Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, on September 29, 2008, I missed rollcall vote No. 673. Had I been present, I would have voted in the following manner:

Rollcall No. 673 ``nay.''

Madam Speaker, I rise today to support this relief from the Alternative Minimum Tax, AMT. If Congress does not pass this legislation, over 25 million middle-class tax payers would find themselves subject to this tax.

It is important that we provide this relief to millions of American families who want a better life for their families. The current structure of the AMT leaves middle-class households vulnerable to a significant unexpected tax bill while many very wealthy households pay no AMT. In these economic times, enacting AMT relief can put more money in their pockets rather than subject them to taxes that were not intended to apply to middle-class families.

I have long supported and advocated for responsible reform of the Alternative Minimum Tax, which would be offset by other changes that target loopholes and abuses in the tax code. A responsible paid-for fix would also protect future generations of Americans from tax increases by not adding to our national debt. The Federal Government deficit will reach over $400 billion this fiscal year and it is projected to reach $500 billion in the next fiscal year.

Today, we see the consequences of excessive debt in our economy. I am greatly concerned with the legacy of debt that we are leaving to our children as our national debt reaches over $10 trillion. That amount translates to a debt of over $30,000 for each of our children. We must pay interest on the debt and each day the average interest payment adds more than $1 billion to the tab we leave behind.

While I believe that huge, persistent debt has a significant cost for the economy, I also practically realize that both the President and my colleagues across the aisle refuse to pay for this package of tax relief. They rejected the fiscally responsible bill, H.R. 6275, that I voted for in the Ways and Means Committee and on this floor when the House approved the bill on June 25, 2008. The other legislative body has only passed an AMT patch without an offset, rejecting paying for this tax relief just last week once again.

Weighing the economic stress middle-class families face today, I will cast my vote for the Alternative Minimum Tax Relief Act today so that this tax does not fall on families struggling to meet increasing prices with wages that have not kept pace with inflation over the last 8 years. I do so in the hope that Congress will work next year with a new administration to advance commonsense tax reform that includes paid for AMT relief. We must reverse years of failed Republican policies that have mortgaged our grandchildren's future with debt.

Madam Speaker, 2008 marks the 30th anniversary of the Employee Benefit Research Institute (EBRI). I rise to congratulate them on their three decades of important work and the unique role they continue to serve for us here in Congress, the news media, and the public.

EBRI was created in response to enactment of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), the major Federal law that still governs private-sector retirement and health plans today. EBRI's purpose was the--as it is today--to conduct objective, reliable research on income security issues so that policymakers and the public would have the best possible information when making decisions on these issues.

EBRI is an extremely rare organization in this town: It does not take policy positions, and it does not lobby. Rather than trying to tell Congress and the Federal Government what we should do on health and retirement issues, instead it simply reports what the facts are--and what the likely results are likely to be from different policy options. Substance, reliability, credibility: That's what I expect when I see work from EBRI.

Because EBRI is nonpartisan, its data and analyses are trusted and used by Members of both sides of the aisle. As we in Congress continue to address the important health- and retirement-related challenges facing our country, it is extremely important that we have a reliable source of information to turn to like EBRI. And in a town as transient as Washington, EBRI also is remarkable for the depth of knowledge, institutional memory, and tenure of its first and only CEO, Dallas Salisbury, who has led the institute ever since it opened its doors 30 years ago. The institute has never wavered from its original mission of objective research and education.

I offer my congratulations to EBRI on its three decades of service. With health care and retirement coverage becoming ever-more important to our constituents, and the policy choices becoming ever-more complex and difficult, we will need their contributions and knowledge more than ever in the years to come.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of S. 431, the ``Keeping the Internet Devoid of Sexual Predators Act of 2007'' also known as the KIDS Act. This important legislation takes a historic step forward in updating and strengthening our laws to protect our kids from sexual predators online.

At the beginning of this Congress, I introduced the House companion to the KIDS Act with our dear departed friend, Rep. Paul Gillmor, a true champion of protecting children from dangerous sexual predators both online and offline. He spent much of his time in Congress fighting to keep our kids safe, and I know that he would be very proud of the passage of today's legislation.

When my own kids are online, I want to do everything possible to keep them safe from online predators. Sex offenders have no business being on social networking sites like MySpace and Facebook and the hundreds of other social networking sites that kids are on today. This bipartisan compromise will make it easier for social networking sites to find these offenders and kick these individuals off of their sites so that they are not able to prey on our Nation's children.

Under current law, convicted sex offenders have to register where they work, live, go to school, and provide any other information that is required by the Attorney General, This act mandates that the Attorney General use his authority to require convicted sex offenders to register their Internet identifiers such as their email and instant messaging addresses. Failure to register internet identifiers as required will be treated as any other registration violation punishable under 18 U.S.C. Sec. 2250. The Department of Justice will then create a system to share this information with social networking sites so that these companies can keep registered sex offenders from using their services.

According to a University of New Hampshire study, 1 in 7 children receive unwanted sexual solicitations online. With nearly 90 percent of our Nation's teenagers using the Internet everyday, it is now more important than ever to pass legislation like this that updates our laws to protect our kids from those who would exploit them online.

I would like to thank MySpace for their leadership in advancing this legislation and for the proactive steps that they have already taken to delete convicted registered sex offenders from their site. We hope this legislation will encourage others to follow their lead.

I would also like to thank Chairman Scott, Chairman Conyers, Senator Schumer and Representative Rahm Emanuel for their work on this issue. I would specifically like to thank House Judiciary staff--Mark Dubester, Ted Kalo, Bobby Vassar, Ameer Gopalani and Karen Wilkinson--for their hard work in reaching a compromise on this issue. I look forward to continuing to work with all of you to protect our children from the threat of sex offenders on the Internet.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of the Fostering Connections to Success and Increasing Adoptions Act, important legislation that improves and strengthens the Federal programs that assist foster care and adoption assistance programs.

Under current law, States are reimbursed by the Federal Government for eligible foster care or adoption assistance programs through Title IV-E of the Social Security Act. Unfortunately, these very same services are not directly reimbursed when provided by an American Indian tribe. This was not a deliberate adoption policy decision, but instead a drafting error that has meant that some tribes have been left without the Federal resources they need to support services for these priceless children.

My bill would provide parity to Native American children living on tribal land by allowing Indian tribes to have the same direct access to Federal funding for foster care and adoption services that States currently receive via Title IV-E. This legislation improves the Native American child welfare system by requiring tribal adoption and foster care programs to meet the same requirements that are required of States to ensure the safety of children placed in tribal foster care programs, while entrusting the establishment and maintenance of these programs to tribes.

The critical importance of this legislation was driven home to me when I met recently with the Mitzel family from West Fargo, ND. They have served as foster parents for 13 children throughout the years and are now adopted parents for a sibling group of five precious Native American children who were scattered from one another in the foster care system. For their persistent efforts to reunite this sibling group, I nominated the Mitzels this year for the Congressional Coalition on Adoption's Angels in Adoption Award.

I am deeply grateful for the commitment of tribal leaders to make certain that these children were united and raised as a family even though in this particular case it means that these children will be raised off of the reservation. Meeting these children powerfully drove home to me just how important it is that all of our children, including American Indian children receiving services from a tribe, have the same level of support.

This compromise bill with the Senate puts tribal adoption and foster care one step closer to being on equal footing with States and gives tribes the ability to provide their children with the culturally appropriate care they deserve. I am hopeful that this bipartisan legislation will quickly pass the Senate and be signed into law.

I urge my colleagues to support the Fostering Connections to Success and Increasing Adoptions Act to ensure that all children in foster care get the services, education and healthcare that they need.

Mr. Speaker, I'm from North Dakota. I can understand why someone from Virginia would want the State of Virginia to get a lot of money for drilling more than 50 miles out, but you know, from where I come from, when you're past 50 miles off the coast, I'm not thinking of Virginia; I'm thinking of ocean. When you're dealing with leases owned by the United States of America, I think of resources that ought to come to the United States of America.

By the time this administration is done bailing out Wall Street, we may be looking at a fiscal deficit this year of $500 billion. Sure, it would be nice to just cut a big, old slice and give it to States here or to States there, but what about the Federal Treasury for heaven's sake?

I'm from a State that has got some oil. I'm very proud of what's going on in North Dakota. We've got a play called the Bakken shale play. They estimate there are 4 billion barrels of recoverable oil, some of it on U.S. leased land. North Dakota is not getting a big, old slice of that, but we're sure generating a lot of economic activity. Man, it's making our State's economy hum, and the economic activity of this drilling off the coast is going to make a lot of the economies of these States hum.

I can sure understand. Look, if I were from Virginia, I'd be saying, ``Hey, give us some money. Give us some of this.'' I understand that, but as a Nation, this year alone, it's going to run potentially $500 billion in the red. Don't you think we have some responsibility to our Nation, to all of the States and to our children?

You know, I like this bill, in my coming from an energy State, because it has got so many things in here that are positive. I mentioned our contribution in oil, but we also have a major wind dimension to our State. They call us the Saudi Arabia of wind. If you've ever been up to the high prairies of North Dakota, you'd know what they're talking about. We need to continue the tax support for the drilling-wind energy, and it's in this bill.

There is one other thing I wanted to mention. We're sitting on 800 years of lignite coal at present consumptive rates. The provisions of this bill that deal with trying to get clean coal technology so that this can continue to be an abundant, affordable component of our energy sources while trying to meet new environmental concerns is going to take investment. It's in this bill. This bill is a diverse bill--oil, renewables like wind and clean coal. This bill deserves your support. I hope you will.

I thank the gentlelady for yielding.

I doubt our departed sister, Stephanie, would ever have imagined the impact she had. In fact, the Cleveland Plain Dealer referenced her essential humility even when mentioning her personal electricity in this editorial of August 22:

``I have no illusions about myself,'' Tubbs Jones told the Plain Dealer reporter Fran Henry in 1995. ``It could all go up in a puff of smoke. I'll never lose sight of that.''

Stephanie's presence on Earth has come so tragically to an all too early end, but her achievements--rising from the daughter of a factory worker and skycap to the positions of judge, county prosecutor, five- term Member of Congress--have made a lasting impact at each and every step along the way, especially with the many, many lives she touched.

I was privileged to sit by her on the Ways and Means Committee. You could probably call us the odd couple--a reserved, middle-aged man from the most rural part of our country, teamed with the most energetic, charismatic, bombastic, thoroughly urban Stephanie Tubbs Jones.

Over the years, on our committee together, I came to fully understand just how deep and how genuine her passion for others was, especially for those less fortunate, for those needing help. We'd joke about taking turns keeping each other settled down even under considerable provocation sometimes in Ways and Means debate. My counsel of ``take it easy, Stephanie'' would be met in turn with ``now settle down, Earl.'' In one hearing on inexcusable Social Security delays, we both just lost it entirely. I'll never forget that hearing; it's one of my favorites.

One of the greatest compliments I've had in this Congress, in any Congress I've served in, was when she'd call me her country boyfriend. She had the most incredible way of making those she met feel better. In the place where smiles, laughter and deep compassion are never in sufficient supply, Stephanie Tubbs Jones will be deeply, deeply missed but never forgotten.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of this resolution.

I am very pleased that Albania and Croatia were invited to join the alliance at the Bucharest summit in April of this year. Enlarging NATO has been hugely successful in advancing stability and cooperation among NATO's member states, and this invitation to Albania and Croatia to join the alliance is very welcome news.

Unfortunately, another friend and important ally, the Republic of Macedonia, was blocked from joining NATO at the Bucharest summit due to the objection of a single nation, Greece, over the official name of Macedonia. This is very disappointing.

Macedonia has made significant economic and political reforms. They have made a strong contribution to U.S.-led military missions. They have been deemed to be fully qualified to become a member of the alliance.

Greece is our long-time friend, our valued ally, but their refusal to allow Macedonia into NATO over a bilateral name dispute represents, to my belief, the first time NATO membership has been denied any country due to a bilateral dispute unrelated to strategic defense considerations of the alliance. This is a very troubling precedent. It sets the stage for what could be a pattern, where member states leverage their advantage to nonmember states seeking to get into NATO and try and extract any measure of bilateral concession, all occurring at the expense of the alliance.

I strongly support a quick and expedient resolution to the name dispute between Greece and Macedonia so that Macedonia can join Albania and Croatia in signing accession protocols with NATO. I commend the United States diplomat that has led the efforts to resolve this issue. Both Greece and Macedonia have expressed their resolution to continue to work on getting a breakthrough. I encourage their efforts and I urge them, these great countries, these important friends of ours, to rise above the temptation to exploit nationalist themes for domestic political advantage in each of their respective countries. Put that aside, rise above that for the good of the alliance. Resolve this issue and let Macedonia in.

The resolution before us commends Albania and commends Croatia for the beginning of the accession process. They deserve this commendation. Please support this resolution.

Announcement By the Speaker Pro Tempore

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

The latest example of a White House that runs energy policy by the oil companies, of the oil companies, and for the oil companies is found in the Statement of Administrative Policy threatening a veto on this bill.

The White House asks to give basically a blank check to the oil companies to drill wherever they want, notwithstanding the fact they already have authorized drilling for 34 billion barrels offshore. And then the White House opposes our efforts to address speculation.

The bill before us is a substantive and measured approach at trying to make certain that the price our consumers are paying at the pump is based on consideration of the supply and demand and not market manipulation.

Greater transparency, more reporting of transactions, greater oversight, 100 new personnel at the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, greater enforcement, a stronger direction from Congress to drive out excessive speculation: you would think this would be one area where the White House and the Congress could agree.

I urge passage of this bill.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, I have a great deal of respect for the preceding speaker, the ranking member of the Ways and Means Committee. The facts of what he said are absolutely correct. Health care costs are out of control. They are threatening the future of the Medicare program. They are threatening the future of U.S. health care.

But the issue before us is a trigger which would have one of two results, only one of two results, cut Medicare benefits or raise Medicare premiums on our seniors. Now, if we are going to address, and we need to address the underlying systemic problems in our health care system, but this trigger, which would simply cut Medicare or raise seniors' premiums, is not the way to systemically address our problems.

I believe that it's incorrect to single out Medicare for this treatment, to single out seniors for the overall problem of broader health reform. We need to work together on health reform. I hope the next Congress will give us an opportunity to do that, but the months remaining in this Congress don't.

Look, we had to override the President's veto to prevent a 10 percent cut in physician reimbursements under Medicare, cuts that would have threatened universal access of our seniors under Medicare. We had to override a veto. So moving forward with a trigger mechanism that at this hour in the administration is going to cut Medicare or raise seniors' premiums is certainly not the way to address the broader issues of health care costs.

I look forward, as a member of the Ways and Means Committee, to working with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle as we address health care costs. Let's not have this trigger.

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 6532, Highway Trust Fund Restoration as it provides the funding necessary to replenish the Highway Trust Fund and avoid significant cuts in federal highway funding to the States.

Forecasts indicate a shortfall of several billion dollars to the Highway Trust Fund in fiscal year 2009 due to lower-than-expected gas tax revenue. According to the Federal Highway Administration, the estimated miles traveled on U.S. public roads has dropped 30 billion miles from November through April 2007-08 compared to the same period in 2006-07. This is the first year-to-year reduction since 1979. As Americans drive less and purchase less fuel, the Highway Trust Fund's shortfall will continue to worsen.

As a result of this shortfall, States are facing funding cuts of approximately 34 percent or nearly $14 billion in highway funds. This would include cuts of $70,473,422 in my State of North Dakota, threatening approximately 2,452 jobs. If this shortfall is not addressed, countless bridge and tunnel projects, reconstruction of streets, traffic signals, lighting and safety initiatives will be postponed.

I am an original cosponsor of H.R. 6532 which would address these impending cuts by crediting the Highway Trust Fund's Highway Account with the $8 billion taken away from the Highway Account's balance in 1998, and therefore helping the Highway Trust Fund avoid insolvency.

The Highway Trust Fund Restoration is a good bill that will provide States with the resources they need to continue to provide improvements to America's highways. It deserves all members' votes on the House floor.

Madam Speaker, today I will vote to refer House Resolution 1345 to the Judiciary Committee. My vote does not reflect a belief that this Resolution deserves continued consideration in the House of Representatives, instead it was a vote cast to preclude consideration of the Resolution on the floor of the House.

As you know, the Constitution provides for ``impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanors.'' Whether we agree or disagree with this President, most Americans--including myself--do not feel this high threshold has been met. Furthermore, as the lone representative for North Dakota in the United States House of Representatives, I take the responsibility of representing the beliefs and values of my State seriously, and I believe I am reflecting prevailing view among the majority of North Dakotans on this issue.

Again, I do not believe that the House of Representatives should be considering the highly partisan issue of impeachment at this time. Bringing up this Resolution on the floor of the House would not only waste valuable floor time, but would also distract from far more pressing national issues and undermine the bipartisan cooperation that is necessary to pass effective and timely legislation.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

This debate has a familiar feel. Once again the President has vetoed legislation important to rural America, legislation that was supported by a broad bipartisan consensus in this body. We saw the same thing in the farm bill, overrode him once, overrode him twice, and we need to override today as well. Those that argue that rural interests are best served by standing with the President's position on this are arguing that we ought to pay insurance companies more, cut doctors, cut hospitals and somehow this produces a better health result. It doesn't stand up.

This bill provides very important reimbursements, not just to physicians, but also to struggling rural facilities representing the infrastructure for health care in rural America. Passing this bill and overriding the veto addresses physician payments. It addresses critical-access hospitals. It addresses sole-community hospitals. It addresses rural ambulance services. It addresses rural pharmacies. That is why the Rural Health Care Association supports the bill. It is why the Rural Health Care Coalition supports the bill. Please vote to override.

Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of overriding the President's veto of H.R. 6331, the Medicare Improvements for Patients and Providers Act, legislation that strengthens the Medicare Program and maintains our commitment to rural America.

With an estimated 40 percent cuts in physician payment reductions under Medicare expected by 2016, Medicare's physician payment system is clearly broken. Because of the flawed Sustainable Growth Rate, 2008 Medicare physician payment rates are about the same as they were in 2001. This has prevented some physicians and the hospitals who employ them from making needed investments in staff and health information technology as well as created a great deal of uncertainty and instability for physicians and hospitals as they run their businesses.

H.R. 6331 takes an important step forward by reversing these previously scheduled cuts in Medicare payments over the next 18 months while also providing a 1.1 percent update for 2009. This translates to at least $30 million for North Dakota's doctors and hospitals over the next year and a half, bringing relief for many of our struggling hospital systems. I am hopeful that these 18 months will give Congress the time it needs to make commonsense and much needed reforms to the SGR system so that North Dakota hospitals and doctors will have the fairness and stability in Medicare payments they deserve.

H.R. 6331 also makes a strong commitment to maintaining access to important rural health services by investing in $3 billion in our vulnerable rural health care delivery system. Rural America continues to be challenged by shortages of health care providers, barriers to health care access, and geographic isolation. In my own home State of North Dakota, approximately 80 percent of the State is designated as a partial or full county Health Professional Shortage Area. In order to address these unique challenges, the Medicare Modernization Act (MMA) enacted special payment enhancements to make sure that rural health care facilities and providers have the resources they need to deliver quality care in their communities.

Unfortunately, many of these important provisions have expired and further assistance is needed to ensure that seniors living in rural America have access to quality, affordable health care. That is why Representative Greg Walden and I, as co-chairs of the bipartisan Rural Health Care Coalition, introduced H.R. 2860, the Health Care Access and Rural Equity (H-CARE) Act, legislation that addresses these and other barriers to quality health care by recognizing the unique characteristics of health care delivery in rural areas and assisting rural health care providers in their efforts to continue to provide quality care to rural Americans.

I am pleased that the Medicare Improvements for Patients and Providers Act (MIPPA) of 2008 incorporates many important provisions from H-CARE that will do much to protect the fragile rural health care safety net. More specifically, MIPPA will do the following:

Ensure that rural doctors are paid the same rate for their work as their urban counterparts by extending the 1.0 work floor on the Medicare work geographic adjustment applied to physician payments through 2009, bringing in $9 million to North Dakota;

Improve Medicare reimbursements for Critical Access Hospitals by directly increasing payments for critical lab services performed outside the hospital that will benefit North Dakota's 34 CAHs;

Boost reimbursements to sole community hospitals by updating the data used to calculate their Medicare reimbursements;

Protect access to rural ambulance services by providing rural ambulance providers an additional three percent of their Medicare reimbursement in order to help cover their costs;

Require prompt payment to rural pharmacies by Medicare prescription drug plans;

Extend a provision that allows 19 North Dakota hospital-based labs to directly bill Medicare for pathology services;

Expand access to telehealth services by allowing hospital-based renal dialysis facilities, skilled nursing facilities, and community mental health centers to be reimbursed under Medicare for telehealth services;

Reauthorize and expand the FLEX Grant Program to include a new grant program that could mean up to $1 million to Richardton, North Dakota, as they convert from their status as a Critical Access Hospital; and

Extend Section 508 of the Medicare Modernization Act which provides nearly $10 million a year to North Dakota hospitals to give them the resources they need to compete in an increasingly competitive labor market.

The Medicare Improvements for Patients and Providers Act is a good bill that has been endorsed by the National Rural Health Association and deserves every Member's support.

We should quickly override this veto so that our health care providers can get back to their business of caring for our seniors without the uncertainty that has been hanging over their heads for the last 2 weeks.

Mr. Speaker, it's with a great sense of sorrow that I rise to remember a prominent North Dakota journalist and friend, Terry DeVine, whose funeral was held today in Fargo.

If North Dakota had a hall of fame for journalists, Terry DeVine would go in by acclamation. He was tough, smart, hard working, and fair. Fortunately for us, he spent most of his career at the Fargo Forum, where over the years we came to know that he had a mighty big heart as well.

My indelible memories of Terry include his early years at the Forum, which coincided with my early years in politics. As if my first trip to the Fargo Forum, our State's largest newspaper, wasn't unnerving enough, there was hard-charging Terry DeVine, former collegiate football player, Marine Corps combat veteran. He presented a gruff demeanor that clearly conveyed ``Don't even think of trying to B.S. the Fargo Forum.''

In fact, his journalist skepticism was a point of pride for Terry. After a politician sparked his ire by complaining about what he saw as the unnecessary intrusions of reporters in pursuit of a story, Terry wrote about the role of the press in holding officials accountable. ``The relationship between a reporter and a politician should be like the relationship between a barking dog and a chicken thief,'' he proudly quoted from his former colleague Jules Loh.

True to his writing, Terry relished the watchdog role of the press. I consider it a true privilege to have known and worked with Terry DeVine for nearly three decades. I came to admire not just his prowess at writing and running a newspaper but his unflagging intellectual curiosity, his deeply anchored sense of right and wrong, and his compassion for the ``average Joe.''

The Terry we knew ran the gamut, from hard-charging city editor like a character out of ``Front Page'' in the early days to a quieter but steady leader through years of personal health adversity. His quick humor and core values never changed, and in his determined perseverance, he gave us the very best lessons of a remarkably dedicated and talented journalist.

I called him a week ago to say good-bye. I wanted to tell Terry of my respect for his career, my enjoyment of our visits over the years, and that in our dealings I felt he had always been fair. Whether I got all that across or not, I don't know. I'm not good at saying good-bye. But Terry, without a hint of self pity, thanked me for the call and he thanked me for our friendship. That was so like Terry: strong, direct, on point.

Terry DeVine's career has set a high bar for journalists in North Dakota. Come to think of it, he set a high bar for all of us. He had a life well lived, a career of distinction, and an impact that we will never forget.

God speed, Terry.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 6382) to make technical corrections related to the Pension Protection Act of 2006, and for other purposes.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that 10 minutes of my time be controlled by Mr. Andrews of New Jersey of the Education and Labor Committee.

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

I rise today in favor of moving this bill, H.R. 6382, the Pension Protection Technical Corrections Act, forward in an expedited manner. This bill is important to workers so that their retirement years will be more secure, and to employers so that the cost of the defined benefit pension which they are committed to offering their employees will be more predictable.

The Tax Code and the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, known as ERISA, are complex and broad reaching laws. When Congress enacts laws to change them, such as in the Pension Protection Act, the interactions between the Code and ERISA are difficult, and we need to make corrections of drafting areas in other aspects of the law that come to light after the bill is passed. That is why we are here today.

We need to act quickly. The Pension Protection Act became effective more than 6 months ago, imposing sweeping reforms that affect how employers fund the promises that they make to their employees in the defined benefit pensions. In addition, the bill includes many significant reforms to multi-employers' pension plans that cover union workers.

Three months ago, this House unanimously passed a bill that included many of the provisions that are before us this morning, but that bill did not address several key issues of special importance to those employers who continue to weather the storm and are persistently committed to providing a secured lifetime pension benefit to workers.

At that time, there was a bipartisan agreement that Congress needed to take further action. It is important that we are here today to complete our work because American workers are anxious about their retirement security.

In April, the Employee Benefit Research Institute reported that worker confidence in their financial prospects for retirement have reached a 7-year low. Their 2008 Retirement Confidence Survey found only 18 percent of workers very confident they will have enough money to live comfortably through their retirement years. This is down from 27 percent 1 year ago, a drop of nearly a third.

I commend the Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, the Chairman of the Education and Labor Committee for bringing a bill to the floor that gives both public and private sector defined benefit plans the added clarity they need to comply with the Pension Protection Act.

Let me also extend thanks to the staff of the Ways and Means Committee, the Education and Labor Committee and their counterparts in the Senate. Their hard work brings us to this point with a bill that provides the needed clarifications of congressional intent that the Treasury Department and Internal Revenue Service need to implement the provisions of the Pension Protection Act.

Today we also have an opportunity to pass a bill that will help the beneficiary of a 401(k) plan who would like to keep the money for retirement savings since the bill before us clarifies the application of a non-spousal rollover provision and the construction worker whose pension may experience underfunding since this bill also clarifies how the notice he or she will get alerts him or her to any benefit reductions.

I want to speak for a minute about the asset smoothing provision of this bill, which I believe is substantively very important. Importantly, H.R. 6382 does not leave the gaps that were not included in this bill in this body when it passed a few months ago, because the bill before us today gives relief to plan sponsors from volatility in plan costs faced by employers who provide defined benefit pensions.

It allows plan sponsors to use a tool called ``asset smoothing'' to balance out the ups and downs that occur with investments. Several months ago, one of my colleagues from the other side of the aisle called on this body to pass asset smoothing quickly. Today we have that opportunity.

As we have seen a sharp market downturn occur in the stock market, this tool becomes even more important to help employers plan for pension expenses. With this clarification of congressional intent, employers will not be forced to base pension plan contributions on shifting marked-to-market values. For some large employers, this can mean a difference of several million dollars. Our economy has gone through a patch where over 400,000 jobs have been lost in the last 6 months alone. We do not want to put employers in this pinch between providing pensions or keeping employees on their jobs.

Some might think if the employer has to put more money in the pension, it is really a great thing for workers. But there is an important hitch to this consideration. Our Nation's pension plan is a voluntary system and employers can decide that offering a pension simply no longer makes good business sense.

We have businesses struggling in this recession. Many plans have been frozen as employers ask, can we continue to provide pension plan coverage? 3.3 million workers have seen their benefit plans frozen in some way, and, unfortunately, when the Department of Labor analyzed the Pension Protection Act, they conducted no research on whether the new stringent funding requirements would accelerate the freezing of pension plans. I believe there is no question the Pension Protection Plan has accelerated the freezing of pension plans, and if we don't pass this act and that smoothing provision in this technical corrections bill, more plans will be frozen.

Another important fix included in this bill is the defined benefit pension plans that State and local governments offer their employers. These public plans were caught in the provisions of a Pension Protection Act designed only to cover cash balance conversions. It was never intended to apply to public pension plans. But, unfortunately, the Treasury Department has held that the credited interest provision of public pension plans is limited to a rate no greater than a market rate of return.

Under long-existing law that has been in place for decades, the public plans themselves and the political subdivisions or States that sponsor those plans determined what the credited interest rate would be. As a former employee of the State of North Dakota, for example, I have a credited rate of interest on a pension accrual that I had, a vested pension benefit that I have, of 7.5 percent that was determined by the State of North Dakota. It ought to be recognized, as it has been in the past. But under the Treasury provision, no greater than market rate of return would be allowed.

Well, public plans not subject to ERISA, but with their unique protections and plan designs, should benefit from this clarification to ensure rates of interest provided by State and local governments. Who in the world are we in Congress, without even thinking that this applied to public pension plans in the first place, to say what the credited rate of interest should be? We have got to trust State and local political subdivisions with this call, and this bill fixes that problem.

In conclusion, just let me say that American workers are anxious about their retirement security. Today, Congress can act to address and reduce this uneasiness. It is a very important technical fix before us, and I urge its adoption.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Georgia, my colleague on the Ways and Means Committee, Mr. Lewis.

Mr. Speaker, I just want to thank Mr. Ramstad, a committee member who meant so much to the Ways and Means Committee, Mr. Lewis for his work with the Delta pilots and the provision he speaks to, as well as Mr. Andrews, the pension retirement benefits expert on the Ways and Means and the Ed and Labor Committee.

I would like to think that, as we get this finished today, this sets the stage for joint collaboration further as we work on pension and advancing retirement security.

I yield back the balance of my time.