Floor Statements

It's Women's History Month, and it's a great month for us to pass comprehensive health care reform. Here we are, again, women, in another epic battle for equality between men and women. As Alice Paul once said, When you put your hand to plow, you can't put it down until you get to the end of the road. And here we are now.

Staggering statistics on women and health care: 18 percent of women are uninsured; 26 percent of single mothers and 41 percent of low- income women are uninsured; 52 percent of women have foregone getting the care that they needed because of the cost, including not filling prescriptions, skipping a medical test, or not going to the doctor.

For decades, the health insurance industry has used every trick in the book, Mr. Speaker, to deny women the care that they need, to charge women more for the same services as men, and even to drop their coverage when they might need it most. Women face so many barriers in getting affordable health care, and our rights have been trampled on for too long.

This Women's History Month reminds me of the most famous speech that Sojourner Truth ever gave when she asked again and again, ``Ain't I a woman?''--asking when would it be her turn to have equal rights. With regard to health care, I would paraphrase Sojourner Truth and say, Ain't I a human being?

It's not an understatement to say that the lack of affordable health coverage has contributed to keeping women in poverty, not to mention keeping too many women in poor health. Women are more likely to be in

low-wage jobs or to have to work several part-time jobs to make ends meet, which means they're less likely to have health coverage offered by their employer. Less than one-half of women have health insurance through their jobs. And because women are more likely to be below the poverty level in the first place and only earn 78 cents for every dollar that a man earns, they're more likely to be completely unable to afford health care in the first place.

Isn't it about time we stood up and said, Ain't I a woman? Or, even: Ain't I a human being? Women are routinely denied care for having a preexisting condition, which could include being a potential, former, or actual mother; which could include being a victim of domestic violence; which could include having a serious illness or an operation, like a Cesarian section.

Health care reform here will provide women the care that they need; the economic security they need; prohibit plans from charging women more than men; ban the insurance practice of rejecting women with a preexisting condition; and include maternity services. Yes, we are women; and, yes, we are human beings.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to congratulate and pay tribute to a fine American, William ``Bill'' Reilley, Sr., on an occasion when he and his business have received a prestigious honor: the International Circle of Excellence Award for 2009.

His success has been recognized by the industry. In 2001, Bill was named the International Dealer of the Year, an honor awarded to one International dealer who exhibits the highest commitment to best-in- class customer service. He was a multi-finalist for the American Truck Dealers' Dealer of the Year and the Wisconsin Truck Dealer of the Year awards. With this most recent award, Bill has received the Circle of Excellence Award a total of 15 times. The Circle of Excellence awarded by the International dealer organization of Navistar, Inc., honors International truck dealerships that achieve the highest level of dealer performance with respect to operating and financial standards and most importantly, customer satisfaction. It is the highest honor a dealer principal can receive from the company.

He started his career with International Harvester in 1963 and eventually left to become the International dealer in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Bill's business acumen has successfully positioned the company for continued success, growing Lakeside International, LLC, from one location to six while concurrently increasing revenues from $14 million to more than $100 million annually. Lakeside International employs 200 people in all. The company remains a family venture with Bill's son, Bill Reilley, Jr., being named successor, assuring consistent leadership and growth for years to come.

Bill has achieved this level of accomplishment and recognition through many years of hard work and service to his industry and community. He recently transitioned from his leadership role as board chairman of St. Anne's Center for Intergenerational Care in Milwaukee, a nationally recognized facility. He

continues to dedicate his time and talents to St. Anne's as an Honorary Board Member, so that the center can continue to benefit from his leadership and commitment. Above all, he is committed to his family that includes Patricia, his wife of 43 years, his son Bill, Jr., his daughter Amy, his son-and-daughter-in-law and nine grandchildren.

Madam Speaker, for these reasons, I am honored to pay tribute to Bill Reilley for his contributions to the Fourth Congressional District. Mr. Bill Reilley has acquired a lifetime record of accomplishment and contributed much to his community, State and Nation.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize an artistic leader, theater director, producer, actor, and consummate professional from the Fourth Congressional District. Mr. Joseph Hanreddy is recognized at the international, national, regional and local level for his work and achievements during his seventeen seasons as the Artistic Director for the Milwaukee Repertory Theatre Company in Milwaukee, Wisconsin.

The influence of the Repertory Artistic Director goes beyond the company; the person in the job affects the tone and style of the entire theater community. Because of his commitment to the theater, Mr. Hanreddy gave nearly two years advance notice of his retirement so his successor could choose his or her inaugural season.

During his tenure, the theater has presented 252 productions, 55 world premieres, as well as having established one of the country's finest resident acting ensembles. The total attendance while Mr. Hanreddy has been in residence is 3,247,045. International connections continued under Mr. Hanreddy's leadership with the recruitment of acclaimed directors Ben Barnes, former Artistic Director of Ireland's Abeey Theater, and Paolo Landi, Ganshi Mureta, Lev Stukalov and Mark- Wing Davey from Italy, Japan, Russia and Great Britain respectively, to create productions for the theater.

The Milwaukee Repertory Theater, affectionately known as The Rep, presents critically-acclaimed dramas, contemporary plays, and cabaret shows. The Company continues its strong history of premiering new American plays. Mr. Hanreddy commissioned and directed the premieres of several original plays by Steven Dietz, directed 40 productions at The Rep, with recent premieres going on to be produced in Los Angeles and Chicago, and a successful Off-Broadway run.

The Rep has one of the oldest artistic internship programs in regional theater to foster valuable experience in professional theater. Each season welcomes acting and directing fulltime internships, as well as, internships throughout the production, marketing and development departments. The Rep maintains community service programs including education programs serving over 20,000 students annually, student matinees, facility tours and in-school workshops. The Rep contributes hundreds of complimentary tickets to Milwaukee area non-profit fundraisers, conducts adult acting classes, and access services including audio-described performances, American Sign Language- interpreted performances and Captioned Theater performances.

Madam Speaker, for these reasons, I am honored to pay tribute to Joseph Hanreddy. Mr. Hanreddy's dedication to the Milwaukee Repertory Theatre has brought the arts and enriched the lives of all of us in the Greater Milwaukee area and beyond.

Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 48, had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''

Stated against:

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague from Wisconsin for supporting House Resolution 901.

I can tell you that you have heard the history of Ruby Bridges, but in my own Fourth Congressional District of Wisconsin, last spring another teacher, a first-grade teacher, started a class project to teach her 6-year-old students the historic impact of Ruby Bridges during last February's Black History Month.

The students, recognizing the bravery of another child their age, thought Ruby Bridges should have her own special day of recognition. So what started as a very modest class project sort of built this groundswell where 2,200 signatures were collected throughout the Fourth Congressional District of Wisconsin, and indeed throughout the State. The project gained letters of commendation from Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett and from then-State Superintendent of Education Elizabeth Burmaster. They sent the full list to President Barack Obama and other elected officials in support of a Ruby Bridges Day.

It is so truly remarkable that a first-grade class in my district not only learned the historic lessons of 6-year-old Ruby Bridges, but also learned how extraordinary it is to have a voice in this great country of ours through the power of the pen. In fact, the initiative of these small children brings me to the floor of the House of Representatives today seeking support for H. Res. 901.

Ruby Bridges is the young black girl in the classic Norman Rockwell painting wearing a white dress, escorted, for her safety, by Federal marshals to school. And years after the Supreme Court had ruled the segregated schools were unconstitutional, Louisiana was finally forced, under a Federal court order, to implement a desegregation plan for the New Orleans public schools.

How frightened but how brave was a 6-year-old girl who took that test and qualified to become one of the first official African American students to attend this all-white school. And although she was only 6 years old, Mr. Speaker, and the lone black student at the school, she never missed a day, attended each and every day. Ruby, a jewel, Bridges, bridging a cultural gap.

I am so proud to support this resolution honoring Ruby Bridges.

Madam Speaker, I am concerned about Iran's irresponsible violations both of its commitments under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, NPT, and its agreements which it signed with the International Atomic Energy Agency, IAEA.

I share my colleague's conviction to stop an Iranian regime headed by Ahmadinejad from getting nuclear weapons. However, I think we should do so without crippling the Iranian people (as is noted in this legislation towards whom the people of the United States have feelings of friendship and hold in the highest esteem) or crippling efforts to raise a unified and international response to Iran's continuing noncompliance.

While we all recognize that the intention of this act is not to punish the Iranian people, it does not escape me that the impact of these sanctions will result in more suffering for them nonetheless. Upon introducing this bill in April, the Chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee noted his belief ``that this measure could have a powerfully negative impact on the Iranian economy.'' For sanctions to be truly crippling to Iran, they have to ``cripple'' the people first.

At a time when the Iranian people have courageously challenged the mullahs and the rulers in Iran by taking to the streets after the elections and recently again this month, there is concern that this unilateral approach may end up benefitting, not hindering, the regime and sowing the anger of the Iranian people at the U.S., not the Iranian government.

Unilateral sanctions can have unintended consequences. In a recent Dear Colleague, it was noted that ``in two recent instances, Microsoft and Google each determined that they must deny instant messaging services to the Iranian people that were previously available, citing their duty to comply with U.S. sanctions.'' Apparently, this medium had become a popular way for protesters to get around increasing efforts by the Iranian government to monitor their communications. As a result, my colleagues warned that ``Congress must act quickly to ensure that we are not unwittingly doing the repressive work of the Iranian government on its behalf.''

The President is currently working with our international partners not only as part of a renewed diplomatic outreach effort but also to fashion a strong multilateral response if Iran continues to refuse to cooperate with the international community.

In testimony in October, the State Department told Congress that it believes it has ``the authorities necessary to take strong action alone and together with our international partners, should they prove necessary'' to squeeze off financing of Iran's nuclear weapons efforts.

For example, the Treasury Department can continue to use the authority that it has used for over three years now to blacklist Iranian banks and encourage international banks to avoid doing business with Iran.

As a result, since 2006, the U.S. has taken action against over 100 banks, government entities, companies, and people involved in Iran's support for terrorism and its proliferation activities including freezing assets and preventing U.S. persons, wherever located, from doing business with them.

Recently, the Department wrote to express its concerns about companion Senate legislation to the bill before us today warning that ``during this crucial period of intense diplomacy to impose significant international pressure on Iran'' it was concerned that such legislation, ``in its current form, might weaken rather than strengthen international unity and support for'' these efforts.

In this letter, the Administration appealed for a delay of that bill in order not to undermine ``its diplomacy at this critical juncture.''

Israeli officials have also made clear that broad-based international efforts, including for sanctions, are better than the unilateral approach before us today. Very recently, Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak noted that ``There is a need for tough sanctions . . . Something that is well and coherently coordinated to include the Americans, the EU, the Chinese, the Russians, the Indians.''

I also share the concerns that some have that the legislation before the House today will ``disempower''--not empower--the President to bring this multination coalition together by taking away or limiting his flexibility to use sanctions as necessary to assist diplomatic efforts. That's a very curious definition of ``empowerment.''

It's as curious as saying that it is in the U.S. national security interest and helps diplomacy to make it harder for the President--any President--to use and waive sanctions when he

thinks the timing best serves our efforts to put pressure on Iran.

The President's flexibility to conduct foreign relations and diplomatic efforts to achieve a strong international consensus against Iran is not a loophole that needs to be closed but a vital tool that needs to be supported. I am concerned that this bill as written would keep our allies from working with us to address the threat from Iran.

Earlier this year, Nicholas Burns, who served under the Administrations of George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton, and as George W. Bush's top State Department negotiator in efforts to thwart Iran's nuclear program, testified in dealing with Iran, ``My main recommendation for this committee and the Congress, however, is to permit the President maximum flexibility and maneuverability as he deals with an extraordinarily difficult and complex situation in Iran and in discussions with the international group of countries considering sanctions. It would be unwise to tie the President's hands in legislation when it is impossible to know how the situation will develop in the coming months.''

An action taken against Iran--including sanctions--should have the broadest possible support in the international community. According to the Administration, ``with wide international support, sanctions regimes can be enforced, pressure can be sustained, and Iran's leaders are less able to shift the blame from themselves to the U.S. for the pains caused by their behavior.'' Even the Senate version of this same legislation recognizes the limits of more U.S. only sanctions. In section 111 of S. 2799, it is noted that ``in general, multilateral sanctions are more effective than unilateral sanctions at achieving desired results from countries such as Iran.''

International pressure for Iran to act or to face more forceful international action is building, as evidenced by the recent IAEA vote condemning Iran for its Qom enrichment facilities.

All five veto-wielding members of the Security Council (China and Russia included) voted for that measure, which opens up the potential for another round of Security Council sanctions.

The progress in uniting the Security Council is attributable to President Obama's investment in diplomacy. If Congress moves forward with sanctions that target our allies, that unity may very well collapse.

Sanctions have a place. I am a cosponsor of H.R. 1327, the Iran Enabling Sanctions Act of 2009, which passed the House with my support by a vote of 414-6 on October 29th. There are even provisions of this legislation which are worthwhile and which I have supported in the past as stand-alone legislation (H.R. 957 in the 110th Congress) that make clear that current U.S. sanctions can be used against financial institutions, insurers, underwriters, guarantors, and any other business organizations, including foreign subsidiaries, that aid investment in Iran's energy sector.

However, the less united the international community is in applying pressure against Iran, the greater the risk our measures will not have the impact we seek. And given the gravity of the stakes at risk here, that would be truly regrettable.

As noted by Secretary of State Clinton just yesterday, ``we have pursued, under President Obama's direction, a dual-track approach to Iran. We have reached out. We have offered the opportunity to engage in meaningful, serious discussions with our Iranian counterparts . . . The second track of our dual-track strategy is to bring the international community together to stand in a united front against the Iranians.''

I hope that as this legislation moves forward in the legislative process, further changes will be made to strengthen this bill in a way that will truly enhance, and not hobble, strong diplomatic efforts to diplomatically engage with Iran as well as to enact multilateral sanctions.

Mr. Speaker, it's such a privilege to stand in the well of the House of Representatives.

Each time I stand here, I just shiver and shake and think about just how I got here and the unusual circumstances that have allowed me to be here. Really coming from a very poor background, parents who had very, very meager means. But it was because of an educational opportunity that I'm able to be here with you and to speak with you here this evening.

You've heard it all from the well of the House of Representatives, Mr. Speaker. You've heard about all of the problems that we have in our economy. And this evening I want to talk to you about the importance of reestablishing ourselves in the world as a nation that is graduating students from college and producing the next generation of innovators and engineers and doctors and scientists and teachers so that we can reestablish ourselves in the world and continue to enable our economy to grow. But, of course, you've heard about all of the problems that sort of crowd out a really important discussion about the importance of funding educational opportunity.

You've heard about the two wars and the escalation, which is going to cost us $30 billion. You've heard about the war spending. Between 2001 until 2009, we've spent just under $950 billion for Iraq and Afghanistan, and we've just included another $139 billion for both wars. In July, the DOD was spending $11 billion a month on both wars. And CRS projects that we're going to be spending another $400 billion to $900 billion in the next 10 years.

You've heard about the entitlement programs, Medicare and Social Security, and how they're in danger and how we have to fund that. You've heard about the escalating health care costs consuming 20 cents of every consumer dollar in the so-called takeover by the government of health care. You've heard about the great recession where as many as 700,000 jobs were lost in a single month in the last 15 months. You've heard about the financial systemic risk that threatens the economy not only of the United States of America but of the world, requiring countries, including this one, to develop billions of dollars in stimulus funding. You've heard about various proposals to right ourselves and to justify our economy. You've heard proposals to just simply reduce spending. You've heard proposals to give tax breaks to the wealthy and that these tax breaks will somehow trickle down to support those workers and small businesses. And you've even heard whispers of raising taxes. And very few people raise as a solution to this problem at looking hard at what we're doing in terms of

advancing post-secondary educational opportunity.

That's why this evening, Mr. Speaker, I'm so happy to be joined by my dear friend and colleague from Virginia, Representative Bobby Scott, who serves on the Labor and Education Committee and I'm sure will give us some valuable information about the importance of preparing the next generation of students.

Reclaiming my time, I guess what I'm recalling is a country where, I mean, we invented the telephone. We invented the automobile, the television, the camera, Google, iPod. We've made major medical breakthroughs. We discovered the cure. We discovered Penicillin and practically eradicated polio by developing the vaccine. And we've done this because we have been number one in the world for developing a brain trust.

So I guess I'm sort of curious about the statements that you've just made that we no longer have the smartest students or the best workforce and that we're no longer leading in innovation and technology.

Will the gentleman yield, please?

This administration has been very good on financial aid, and this Congress has been great in providing financial aid. As a matter of fact, between fiscal years 2001 and 2009, the Pell Grant has seen an increase of over $27 billion. Now, these TRIO Programs that you talk about have a funding level of $853 million. That is less than $1 billion to the Pell Grant of $27 billion.

While providing financial aid to students is a great strategy, can you tell me why you think it is so important to fund these TRIO Programs in addition to the Pell Grant? Aren't we making a big enough investment in Pell?

Will the gentleman yield?

I come from a community where there has been a great deal of discussion about the failures of students on the fourth-grade reading tests and about the failures of students on the eighth-grade math tests, so I am really interested in your description of how the TRIO Programs really provide an intervention, as it were, in, admittedly, a systemically failed process up through middle school.

The TRIO Programs, as I have come to understand them, literally intervene in kids' lives in middle schools through the Upper Bound program, for example, and through Talent Search. They really identify that next generation of students who have the capability and the capacity to go to college and to really keep our country on top. Many countries do this. They have done it for generations. They have identified kids in middle schools. Despite the incapacity of the families, based on their incomes, to put their kids in private schools or to give them tutoring, the TRIO Programs intervene in middle school, and put them on a college track. Here are some of the data and statistics that I want you to respond to:

First of all, in terms of low-income students--and I'm not talking about any particular race or anything because, as I understand it, 37 percent of those students enrolled in TRIO are white students; 35 percent are African American; 19 percent are Hispanic; 4 percent are Native Americans; 22,000 of these students in TRIO are disabled students; and 25,000 are veterans.

So here we have a really diverse group of students who take advantage of these TRIO Programs, but they have one thing in common--they are all low-income students. They are all students who are disadvantaged by not having wealthy parents who can send them to prep schools. These are students we are depending on to become that next generation of engineers, scientists, and biologists. They are the people who are going to correct the conditions of our lakes, of our forests, and who will be these innovators. Yet, of all the low-income students in our country, only 41 percent enroll in college, and after 6 years in these Student Support Services, we find that almost 31 percent of these students actually attain a bachelor's degree, and that only 21 percent, literally 10 percent fewer of them, graduate from college when you have only given them Pell Grants.

I guess that is one of the problems that you have tried to share with us today, which is: If you are going to spend $27 billion and are going to make that kind of important investment in financial aid, it sure is important to give these students the wraparound services that they need, perhaps some remediation in math and in reading, so that they can succeed, some support services.

If you will indulge me, Mr. Scott, I will tell you a little story.

I was pregnant at 18 years old when I graduated from high school, and I was not headed to college. As a matter of fact, I was at the then- Boys' Club--it was not the Boys and Girls Club. I was at the Boys' Club, watching the boys play basketball, when a young man walked up to me and said, The director of the Educational Opportunity Program in Marquette is looking for you, and he said he wants you to come down there right away. That's how I ended up in college--18 years old, pregnant.

What these programs do is they actually interrupt the poverty cycle. They actually interrupted the sociological outcome for me to just be a welfare mom, receiving food stamps, with no hope of ever making an important contribution to society.

So I think that, if we are looking at a long-term bang for our buck, these TRIO Programs and increasing the funding for these TRIO Programs will certainly do that because we cannot afford the downward slide that you have described.

I'm not sure that people have really understood the seriousness of this. You mentioned that we were probably in the middle of the pack. According to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, we are about 15th among 29 industrialized countries in college completion rates. That really has consequences, because when you look at China and at Japan and at South Korea, these are countries that are now the innovators in the world. They are producing the engineers. There used to be a time when you saw Chinese students sitting in American universities. You don't really see that anymore. They are staying at home and are obtaining their baccalaureate degrees.

Now, President Obama has indicated that he has a goal of producing the highest proportion of college graduates in the world by 2020. To reach that goal, this Pell Grant increase is a part of that program. He also wants to expand the reach of community colleges, wants to invest Federal money in research and data collection and in other reforms to the student loan program, and wants to simplify the student aid process.

The gentleman from Virginia, those are very good intentions, and you're experienced on the Education and Labor Committee, but I guess I'd like you to respond to whether or not just simply providing financial aid and collecting data will get us there.

Right.

Will the gentleman yield?

Gentleman, you indicated, I heard you say that we need to get all of our kids prepared to go to college. And I'm wondering if we aren't concerned about class warfare. We talked about those parents who are not low income. They've gone to college. They've had a college fund for their children early on. And perhaps these are parents who might feel somewhat resentful that there's a program out there that provides supportive services for low-income students, as I indicated, I mean, 41 percent of low-income students, just--I mean, if you're not an athlete and you can win a scholarship, you know, if you're not summa cum laude, valedictorian of your high school, you might not have access to scholarship funds.

What would you say to those parents who do have a baccalaureate degree about the need to make sure we give access to all students to college?

I was just looking at an article that was published in Forbes Magazine recently, called Investing in America's Future, and one of the points that the author made was that in California, two-fifths of the State's jobs are expected to require college degrees by the year 2020. But the number of adults with those credentials will fall short. So it's not just a matter of providing an opportunity for middle-class and upper-class students.

We've been joined by Congresswoman Sheila Jackson-Lee, who has spoken often about the need for businesses to have an educated workforce. I've heard her speak very passionately about how there are so many requests among our business leaders for foreign students to come into the country because we don't have an educated workforce.

And so, gentleman, I'd like you to respond to that.

Thank you so much.

I'm so happy this evening that we've been joined by Congresswoman Sheila Jackson-Lee from Houston, Texas; and I would yield to her at this time.

Will the gentlelady yield?

This is the question I have for my colleagues here. If it's so clear, as you've indicated, gentlelady from Texas, that TRIO works, if it's so clear, as the gentleman from Virginia has indicated, that we need, in order to remain globally competitive and to continue to be the innovative country and to really develop a way to develop and create new revenues for our country, we're not going to just cut spending and raise taxes and have that be adequate for remaining a first-class nation.

If it's true that we don't have enough upper-class students who are graduating from college that we can afford to ignore low-income white students, low-income African American students, low-income Hispanic students, low-income Asian students, disabled students and veterans who are in these programs, if we can't afford to ignore them, we've got to grab them and educate them so that we can meet those goals and that bar, why has TRIO been flat funded?

What are the consequences of the fact that TRIO was flat funded during fiscal year 2006 and 2008, had just a minimal increase in 2009, a minimal increase in 2010 and, God bless him, our Appropriations Chair, Dave Obey, added $20 million to TRIO this cycle, but after all of the negotiations with the Senate, only $5 million was retained in that program. What are the consequences of reducing these vital services to TRIO students and our remaining competitiveness of the world? We need at least $200 million for this program.

Will the gentlelady yield?

My colleague Representative Scott is a great mentor of mine. He serves on the Budget Committee, and he is an expert on one of the subjects that really consumes a great deal of time on this floor and in our committees, and that's the subject of the budget deficit and how we dig ourselves out of this hole. And I guess I was wondering if he would share--I'm sort of surprising him with this question, but I guess I would like for him to talk about the revenue options or the cutting options or how we got into this fiscal hole that we are in and what the role of educating and having an educated workforce will have on us ever being able to approach some sort of deficit reduction.

And I will yield to the gentleman.

Thank you so much for that, gentleman. That is so important.

You know, the Department of Education really bears this out. They say a high school dropout earns about $18,000 a year--of course that's if they're not costing us money in the prison system--a high school graduate, $26,000 a year, an associates degree, $38,000, and a bachelor's degree, $65,000. When we consider our aging baby boomers, we certainly are going to need to make sure that we have a lot of higher- income individuals working toward all of these innovations that we are so capable of.

Wow. Before I yield to the gentlelady, I just want to say that old adage, ``pennywise and pound foolish.'' I started this hour out by talking about all of the competing problems that we discuss on this floor, the cost of the war and cost of health care, costs of Medicare and Social Security, those entitlement programs, the cost of escalating the war in Afghanistan, the great recession where, at its height, 700,000 jobs were lost in a single month, the bailout funds for the ``too big to fail'' institutions.

And so if we allow ourselves to get mired down in this and decide that $200 million for an education program is just too much money, that would be the perfect place to talk about pennywise and pound foolish, wouldn't you agree, gentleman?

Thank you so much. That was just amazing information.

The gentlelady from Texas, I would love to hear what you have to say on this matter.

Thank you so much, gentlelady from Houston, Texas. And thank you, my dear friend and colleague on the Budget Committee and also on the Education and Labor Committee.

Before we close out this hour, I just want to sort of summarize what we have said here this evening.

We really admire this Congress and our President for really revamping tuition and making adequate tuition a priority. It has been so important to revisit how we make student loans so that we don't just provide funding for bankers, that we actually use those funds for students, to simplify student forms. It is even important to invest in research about educational outcomes.

It has been very, very important to have seen the dramatic increase in the Pell Grant because, without this tuition assistance, students would not be able to make it. Tuition assistance is a vital component in helping low-income and first-generation college students or any students get through college. Without these dollars, higher education would be unattainable for millions of students who rely on Pell to pay the bills. But all too often, Pell is a wasted investment for our low- income kids because they don't have access to guidance counselors and tutors and the other types of support that come with the TRIO programs.

It doesn't do the student or our country much good if we spend millions on first-year Pell recipients only to have those students drop out after their second or third year. That's not a sound investment. A sound investment is making sure that when we commit to providing educational resources for our most vulnerable kids, we give them all the tools to successfully see that journey through.

That's why we're here today. This Congress has drastically increased vital funding for Pell Grants. I have been and will continue to be a staunch

supporter of that increased investment, but I also know that millions of those dollars will be wasted unless we also invest in the tools to get these students through college.

More importantly, our country, our country, our beloved country that we love so much, and love so dearly, and a country that has given us an amazing life-style of modern living is at risk if we don't educate the future workforce. We have got to start with our tiny tots in early education, but that's a more long-term goal. Right now we are having an emergency, an emergency; students are either not graduating from high school or they are graduating with deficiencies.

In order to step up, we need a TRIO program, a modest amount of funding, $200 million in the scheme of things, nothing like we are spending on all the other crises in this country, that would help these programs serve those students who are on waiting lists.

With that, I would yield to the gentleman from Virginia.

This has been great, this has been fantastic, and I would say that the importance of this program is its diversity. It is not a program that just benefits one group of people. Thirty- seven percent of TRIO students are white, 35 percent are African Americans, 19 percent are Hispanics, 4 percent are Native Americans, 22,000 of TRIO's students are disabled students, and 25,000 are our beloved veterans.

This is a program that embraces every American from all backgrounds and makes sure that money is not the reason that you cannot use your brain. Talk about a brain drain, it's a brain drain when the only thing that stands between you and greatness is an education.

Thank you so much and good night.

Madam Speaker, I could not resist coming to you and speaking to you about my experience when we passed the financial reform bill last Friday.

You know, Wall Street has provided an unparalleled life-style for Americans. The speculation and the brilliance and genius of futures and credit default swaps and derivatives have provided us with a life-style where every bride can have a diamond ring and every handsome groom can have a gold band. We can have two cars, one a gas-guzzling SUV, lobster dinners, McMansions, Madam Speaker, with six bedrooms, five fireplaces, 4\1/2\ baths but, of course, not enough closet space for all the shoes and designer clothes that we have.

Last fall, all of this balloon spending came to a crash. And it was amazing to me, Madam Speaker, that when we tried to rein in Wall Street and some of the speculation, that there was tremendous resistance from both parties with developing a Consumer Financial Protection Agency, putting together an assessment from all of these ``too big to fail'' companies to pay for an orderly dissolution of the mess that they created. I can tell you, Madam Speaker, it was amazing to me.

This bill that we passed, for those who have asked the question, what is government for, this bill demonstrates better than anything that I have seen what the purpose of government is, and that is to regulate unfettered greed and avarice that can bring our country and, indeed, the world to financial brink.

Well, thank you, gentlelady from Ohio for yielding. And I can tell you that I found the remarks of our Chair very, very compelling, and I guess I would agree with her. But I want to add that while a couple of the categories of the Congressional Black Caucus include infrastructure jobs and providing funds for local programs, and while I believe that there is a general call for these types of spending to stimulate our economy, I've heard on both sides of the aisle calls for moneys to be used for infrastructure improvements.

I would say, with a qualification, that we need to make sure the funds for infrastructure projects go directly to cities and counties and allow those governments the flexibility to determine where the greatest infrastructure needs are for their communities. I think that while the Recovery Act saved between 600,000 and 1.6 million jobs, we ought to learn from some of the mistakes that were made there, and I think that the Congressional Black Caucus, in its wisdom, has pointed out that we need to target our initiatives more and not just give the moneys to those States that don't necessarily target those funds, and make sure that it gets to the cities and States to work on infrastructure programs that are needed.

The other qualification that I would give, and I think that the Chair raised it in her comments, is that we need to make sure that the infrastructure projects include those people that--that they target them to those communities that are in need. And with that, I would say that we need to target, we need to create programs for pre- apprenticeship programs so that all of the moneys don't go to those, all of it doesn't go to those laborers and those folks who are typically building within our communities, those people who already have some of the skill sets and education that can transition them into the new energy-related initiatives, but that we ought to look at pre- apprenticeship programs so that we can expose individuals with low skill sets to other workers with family-supporting jobs by working alongside with them nearby and on the same projects.

From those experienced workers, the pre-apprentice participants can learn a pathway on how to move forward and develop those skill sets that will move them up the career ladder, and at the same time, provide them with sustainable income. To help enforce this, lady from Ohio, I believe that contractors could be required to include a certain percentage of pre-apprenticeship participants in their so-called Federal

floor participation of women and minority workers that is already required by executive order.

The reality is that we cannot afford to wait while the unemployment rate for minorities continues to rise. Unemployment, reemployment is a lagging indicator, and we can't wait until we reduce these numbers. The unemployment rate among black males is currently 15.6 percent. And by April of 2009, the gap between black and white men grew to a 13-year high of 7 percent. The time is now. And I urge my colleagues to consider all proposals that present the American people with a jobs bill that not only creates jobs, but sets up training programs and education programs that will help dislocated workers gain new skills that will lead to sustainable employment.

Now, Madam Chairman, lady from Ohio, I have in fact, mentioned that we need to work toward helping women and minorities get into these infrastructure jobs and the new energy-related jobs. And there has been feedback that we ought not target this specifically toward a particular race, or perhaps toward a particular gender. But when you look at the framework that the Congressional Black Caucus has laid out, that we need to target it toward those census tracks where there is a dearth of persons who have these kinds of jobs, or who are unemployed, we will find, much to many people's amazement, that there's a great deal of poverty among minorities, and there certainly is a great deal of poverty among women who find themselves increasingly heading households and providing the greatest source of income.

I thought it was very interesting that Maria Shriver recently did a study that really elucidated the fact that women were providing a greater and greater amount of the family income. And so this is something that I think the Congressional Black Caucus is raising in a very timely manner. And with that I would yield back to the gentlelady from Ohio.

I just want to mention to the gentleman from Minnesota, we're neighbors in the Midwest, and of course you know there have been hundreds of thousands of manufacturing jobs that have been lost in the Midwest over the last 30 years. But since 2008, we have lost more jobs during 2008 than in any--for the last 70 years that these data and statistics have been collected. And so that, I think, is really telling about the attrition of jobs.

I hear people often talking about how horrific the 10.4 percent unemployment rate is. If there were a 10.4 percent unemployment rate within the confines of the city of Milwaukee, we would be dancing in the street with delight.

We have a researcher named Marc Levine from the University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee who has kept data of the discouraged workers-- those people who are not officially unemployed because they're no longer standing there, discouraged workers. And among white men in my community, we have a 17 percent unemployment rate. And we have a 40 to 50 percent unemployment rate among white men, and of course a staggering statistic, about 30 percent among Hispanic men. But about 17 percent among white men in our community. So it's really a crisis of gargantuan proportions.

Yes.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this bill because domestic violence costs as much as $750 billion to our health care system.

Madam Speaker, I am disappointed that we have gotten to the point that the House even has to consider this resolution before us this week. I am inclined to vote for this resolution but not without reservations.

My vote for this resolution should not be read either as an endorsement of Operation Lead Cast or as an endorsement of the position that investigations of serious allegations of war crimes should not be undertaken.

We cannot act as if the devastating war in Gaza in January did not have consequences for Palestinians, Israelis, and the international community. We cannot and should not brush aside legitimate allegations about abuses committed by both sides during this conflict. Yet, now more than ever, we also need to intensify efforts to resolve the very serious issues that had unfortunately led to many needless deaths and continuing tensions and may continue to do so if we let the status quo linger.

I have reservations that the resolution before the House this week would do nothing to defuse the demagoguery that has long plagued the Middle East and to help steer us to a future devoid of more rocket attacks or violence in the region.

Ten months after the ``cessation'' of overt fighting in Gaza, tensions remain high and both the Palestinian and Israeli people continue to live with tremendous insecurity and fear. I am dismayed that it appears to be only a matter of time until the endless cycle of violence repeats itself again along with the resumption of increased misery for innocent Israeli and Palestinian men, women, and children in the region. We as a Congress, at this point, would be better served by trying to support efforts to reinvigorate the peace process, defuse these mounting tensions, and pressing both parties to meet at the negotiating table.

Nonetheless, the Goldstone report includes some very serious charges relating to possible war crimes or other crimes against humanity committed by Israel, Hamas, and other Palestinian armed groups. To give just one example, there are allegations of deliberate and premeditative efforts to target a wastewater treatment plant--that did not have any link to ``Palestinian armed groups or any other effective contribution to military action''--sending over 200,000 cubic meters of raw sewage onto farmland. What is lacking in this report is a full and complete accounting of the reckless, indiscriminate, and ongoing use of rockets by

Hamas and other groups to target innocent civilians in Israel. Such a report cannot shortchange such an effort because doing so allows those seeking to score political points--rather than seeking peace, stability, and accountability--to hijack this process.

Again, the breadth and gravity of these charges demand that these ``facts'' be established in a comprehensive and fair way. Yet, even our own State Department--which has been actively engaged in pursuing peace in the region and urging both sides to move that process forward--has raised concerns about both the mandate for the report as well as the report itself, noting ``serious concerns about the report's unbalanced focus on Israel, its sweeping factual and legal conclusions, and many of its recommendations.'' I am not saying that there should not be a serious and comprehensive finding of fact that can serve as a starting point on the road to truth and justice about what occurred on both sides. But this is not it.

The lack of a widely credible report on potential human rights abuses during the Gaza conflict is a missed opportunity to advance peace or stability in the region. It does not advance accountability. In a region with plenty of easy opportunity for division and unleashing of tensions, I believe that a more widely credible report could have been so much more useful in promoting transparency about what occurred, justice for those affected, and the prospect of a future peace for all. And it would have made this resolution on the floor this week unnecessary.

Madam Speaker, I rise in honor of Elmer Winter, a noted Milwaukee philanthropist, entrepreneur, artist, and author. In 1948, Mr. Winter cofounded Manpower, Inc., based in Milwaukee, WI and today the largest temporary employer in the world.

Elmer Winter was born in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, on March 6, 1912. His father was a clothing merchant and belonged to a small, liberal Jewish community in Milwaukee in the 1920s. He was educated in Milwaukee Public Schools, graduated from the University of Wisconsin with a degree in economics as well as a law degree. He practiced law in partnership with his brother-in-law, Aaron Scheinfeld.

Manpower began with the illness of their secretary: Winter and Scheinfeld were frantic to find a typist in order to finish a legal brief for the state Supreme Court. The deadline was met only because a former secretary worked until dawn. The partners knew that other businesses must face these types of challenges and launched the temporary help agency with an investment of $7000. Manpower is now a multibillion-dollar company with 30,000 employees in 4,100 offices throughout 82 countries.

Mr. Winter had many community-building interests such as improving the central city of Milwaukee, including its schools. ``I am very much concerned about the movement of corporate executives away from public schools to charter and voucher schools,'' he said in 2000. ``Corporations have forgotten about the fact that we have 100,000 young people in the public school system that need help''. Mr. Winter considered jobs as the bedrock for any social reform because a job meant a better place to live, streets that are safe, and kids who are out of mischief. In his spare time, he created art and wrote 13 published books. As a painter and sculptor his work was displayed throughout the United States and Israel.

His efforts included everything from the Youthpower Jobs Program to getting business-donated computers refurbished at the state women's prison at Taycheedah for MPS classrooms. Mr. Winter founded the Milwaukee Center for Independence, which serves people with disabilities and is one of Milwaukee's largest nonprofit agencies. He served as a national president of the American Jewish Committee and worked on behalf of the Jewish community on both the national and international level. Mr. Winter formed and led the Committee for the Economic Growth of Israel, a nonprofit dedicated to expanding trade relationships between Israel and the United States.

Mr. Winter was married to Nannette Rosenberg for 54 years and together they raised three daughters, eight grandchildren and six great-grandchildren. Nannette passed away in 1990. In 1992 he married Hope Melamed. Mr. Winter retired as president of Manpower in 1976. He drove daily to the office he maintained at Manpower's headquarters in Milwaukee until shortly before his death on October 22, 2009, at the age of 97. Madam Speaker, Milwaukee has experienced a profound loss of a valued native son with the passing of Mr. Winter. Today, I thank him and his family for their immeasurable achievements. I mourn his loss and salute his legacy to our community and the world.

I thank the chairwoman for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the fiscal year 2010 Agriculture appropriations conference report, and specifically the provision included in the bill that will grant Wisconsin a waiver in the Child and Adult Food Care Program to serve a third meal through the At-Risk After-School Supper Program. As a matter of fact, Representative Andre Carson and I have introduced H.R. 3321 that would also provide a third After-School Supper meal. I want to thank the chairwoman here and Senator Herb Kohl in the Senate for diligently putting together a bill with record funding that will help to meet the needs of all those who are food insecure.

Every 35 seconds a child is born into poverty, and in the United States 12 million children are at risk of going hungry. In the city of Milwaukee, a city I represent, this is the 11th-poorest large city in the Nation, and we are in dire need of this expansion.

Mr. Speaker, as a school-aged youth, I attended school hungry every day. But now that our country is facing a recession, all signs point to an epidemic of hunger unlike anything we have seen in our lifetime. Between 2000 and 2007, the number of people we have seen living in poverty and suffering from very low food security rose from 8.5 million to 11.9 million. This is a 40 percent increase in the numbers of households living in poverty.

In my own city of Milwaukee, we have the largest achievement gap between blacks and whites in Wisconsin. But studies have shown that students who eat nutritious meals every day perform better on standardized tests, improve reading and are more attentive in class. Every single day this program provides 3.1 million children with nutritious meals.

Mr. Speaker, I again congratulate the gentlewoman.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Marshall and Marjorie Barlow for being selected for the 2009 Angels in Adoption Award. This award is to honor the tremendous and selfless work of two of my constituents that has enriched the lives of foster children and orphans. I believe the Barlow family is truly deserving of this high honor and I want to commend them for their service to our community.

According to most recent data from the Department of Health and Human Services, in 2006, 79,000 children were taken away from their parents in the court systems but only 51,000 were adopted. According to the same data, in 2006, there were a total of 510,000 children in the U.S. foster care system that needed a safe environment to live. These startling facts demonstrate that foster care families, like the Barlows, are so tremendously important for helping and preserving our nation's most valuable investment for the future, our children.

Marshall and Marjorie have gone consistently above and beyond the call of duty by taking on a rather specialized role in the foster care system. In addition to over 400 children who have entered their doors, the Barlow family serves as an assessment family. Assessment families are on call 24 hours a day, 7 days a week in order to ensure that a potential adopting family meets the requirements for providing a safe and caring environment for the children.

The Barlow family also shows their deep and personal dedication to the foster care system through many different aspects of their own lives. For example, their household contains what they call a ``virtual store,'' a collection of clothes, toys, and care items for children of all ages. Another example of their generosity is when Marjorie and Marshall, already parents of three, opened their family to one of their foster children. The first young woman that they took in was pregnant and they helped her give birth to the first child that they adopted into their own family, Taliyah.

Marshall and Marjorie Barlow are truly deserving of this honor and recognition for their dedication to such a noble cause. The Barlow family is a true inspiration to us for touching the lives of so many children that desperately need our help.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in recognition of the 15th anniversary of the Violence Against Women Act. I am so proud of the light that Congress shined on domestic violence 15 years ago this week, of the work that the dedicated staff and advocates have done for the past decade and a half, and of the bravery shown by victims and their families. For 15 years now, the Office on Violence Against Women has served as a safe haven for families everywhere. Through it, we have provided services and counseling during victims' darkest hours, emergency and transitional shelter in times of need, and legal assistance to help prosecute perpetrators.

Domestic violence is a scourge in this country, one that recognizes no income brackets, no race, no age. Earlier this week, I joined my constituents in Wisconsin for the fourth annual Brides Walk. We donned wedding dresses and marched through the streets of Milwaukee, calling attention to the violent murder of Gladys Ricart. Gladys was in the process of handing her bouquet to her maid of honor 8 years ago in New York when a former lover burst into the church and killed her in her wedding dress.

Domestic violence is not a private matter. Domestic violence against a partner or a child, whether physical or mental, is not okay. On this anniversary, I urge my colleagues to recommit themselves once again to ending this injustice in our country.