Congress has an opportunity to lend its voice to the communities, families, and individuals who are fighting to find a cure for an illness that kills more than 27,000 men every year.

It is easy to get caught up in statistics when talking about massive health challenges like prostate cancer, and the numbers produced by this disease are indeed staggering. Over 200,000 men will be diagnosed in the United States this year. One in every six American males will have prostate cancer at some point during his life. Prostate cancer is the most common type of non-skin cancer in the country, and will kill approximately 27,000 men this year alone.

Twenty-seven thousand fewer husbands, fathers, uncles, best friends, and mentors because of prostate cancer, Madam Speaker. This is not a disease that we can afford to ignore.

Fortunately, we are not helpless in our fight against this killer. If caught early and treated correctly, prostate cancer can be managed and overcome. In fact, nearly all patients who identify that they have prostate cancer in its early stages survive and go on to live healthy adult lives.

The problem is that early-stage prostate cancer exhibits no symptoms. As a result, early and vigorous screening is absolutely critical for doctors to find the 27,000 American men who won't catch their prostate cancer early enough, and who will die as a result.

Screening will become an even more important part of our fight against prostate cancer as the baby boom generation comes of age. Males between the ages of 50 and 65 are particularly susceptible to prostate cancer, and this pool of men over 50 will only get larger in the near future. In today's United States, a man turns 50 years old about every fourteen seconds.

As a result, the aggregate risk to our society posed by prostate cancer will only rise as that huge swath of people born in the 1950s continues to age. Our fight against this killer will only become more challenging, Madam Speaker, even as we increase the quality of our screening, treatment, and research related to the disease.

That is why awareness will be so critical in the near future. The more people we make aware of the risks of prostate cancer, the better our chances of curing them before it is too late. National Prostate Cancer Awareness Month is a vital part of this mission. Every year in September, prostate cancer advocates, survivors, patients, and policy leaders heighten awareness of this disease. This is not just a feel- good exercise, Madam Speaker. It saves lives and keeps families together.

In many ways, the growth in Federal research spending into this disease can be traced to the positive effects and outreach of National Prostate Cancer Awareness Month. A disease which once received $86 million for research is now a $466 million priority for medical researchers around the country. This huge success is due in large part to the tireless advocacy of the National Prostate Cancer Coalition, working with so many partners in support of National Prostate Cancer Awareness Month.

For the sixth year in a row, the United States Senate and the President have issued resolutions supporting National Prostate Cancer Awareness Month. The House of Representatives has never joined them, Madam Speaker, until today.

With the resolution I now introduce with my colleague Mr. Latham of Iowa, the people's House will finally be on record supporting the worthy goals of National Prostate Cancer Awareness Month. Millions of American families around the country deserve the help of the

House of Representatives in their fight against this silent killer, and I urge all my colleagues to join me in supporting this timely and overdue resolution.

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 650 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sessions), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.

(Ms. MATSUI asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, as the Clerk just read, H. Res. 650 provides for consideration of H.R. 1852, the Expanding American Homeownership Act, under a structured rule. The rule provides 1 hour of general debate to be controlled by the Committee on Financial Services. The rule makes in order seven amendments printed in the Rules Committee report.

This bill is being considered under a structured rule that will allow the House to consider amendments to address important issues with regard to this legislation. I look forward to the debate on the important issue before us today.

I rise today in support of the rule providing for the consideration of the Expanding American Homeownership Act and for the underlying legislation. I thank Subcommittee Chairwoman Waters for offering this bill. I thank Chairman Frank and Ranking Member Bachus for their hard work, along with the other members of the Financial

Services Committee, in bringing this important legislation to the floor.

The bill underlying this house resolution addresses an issue of critical importance to our constituents and to our economy, the subprime mortgage lending crisis. We are here today to consider reforming the Federal Housing Administration's loan policies as a means of stemming the tide of foreclosures that have besieged our Nation.

Owning a home is part of the American Dream, but predatory lenders have been crushing that dream by taking advantage of home buyers with damaged credit. Lured by attractive initial terms, vulnerable home buyers who do not qualify for federally backed loans take on subprime mortgage loans that they cannot afford. These loans come with escalating interest rates which start low and encourage overborrowing. The borrowers learn too late, when their homes are foreclosed upon, that they will not be able to afford those higher payments.

We are now faced with the unfortunate situation that our residents are losing their homes in record numbers. The increasing rate of foreclosure continues to make the news in California and across the Nation. Data released just last month show the rising foreclosure rates in cities across the country. The numbers are as high as one foreclosure in every 27 households. That is not acceptable.

And the housing market continues to suffer. Last week a report from my Sacramento district cited a more than 13 percent drop in the median home prices in the past year. That is the largest 1-year drop in 20 years.

Despite good economic growth in the region, the housing market is in trouble. Many point to the subprime mortgage crisis to explain this. Trends like this can be seen across the country, not just in Sacramento.

The administration wants to allow 80,000 people to refinance their loans through FHA. That is good but it is not going to address the scope of this problem. More than 2 million adjustable rate mortgages are up for reset this fall, at which time their interest rates will increase. Two million mortgages, that is 2 million more families who will be at risk at losing their homes if they cannot keep up with the higher payments. This pattern cannot continue.

The housing market crunch, driven by the subprime mortgage lending troubles, is making waves throughout our economy. Over the past few months, we have seen the Federal Reserve cut its discount rate and make an additional $62 billion available to try to stabilize the real estate financial market. Last month, Countrywide Financial, the largest home mortgage lender, was trading at levels comparable to junk bonds. And, lastly, AIG, the world's largest insurer and one of the biggest mortgage lenders, stated that delinquencies and foreclosures are becoming more common among borrowers whose credit rates are just above subprime. So the problem is getting worse, not better. Congress needs to act and we need to act now.

The bill we are considering today will overhaul the Federal Housing Administration to make federally backed loans competitive with subprime and other nontraditional mortgage loans. We need to make sure that subprime mortgages are properly regulated to get our home buyers into good loans and rein in predatory lenders. The bill authorizes FHA to offer loans with little or no down payment and directs it to approve loans to borrowers with higher credit risk than is currently allowed. These measures will enable FHA to compete with the introductory teaser rates advertised by subprime lenders.

The bill will raise the single-family loan limit, enabling families who live in more expensive areas, such as California, to qualify for FHA-backed loans. The FHA has virtually no presence in expensive areas where the average price of a home already exceeds the FHA loan limit. Increasing access to FHA-backed loans will give many thousands of our constituents the stable financing terms that they need to keep up with their payments and stave off foreclosure.

Furthermore, this bill offers relief to our seniors. Seniors are often targeted by subprime loans, especially for reverse mortgages. Seniors who own their homes but who have limited financial resources might need to mortgage their homes to pay for other expenses. This bill eliminates the cap on FHA reverse mortgages to meet with growing needs of our seniors in tight financial times.

Finally, the legislation directs surplus FHA funds to a housing counseling program as well as to an affordable housing fund. In this way the legislation will ensure that borrowers have the opportunity to achieve the dream of owning a home as well as to become educated about their mortgage options and what it will mean in the long term.

The mortgage lending troubles are getting out of control. This bill will take an important first step toward reining in a disturbingly high rate of foreclosure. Later this week Chairman Frank will hold a hearing with Federal Reserve Chairman Bernanke and other administration officials to look for additional legislative and regulatory solutions to this growing problem. Ensuring that FHA lending policies are up to date and competitive in the current market is a good start.

This bill will ensure that our fellow Americans have better federally backed choices to buy a home. This bill will curtail the spread of subprime lending and get more of our homeowners into mortgage loans with stable interest rates and transparent terms. This is a step in the right direction.

This is a bipartisan issue. The House passed similar legislation in the 109th Congress. This bill expands upon that legislation, reflective of the growing crisis. We need to pass this bill. Our constituents need this bill to keep their homes, and we need to work with our colleagues in the Senate to get this bill to the President.

I look forward to the debate on the Expanding Homeownership Act and hope that my colleagues on both sides of the aisle will join me in supporting this rule and the underlying bill.

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

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

Before yielding to my next speaker, I would like to point out that the bill directs surplus funds to an affordable housing fund. This is an appropriate

use of any net FHA funds. The surplus funds are directed to a source that is consistent with the mission of this legislation: to help Americans buy homes through federally backed means.

However, for those Members who do not support this fund, I want to point out that there is an amendment made in order to strike the fund. All Members of this House will have an opportunity to vote on this important issue.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Sutton), a member of the Rules Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to make a comment before yielding to my next speaker.

I would like to point out that seven amendments were made in order. Two of the minority amendments offered were redundant changes, so one of those was made in order. And, finally, an amendment in the nature of a substitute offered by Mrs. Biggert was made in order. We are providing ample opportunity for debate and for Members to vote on the provisions of the bill.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).

Mr. Speaker, I am waiting for an additional speaker.

Mr. Speaker, my remaining speakers are not here, so I am prepared to close if the gentleman from Texas is prepared to close.

Mr. Speaker, before I close, I just want to make a comment that H.R. 1852 already has strong identification requirements for those applying for FHA-backed mortgage insurance.

With that, Mr. Speaker, we know that our housing market is in severe distress. We must ensure that subprime mortgage lending is not putting our residents at risk. Subprime mortgages can be a very useful tool enabling those with imperfect credit to qualify to buy a home. Reining in predatory lending practices will help our families keep those homes that they have worked so hard to buy. The Expanding American Homeownership Act will ensure that FHA has the tools it needs to get more home buyers into good loans.

This bill will bring the FHA regulations up to date. It will provide the agency with the ability and resources to offer a broader diversity of loans to meet the needs of the current market. This is an important bill that will give more of our constituents access to solid federally backed loans. That is a kind of stable financing that homeowners need to get through the rocky times our real estate market is weathering.

The Financial Services Committee has worked very hard to get this bill to the floor. I hope that we can keep it moving forward. I hope that my colleagues will join me and show strong bipartisan support for the rule before us and the underlying bill.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Madam Speaker, today I am introducing the Protect Americans from Crimes on Cruise Ships Resolution with many of my distinguished colleagues, including Representatives Chris Shays and Carolyn Maloney.

Madam Speaker, in 2007, over 12 million Americans will travel on cruise lines. Unfortunately, few of these vacationing ``cruisers'' fully appreciate their potential vulnerability to crime while on an ocean voyage. Citizens who are victimized often do not know their legal rights or who to contact for help in the immediate aftermath of the crime.

In recent years, the media has reported on a number of high profile cases of passengers falling overboard, passengers gone missing and passengers being raped and sexually assaulted. Sadly, many of these cases remain unresolved. Worse yet, many cases go unreported because there is no industry reporting mechanism.

My involvement in this issue began after a young woman from my district, Laurie Dishman, came to me for assistance after she had been a victim of a violent crime on a cruise ship. Laurie shared her shocking story with me in a letter one year ago.

As a passenger on board the Vision of the Seas, a ship operated by Royal Caribbean, Laurie was raped by a crew member. One of the most disturbing aspects of Laurie's case is that the cruise ship on which she was raped was short security staff. As a result, the cruise line promoted someone with no training to perform security personnel duties. If a real security guard had been aboard, Laurie may have been spared her awful ordeal. The tragedy that ensued is something that Laurie will never forget.

The story of her experience on the ship was shocking enough. Unfortunately, I soon learned that was only the beginning. Laurie wrote me to tell me she was having difficulty getting a response to her request for information about the incident from the cruise line. As I began looking into the matter, a number of red flags were raised regarding the handling of

Laurie's particular case. These include the FBI's decision not to have a polygraph test of the crewmember and the cruise line's decision to withhold Laurie's own medical information.

These incidents beg the question: what is the process when a crime is committed on a cruise line and what recourse do passengers have? The more I have inquired, the more I have been alarmed that there is no shortage of cases of: rape, sexual assaults of minors, alcohol related fighting and abuse, and persons overboard.

Even more troubling, most of these incidents have not been fully resolved or prosecuted. I have also learned that there have been no convictions for rape cases on cruise lines in four decades, a statistic that takes a new meaning through the lens of Ms. Dishman's experience.

As a result of continued cases of victims of crimes on the high seas, and with the much appreciated leadership of Chairman Cummings, the Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation held a hearing on this important issue in March, 2007. The hearing showed numerous discrepancies between the experience sold by cruise lines and the real experience on board these ships. In addition, the hearing highlighted how crime numbers reported to Congress in a previous hearing are radically different from the cruise industry's internal crime statistics.

The result of our hearing, combined with numerous and unending media reports of crimes on cruise ships, point to the need for increased safety and security for these passengers. Prevention can be an important tool, and we all know that prevention starts with making people aware of the potential for a crime to occur. It is time for Congress to acknowledge formally this ongoing problem and to ensure that Americans are informed, aware and safe. The Resolution I am introducing today will do just that.

The resolution acknowledges:

The lack of federal regulation overseeing crime reporting by the cruise industry;

The absence of law enforcement officials on ocean voyages;

That without a law enforcement official, cruise officials are essentially responsible for collection and preserving a crime scene;

Most cruise ships are registered under the laws of another country;

Perpetrators of sexual violence and other violent crimes on cruise ships are rarely brought to justice; and

Consumers who book a cruise generally do not receive information at the point of sale about their legal rights as a cruise passenger and who to contact for help in the event a crime occurs during their voyage.

And Resolves that:

The members of the International Cruise Victims Association, the National Center for Victims of Crime, and the Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network are to be commended for their leadership in highlighting the problem of crimes against American citizens on cruise ships;

Americans who are victims of crime on a cruise ship should have access to justice, and necessary steps should be taken to ensure that the perpetrators of such crimes are brought to justice;

The cruise industry should provide comprehensive information to passengers about security risks and maintain necessary security personnel on each ship; and

Congress should provide oversight to ensure the safety and security of American passengers.

Madam Speaker, nearly all cruise ships operate under a foreign flag. U.S. citizens who are victimized onboard cruise ships often do not know their legal rights or who to contact for help in the immediate aftermath of crimes. Cruises operate in a legal vacuum, where a lack of accountability empowers predators and obstructs their victims' pursuit of justice. That is an unacceptable situation, made worse by the cruise lines' own efforts to avoid scrutiny of and accountability for their own handling of the security of their passengers.

My hope is that with increased Congressional involvement that the cruise lines finally take these crimes seriously and enact necessary reforms. The Resolution acknowledges the ongoing safety concerns and will help ensure that the millions of men, women and children who cruise each year are informed, aware and safe on cruise ships. This resolution is supported by the Women's Caucus and Victim's Rights Caucus, and I would urge all of my colleagues to cosponsor this important Resolution.

Mr. Speaker, the Rules Committee is expected to meet Wednesday, September 19, to grant a rule which may structure the amendment process for floor consideration of H.R. 2881, the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2007.

Members who wish to offer an amendment to this bill should submit 30 copies of the amendment and a brief description of the amendment to the Rules Committee in H-312 in the Capitol no later than 10 a.m. on Wednesday, September 19. Members are strongly advised to adhere to the amendment deadline to ensure the amendments receive consideration.

Amendments should be drafted to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to H.R. 2881. The amendment reflects an agreement between the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee and the Science and Technology Committee. A copy of the text is posted on the Web site of the Rules Committee.

Amendments should be drafted by legislative counsel and also should be reviewed by the Office of the Parliamentarian to be sure that the amendments comply with the rules of the House. Members are also strongly encouraged to submit their amendments to the Congressional Budget Office for analysis regarding possible PAYGO violations.

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the progress to our Nation's competitiveness that the Patent Reform Act represents. Patents are vital to our universities, our large and small companies, our entrepreneurs, and our economy. Our advances in technology are clearly demonstrated by the vast increase in patent applications submitted. Our policies and procedures governing the United States patent process must be updated to keep pace with our inventors. The Patent Reform Act takes significant steps towards that goal.

I appreciate the extensive patent portfolio that is generated by the cutting-edge research at the University of California. These innovations provide the intellectual property that businesses depend on to develop new products. I have heard from numerous constituents in my district on this issue who benefit from the technology transfer process. I am happy to represent their interests by supporting patent reform. This is an incredibly complex topic, as we face the challenge of legislating a single patent system to meet the needs of many industries.

I commend Subcommittee Chairman Berman, Chairman Conyers, Ranking Member Smith, and the entire House Judiciary Committee for their diligence. They have worked tirelessly with hundreds of stakeholders to reach the carefully crafted bill that we have on the floor today. I thank the committee and its staff for their long commitment to patent reform. The product of their years of work, the Patent Reform Act, will improve our nation's competitiveness and start moving our country's patent system into the 21st century.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to offer my welcome home greetings to the men and women of Naval Mobile Construction Battalion 18 as they return from their deployment to Iraq in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom. On Saturday, these sailors and their families will gather at Sacramento's Naval Operational Support Center for a homecoming celebration and I ask all my colleagues to join me in honoring their service.

Naval Mobile Construction Battalion 18, often called NMCB 18, is made up of 14 detachments of naval reserve units from across the northwestern United States. For NMCB 18's nearly 500 members, their 9- month tour in Iraq meant time away from their families and loved ones, often at great personal sacrifice.

The battalion's motto, ``We are Strong, Mighty and True; Genuine, Solid and Able to Do'' summed up their mission while in Iraq. Their assignment was to build the necessary infrastructure to support forward based Marines in the Al Anbar Province. This included building hundreds of South West Asian huts to shelter over 3,500 Marines, laying 5,000 cubic yards of concrete and hauling over 33,000 cubic yards of material.

Among many things, their combined efforts helped establish nineteen combat outposts, construct eleven culvert crossings and complete 4 water wells. Across Iraq's Al Anbar Province these Seabees have installed wooden floors in Marines' tents, added air conditioning units and installed shower and bathroom trailers. Their work has made life a little bit easier for the Marines on the front lines. Each time the dedicated sailors of NMCB 18 were asked to complete a project, it was likely to be completed under the scheduled time and without a safety incident. In fact, NMCB 18 had the lowest number of safety incidents of any of the previous 6 battalions that preceded them.

Unfortunately, the realities of war hit home to the sailors of NMCB 18 on October 25, 2006 when they lost one of their own. Petty Officer 2nd Class Chuck Komppa of Belgrade, Montana died from enemy action in Al Anbar Province. Komppa was traveling between cities in order to assess the living conditions of our Marines when his convoy came under attack. I ask that all of my colleagues extend their heartfelt sympathies and sincere gratitude to his wife Delisa and their 2 children.

In a true feat of the determination, teamwork and ingenuity that characterized their time in Iraq, the sailors of NMCB 18 built a Morale, Welfare, and Recreation hut in less than 24 hours for the service men and women at Al Asad Air Base. This facility now serves as a place for rest and relaxation and allows servicemembers to call home in the privacy they deserve. Appropriately, the MWR hut was dedicated in the memory of Petty Officer Komppa.

These sailors did their job away from the safety of the more protected parts of Iraq and by all accounts their mission was a success. In reviewing his battalion's time in Iraq NMCB Commander Dan Gould said he had nothing but ``seam-bursting pride'' for his sailors.

Madam Speaker, all of these sailors left their families and loved ones and placed their lives on the line for others. We owe these true citizen soldiers our thanks and gratitude. It is an honor for me to represent such fine men and women in Congress. Once again, I urge my colleagues to join me in thanking them for their service. Welcome home.

Mr. Chairman, the debate over our Nation's energy policy is both a national and a local one. Energy policy impacts our national security, our international trade balance, and our relations with other countries.

At the same time, energy policy reaches into every single State, county, and Congressional district.

The energy bill we consider today recognizes this fact. It makes significant investments in the new energy sources, research, and technology that will power our economy in the future. It revolutionizes our energy policy at the national and local levels. And it improves the way local communities around the country use, generate, and conserve power.

In my hometown of Sacramento, energy is an especially important local issue. Sacramento is located at the confluence of two mighty rivers, and at the base of a large watershed. This leaves us vulnerable to catastrophic floods that are made more likely because of global warming. The more we burn fossil fuels for energy, the higher our flood risk.

In Sacramento, changing our national energy policy means reducing our dependence on foreign oil, preserving our environment, and stopping global warming. It also means protecting our homes.

Mr. Chairman, the people of Sacramento are eager to change their energy consumption habits. In fact, we have already made significant investments in a new energy economy.

Sacramento has a growing clean-energy industry that is poised to take off. Our local utility produces significant electricity from solar, wind, and methane gas sources. Every day, more and more of the Sacramento region's homes, businesses, and vehicles are powered by renewable energy.

But my constituents need help from the Federal Government. That is why I am so proud to stand before the House today in support of this energy package. The investments it makes in clean energy complement and support what is already happening in Sacramento.

The bill's tax incentives for renewable energy bonds are crucial for my local electric utility. The biofuels that will be developed because of this legislation will power my constituents' cars. The people I represent will work in some of the 3 million new green-collar jobs it creates. My constituents will find it easier to take public transit because of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee's title.

This energy bill helps Sacramento continue to lead our country's energy revolution, Mr. Chairman. Our Nation and our energy supply will be more secure once we pass it.

I urge my colleagues to support this landmark legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman/lady from [STATE] for yielding me this time. I request unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks.

Mr. Speaker, today's debate is about promises and responsibility. It is about the promise of an American childhood. It is about our responsibility to protect the health and well-being of those who grow up in the world's most prosperous Nation.

It is about the promise of a better world for our children and grandchildren. We have a responsibility to create a healthcare system that is fair, equitable, and affordable for all Americans, regardless of their income.

Mr. Speaker, the Children's Health and Medicare Protection Act delivers on these promises and fulfills these responsibilities. It revitalizes and expands one of the most successful and cost-effective health initiatives we have: the State Children's Health Insurance Program.

SCHIP is a model for how government programs should work. It has saved money for taxpayers by helping children avoid costly hospital and emergency room trips. It has made states equal partners in the program's administration, giving them flexibility and a stake in the outcome. Most critically, it has provided six million kids with health care that they would not otherwise have.

Because of SCHIP, six million American kids are healthier and more vibrant. Six million young lives are better because of this program. Isn't this what good government is supposed to accomplish?

There is still more for us to do, though. Millions of children in our country cannot go to a doctor when they feel sick. In my hometown of Sacramento, 17,000 kids cannot get the medicines they need until they go to an emergency room. This is unacceptable to me, Madam Speaker. It should be unacceptable to every single Member of Congress.

When I cast my vote for this bill today, it will be a vote for the future of our country. It will be an investment in the children who are the future.

Mr. Speaker, I stand before this House today as a colleague, but also as a proud grandmother. My two beautiful grandchildren are named Anna and Robby, and most of what I do here in Congress is colored by how it will affect them and their generation.

Anna and Robby are fortunate in that they have stable, reliable health insurance. Millions of their peers are not so lucky.

I am confident that if we all do so, we will see that voting ``Yes'' on the CHAMP Act is not only the right thing to do. It is the smart thing to do. It will secure our country's future by providing healthcare for the millions of American kids who literally are our country's future.

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 597 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Hastings). All time yielded during consideration of the rule is for debate only.

General Leave

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and insert extraneous materials into the Record.

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

(Ms. MATSUI asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 597 provides for consideration of the conference report to accompany H.R. 1495, the Water Resources Development Act of 2007. The rule waives all points of order against the conference report and its consideration and considers the conference report as read.

Mr. Speaker, it has been well-documented that our country has not had a WRDA bill in over 7 years. Seven years is perilously close to an entire generation passing without a national water resources policy being signed into law by the President. We are taking a big step in that direction today.

WRDA authorizes upwards of $20 billion for the construction of water resource development projects and studies by the Army Corps of Engineers for flood control, navigation, and environmental restoration. Additionally, H.R. 1495 authorizes hurricane recovery activities along the gulf coast that would cost an estimated $2 billion. Furthermore, the bill requires an external peer review for studies and projects that would cost more than $45 million. The bill also coordinates environmental analyses and other permit processes among Federal and State agencies and authorizes environmental quality initiatives.

In my district in Sacramento, California, this WRDA bill is one of the most important pieces of legislation that will pass Congress this year. We have been waiting a long time for this bill. Sacramento is the most at-risk river city for catastrophic flooding. Located at the confluence of the Sacramento and American Rivers, the Sacramento floodplain contains: 165,000 homes; over 488,000 residents; 1,300 government facilities, including the State capitol; and businesses providing 200,000 jobs. It is a hub of a six-county regional economy that provides 800,000 jobs for 1.5 million people.

A major flood along the American River or the Sacramento River would have catastrophic ripple effects regionally and nationally; cost upwards of $35 billion in direct property damages; and likely would result in significant loss of life to our families, friends, and neighbors. In my district we understand the need and urgency for an overarching water resources policy to protect our homes, businesses, and families. Sacramento needs this bill, but so

do countless other communities across the Nation.

This bill, the projects and policy it contains, goes a long way in addressing our country's flood vulnerabilities. Nationally, regions across the country are starving for a Federal partner in water resources policy. Our country is confronted with population growth, climate change, and growing demands on our water infrastructure. Our districts across the country need this bill, and the Members in this Chamber have repeatedly supported WRDA bills.

In the 108th Congress, WRDA passed the House by a vote of 412-8. In the 109th Congress, WRDA passed the House 406-14. In the 110th Congress, WRDA passed the House 394-25.

There is a strong history of support and bipartisanship for WRDA bills. It is my hope that this support continues and that we move forward on this very important work.

I also want to congratulate and thank Water Resources Environment Subcommittee Chairwoman Eddie Bernice Johnson and full committee Chairman Jim Oberstar for their commitment to make this bill a priority in the 110th Congress.

Finally, I want to make a point that WRDA bills are traditionally intended to be 2-year authorization bills. It is important that we get our water policy back on track and address these ongoing challenges on a regular basis. It is my belief that the best protection that we can provide our communities is to be prepared. I look forward to passing this WRDA conference report and moving on to the next WRDA bill.

I strongly urge my colleagues to support this rule and final passage of the conference report to accompany H.R. 1495, the Water Resources Development Act of 2007.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas, who is our subcommittee Chair of the Water Resources and Environment Subcommittee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to our distinguished chairman, the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar).

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

Mr. Speaker, as was said, this bill is long overdue. Our country needs a comprehensive water resources policy, and WRDA is the framework that can meet this need.

We have 7 years of backlogged water projects that must be addressed. There is a growing demand on our already overburdened water infrastructure. The sooner we move forward on this conference report, the sooner our communities across the country will be healthier and safer. This conference report has bipartisan support. In fact, every member of the conference signed off on it.

Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote on the previous question and on the rule.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

The previous question was ordered.