Floor Statements

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I am pleased to rise to support H.R. 1495, the Water Resources Development Act of 2007.

This bill authorizes water resources projects and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers policy and programmatic changes that our Congress has failed to consider for far too long.

Water resources legislation is most effective when it is considered biennially. I support this 2-year cycle, as it provides stability to the program and assurance to the non-Federal sponsors who support Corps projects.

When we let them go, they get to be more costly. And, unfortunately, no water resources bill has been enacted since 2000, the entire term of our current administration. This is a result, in part, of a failure of the current administration to engage in this important legislation, as well as a failure of the Congress to reach agreement.

Last year, we came very close to resolving our differences with the other body in conference. However, we ultimately ran out of time. I hope this legislation that we consider today can take us to that point and further, releasing this backlog of authorizations to fix our existing infrastructure and

to authorize new flood control, navigation and environmental restoration projects.

We are trying very hard to move a little ahead of the next flooding. We must do that. And they are not going to kick out Democrats or Republicans for flooding, it is going to be whoever is in the way. It is purposeful that we have brought this bill to the floor as early as we have in this session.

The authorizations in the language are time sensitive, and there should be no surprise that this bill contains a substantial number of provisions. Many of these authorizations have been waiting for action more than 6 years.

Within the 110th Congress, the committee intends to move two water resources bill. This first one contains a logjam of more than 6 years of issues. The second bill will consider new projects and policy changes that we were not able to add to this legislation, that we will consider today. This approach may not be traditional, but it is necessary.

Since Congress last passed a Water Resources Development Act, we have seen Hurricanes Katrina and Rita tear up the gulf coast and my home State of Texas, flooding cities, damaging economies and businesses, and threatening public health.

The Florida Everglades continue to need attention and restoration to save the unique treasures it brings to the State and our country.

This bill also contains smaller projects that may be less publicized but just as vital to communities that rely on various water resources for their livelihood.

As in the past, these projects were not considered on a partisan basis, but on individual merit. Their approval should not be considered solely on whether they are Democratic projects or Republican projects; these are human projects. They should be considered on their contributions to public safety and economics.

H.R. 1495 authorizes programmatic changes to the Corps of Engineers that previously have passed the House, but have stalled in the failed conference negotiations. During the 109th Congress we came close to resolving these differences with the Senate. I urge my colleagues to once again support these provisions. Everybody who has been here more than 6 years ought to know what everything is in this bill because they have seen it over and over and over again. We must engage the other body and together produce the best package for Corps reform.

I would like to acknowledge Chairman Oberstar for his leadership and eloquence in the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, as well as the interest and expertise that he shares on water resources issues.

I also would like to thank our ranking member, Mr. Mica, and the ranking member of the subcommittee, Mr. Baker, for their knowledge and effort and partnership with me, and for their support.

I strongly support this legislation. I hope and urge my colleagues to vote in favor of its final passage. The time is now.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

I support the manager's amendment on this water resources bill.

The manager's amendment reflects project and policy revisions that have come to the attention of the subcommittee that I chair, and the subcommittee of Water Resources Environment.

Since the bill was passed out of committee, the Transportation and Infrastructure, in March, the amendment contains authorizations that are by no means inequitable to those that were contained in the bill that passed out of committee. Likewise, the projects in the manager's amendment were not considered on a partisan basis but on a need basis and merit. And this has been a long tradition in our committee, and I hope we will always have that.

I support the amendment. And I want to express my appreciation to the persons who did do all of the certifications and all the new paperwork we have to do. And I want to thank the ranking member on the subcommittee as well as the full committee and our general chairman. Thank you so very much.

Mr. Chairman, I support the amendment offered by my colleague, Mr. Boswell.

Congressman Boswell has been working with the Committee to resolve scoring issues related to modifications for the Rathbun Lake, Iowa project that had surfaced since the project was last included in the Water Resources Development Act of 2005.

It is my understanding that these issues have now been settled.

I urge the adoption of this amendment.

Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 227, I missed voting because of a visit to the doctor's office. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in complete support of the Financial Literacy Month Resolution which addresses the public's lack of knowledge of basic financial principles and aims to lessen our Nation's already enormous consumer debt.

According to recent studies, many young Americans seem to be lacking personal financial management skills. The facts indicate that for nearly a decade now, high school seniors have possessed an insufficient knowledge of personal finance. Attempting to address this gap in knowledge and to prevent future financial blunders, 16 states are requiring basic financial education in their high schools. I strongly believe that, as a result of such efforts, many young citizens will become financially responsible. This will not only enlighten their personal lives, but ultimately combat our growing consumer debt.

Along with America's youth, many adults are also seemingly incapable of properly managing their finances. It is my understanding that, three years ago, a Retirement Confidence Survey found that 42 percent of workers surveyed had not calculated how much money they will need for retirement; and additionally, 37 percent of the workers said that they were not saving for retirement. From these statistics and with the current status of Social Security, I feel that it would be beneficial for many Americans to be educated on financial opportunities; including, but not limited to, qualified cash and deferred arrangements. Thus, we must promote nation-wide financial literacy programs to help citizens seize such opportunities.

In closing, our Nation's expanding consumer balance and the economic fears of many Americans can both be assuaged through H.R. 273. I am delighted that many of my fellow members are already in favor of this resolution, and I encourage my other colleagues to follow suit.

Let me thank our chairwoman of the Congressional Black Caucus, Ms. Kilpatrick, and Mr. Scott, our colleagues, for their unwavering support for the development of the CBC alternative budget that encompasses progressive and visionary funding motivated by principle and compassion.

I also would like to thank all of the members of the CBC and their staffs for helping to complete this very important task. I appreciate and applaud their efforts on issues important to all of us.

Madam Chairman, the CBC alternative budget understands that our Nation's transportation system is the backbone of our economy and our way of life. We could not afford to shortchange our transportation system, nor ignore the need for greater competitiveness in science and technology.

As a senior member of the Science Committee, I feel the CBC budget supports these initiatives to invest in our children's future, our future, our Nation's future. Federal entitlements such as NASA and the National Science Foundation need funding to inspire today's youth so that we can have a future in research and competitiveness. The science budget funds our scientific and engineering workforce, supports teacher enrichment programs and helps inspire future generations of researchers.

Our Nation's future depends more and more on the quality of our innovative ideas. The fruits of these investments meet vital national needs and improve the quality of life for all Americans. The CBC alternative budget also provides funding for the minority health initiatives, health insurance for the uninsured, child nutrition programs, job creation programs, the SBA, and the extension of unemployment insurance benefits and the elimination of the disabled veterans tax.

I urge my colleagues to support this budget, and don't listen to the rhetoric of taxes being raised. We have different priorities.

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that my amendment be modified with the text that I have at the desk that proposes text changes in section 107 of the bill.

Mr. Chairman, this amendment proposes text changes to section 107 of the bill, the section that deals with improved training for health care professionals, medical care case managers and servicemember advocates on particular conditions of recovering servicemembers.

As of March 1 of this year, over 24,000 servicemembers have been wounded in action since the onset of Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom, according to the Department of Defense. The Government Accountability Office has found that servicemembers injured in combat face an array of medical and financial challenges as they begin their recovery process in the health care systems of the Department of Defense and the Department of Veteran Affairs. A GAO report was recently released on March 5 and entitled ``DoD and Va Health Care, Challenges Encountered By Injured Service Members During Their Recovery Process.''

According to the report, Mr. Chairman, the Department of Defense screens servicemembers for post-traumatic stress disorder, but it does not ensure that further mental health evaluations occur.

DoD health care providers review questionnaires, interview servicemembers, and use clinical judgment in determining the need for further mental health evaluation. Sadly, DoD found that only 22 percent of the service members who may have been at risk for developing post- traumatic stress syndrome were actually referred by the Defense Department health care providers for further evaluation. In addition, the Defense Department never identified the factors as health care actually used to determine which servicemembers needed the referrals.

Although our wounded warriors may obtain mental health evaluations for treatment for post-traumatic stress through the VA, and the VA may face a challenge in meeting the demand for these services, VA officials estimated that follow-ups for veterans to get treatment for this stress syndrome may be delayed up to 90 days.

Now, Mr. Chairman, I spent my professional career as a psychiatric nurse with the Veterans Administration. I can tell you that we could save time and money if we had the proper people in place to diagnose early, or at least get a referral. We miss a lot of early symptoms that later causes long-term unemployment, long-term financial stress and long-term hospitalization simply because we have not put the well- trained people in place, professional social workers, professional nurses that would diagnose and know that something needs to be done to prevent further deterioration, and that is my reason for bringing this.

My 15 years of hands-on inpatient program care were specialized in mental health. And I have my credentials to show that. And my amendment strengthens this section because I feel that more emphasis needs to be made on adequate training by health care professionals to recognize these signs, including suicidal tendencies, so that the early intervention can come, and it will shorten the recovery period.

I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.

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

I yield 1 minute to Mr. Andrews from New Jersey.

Mr. Chairman, I have no further requests for speakers. I want to thank both sides for their support, and I urge adoption.

Madam Speaker, I was not able to attend a number of votes that took place March 21, 2007 on the House floor. I take my responsibility to vote very seriously and had I been present I would have voted: ``Yea'' on rollcall 167, Motion to Permit to Proceed in Order on This Day; ``Nay'' on rollcall 168, Neugebauer of Texas Amendment; ``Nay'' on rollcall 169, Price of Georgia Amendment; ``Yea'' on rollcall 170, Al Green of Texas Amendment, as Modified; ``No'' on rollcall 171, On Motion to Recommit with Instructions; ``Aye'' on rollcall 172, On Passage, Gulf Coast Hurricane Housing Recovery Act of 2007; ``Yea'' on rollcall 173, On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass, Hawaiian Homeownership Opportunity Act; ``Yea'' on rollcall 174, On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass, as Amended, Joshua Omvig Veterans Suicide Prevention Act; ``Yea'' on rollcall 175, On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass, as Amended, Dr. James Allen Veteran Vision Equity Act; ``Yea'' on rollcall 176, On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass, Veterans' Compensation Cost-of-Living Adjustment Act of 2007; ``Yea'' on rollcall 177, On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass, Judicial Disclosure Responsibility Act; and ``Yea'' on rollcall 178, On Passage, Preventing Harassment through Outbound Number Enforcement (PHONE) Act of 2007.

Mr. Speaker, due to sickness, I was unable to vote during the following rollcall votes, had I been present I would have voted: ``yea'' on rollcall No. 179, On Ordering the Previous Question, Providing for the consideration of H.R. 1433 District of Columbia House Voting Rights Act; ``aye'' on rollcall No. 180, On Agreeing to the Resolution, Providing for the consideration of H.R. 1433; District of Columbia House Voting Rights Act; ``yea'' on rollcall No. 181, On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Agree, Use of Rotunda for Holocaust Days of Remembrance Ceremony; ``yea'' on rollcall No. 183, On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass, as Amended, Native American Methamphetamine Enforcement and Treatment Act of 2007; and ``aye,'' on rollcall No. 184, On Approving the Journal.

Mr. Speaker, I want to express my deepest concern for the situation that is worsening in Iraq.

March 19 of this year will mark the fifth year of war, and still Vice President Cheney states that the Democratic strategy toward Iraq validates al Qaeda's agenda. This comment really means that anyone that disagrees with him gets accused of this issue.

Terrorists instill fear in their enemies, and it is this fear that generates self-defeating behavior. It is this fear that led the American people to believe that war was a validated solution, and still try to link it to September 11. It is this fear that has cost the United States billions of dollars on Iraq reconstruction plans, while neglecting our own system.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of Congressman Al Green's Resolution to honor Black History Month.

Founded in 1926 by Carter G. Woodson, Black History Month serves as a time to recognize and celebrate the contributions of African-Americans in shaping our Nation. It brings to life a rich and vibrant history that was all too often untold.

The fact is that until there was a Black History Month, prominent African-Americans were virtually left out of our Nation's school books. Often, the only mention of African-Americans would reference the institution of slavery. This is simply unacceptable. Black history is not an anonymous footnote, and expands well beyond the institution of slavery. We have great leaders who fought to overcome the oppression of slavery and that of Jim Crow. We have great scientific minds and inventors. We have extraordinary novelists, poets, and musicians. These are not nameless, faceless individuals, but people who have helped shape our Nation.

Because of Black History Month we have expanded our schoolchildren's curriculum. Our children now learn about Frederick Douglas, Thurgood Marshall, Malcolm X and Toni Morrison. These are names and stories that our children otherwise may not have known. With Black History Month we are preserving our abundant history for future generations.

I commend Congressman Green for bringing this important Resolution to the floor and I strongly urge my colleagues' support.

Madam Chairman, thanks to the chairman of our committee.

I rise in strong support of H.R. 720, the Water Quality Financing Act of 2007.

This essential legislation reauthorizes the Federal grant program for capitalizing State revolving funds at $14 billion over the next 4 years, while providing States with additional flexibility in the types of projects they finance.

The bill also provides States with increased flexibility in the financing packages they can offer to cities and local communities, including principal forgiveness, negative interest loans, or whatever other financing mechanism might be necessary to assist communities in meeting their water quality infrastructure goals.

The flexibility afforded by this bill will go a long way in helping many of our communities that are least able to afford necessary improvements to their water infrastructure systems.

This legislation also encourages communities to consider innovative and alternative technologies for addressing ongoing water quality concerns, including the so-called ``green infrastructure,'' and provides financial incentives for implementing these technologies that may result in greater long-term environmental benefits.

In my State, few Federal programs have proven as effective as the Texas Clean Water State Revolving Fund program in realizing congressional goals for all citizens. The key to its success has been the partnership between the Texas and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency working together in blending State and Federal resources to provide sustainable funding sources.

This funding source provides a significant financial incentive for communities to construct, rehabilitate, and enhance wastewater systems that support the goals of the Clean Water Act.

Since its inception in 1987, the State revolving fund has successfully awarded communities approximately $4.3 billion in low- interest loans to finance 472 water infrastructure projects across the State.

These projects, which serve approximately one-half of the Texas population and treat about 2.1 billion gallons per day of wastewater, provide direct environmental and public health benefits by protecting our water resources through the reduction of pollutants entering the water.

The projects are made economically viable because Texas customers realize a direct cost savings by assessing the State revolving funds at rates below market rates.

Madam Chairman, it has been 20 years since Congress last authorized appropriations for the Clean Water State Revolving Fund, and almost 10 years since the Committee on Transportation Infrastructure Subcommittee on Water Resources first investigated the growing need for it.

Fortunately, we have overcome one hurdle that has prevented this legislation from coming to the floor over the past 8 years, and I applaud the leadership of the Chairman of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, Mr. Oberstar, as well as the committee staff for their good works in moving this legislation out of Committee and on to the House floor.

Now, Madam Chairman, it is past time for this Congress to complete its task in sending this legislation to the President.

I urge my colleagues to strongly support this legislation; it's time we make our domestic infrastructure programs a priority again.

Madam Chairman, I strongly oppose the Baker-King amendment. I am from a working family, and I stand

with the American workers. The amendment would strip the prevailing wages protection from the bill.

Since 1931, the Davis-Bacon Act has provided a living wage for American workers, and as the authors of the Davis-Bacon Act knew then and as we continue to know today, the greatest way to improve the quality of life for our Nation's workers is for the Nation as a whole to provide workers with an honest living for an honest day's work.

We save nothing when we give people little pay or we pay it through other sources, by more taxes, more welfare rolls. I would much rather have people working.

It has been well documented by this committee that every $1 billion invested in transportation and water infrastructure creates 40,000 jobs. As of today, 31 States have enacted their own prevailing wage laws of publicly funded construction projects. And you check this with me: Those States that are against it have more poor people than the ones that have it. In some of these States, prevailing wage laws result in even higher wages to workers than if the Federal Davis-Bacon were alone, in effect. Studies have shown that the prevailing wage protections offered by Davis-Bacon in fact attracts better workers with more experience and training who are more productive than the less experienced, less trained workers. So it really saves money in the long run.

We need not to interfere with the Davis-Bacon provision. I support this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks on H.R. 700.

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

I rise today in strong support of H.R. 700, the Healthy Communities Water Supply Act of 2007. This important legislation would reauthorize appropriations of $125 million for the EPA's alternative water sources grant program.

Mr. Chairman, rapid population growth and development along with an increased awareness of the impact of massive water withdrawals and the threat of global climate change have forced many local communities to explore alternative sources of water.

H.R. 700 provides one alternative for meeting these future water needs by encouraging the testing and implementation of technology that reclaim and reuse water from municipal, industrial and agricultural needs.

I applaud the efforts of my colleagues on the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, Congressman McNerney and Congresswoman Tauscher, for their efforts in moving this legislation forward and ensuring that communities are able to meet current and future water needs.

This committee approved similar legislation in the 109th Congress, and it is my hope this year Congress will finally approve legislation and forward it to the President for his signature.

I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this legislation.

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

Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from California (Mr. McNerney).

Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the distinguished chairman of the full committee, the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar).

Mr. Chairman, what time do we have left?

Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from California, the primary author of the legislation, Mrs. Tauscher.

Mr. Chairman, I have no further requests for speakers. I want to express my appreciation to all of the staff of the committee. I ask for support of H.R. 700.

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

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment offered by the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Price), almost to say the same thing we said yesterday: He has gotten the appropriations mixed up with the authorization.

This is an authorization committee, and actual funding of these programs through the appropriations process, which is where this will be more appropriate. A similar manner it was offered yesterday, as we said, to H.R. 569, the Water Quality Investment Act, and was defeated by 166-260.

This amendment would require that any authorization of appropriations be considered with corresponding offsets regardless of whether the program ever receives any funding. It is possible that it won't.

In the example of the Alternative Water Source pilot program under consideration today, a program that again has never been funded through the appropriations process, this amendment would require the identification of $125 million in offsets, regardless of whether appropriations are ever enacted for this program.

During the first few days of the legislative session, the new Democratic majority renewed the PAYGO rules to require the identification of offsets to any changes in direct spending by legislative initiatives.

This bill has no effect on direct spending. According to the Congressional Budget Office in its analysis of the bill, enacting the bill would not affect direct spending or revenues. Therefore, the offset requirements of PAYGO are never triggered.

I also remind my colleagues that the PAYGO provision was allowed to expire under Republican control of the House, with no attempt by the former Republican leadership to restore its protections to the Federal budgetary process. To now claim to be the champions of fiscal responsibility and attempt to hold Congress to stricter budgetary principles than instituted under their own leadership is a fairly hollow argument.

The gentleman's amendment would require offsets for any authorization of appropriations, regardless of its impact on Federal receipts. Were the gentleman's amendment adopted, my expectation is that every authorization of appropriations, whether it be for clean water, safer schools, better health care, or national defense, would require equal offsets. This is an inappropriate limitation on the ability of Congress to address the needs of the Nation.

Fiscal responsibility is a noble cause, but not at the cost of hindering Congress's ability to meet the needs of our constituents.

Mr. Chairman, I oppose this amendment.

Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

I think what I did say is, it is not the authorization; it is the appropriations that I spoke about that would cause this to happen. It would trigger it. It is not the authorization. We are an authorizing committee.

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

(Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Today, the House will consider the first of three bills reported from the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure that seek to improve overall water quality of this Nation.

The first bill is H.R. 569, the Water Quality Investment Act of 2007, sponsored by a former committee colleague, Mr. Pascrell, as well as Mr. Camp and Mr. Capuano.

This legislation authorizes $1.8 billion in Federal grants over the next 5 years to address combined sewer overflows and sanitary sewer overflows nationwide. CSOs and SSOs are overflows of untreated waste that can occur during wet weather events as a result of poor maintenance, deteriorating infrastructure, or inadequate incapacity. These overflows are significant concerns for public health and safety because they often result in discharges of raw sewage into neighboring rivers, streets, beaches and basements.

In the first year of authorization, H.R. 569 requires the administrator to make grants directly to municipalities on a competitive basis. For fiscal years 2009 and thereafter, the bill directs the administrator to establish a funding formula, after notice and comment, that allocates to each State a proportional share of grant funding based on the total needs of the State to address CSOs and SSOs within its borders.

States would be responsible for awarding grants to municipalities using these allocated funds. I applaud the tireless efforts of Congressmen Pascrell, Camp and Capuano in advocating for increased funding to address CSOs and SSOs.

The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure has twice approved legislation to reauthorize appropriations for this important effort. It is my hope that this year Congress will finally approve legislation and forward it to the President for his signature.

I urge my colleagues to support this legislation which is both vital and overdue.

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

Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pascrell) such time as he may consume.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Kagen).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Bishop).

Mr. Chairman, I now recognize Mr. Hill of Indiana for 2 minutes.

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

Mr. Chairman, could you tell us how much time is remaining?

Mr. Chairman, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to Mr. Blumenauer from the State of Oregon.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlelady from Florida (Ms. Corrine Brown), a member of the committee.

Mr. Chairman, I now recognize the distinguished Chair of the entire committee, Mr. Oberstar, to close general debate.

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment offered by the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Price).

The amendment confuses the issue of authorization of appropriations and actual funding of these programs through the appropriations process. This amendment would require that any authorization of appropriations be considered with the corresponding offset, regardless of whether the program ever receives any funding.

In the example of the sewer overflows grant program, we are considering today a program that I remind my colleagues has never been funded through the appropriations process. This amendment would require the identification of $1.45 billion over the next 5 years in offsets regardless of whether appropriations are ever enacted in this program.

During the first few days of the legislative session, the new Democratic majority renewed PAYGO rules to require the identification of offsets of any changes in mandatory spending by legislative initiatives. This important provision expired under the Republican control of the House with no attempt to restore these protections to the Federal budgetary process.

As the gentleman is well aware, in the first days of the 110th Congress, the Democratic majority reinstituted PAYGO rules that requires the offsets in Federal receipts resulting from legislative proposals.

This bill has no effect on direct spending. In its analysis of the bill, the Congressional Budget Office specifically stated enacting the bill would not affect direct spending or receipts. However, to require offsets for any authorization of appropriations, regardless of its impact on Federal receipts, is beyond the scope of PAYGO and an appropriate limitation of the ability of Congress to address the needs of the Nation.

I oppose this amendment.

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

Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I raise a point of order against this amendment. The amendment imposes conditions for receipt of these funds that are unrelated to the underlying bill. Specifically, the amendment requires contractors to participate in the employment eligibility verification pilot program of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act. The amendment is not germane to H.R. 569 and violates clause 7 of rule XVI of the Rules of the House.

Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 569.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to women by supporting the goals of International Women's Day. As a woman, I recognize and honor all the women who have fought and struggled for the equality of women.

Women from all parts of the world are divided by ethnic, linguistic, cultural, economic and political differences. This day will allow for the differences to be overshadowed by the similarities. This day will enable them to look back to a tradition that represents decades of struggle for equality, justice, peace, and development.

International Women's Day recognizes the importance of securing peace and allowing social progress by identifying the rights of women to equal opportunity and freedom. Women are being given the opportunity to participate in the workforce and contribute to international peace and security; this is an extraordinary advancement.

As Members of Congress, we need to reaffirm the commitment of ending discrimination and violence against women and girls. We must continue to encourage the President to affirm his commitment to pursue policies to protect human rights and civil liberties.

Madam Speaker, the key fact remains: women themselves have the right to live in dignity. Let us rededicate ourselves to making that a reality by honoring International Women's Day. I urge my colleagues to vote in support of International Women's Day.