Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, if House Republicans really want to help America's seniors, they would join us in reversing a proposal in the Republican prescription drug plan that would penalize any senior who chooses a private drug plan after May 15.

As this calendar shows, we have 18 days left. If House Republicans do not support our efforts to extend the deadline until the end of the year, millions of seniors will face a prescription drug tax that they must pay every month for the rest of their lives.

Over 14 million seniors still have not chosen a plan. Some are frustrated, confused by dozens of plans they have to choose from. Others have heard the horror stories of seniors not having access to drugs they were promised or seniors being overcharged for some of their medication. Some of these seniors will eventually want to choose a

plan, but they should not be forced into making that tough decision by May 15.

It is time House Republicans stand up and support America's seniors. Reject the President's prescription drug tax. And as we mark off another day on the calendar, Republicans only have 18 days to make the right decision.

Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me today in supporting H.R. 282, the Iran Freedom Support Act.

I want to thank Ms. Ros-Lehtinen and Mr. Lantos for drafting this bill that has gathered great support from our colleagues to address the urgent and problematic situation in Iran.

This bill will extend and strengthen existing sanctions designed to cut off funds Iran could use for its illicit atomic programs.

Inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) over the past three years have turned up evidence that Iran has been pursuing nuclear technology for nearly two decades. Despite recent rulings by the IAEA Board of Governors that found Iran to be in noncompliance with its Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty safeguards agreement, and a presidential statement last month by the United Nations Security Council that called upon Iran to reinstitute its voluntary suspension of enrichment and reprocessing, Iran has stated that it will continue development of its nuclear program.

The U.S. and our allies cannot stand by and watch Iran develop nuclear capabilities, and this legislation is just a first step in what must be done to address this problem.

A state that has vowed to continue supporting terrorist activity against the West and the U.S., has openly stated that Israel must be wiped off the map, and has threatened to retaliate to international pressure and sanctions by giving nuclear technology to other states, must be dealt with before it has a robust nuclear program.

Iran's pursuit for weapons of mass destruction--and nuclear technology in particular--along with its outright support for international terrorism require a strong response from our government.

Passing H.R. 282 is a first step in addressing this urgent situation, and I ask my colleagues to join me in supporting this bill.

Mr. Chairman, more than any single piece of legislation we passed this year, the budget reflects our Nation's core values. Unfortunately, this budget values deficits over balanced budgets and tax cuts over the health and education of the American people.

This budget cuts more than $10 billion from critical domestic programs our constituents rely on every day. By eliminating 42 educational programs, the budget fails our children and wastes our opportunity to invest in their future.

It hurts low-income students' shot at the American dream by wiping out the GEAR-UP program that prepares them for college.

It threatens our future economic competitiveness by eliminating vocational programs to help our students gain skills in the global economy.

There is so much in this budget that is wrong this cannot actually represent the value of this Congress and the values of the American people because of what it does.

It cuts the budgets of 18 out of 19 institutes of the National Institutes of Health. It raises deductions and copays for veterans health care.

Mr. Chairman, there is so much wrong with this budget that one thing

it does, it continues the tax cuts, and that is why it is not the American values.

Let us help our children, our veterans, and our elderly without giving tax cuts.

Mr. Chairman, more than any single piece of legislation we pass this year, the budget reflects our Nation's core set of values.

Unfortunately, this budget values deficits over balanced budgets, and tax cuts over the health and education of the American people. This budget cuts more than $10 billion from critical domestic programs our constituents rely on every day.

By eliminating 42 education programs, the budget fails our children and wastes our opportunity to invest in their future. It hurts low- incomes students' shot at the American Dream by wiping out the GEAR-UP program that prepares them for college. It threatens our future economic competitiveness by eliminating the vocational education programs that help our students gain the skills to compete in a global economy.

This budget breaks our commitment to military retirees by increasing--and in some cases tripling--their out-of-pocket health care fees. It abandons our quest for health care research and discovery by cutting the budgets of 18 out of 19 institutes within the National Institutes of Health. It cuts programs aimed at preventing illness and disease while also slashing programs that train health professionals to treat these diseases.

As a country at war, there is no doubt that we have to make sacrifices to successfully implement the war on terror and equip our troops. But the funding cut from domestic programs in this budget does not go for war costs. In fact, war costs aren't even included after 2007.

The funding cuts also aren't being used to balance the budget. With this budget, this country will post a deficit of $348 billion for 2007--one of the largest deficits in our Nation's history.

Instead of funding war costs or paying down the deficit, the cuts in this budget are used for tax cuts; $228 billion in tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans when families are in need here at home, and troops are putting their lives on the line far from home.

Mr. Chairman, at best this budget is misguided. But the truth is, this budget is down right immoral, and I urge my colleagues to join me in opposition to it.

Madam Speaker, this past weekend, I met with many students from schools in our district and hope to meet with many more. This banner is signed by students from the Alta Charter School in our district. These students are voicing their concerns because they want to keep their families together and felt their heritage was not being respected.

They are concerned about the possibility of their parents being deported, even though their children are citizens. They are worried about the possibility of them being deported, although this is the only life they have ever known.

I believe we should improve border security, and every Nation in the world should control their borders and know who is crossing it, but I voted against H.R. 4437 because this bill doesn't realistically deal with the 10 to 12 million people who are living in this country.

If this bill is enacted, 3 million U.S. citizens will be left without their parent or guardian. Family values should apply to our immigration laws. This is why we see students marching in our communities all across our country and why you see this banner on the floor of the House today.

We need comprehensive, fair immigration reform that includes increased border security, more detention beds to prevent catch and release, requiring applicants to go through criminal background checks, to learn English and also pay a penalty. That way, we can make sure these people, these children who are here know that their parents won't need to be deported or they won't be.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Mr. Cesar Estrada Chavez. Seventy-nine years ago one of the greatest civil rights leaders of our time was born near Yuma, Arizona. A man that embodied the strength to fight for civil rights, Cesar Chavez dedicated his life to the liberty and justice of farm workers across America.

Mr. Chavez dedicated his life to teaching others that persistence, hard work, faith, and willingness to sacrifice one's self breaks down barriers. He committed himself to achieving justice and equality for all farm workers and paved the way for momentous social change.

Mr. Chavez began early in his life dealing with injustice and inequality; his family was forced off their land and subjected to working in fields all over California. He attended 37 schools, never succeeding past the eighth grade. Despite his tribulations, he was able to instill his passion for education in the hearts of all that he touched. Mr. Chavez taught that the love for justice is inherent in each and every one of us and that it is the most amazing and true part of being human.

In 1962, Mr. Chavez put his beliefs into action and formed what is known today as the United Farm Workers. His efforts initiated one of the greatest social movements of our time; fighting for safe and fair working conditions, reasonable wages, decent housing and the outlaw of child labor for farm workers everywhere.

Mr. Chavez embraced nonviolent tactics to help focus national attention on the problems that existed for farm workers. The non- violent tactics Mr. Chavez utilized included fasting, marching, rallying, picketing and boycotting. The vast attention that was drawn to the plight of the farm workers educated America of the great pain and exploitation the farm workers endured to produce food for millions of American families.

Mr. Chavez was said to have given his last ounce of strength defending the farm workers before he died in his sleep on April 23, 1993.

Cesar E. Chavez is honored throughout America for his tireless work to help those that could not help themselves. In my hometown of Houston, every year we celebrate the life and times of Mr. Cesar E. Chavez by holding a Hispanic Pride parade. An event sponsored by the community and an event to bring us together and celebrate as one.

We honor him today in life and in death for his leadership, his vision, his bravery, and his unselfish commitment to the principles of social justice and respect for human dignity. He will forever live on as an inspiration to those of us who seek to create a better world, and his legacy is one which serves to remind us that ``Together all things are possible.'' Si se puede!

Mr. Chairman, I rise today because I believe my Republican colleagues are sending a mixed message by offering this legislation.

This bill increases the authorization for the maximum Pell grant to $6,000, reauthorizes funding for Hispanic-serving institutions and historically Black colleges and universities.

From the looks of this authorization bill, you would think the majority leadership in this Congress cared about getting low- and middle-income students through college.

However, this authorization bill does not fund these programs. Just 2 months ago, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle voted to cut student aid by $12 billion by passing the budget reconciliation bill.

I don't understand why my Republican colleagues care more about giving tax breaks to the wealthy than helping low- and middle-income families send their children to college.

The budget reconciliation bill raised interest rates on parent student loans, raised loan consolidation fees, and required that student and parent borrowers pay a 1 percent insurance fee on college loans.

We need to do something to help people get through college, not charge them a 1 percent insurance fee and make their education even more expensive than it is now.

Since 2001, college tuition in this country has increased 40 percent. Students are graduating with over $17,000 of debt. And what has Congress done?

We've consistently flat-funded Pell and raised the maximum Pell award by small amounts that don't keep up with rising tuition rates, including this increase.

When Pell first started, it covered over 70 percent of the average cost of a 4-year education. Now, it pays for 30 percent of the cost of a college education.

While I appreciate the effort of the bill sponsors to increase the Pell maximum grant, it is still not enough to truly help low-income families send their children to college.

I hope in the future appropriators will enable us to show a true commitment to higher education by bringing us an appropriations bill that reflects the priorities outlined in H.R. 609.

Working families need more than the numbers offered in this bill, they need to see real dollars put into these programs.

My Republican colleagues have not adequately funded the very programs they are on the floor supporting today.

I hope that in the future, we fund the programs that are so important to us today.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the late Reverend Wilbert Leo Daniels and his brother the late Reverend Cooper Darryl Daniels for their dedication and service to the elderly and non- elderly disabled citizens of our community.

During his tenure as pastor of the Greater Jerusalem Baptist Church, Reverend W. Leo Daniels secured the funding from the Department of Housing and Urban Development to begin development of an eight story housing facility in Northeast Houston. His dream of constructing a home for the elderly and handicapped was realized after his death under the guidance of his brother, Reverend Cooper Darryl Daniels.

The W. Leo Daniels Towers were dedicated in 1979 and have maintained nearly full occupancy for 27 years. The Towers, located at 8826 Harrell, Houston Texas consist of 100 units and serve to assist residents in their daily independent lifestyles. The residents are offered a variety of services including a beauty shop, a washateria and a cafeteria with a central dining room that accommodates 299 persons. The Towers also offer a remedial education class that is supported through the Houston Community College.

The W. Leo Daniels Towers has become a powerful influence among the residents and the Northeast Houston Community alike. In 2002, a computer literacy lab with bi-weekly classes was opened for all the residents and Northeast Community population to attend. The Towers have also collaborated with the Houston Food Bank and with the United Way of Houston Gifts to provide access to food, furniture, office supplies and clothing for its residents.

The solidarity of the Greater Jerusalem Baptist Church membership and the united efforts of all concerned have made the dream of Reverend W. Leo Daniels a reality. The Towers have helped fill the need of so many in the Northeast Houston Community, and I ask that we all honor this great achievement and pay tribute to those that are responsible for its success.

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

I would like to thank my colleague from Texas for calling up S. 2320, and I agree with what he said. I this it is interesting, though, the parliamentary procedure that the chairman of our Energy and Commerce Committee talked about, because I would assume that if this bill passes with the two-thirds requisite votes tomorrow and goes to the President, that the section in the supplemental bill would be stripped out in the conference committee, because that bill still goes to the Senate into a conference committee. So I guess parliamentarily that would be the solution in our situation.

Madam Speaker and Members, low-income Americans have been struggling to pay for heating bills during the winter; and, thankfully, this winter has not been as cold as expected and heating bills have not increased as greatly as feared. However, natural gas prices that drive electric prices have quadrupled over the past several years. The States' public utilities commissions, PUCs, are passing those costs on to our constituents.

Low-income Americans also struggle to pay cooling bills. When the 90 and 100 degrees heat rolls around this year, the situation is going to become very critical very quickly.

Air conditioners run on electricity, and a lot of electricity comes from natural gas. The need for relief is going to be intense throughout 2006, the end of this winter, this summer, and the start of next winter due to the incredible energy prices our country is experiencing.

The LIHEAP program has been controversial because the formula can pit different regions of the country against each other. For the first $2 billion appropriated under this program, Northern States do very well, and relatively little funding goes to the South. Above this $2 billion trigger, however, the formula becomes much fairer, for Congress has never crossed this trigger by any large amount, that is until tonight.

The Senate compromise legislation provides an extra $500 million to the LIHEAP formula over and above the $2 billion Congress has already provided. This is incredibly important for regional equity.

This legislation has provided $500 million in contingency funding which can be used for emergencies such as blizzards, heat waves, hurricanes; and this funding is required to be allocated in 2006.

Today marks the first day we have a real chance to cross that $2 billion trigger and provide a measure of equity for the warm States. Importantly, today also marks the best chance to increase LIHEAP for 2006 for cold States as well by providing 2006 contingency funding.

If we pass this legislation today, the LIHEAP allocations for 2006 will become much more equitable between regions. It is important we pass this legislation today. It will directly go to the President's desk and provide immediate extra assistance for the Northern and the Southern States this year.

The administration supports this bill, and I would like to introduce this letter from Secretary Leavitt into the Record.

The Secretary of Health

and Human Services,

Washington DC, March 8, 2006.

Hon. Olympia J. Snowe,

U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.

Dear Senator Snowe: I am pleased to respond to your request

for my view on your LlHEAP amendment (which is attached).

This is a positive step to provide additional aid for those

in need of energy assistance this year. HHS supports Senator

Snowe's amendment to utilize '07 funds this year to help

those affected by increased home energy costs. HHS supports

providing at least $500 million of the total as contingency

funds.

Sincerely,

Michael O. Leavitt.

Madam Speaker, CBO certified this bill with no budgetary effect, and I want to introduce their letter into the Record.

U.S. Congress,

Congressional Budget Office,

Washington, DC, March 6, 2006.

Hon. Olympia J. Snowe,

U.S. Senate,

Washington, DC.

Dear Senator: As requested by your staff, the Congressional

Budget Office has prepared the enclosed cost estimate for S.

2320, a bill to make available funds included in the Deficit

Reduction Act of 2005 for the Low-Income Home Energy

Assistance Program for fiscal year 2006, and for other

purposes.

If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be

pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Matthew

Kapuscinski.

Sincerely,

Donald B. Marron,

Acting Director.

Enclosure.

S. 2320--A bill to make available funds included in the

Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 for the Low-Income Home

Energy Assistance Program for fiscal year 2006, and for

other purposes

Summary: S. 2273 would amend section 9001 of the Deficit

Reduction Act of 2005 by making the $1.0 billion appropriated

for the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP)

available in 2006 rather than 2007. The bill would increase

direct spending in 2006 by $750 million, but have no net

budgetary effect over the 2006-2009 period as a whole.

S. 2273 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector

mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

(UMRA) and would benefit state and tribal governments by

making federal funds available a year early.

Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated

budgetary impact of S. 2273 is shown in the following table.

The costs of this legislation fall within budget function 600

(income security).

Basis of Estimate: Under current law, CBO expects that the

entire $1.0 billion in LIHEAP funding appropriated for 2007

would be obligated in 2007 and spent over a three-year

period, resulting in outlays of $750 million in 2007, $230

million in 2008, and $20 million in 2009. Enacting S. 2320

would accelerate the spending of these same amounts to the

2006-2008 period.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--

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

Madam Speaker, I want to thank our colleague and chair of our appropriations subcommittee. I understand where he is coming from. But I also know, Madam Speaker, that we have not passed a budget for 2007 and that is still to be considered.

I understand that the concern about moving money into this year. But it is also going to be very difficult for me to talk to the 40,000 plus Texas families if we do not pass this bill. By the way, this summer, I am sorry it did not fit within our legislative rules, and it is causing more problems, and we are not going to give you any heat assistance when it gets to be 100 degrees in Texas and across the South, and, frankly, even the Northern States, Illinois, Maryland and other places, New York has problems with heat in the summer.

So I would hope that next year or later this year we will probably see another supplemental. If we see a year like we have seen now for both the cold assistance for the Northern States and what we see in the South that we need help, then I would hope in the future that we would see a supplemental that would restore that money. I would be glad to support that at that time.

Madam Speaker, I also understand Chairman Regula and the Appropriations Committee, a lot of us want them

to be able to have the funding for medical research and education. Those programs are near and dear to our heart. I hope we will still be able to do that.

But I also know there are some other ways that we can deal with that since we have not adopted a budget and we will probably have another supplemental, because they get pretty regular around here. I hope that we can add to it without having to rob Peter to pay Paul.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, how much time do I have remaining?

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

Following the chairman of our full committee and, again, I understand the Chair of our appropriations subcommittee's concern, but this bill has a great deal of bipartisan support.

We heard from our colleague from New Hampshire, who is experiencing high utility bills and has already run out of their funding for their poor in New Hampshire. But a lot of us are looking forward to what may be happening not only this winter, but also this summer. So I am proud to have Congressman Pickering of Mississippi and Congressman LaTourette, who is also supporting this legislation.

When we vote on this tomorrow, we will see a lot of Members from across the aisle who are supporting this legislation; and again, like my chairman of our full committee and also the ranking member of the committee, John Dingell is supporting this legislation. We need to do something now to help and we will work whatever we can to help with the allocation from the Appropriations Subcommittee on Health and Human Services or, again, another supplemental next year or later this year that will be able to deal with it.

Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote aye.

Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I fully support the funding for our troops in this Emergency Supplemental; the men and women serving our country in Iraq and Afghanistan must have equipment to effectively fight insurgents, and the harsh environment has taken its toll on everything from helicopters to tanks to armored vehicles.

I am concerned however that we are not addressing the impact of lost equipment and vehicles when our National Guard and Reserve units are forced to leave their equipment in Iraq.

Some reports state that Guard and Reserve units in the U.S. are only equipped at 30 percent of pre-war levels. The FY06 Defense Appropriations bill included $1 billion for reequipping units here at home, but the Guard needs $20 billion to address the shortage.

Money is tight in times of war, but national security is hollow if we leave our homeland unprotected to fight wars overseas. If we are going to increase the federal debt limit yet again--by nearly $800 billion this time--and extend tax cuts, we should also equip the men and women who protect the homeland from terrorist attacks and natural disasters.

This is extremely important for constituents in the district I represent. In 2001, Tropical

Storm Allison, just weeks into the hurricane season, flooded tens of thousands of homes and businesses in Southeast Texas. The Guard was a critical part of the rescue and recovery effort, using its large trucks and equipment to reach individuals stranded by the high water. During Katrina and Rita, the Guard again played a major role in rescue and recovery efforts after a natural disaster.

With the start of hurricane season on June 1st--less than three months away--we must ensure Guard units along the Gulf coast have the equipment they need to save lives.

I also want to talk about housing for Katrina and Rita evacuees. We have 100,000 evacuees in the City of Houston's emergency housing program, but frankly FEMA and HUD have been very difficult to work with.

FEMA told the City to sign 1-year leases for evacuees and promised in writing to reimburse Houston. First, these reimbursements have been extremely slow, and the our cities and apartments are becoming the bank for FEMA.

I met with Houston apartment owners that have not been paid rent for 90 days--I could not get away with that in my apartment in D.C., but FEMA gets away with it.

Second, these commitments are not being honored. Instead, they are going to pull the rug out from under probably 30,000 of these evacuees that FEMA says won't qualify for housing help after March 31.

In the coming weeks, 30,000 evacuees in Houston are going to get a letter giving them 30 days notice before eviction, even if they have a 1-year lease that FEMA promised to reimburse back in September. Many of these evacuees are schoolchildren.

FEMA has no plan for where the folks that they decide no longer qualify for housing assistance are going to find housing or where they are going to go. Rental rates are going to go up due to the influx of evacuees. Houston's section 8 housing program is full.

30,000 Americans should not end up on the streets of Houston and America should not stand for it. FEMA made commitments to 1-year leases and they are not abiding by their written commitments.

Mr. Chairman, I fully support the hurricane relief funding in this bill and the funding for the men and women in Iraq and Afghanistan, but I believe that there is a tremendous amount of work yet to be done.

Mr. Speaker, today marks Texas Independence Day. 170 years ago today, the Texas Declaration of Independence was ratified by the Convention of 1836 at Washington-on-the-Brazos.

Just as American patriots declared their independence from the tyrannical British Empire's military domination and established the first true democracy in the modern age, Texas declared its independence from Mexico to restore their political rights.

After July 4th, 1776, democracy became a common goal for all people of the New World, but one that we would have to fight for.

Texas declared its independence after many peaceful years as a part of a Mexican federal republic because Texans lost their political rights when Mexico became dominated by military dictatorships.

In 1824, a military dictatorship took over in Mexico that abolished the Mexican constitution. Facing an even more oppressive regime than the British Empire, the Texas Declaration of Independence states that Texas's government had been ``forcibly changed, without their consent, from a restricted federative republic, composed of sovereign states, to a consolidated central military despotism.''

The Texas Declaration of Independence was also fully justified because this military dictatorship had ceased to protect the lives, liberty, and property of the people of Texas--Anglos and Tejanos.

The new military dictatorship refused to provide for trial by jury, freedom of religion, or public education for their citizens.

When Texans and Tejanos peacefully protested the undemocratic changes to Mexico's government, they were imprisoned unjustly.

Failure to provide these basic rights violates the sacred contract between a government and the people, and Texans did what we still do today--stand up for our rights by declaring our independence to the world.

In response, the Mexican army marched to Texas to wage a war on the land and the people, enforcing the decrees of a military dictatorship through brute force and without any democratic legitimacy.

The struggle for Texan independence was a political struggle, not an ethnic conflict. In fact, many Texas Hispanics considered themselves Tejanos--not Mexicans--and Tejanos from all walks of life served bravely in the Texas War for Independence and sacrificed greatly.

Tejanos were in Texas before Mexico became a nation, and Tejanos cherished the freedom to run their own affairs democratically just as dearly as Anglos. When the Mexican government failed, it failed all Texans and Tejanos equally.

For example, two Tejanos who distinguished themselves in the Texas War for Independence were Captain Juan Seguin and Lorenzo de Zavala, a future Republic of Texas Vice President. The historical records are full of many other patriotic Tejanos as well.

As future President Sam Houston and other delegates signed the Texas Declaration of Independence, Mexican General Santa Ana's army besieged independence forces at the Alamo in San Antonio.

Four days after the signing, the Alamo fell with her commander Lt. Colonel William Barrett Travis, Tennessee Congressman David Crockett, and approximately 200 other Texan and Tejano defenders.

All these men were killed in action, a heroic sacrifice for Texan freedom. If this tragedy were not enough, weeks later Santa Anna's army massacred over 300 unarmed Texans at Goliad on March 27.

In a dramatic turnaround, Texans and Tejanos achieved their independence several weeks later on April 21, 1836. Roughly 900 Texans and Tejanos of the Texan army overpowered a much larger Mexican army in a surprise attack at the Battle of San Jacinto.

That battle is memorialized along the San Jacinto River with the San Jacinto Monument in Baytown, Texas in my district. The monument is larger than the Washington Monument here in D.C.

Today is an important day for Texas identity, and patriotic Texans are observing this occasion with great pride at the monument in Baytown today. If it were not for our voting schedule here in Congress, I would be at home with them for this event.

We give thanks to the many Texans from all backgrounds who sacrificed for the freedom we now enjoy. God bless Texas and God bless America.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this legislation.

This is the second Congress in which this bill has been approved by the House Energy and Commerce Committee without the benefit of a hearing.

Committee approval of a bill with universal support is one thing. But this bill does not enjoy universal support and raises serious questions about States' rights and national security. Had we been given the benefit of a hearing, we could have learned more about the National Association of Attorneys General's opposition. We could have learned about the elements of the bill that led the Association of Food and Drug officials to conclude that this bill would ``handcuff the first responders who deal with food safety issues every day.''

Legislation that causes this degree of concern should not be pushed through committee and brought to the floor without the benefit of a hearing.

Mr. Chairman, this bill is an affront to States' rights. In each of the 50 States, State legislatures have passed food safety laws that offer residents additional food safety protections than federal law provides.

This sweeping legislation would eliminate those State laws. It does so in two ways.

First, the bill preempts all existing State-mandated food safety warnings.

Second, it eliminates all State food safety laws that are not identical to federal law.

In the name of food uniformity, this bill will actually disrupt State food safety enforcement activities and hinder States' ability to protect residents from unsafe foods.

The bill also would prevent State and local governments from warning residents about the presence of contaminants in local food.

In my State of Texas, this bill would nullify laws protecting Texans from unsafe food and color additives. It would have the same effect on nearly 200 laws in each of the 50 States. Jurisdiction for food safety activities has long resided with the States, which conduct 80 percent of all food safety inspections.

This bill also has serious implications to national security.

The National Association of State Departments of Agriculture--which opposes this bill--has highlighted the role that the current food safety system plays in national security, saying that it ``forms the first line of defense against the growing threat of a terrorist attack against our nation's food supply.''

According to the State Agriculture Departments, the preemption provisions of this bill ``would leave a critical gap in the safety net that protects consumers.''

I encourage my colleagues to protect consumers, stand up for States' rights, and ensure the security of our Nation.

Oppose this misguided bill.

Mr. Speaker, Congress should act to increase the borrowing authority for the National Flood Insurance Program to honor the debt incurred by the United States.

If we do not act, people who have paid their flood insurance premiums will not receive their

claims for their flood damage. No one wants to live in a nation that does not honor its debts.

In addition, I am concerned that Congress is reacting to the unprecedented flooding damage of 2005 by blaming the victims and innocent parties.

Federally backed flood insurance is necessary because the private sector will not supply this product since the damages are too concentrated geographically and chronologically for the risk to be sufficiently spread by private firms.

We recently passed a Federal flood insurance reform bill in 2003 and many of those provisions have not come into force, so I think it is premature to require Congress to approve more ``reforms'' before honest, premium paying policy holders are allowed to receive their payments.

The Katrina disaster was a tragedy, because the mass New Orleans flooding was probably preventable; if the levees had been built and maintained as they should have been.

Now my constituents in Houston, who do not live below sea level and do not live on the ocean coastline, will have to pay the price.

There are over 120,000 families in the 100-year floodplain who are required to have flood insurance. In Harris County we have updated our maps using airborne infrared radar, so they are accurate. There are another 155,000 families in the 500-year floodplain.

These people did not develop irresponsibly, in fact many of them didn't move into the floodplain, but the floodplain moved to them. Subsidence and later development has expanded floodplains and put innocent homeowners in the floodplain.

We should not blame these people for geographic factors beyond their control. Reforms of the NFIP should focus instead new development in floodplains, eliminating flood insurance for beach houses, and ensuring that the program keeps its commitments to its policy holders.

If we greatly increase premiums or expand the number of people required to have flood insurance, we should take into account the shock this can have on low-income families, and consider my legislation, H.R. 103, to offer 50 percent discounts for the first 5 years to low-income homeowners who suddenly have to pay premiums after a floodplain is redrawn to include them.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of this resolution to condemn the Iranian government for violating its international nonproliferation obligations and to support efforts to report Iran to the United Nations Security Council.

Last week, the 35-nation International Atomic Energy Agency's, IAEA, Board of Governors overwhelmingly voted to report Iran to the U.N. Security Council, an important step in the international effort to prevent Iran from attaining nuclear weapons.

Iran has made clear its plans to enrich uranium by building its centrifuge program and constructing a heavy-water reactor which could provide plutonium for nuclear weapons. Additionally, the IAEA revealed that Iran was in possession of a document describing the procedure for fabricating uranium metal and casting it into hemispheres, which form the core of a nuclear weapon.

Following the vote on the resolution, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad ordered Iran's nuclear commission to end its cooperation with the IAEA and begin full-scale production of enriched uranium, which can be used to build nuclear weapons.

The thought of Iran with a nuclear weapon is a frightening one, and if this issue is not addressed promptly Iran will soon have the ability and materials to produce such weapons. Nuclear proliferation alone is a threat to American interests and security; nuclear proliferation to a country with a radical Islamic leader who has supported terrorism is an even more immediate threat.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this resolution to condemn Iran's decision to advance its nuclear program and to urge the U.N. Security Council to address this issue at once.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of this resolution as a first step toward helping our close ally, Israel, from an increasing threat. This resolution responds to the troubling results of the Palestinian Legislative Council, PLC, elections last month, in which Hamas--the radical Islamic Palestinian organization that has sought to expel Jews and destroy the state of Israel to establish an Islamic Palestinian state based on Islamic law-- won a majority of the seats.

Hamas has been recognized by the United States and the European Union as a terrorist organization, and has committed hundreds of acts of terrorism against Israeli citizens since its creation in 1987.

The group has employed car bombings, suicide bombings, mortar attacks, Qassam rocket attacks, and assassinations to achieve its stated goal of destroying Israel, and in doing so has killed thousands of innocent Israelis, as well as several Americans, including 5 during a series of bombings in 1996.

In FY 2005, $275 million was appropriated to the West Bank and Gaza, with $50 million of that funding going directly to the Palestinian Authority. We can never allow U.S. taxpayer dollars to get in the hands of a Hamas-controlled government to be used against Israel.

The Palestinian people voted and selected Hamas, but that does not mean we must support an organization that is counter to real peace in the Middle East. Elections are serious business, and I am disappointed the Palestinian people selected a group who does not want peace.

Passing this resolution is just a first step to notify a Hamas led government; the US and its allies can not support a government in Gaza and the West Bank that does not recognize Israel's right to exist.

Mr. Speaker, these election results are extremely troubling and this resolution shows solidarity and concern for the security of Israel and its people. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this resolution to send a strong message to Hamas that we will not recognize them as a legitimate government so long as they promote terrorism.

Mr. Speaker, the President gave the annual State of the Union speech and also released his budget recently. The speech and the budget were short on many important issues that face our families and neighbors every day.

I was glad he talked about supporting our troops; and I agree. However, I did not hear a call for creation of additional divisions to give our regular military and reserves more time at home between deployments. He announced no plans to stop extending the enlistments for the young men and women serving our country, some of whom are serving their third tours in the Middle East.

We also need better equipment and training for the people who volunteer

to serve our country. Instead, this budget request maintains and grows weapons systems that are no use to our troops on the ground, rather than adding the manpower we need for Iraq and Afghanistan, and reduces the authorized size of the National Guard by 17,000 soldiers.

I did not hear a renewed commitment to fully fund our veterans health care either. When someone serves and is injured we owe them a debt to make sure they receive health care second to none. President Bush's VA budget request for 2007 does add nearly $3 billion in real appropriations to veterans health care compared to the 2006 budget. However, it does so by charging a new annual enrollment fee for VA care, nearly doubling drug copayments and driving 1.2 million veterans out of the system created specifically for them.

A chart in the President's budget request anticipates approximately 1.2 million fewer veterans in Priority Groups 7 and 8 in 2007. These groups are forced in this budget request to pay new $250 enrollment fees and nearly double in pharmaceutical co-payments. This is not looking out for those who have served our country.

The President touched briefly on health care problems in our country. Health care is the number one domestic concern of the American people, 46 million of whom lack health insurance.

The administration's solution is expanding health savings accounts, HSAs, eliminating State mandates on health insurance policies, and the annual call to federalize medical malpractice lawsuits. HSAs have not been successful with consumers. An October, 2005, report determined that 1 percent of U.S. adults chose HSAs and only one-third of that 1 percent recommend HSAs to someone else. Another one-third of that percent would like to change plans. HSAs only fit a small portion of our society and have not helped to ensure our 46 million uninsured Americans.

Even worse, HSAs will draw healthier, higher income employees out of health insurance pools, leaving the sicker and lower income folks to share the higher risk. The unfortunate result would be increased out- of-pocket costs for those most in need of affordable health care and a weakened employer-based health insurance system.

To solve our health problems, we need bolder leadership, not plans that do not work. Let us expand the State Children's Health Insurance Program, the CHIP program, to working parents, allow early retirees over 55 to buy into Medicare, and help States with Medicaid costs so that they can expand programs for the uninsured.

Decades ago our country made a decision to use employer-based insurance unlike other industrial democracies. We have tried to bridge the gap of what employers can provide, but we still have 46 million people uninsured. Congress and the administration have a duty to bridge that gap for Americans.

I also did not hear anything in the State of the Union Speech about the administration's efforts to secure pensions. Companies are eliminating traditional pensions or going into bankruptcy to get out of commitments to their employees. At a time when the baby boomer generation is reaching retirement age, we cannot depend on Social Security, especially with an administration who wants to privatize it.

The President also did not mention anything on the biggest issues facing Americans, increasing disparity in income. Since World War II, Americans had a history of creating a great middle income majority. We are losing that great middle class as we have more and more millionaires but more and more poor people.

In 2001, the median income in 2004 dollars was $46,058. In January of 2006, it was $44,389, almost $2,000 less. Median income Americans are losing ground while median home prices have increased from $139,700 in 2001 to 215,900 in 2004.

Health insurance costs have gone up from a monthly average in 2001 of $135 to $222. College tuition for our children has increased, while government assistance has remained flat. I could go on and on about lower income and high prices, including costs of gas for our cars and utilities to heat and cool our homes. We need a concerted effort by Congress and the administration to reverse this trend that the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.

Middle income Americans are getting poorer. We have real needs in this country, and it is all too clear that the President's State of the Union speech and the administration's budget have not addressed the concerns of America.