Floor Statements

I thank the gentleman for yielding to me.

Mr. Speaker, I stand today in strong support of my legislation, the Truth in Caller ID Act. But before I begin, I want to first thank my friend and the lead Republican on the Energy and Commerce Committee, Ranking Member Joe Barton. I also want to thank the chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee, Henry Waxman, as well as the staff for being so accommodating in getting this bill to the floor today. And I want to thank my friend Mr. Boucher, who has helped in bringing this bill to the floor, and my friend and classmate Mr. Stearns, who quite correctly said this is about as bipartisan a piece of legislation as you can get. This legislation has been developed in an extremely bipartisan manner, and I want to thank and commend everybody who worked on it.

I introduced this bill, Mr. Speaker, because we needed an immediate change in our laws to help prevent identity theft, to crack down on fraudulent phone calls, and to protect legitimate uses of caller ID technology. I first found out about this just simply by reading an article; and when I realized that this is actually something that could be done, I was flabbergasted. I went over to Mr. Barton, who at the time was the chair of the full committee, and I said, Joe, something really needs to be done about this and would you work with me on it? And he said he would and he agreed and everybody agrees. And the House has passed this bill time and time again, and we hope we can get it passed in both Houses and get it signed.

Last year, the facts are stark, over 6,000 people were victimized by credit card fraud and identity theft. Criminals stole over $15 million from banks and ruined the credit of thousands of victims. They were able to perpetrate this fraud in some instances by using caller ID spoofing. This disturbing fact about spoofing is not just that it's legal but how easy it is to carry out. Criminals use a tool called a ``spoof

card'' to change their outgoing caller ID and even to disguise their voices. Now, if you see a caller ID and you see it has a phone number, most people think that it's ironclad that that's the actual phone number that's calling them when in truth it's not. This technology even allows people to disguise their voice in order to trick banks into giving them access to their victims' accounts. So a man can do that and have his voice change into a woman's voice and vice versa.

So it's absolutely deceptive, absolutely scary, and dangerous; and this tool is available to anyone with access to a Web browser. So it's just ridiculous. The technology has gotten so far ahead of us, we need to have these kinds of laws to simply catch up.

Now, no one can dispute that this legislation is necessary. Last year, a person in New York called a pregnant woman whom she viewed as her romantic rival. Spoofing the phone number of the woman's pharmacist, she tricked the woman into taking a drug used to cause an abortion. I use it because it's one of the horrible examples; and there are many, many more horrible examples of how this is used.

And just think about it. Someone could be tricked into giving up personal medical information. Someone could be tricked to giving up banking information. If someone hears that it is their doctor calling and they take a look at the number and they see it's their doctor's number, they would give out personal information, credit card information, even Social Security identification.

So caller ID fraud has even been used to prank call the constituents of a Member of this body with the caller ID readout saying it came from that Member's office. Just imagine if people committed this fraud in the days leading up to a close election. You can call and you can say you are from one candidate's camp when you are really from the other candidate's camp. And when someone looks down at the phone number, they see it's from candidate A and they think it's legitimate, and it's really from candidate B. So imagine what kind of trouble can happen, what kind of mischief can be done. So this really, again, needs to be curtailed.

So, as everyone has said, in response to this problem, Mr. Barton and I have introduced the Truth in Caller ID Act. Simply, this bill outlaws the deceptive use of caller ID spoofing technology if the intention of the caller is to deceive and harm the recipient of the call.

And let me say we developed that intention through hearings we had in the Energy and Commerce Committee because we want it to be legitimate. There are legitimate times where a number may have to be scrambled. We certainly do it here on Capitol Hill to protect Members and others and staff from having personal phone numbers being given out or private phone numbers being given out. So there is no intent to do that. That is why we say it outlaws the deceptive use of caller ID spoofing technology if the intention of a caller is to deceive and harm the recipient of a call. And, again, through the hearings we have had, we have refined this bill; and that's why it has such strong bipartisan support.

Let say this bill does not change the rules for legitimate uses of a technology. For example, a domestic abuse shelter will still be able to change their number on caller ID to protect the occupants of the shelter, and I also gave the example about what we do here in Congress.

So I am pleased that this bill passed the House in the 109th and 110th Congresses, and I look forward to its passage again today. I strongly urge my colleagues to support the Truth in Caller ID Act and outlaw this type of fraud once and for all.

I thank the chairman for yielding to me.

Madam Speaker, I'm proud to be a Member of Congress, but never as proud as I am tonight. Tonight we're finally going to pass comprehensive health care for the American people.

My friends on the Republican side of the aisle keep saying the bill is flawed. The only flaw was when they controlled Congress and had the President of the United States, not once did they try pass health care, not even incrementally, as they say we should do now.

No longer, when we get sick, will the insurance companies say, Sorry, we can't cover you. No longer, if you lose your job or change your job, can you not keep your health insurance. You will be able to keep it. If have you a preexisting condition, you won't be able to be denied it. If you're 26 years old, you can stay on your parents' policies. There's no annual cap or lifetime cap. We help seniors by closing the doughnut hole in Medicaid. We save money. It's CBO scored.

Everybody wins with this bill, but especially the American people. I'm proud that we're passing comprehensive health care. The current system is not sustainable financially, and what we're doing means that everybody wins.

Madam Speaker, I rise this evening to reaffirm the strength of the U.S.-Israel relationship. Both of our countries have shared values. Both of our countries are democracies. Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East. I know there have been some difficulties during the past few days.

When Vice President Biden visited Israel, there was an announcement of the expansion of a neighborhood in North Jerusalem. The timing of that announcement was wrong, but I don't think that we should blow the timing of that announcement out of proportion. We should not have a disproportionate response to Israel. We need to be careful and measured in our response, and I think we all have to take a step back.

The relationship remains rock solid. The Obama administration and the administration of Prime Minister Netanyahu have been cooperating on a number of things: containing Iran, the Goldstone Report, and making sure that Israel retains its qualitative military edge in the region. And there has been good cooperation between our two administrations, the Obama administration and the Netanyahu administration. But to seem to question the very nature of the U.S.-Israel relationship and to put it in personal terms in a very public way will not contribute to peace in the Middle East. Rather, it's the contrary. It will cause the Palestinians to dig in their heels, thinking that the Americans can just deliver the Israelis.

Last year, when there was public pressure being put on Israel not to expand settlements, there was no simultaneous public pressure being put on the Palestinians, and we saw that the Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas just sat back, didn't make any concessions, didn't say that he would do anything positively to further peace talks, and just thought that the United States would wring concessions out of Israel.

The fact of the matter is that the Israelis have been welcoming peace talks with the Palestinians. The Israelis have said they would sit down and have face-to-face talks for peace with the Palestinians. That's what you do when you have peace. Instead, the Palestinians have refused to sit with the Israelis, and Senator Mitchell is proposing to shuttle back and forth between the Palestinian side and the Israeli side to have negotiations, but not direct negotiations.

We need to be careful. If we criticize Israel for doing what we think was

wrong, then we need to also criticize the Palestinians when they do things wrong. Just recently, the Palestinians named a square in Ramallah for a terrorist who killed 30-some-odd Israelis. I didn't hear any criticism of the Palestinian side. When the Palestinians dig in their heels and say they won't recognize Israel as a Jewish state, I didn't hear any criticism of Palestinians.

So all I am saying, Madam Speaker, is that we need to not only reaffirm the strength of our ties between our two countries, but we also need to understand that in a relationship between friends, as in family, there will be some disagreements. We need to be careful about how we voice those disagreements in public.

Let me say that harsh words are never a replacement for working together, but I think that harsh words can sometimes make us understand that only by working together can we confront the things that we both know need to be confronted--the scourge of terrorism, the thing that all nations understand emanates in the Middle East from radical forces, and those are the kinds of fights that Israel has every single day fighting terrorism. We learned about terrorism on this soil on 9/11. Israel has to deal with it every day.

So let me just say in conclusion that I think we need to take a step back. We need to reaffirm all the things that bring our two countries together. We in the United States understand that our best friend in the Middle East is Israel, and we need to continue with Israel. When we have disagreements, we have to talk about them, but we have to always understand that only by working together can we have peace in the Middle East.

I thank my good friend and fellow New Yorker for yielding to me. I want to commend him for the work he has done.

I want to commend my friend and colleague, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters) for this bill.

Madam Speaker, like all of my colleagues, I rise in strong support of H.R. 4573, which pushes for the cancellation of debts owed by Haiti to multilateral financial institutions.

I am the chairman of the Western Hemisphere Subcommittee, and I also have a large Haitian population in my district in Spring Valley, New York.

I am honored to say that, last Friday, I traveled to Haiti. You can see the devastation in the newspapers; you can look at it on television, but until you are there in person, you cannot imagine how horrible it is.

The other things you see are thousands upon thousands upon thousands upon thousands of people in the streets with nothing to do and with no place to go--with no place to go to work and with no place to call home. There are rows of tents and shacks and of things put up for people to seek shelter. There are people just in the streets, and they are friendly towards the United States. We have a special obligation to help the people of Haiti.

We met President Preval in Port-au-Prince last Friday. Today, I had the honor and pleasure of meeting him again twice--once at the White House with President Obama and then, after that meeting, at a private meeting with Members of Congress. I will tell everyone what I told him and what all of my colleagues are saying:

We must help Haiti. We have a responsibility to help Haiti. It is clear that Haiti faces a very long road of recovery from the impact of the earthquake, and this bill will allow the Government of Haiti to focus its efforts and attention on the present and future recovery of the country and on the Haitian people.

We all know Haiti's early history and independence. It is tragically marked by the onerous debts it was forced to pay by major powers, depriving Haiti of many years of needed resources and development. We shouldn't allow Haiti's present debts to pose similar obstacles in the wake of this earthquake.

People say that Congress can't agree on anything and that there is no bipartisanship here. What we are seeing now is bipartisanship at its best. We are all working together to help the people of Haiti.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to thank Peter Hakim for his 16 years of outstanding service as President of the Inter-American Dialogue. Under Peter's leadership, the Inter-American Dialogue has become a top center for policy analysis on U.S.-Latin American relations.

As Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere, I have benefited enormously from the first-rate work of the Inter-American Dialogue. My colleagues and I--and our staffs-- consistently count on the Inter-American Dialogue's superb analysis of U.S.-Latin American relations.

Peter Hakim testified at my first hearing as Subcommittee Chairman in 2007, and I am pleased that he is closing out his tenure as Dialogue President as a witness at my hearing on U.S. Policy toward the Americas in 2010 and Beyond. His insights are extremely useful to me as I carry out oversight of our policies toward Latin America and the Caribbean. My colleagues and I have also greatly benefited from the dinner discussions organized by Peter and the Inter-American Dialogue where we debate key hemispheric issues. I am pleased that Peter will continue to serve the Inter-American Dialogue as President Emeritus, and I look forward to working with him in the coming years.

I also would like to commend Michael Shifter on his selection as the next president of the Inter-American Dialogue. Michael, who has served as the Dialogue's Vice President for Policy for several years, is clearly the best person for the job. Michael is no stranger to the Western Hemisphere Subcommittee himself. He has testified before my Subcommittee at hearings on the Colombia-Ecuador border crisis and Honduras. His essays and opinion pieces are published in a wide array of top U.S. and Latin American publications, and are a great resource for all of us in Congress.

I congratulate Peter Hakim and Michael Shifter and wish both of them and the Inter-American Dialogue many more years of success.

Tonight, when our President gives his State of the Union Address, I'm going to listen very intently. I know that he's going to talk about creating jobs, improving the economy, lowering unemployment, and also health care reform. Let's rally behind our President. The people sent us here to work together in a bipartisan fashion. Let's not talk about what is best politically for this party or that party, let's look at what is best for the American people.

I ask my Republican friends, stop being the Party of No. Work with us on health care. We can do it if we all put our heads together. Let me remind my friends that the TARP bailout and the bailout of the banks happened under President Bush. It was President Bush's recommendation, and I and other Democrats supported it because it was the right thing to do.

Let's support the President when he says the right things, as he will tonight. Let's understand that we can only succeed if we work together. We were left a mess by the previous administration. One year to clean it up is not enough. We prevented a depression. Now we have to move on. So I ask the other side of the aisle, please work with us. Please work with us to help the American people.

Madam Speaker, a community prospers and thrives on the contributions of its citizens to the common good. David A. Ford

has been active in all aspects of the community life of Mount Vernon for all of his adult life, serving as Commissioner of the Water Department since 1977 and in innumerable positions in the volunteer and political sectors. There are few aspects of life in Mount Vernon that he has not touched and made better.

While his life was community involvement, his passion was politics. From 1969 to 1996, he was Chairman of the Mount Vernon Democratic City Committee. He is Chairman of the Black Democrats of Westchester County and a member of the Council of Black Elected Democrats of New York State. He is also a New York State Committeeperson for the 84th Assembly District. More personally, and to my joy, he serves as my Special Assistant.

He has also served as President of the Lions Club of Mount Vernon and President of the Mount Vernon YMCA. He is a Life Member of the 369 Veteran's Association, and a Life Member of the Mount Vernon NAACP. He is Chairman of the Board of Mount Vernon Neighborhood Health Center and a member of the National Association of Health Care Providers.

And under his leadership the Board of Water Supply has continued a longstanding tradition of excellence.

He is a veteran of WWII. He is married to the former Eula (Daisy) Gadson and is the proud father of five children (David Jr., Renee, Garey, Michael, and Karen). He has five grandchildren: Rachel, Shaarod, Nardara, Jerel and David Christopher) and one great-grandchild, Amira.

David is retiring and I wish him all the very best that retirement has to offer. This is Mount Vernon's loss for he has contributed to his community for longer and better than we are ever likely to see again. On a personal note I am happy to say that he will still be advising me, which means he will still be helping me to help the people of Mount Vernon.

Madam Speaker, for a Democracy to succeed, the people have to be an active part of the political process. John Shields, who is retiring as the Mayor of Nyack, joined the political process, albeit later in life than most people.

He was born in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania and grew up as something of an Army brat, traveling from place to place. After high school he tried summer stock. He moved to New York City in 1965 where he sold caviar and worked in a drug rehabilitation center. He went to City College of New York, graduating in 1972, and for the next 30 years taught in New York City schools.

He moved to Nyack in 1976 and in 1994 he ran for the Nyack Village Board and was elected Trustee. There followed two more terms as Trustee and four terms as Mayor and now he is retiring from elective office.

John is primarily an activist, and got into politics as an extension of his activism. In 2004 he sued New York State for the right for same sex couples to marry. He noted that as Mayor, he could legally marry heterosexual couples while the state denied him that equal right for himself. And while he may have lost the suit he has not quit the battle.

He still lives in Nyack, is still involved in the community, serving on the Board of Directors of Head Start of Rockland. He has not decided what to do next, but I wish him all the best that life has to offer in this next stage of his life.

Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 4462, To Accelerate the Income Tax Benefits for Charitable Cash Contributions for the Relief of Victims of the Earthquake in Haiti Act, authored by my friend and colleague from New York, Representative Rangel, the Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee. This important legislation would permit people who make charitable contributions to the relief work in Haiti to take a tax deduction on their 2009 taxes instead of on their 2010 returns. This is an excellent idea which will hopefully spark additional giving to help the people of Haiti.

Tens if not hundreds of thousands of people have lost their lives in the Haitian tragedy and hundreds of thousands more are homeless. The American people have been deeply moved by this crisis and are showing their profound generosity through donations to organizations helping the Haitian people. In fact, as of yesterday, the American Red Cross had already raised $112 million for Haiti, $22 million of which came from text messages sent by the American people. The outpouring to Haiti from the great people of this nation and from around the world has been truly overwhelming. I am touched by how Americans from all walks of life have given their time, talents, and financial resources to help those whose lives depend upon such aid.

By permitting taxpayers to take a deduction on their 2009 taxes instead of their 2010 returns, H.R. 4462 will help those Americans who have already donated and encourage those who have not yet done so. In addition to thanking Chairman Rangel for this legislation, I would also like to mention our colleague, Representative Kendrick Meek, who was developing similar legislation. He has been a leader on all aspects of U.S. policy toward Haiti and deserves to be recognized here in Congress.

Again, I strongly support H.R. 4462 to recognize the generosity of the American people in responding to the devastation in Haiti and to encourage future giving. This is a bill that inspires ``the better angels of our nature'' and helps the victims of this disaster, as well. It deserves our unanimous support.

I thank my friend, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee), for yielding to me.

Madam Speaker, as chairman of The Western Hemisphere Subcommittee of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, I rise in strong support of H. Con. Res. 1021, which expresses condolences to and solidarity with the people of Haiti in the aftermath of the horrific and devastating earthquake of January 12.

It is with great sorrow that we come to the floor today to lament the catastrophic blow to Haiti from last week's natural disaster. Tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of people have died; and hundreds of thousands are homeless in the wake of the earthquake. Our hearts go out to the Haitian people as they cope with the calamity that has befallen their nation.

While we mourn the great loss of life in Haiti, we must resolve to stand with the Haitian people as they rebuild their lives. Due to my long experience with Haiti from hearings in my subcommittee, visiting the country and, most importantly, my relationship with my Haitian American constituents--I have a large Haitian American community in my district in Spring Valley, New York--I know that Haiti will overcome this tremendous adversity.

However, Haiti and its people will need U.S. and international help for the foreseeable future. It is reassuring to see that the Obama administration has quickly marshaled the resources of the U.S. Government in coordination with the international community.

I thank President Obama and Secretary Clinton for their tireless efforts.

It is also important to recognize the generosity of millions of private American citizens who have responded immediately to this crisis, and we must thank the dedicated U.S. military and government personnel and the thousands of NGO volunteers and staff for their truly valiant efforts.

We should also remember that the challenges faced by Haiti will continue past this immediate period and will extend into the long term. The U.S. and global community will need to offer robust assistance to make sure Haiti can rebuild from this shocking disaster.

Madam Speaker, I would also like to praise President Obama's decision to grant temporary protection status, or TPS, to Haitian nationals living in the U.S. Representative Rangel and I led the New York congressional delegation in writing to President Obama in support of this TPS designation.

On behalf of my constituents and Haitian Americans around the country, I offer my gratitude to the President, and I urge my colleagues to do the same in supporting this resolution.

Madam Speaker, the devastating earthquake which hit Haiti last night is something that pains all of us.

The millions of Haitian Americans in this country and people who care about Haiti all over the world need to see what we can do to get aid as quickly as possible to the beleaguered people of Haiti.

The earthquake was 7.0 on the Richter scale, the largest earthquake ever to hit Haiti. And this comes on top of devastating hurricanes a little more than a year ago. The people of Haiti are going to need the United States to help.

As chairman of the Western Hemisphere Subcommittee, I will leave no stone unturned to try to get aid to people of Haiti. And I know that President Obama and Secretary Clinton have already made statements and promised and pledged lots of and lots of aid.

Probably thousands upon thousands of people are devastated and killed, and this is going to touch all of us. So I call on this House, I call on the American people, I call on our government to do whatever we can to send aid to help the beleaguered people of Haiti. Now is the time.

I urge the American people to listen, to send donations to those organizations that can get aid in as quickly as possible. Money donations are probably what is needed right now. Only the United States is in a very, very unique position. And, again, we want to tell the Haitian people that the United States of America, the U.S. Congress is there with you. We will leave no stone unturned to try to save lives.

The next 72 hours is crucial in terms of saving lives, in terms of preventing any kind of epidemics, in terms of keeping food going and the water clean and making sure that there is no disease, looting, things like that. We need to do everything we can. I know we will. And, again, we will leave no stone unturned.

As chairman of the Western Hemisphere Subcommittee, I know that our committee will be right in there with our sleeves rolled up and do everything we can to help the people of Haiti.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in honor of Ms. Rachel Miller and Mr. John Adamovich who have just become the proud parents of twins Max and Jake on January 6, 2010. A former constituent, Ms. Miller served New York's 17th District as my energy and environment legislative assistant for many years before going on to work for Senator Dianne Feinstein.

Both Rachel and John have built careers of service to their country and community: Rachel on Capitol Hill and John as a social worker. They are people of integrity and will make wonderful role models for their two sons. Max and Jake should know how lucky they are to be part of this new family.

As a proud father of three, I can truly say that I knew the best years of my life were ahead of me when we began our family. And I am confident that Rachel and John will experience the same. Raising children is such a rewarding experience, made double for them by the birth of their twins. I am confident that they will be wonderful parents, and I wish them the best for these exciting years to come.

Madam Speaker, Liam McLaughlin is leaving the Yonkers City Council after serving four terms, representing the Fourth District since 1999. He served as Majority Leader of the City Council and is leaving as the Minority Leader and Chair of the Budget Committee and the Environmental Policy & Protection Committee.

He also served on the Education Committee, the Real Estate & Economic Development Committee, the Municipal Operations

Committee, the Intergovernmental Relations Committee, the Rules Committee, and the Legislation and Codes Committee.

He graduated from Fordham University in 1989, majoring in accounting, and worked for the major accounting firm of Ernst & Young before taking his law degree from the New York Law School.

As a council member Liam worked with the mayor and fellow council members on a bi-partisan basis for the betterment of his district and the City of Yonkers as a whole. He strove to hold down taxes, to create jobs, to improve the city's parks and playgrounds, increase senior citizen programs and implement a citywide beautification program. He encouraged `smart development' to make Yonkers attractive to new businesses which brought many new jobs to the city.

Aside from his representation on the council, he is a Board Member of the Aisling Irish Community Center, a Board Member and President of Tara Circle, a member of the Ancient Order of Hibernians, the Westchester Friendly Sons of St. Patrick, and a member of the New York State Bar Association.

I congratulate Liam for all of his good work and diligence in representing not only his district and its families, but the City of Yonkers as a whole. I was privileged to be able to work with him in helping Yonkers and know first hand that Yonkers is enormously better for having him. I know his family will be happier now that he will not have as many meetings to attend but the City of Yonkers will sorely miss his leadership and dedication. I wish him the best in all his endeavors and am looking forward to his return to office.

I thank the gentleman, my good friend from Texas, for yielding to me. I appreciate the comments made by Mr. Rogers as well.

Mr. Speaker, this bill rights a wrong. It's a very technical bill, but the bottom line is that 35 loyal and hardworking Federal employees stationed overseas, working for America, are being treated unfairly, and the bill corrects this. When I was in Ireland at the Customs post, I had a chance to speak with some of these employees, and I became convinced that they were not being treated fairly.

I rise today in support of my legislation, H.R. 1517, for the conversion of certain overseas Customs and Border Protection employees. I would also like to give special recognition to my colleague and friend, Representative Peter King of New York, for the hard work that he has put into this legislation as well.

H.R. 1517 would grant the Commissioner of the U.S. Customs and Border Protection the authority to noncompetitively convert employees serving on overseas limited appointments into permanent employees. The need for this legislation was brought to my attention by 15 U.S. CBP employees serving at pre-clearance centers in Ireland, who were incorrectly hired by the Immigration and Naturalization Service. These employees were hired on overseas temporary appointments, but the work requirement evolved into a permanent basis.

There are two ways for a Federal agency to fill permanent overseas positions: one, by hiring locally engaged staff or, two, by U.S. direct hire. Yet because an agreement between the United States and Ireland requires that all pre-clearance employees be permanent employees, and, by definition, employees on overseas appointments are limited employees, albeit it in this case limited for an indefinite duration, CBP is technically in violation of the two countries' agreement.

More troubling to me, the 15 employees on overseas limited appointments are not covered by the protections and immunities afforded by the agreement to permanent U.S. pre-clearance employees.

Later, I learned the number of employees in similar positions included over 30 other CBP employees in Aruba, the Bahamas, Bermuda, and Canada. It has been through no fault of their own that these loyal employees, some of whom have been protecting our country for almost 20 years, are now in limbo.

Without this legislation, they will either have to become locally engaged staff, who are compensated by and receive benefits from the Irish government, or be placed into competitive positions that will require a return to the U.S. Some of them have families and have been living in Ireland working for the U.S. as American citizens, a choice that would destroy an established way of life in Ireland if they were forced to come to the United States, or a career with the U.S. Customs and Border Protection. They would have to choose, and that's not right. This was done through no fault of their own.

This bill, H.R. 1517, would allow these employees to stay close to their families and keep their positions protecting our country.

I would like to applaud the Homeland Security Committee for including language encouraging the CBP Commissioner not to be too disruptive to the employees when implementing this legislation. I recognize the standard CBP policy is for employees serving at overseas positions to rotate back to the United States after 5 years. However, in this extreme circumstance, it would be best for the CBP to allow the employees to continue to serve where they are currently with the years of experience they bring to their positions.

Let me say in closing, H.R. 1517 is a bipartisan bill. It is supported by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection and the National Treasury Employees Union, which represents the employees.

I thank the gentleman. This is a bipartisan bill. I repeat: It is supported by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection and the National Treasury Employees Union, which represents the employees. Each has had the opportunity for input into the final legislation.

I would strongly encourage my colleagues to join with me in support, again, of this bipartisan legislation. Continued employment of these individuals is in the best interest of CBP and the best interest of our country as the work requirement remains, and it's critical to CBP protecting our Nation's borders.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague from the Health Subcommittee on the Energy and Commerce Committee, Lois Capps, who is always a leader in issues like this. And I want to commend Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the gentlewoman from Florida, for her courage in talking personally, as well as Congresswoman Sue Myrick from North Carolina for speaking personally. This is obviously a disease that affects so many Americans and their families personally, so I rise in strong support of this resolution on the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force breast cancer screening guidelines.

As the second most common cancer among women in the U.S. and a leading cause of cancer death for women under 60, breast cancer is an issue that resonates with us all. The recent changes in recommendations for breast cancer screenings made by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force on November 16 have been met with considerable attention and consternation nationwide. I can say quite frankly that I was extremely concerned that news reports related to these screenings would cause some women in their forties to no longer get mammograms annually for breast cancer.

I think what was announced was a mistake. This would really be a travesty if women were prevented from getting mammograms annually. We know that declines in breast cancer death rates since 1990 are primarily attributed to early detection and improvement in treatment. In fact, about 15,000 breast cancer deaths this year were prevented in part due to an expanded access to mammography. While our screening tools are not perfect, they are valuable, and leading medical advocacy groups, including the American Cancer Society, the American Medical Association, and Susan B. Komen for the Cure, continue to recommend annual mammography for women starting at age 40, not 50.

The USPSTF has since clarified that it never meant to send the message that women shouldn't get breast cancer screenings, but that in certain age groups women should consult with their personal physician about the benefits, risks, and limitations of mammography. Unfortunately, and the task force admitted this at a hearing in our Energy and Commerce Committee, this message has largely been lost in the media.

I therefore again commend the gentlewoman from Florida for her resolution today and really her work all year, guided by her personal experience, to improve education and awareness of the benefits of breast cancer screening. The guidelines of the USPSTF should certainly not be interpreted as prohibiting a health care insurer from providing coverage for mammography services and should not be used by insurers to deny coverage for services that are not recommended on a routine basis.

We recently marked the 25th anniversary of the National Breast Cancer Awareness Month, which celebrated great strides. We must continue that, and I urge support of the resolution.