Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I have a parliamentary inquiry.

Mr. Speaker, my question is, if we take one of these green cards and sign it and have it sent back by certified mail, would that be acceptable as a vote in the House, if you are more than 1,000 miles from the Capitol?

I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Doggett).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Inslee).

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

Mr. Chair, I rise today in opposition to the Senate amendment to the Middle Class Tax Relief Act of 2010.

This bill has good parts to it for the poor and the middle class, but it gives away $120 billion to the superrich, $120 billion the rich don't need, and will not create any jobs. It's a huge giveaway to the superrich in these tough economic times. It just boggles the mind. It's unconscionable. It's indefensible.

We all know the only reason we're even considering this craziness is to get Republican votes in the Senate so they won't filibuster the bill. That Republicans insist on giving away taxpayer money to the rich while sticking it to the poor and the unemployed is worse than wrong. It is without conscience.

Yesterday, my State of Washington announced it will cut all of the working poor health care from the State basic health plan. 66,000 people and 16,000 low-income children will lose their health care. All they will have is the emergency room. It doesn't end there. Washington State is also cutting off 85,000 elderly off their drug assistance program. These are people's lives we're talking about, and we're pushing American families off their last lifelines during a recession to give tax breaks to the rich. That's the Republican tradeoff.

Americans don't want this giveaway. They want us to act with compassion and economic common sense and not help start another Republican economic disaster.

We could and should fix this bill with fair rates, but we won't because Senator McConnell says, Give me money for the rich.

I urge you to vote against it.

Mr. Chair, I rise today in opposition to the Senate Amendment to the Middle Class Tax Relief Act of 2010.

This bill has good parts to it for the poor and middle class, but it gives away $120 billion dollars to the super rich--$120 billion dollars the rich don't need and will do nothing to create jobs.

A huge give-away to the super-rich in these tough economic times just boggles the mind.

We all know the only reason we're even considering this craziness is to get Republicans votes in the Senate so they won't filibuster the bill.

That Republicans insist on giving away tax payer money to the rich while sticking it to the poor and unemployed is worse than wrong--it's without conscience.

Just yesterday my own State of Washington announced it will cut all of the working poor from the State basic health plan.

Working poor numbering 66,000 and 16,000 low income children will lose their health care--all they'll have is the emergency room. It doesn't end there--Washington State is pushing 85,000 elderly off of drug assistance too.

This bill undermines Social Security and increases taxes on the poor. Republicans won't ever want to restore the so-called temporary 2-year cut to social security taxes in this bill. Republicans will soon be calling the restoration of this tax, which keeps social security solvent, a `tax hike'. Then Republicans will bring up privatization as the only way to solve the shortfall. As a replacement to the Making Work Pay Credit, this tax cut actually increases taxes on the poor, and gives even more tax benefits to the rich.

This bill creates only stop-gap funding for unemployment insurance. Next year at this time unemployment will still be high, and we'll have another mean-spirited debate that demonizes the unemployed.

The give-aways and bad policy in this bill are capped off with the wasteful, environmentally disastrous Ethanol subsidy. Subsidizing ethanol distorts food markets and slows this country's real progress toward a sustainable green energy economy.

This bill transfers enormous amounts of wealth from the average American tax payer into the pockets of the wealthiest of this country at a huge cost.

These are people's lives we're talking about. We're pushing American families off their last life lines during a recession to give tax breaks to the super rich. That's the Republican trade off.

Americans don't want this give-away. They want us to act with compassion and economic common sense--and not help start another Republican economic disaster.

We should fix this bill with fair rates for the wealthy and funding for unemployment insurance that lasts until the working families of this country are back on their feet.

I urge my colleagues to vote ``no.''

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Omnibus Trade Act of 2010.

Mr. Speaker, you know that when the AFL-CIO and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce are energetically in favor of the same bill, that's a pretty good day and probably a pretty good thing to do. This bill helps U.S. businesses. It reduces their costs with tariff reductions on things they need that aren't made here in the United States. Each one of these tariff reductions have been carefully vetted. They have been on the Web site. Anybody can see them. It has been a very transparent process, and it is good that we're able to get it done before we leave the Congress at this time.

It will create billions of dollars of economic activity and help kick-start the creation of jobs. This bill also helps struggling economies around the world--the Andes, the Caribbean, and others--by keeping our trade programs in place and stable for the next 18 months.

We can't let these programs lapse. They are too important to Americans

and also to our good partners worldwide with whom we want economic development, with whom we do better if they're doing better, and these programs are helpful to them. To cut them off is to leave them with no place to sell the goods they are making. In fact, I would like a longer extension, and I really think there needs to be a trade preference bill.

I hope, in the next Congress, Mr. Brady and others on the other side will bring that forward. We had hoped to get it done this time, but we didn't get it done. We need to do it, and this is a good intermediate step.

Finally, we are keeping our Trade Adjustment Assistance program in place and are continuing to improve on it. This helps hundreds of thousands of workers every year, as you have heard, who are negatively impacted by trade. 227,000 workers have benefited from this in this year alone. They receive educational benefits and help in making the transition from an industry that has disappeared to one that is now expanding in the United States and will provide jobs. Our workers need to be mobile and retrained, and the Trade Adjustment Assistance helps get that done.

This bill costs almost nothing. It is fully paid for and will boost the economy. I urge all of my colleagues to vote for it.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pascrell).

I yield the gentleman 1 additional minute.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Etheridge).

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

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the International Protecting Girls By Preventing Child Marriage Act.

Recently, Nelson Mandela asked a group of the world's most thoughtful and experienced political and moral leaders to identify the largest issues fueling humanitarian problems, and forced child marriage is at the top of the list. Child marriage denies girls the chance to get a full education. Every country in the world that has advanced has educated their women as the first step. Child marriage prevents girls from contributing to their communities in the fullest way possible, and it contributes to the health crisis among women and babies in countries around the world.

In the next 10 years, it's estimated that over 100 million young girls will be forcibly married if we don't act, and the policy of the United States right now is to write more reports. With this bill, we can make a huge difference with no additional taxpayer moneys being spent. This bill gives clear guidelines on how already-appropriated moneys are to be spent in countries with the greatest problems, in ways that are culturally sensitive and community-based. It requires the State Department to track the issue annually as part of our human rights considerations.

Mr. Speaker, this bill will save lives and save dreams, and I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support it.

Well, thank you. Mr. Speaker, I am grateful that Representative Garamendi is talking tonight on this issue because it's one that we're going to argue over the next couple of weeks. And people ought to understand or have an opportunity to understand what really is going on. And I think that what the value of these kinds of hours is is that we can educate people about what's happening.

A man named Jacob Hacker wrote a book which is now on the newsstands called ``Winner-Take-All Politics.'' It really is a description of what has happened to the American economy and the American public over the last 30 years. If you just remember one fact, in 1980 the top 5 percent of people had $8 trillion worth of wealth. That's 1980, 30 years ago. Today, that top 5 percent have $40 trillion. They have quintupled, they have gone times five what they had in 1980.

The movement of money up to the top by the tax structure has been dramatic. And the average people who are out there working, both husband and wife are working, and they've been struggling, they've been working more hours, they have barely seen any increase in their net worth over the last few years, especially with the drop in real estate prices and the fact that pensions are gone, and all these things are happening. The people on the bottom have not reaped the benefits.

Now we come to what we're doing here. These taxes were put in before either of you came to the Congress. They were put in in 2001 in order to expire in 2010. As long as they defined them as expiring, they didn't count. They were just temporary. So they put in this huge giveaway for the whole society at the top, and expected that the people would come in in the year 2010 and reenact them.

Now, the Republicans are faced with a dilemma. In about 3 weeks they're going to take over this House. The Republicans will have the House of Representatives. They will have control of the Senate through the filibuster and the fact that the Democratic majority is reduced. So they are going to be forced to deal with this issue if we don't. They want us to deal with it. They bullied the President into putting this package together, and they're trying to give him the bum's rush to get it all done before they take over in January because they know a secret.

They have over there a number of people who ran for election saying they

would not raise the debt limit and they would not increase the deficits, and yet the first bill that would be presented to them is to cut taxes and increase the deficit. And they know it. And they want to get it done. The Democrats are being pushed into it.

Now, how did they do it? Well, it's very simple. We care about workers. We care about the unemployed. We care about people who don't get a check to put food on the table and pay the rent and keep the lights on. So, we want to take care of the unemployed. The unemployment program ran out the 1st of December, and it's more running out by the end of December. You are going to have 2 million people lose their ability to put food on the table for their own children at Christmas time.

So the Republicans said, all right, we're not going to deal with this unemployment thing. We're going to stop it. We're going to stop it. And we're going to use it as the lever by which we force the Democrats to give us this tax break for the rich.

So the decision that's going to be made on this floor is shall we give--the bill that the President put out today, I am voting against it. I will make that real clear. It says 1 year of unemployment benefits for the unemployed in this country, and we're going to give 2 years, $84 billion, or you say 70, but whatever, it's somewhere up above $75 billion that goes to people on the top who already are rich beyond belief. And the hostages in this whole thing have been the unemployed.

What is absolutely unconscionable is what has been done to the unemployed. This is the second time. Last August they let it drag through about 51 days where nobody got a check because the program had expired. And unless you have been unemployed, you don't understand what that means. That means nothing comes in the mailbox, no check. So you have no way to go down to the grocery store and get food for your family.

Now, what do you in that case? People say, well, they go on welfare. No, they don't. There's no welfare program today. The only thing that's available for somebody who is without an unemployment check is food stamps. Or they can of course go to the food banks. The food banks are panicked by the fact that we have not extended unemployment benefits because they gave it all away at Thanksgiving, and here comes the month of December, and people are coming in droves, and they have nothing to give them.

That's what's going on in America. The people on the other side that would say we would not--this is what Mitch McConnell said. If you listen to him, it drives you nuts, because he said if you won't pass the tax break for the millionaires, nothing is going to happen in here. That kind of attitude is simply wrong, and that's why what you are doing here tonight, letting people be aware of what's happening and what the options really are, and what the impacts are going to be, is very important.

Because the whole of the base in a democracy is an informed electorate. If we don't understand what's going on, if people aren't paying attention, they are going to wind up saying how did this happen? Well it happened because we didn't pay attention.

This is a real turning point for the President and the Democrats in this year. Because what we do here will set the stage for the next 2 years. We will be backing up. I learned when I was a kid on the playground, bullies will make you back up. And if you keep backing up, you will be backing up your whole life.

You have got to stop at some point and say ``no,'' we are not going any further, you do it. And I really think that the Democrats would be much better off to force the Republicans to put up the votes for this event. They are going to try and slip around and say, well, we will give you 10, 15 votes but no more.

I think what you are doing here is starting to put the pressure on that whole process, and I commend you for doing it. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, Benjamin Franklin once said: ``Nothing in this world is certain but death and taxes.'' Ha, Mr. Franklin had never met the modern Republican Party.

The only thing certain about taxes these days is that the Republicans are going to use them to take from the poor and give to the rich again and again and again; and now the Senate Republicans have brought all legislation to a halt--a halt--in this building until the super-rich get their tax cuts.

They are determined to take care of the rich. This political maneuvering by the Republicans brings uncertainty to the middle class at a time when they really need certainty so that they know what they are going to have in the next year.

Food banks are panicking all over this country because the Republicans in the Senate say the tax cuts for the rich go before any money for those unemployed people who are looking for their unemployment insurance. The food banks know what is going to happen: hungry people are going to be coming in, but it doesn't make any difference to the Republicans.

In fact, it's time to hang your Christmas stocking. Can you imagine the rich in this country hanging their Christmas stockings and putting in the gold of the tax cuts? Can you imagine the unemployed hanging their Christmas stockings?

To pay for food or to pay the mortgage, they're going to look in their Christmas stockings and see what? Coal.

We know how this movie is going to turn out. This bill will pass over to the Senate. It will come back with the big tax cuts for the rich. Some of us are going to vote ``no.'' We will vote ``yes'' today, but ``no'' when it comes back because it isn't fair to the unemployed people of this country that the rich get their money for sure when we dole it out to the unemployed one bite at a time.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Claims Resolution Act to remedy past injustices against Native Americans and African Americans. This bill will provide a resolution to respond to past mismanagement of tribal lands and to discrimination against African American farmers by the Department of Agriculture. In short, we are taking at least a partial step to right old, old, old wrongs.

This legislation also extends, through fiscal year 2011, the basic Temporary Assistance for Needy Families. That's the TANF program. This extension of the program is welcome, but it is not enough. This bill does not include the TANF Emergency Fund, which provided funds to our States to help needy families and to establish or expand employment programs for jobless Americans. Roughly 250,000 jobs were created by the program, primarily through private sector employers. The House passed the extension of these job programs on two separate occasions earlier this year, but Republicans in the Senate have repeatedly blocked the extension.

Additionally, the bill before us fails to maintain full funding for the Child Support Enforcement Program, which means less support will be ultimately collected and sent to children. The fact that these important supports are expiring should be a wake-up call to the American public. Watch the Republicans control this House. They need to know that Republicans are actively working to shred America's safety net just when it's needed most.

In closing, I will support this bill's response to those who suffered in the past. It is said that justice delayed is justice denied, but it's better to get it late than never. But I find it regrettable that this bill does so little to help those who are suffering today. This is about what went on a long time ago. It is not dealing with what's happening today.

I urge the support of this act. We will be back on unemployment insurance and the other issues that need to be dealt with in the near future.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Rahall).

Madam Speaker, Oliver Wendell Holmes said ``taxes are the price we pay for a civilized society'' and taxes are a very big topic in our national debate today. How much federal income tax people pay and what those taxes buy is not well understood by many Americans. It is hard and complicated to figure out. Very little information about how tax revenues are spent is ever made available to the American people. This results in significant misinformation. For example, a Washington Post and Kaiser Foundation poll found that by a margin of two to one, Americans believe that the federal government spends more on foreign aid than on either Social Security or Medicare. This is why I am introducing the Taxpayer Receipt Act of 2010. This bill requires the Secretary of the Treasury to provide each taxpayer with a simple annual statement explaining how his or her federal income tax dollars were spent.

Similar to the annual Social Security statement, the Taxpayer Receipt will show the taxpayer's income tax liability, the amount of the liability spent on major spending categories, and the actual federal outlays for each category. It will also provide information on the state of the deficit and the 10 costliest tax breaks for that year. This simple annual Taxpayer Receipt will provide clear and consistent information to taxpayers that will serve to educate taxpayers on government spending--a subject full of misinformation.

Thomas Jefferson once said, ``Information is the currency of democracy.'' To that end, providing Americans with information and transparency on government spending is essential to maintaining the strength and health of our democracy.

Madam Speaker, the current recession has impacted the lives of millions of American families. Unemployment rates in the past 3 years have reached record highs, with competition for employment so steep that roughly five Americans compete for every available job. Providing meaningful relief to the unemployed in these scarce times is, by definition, our responsibility as legislators.

To get through these hard times, millions of unemployed Americans are raiding their retirement savings to put food on the table. In 2007, over 34 million Americans participated in their employer-sponsored retirement plans, and over 20 million Americans had an Individual Retirement Account. Unfortunately, withdrawing retirement funds early can carry stiff penalties. That is why I am introducing legislation to waive the penalty for unemployed taxpayers who have turned to their retirement savings for an early distribution. This bill will waive the penalty for such distributions made during 2009, 2010, or 2011, so long as the taxpayer received 12 consecutive weeks of unemployment compensation in the year the distribution was made.

In creating retirement accounts with special tax treatment, Congress was encouraging saving towards a financially stable retirement. It was the right thing to do. Congress wanted these funds to be for retirement, but Congress did not foresee the economic disaster we are going through. By allowing temporary, penalty-free withdrawals from retirement accounts when folks are unemployed we are helping the unemployed when they need it most.

Madam Speaker, in the midst of this recession, the American people face impossible job prospects, decreased wages, and the continuing decline in the value of their homes. Reports show that 23 percent of all residential properties are underwater and the foreclosure rates are only rising. Underwater homeowners are often ineligible for refinancing, and are kept from restructuring the mortgage debt on their primary home in bankruptcy. With banks being largely ineffective in modifying loans, homeowners are left with little choice but foreclosure. The American people deserve better, and fixing this problem will help the economy and American families.

The ``Protecting Homeowners and Foreclosure Stabilization act of 2010'' will give homeowners the ability to restructure the debt on their primary residence in bankruptcy. Furthermore, homeowners will receive increased protection from foreclosure by the automatic stay in bankruptcy, and increased time to file a plan in Chapter 13. Homeowners facing foreclosure have the additional benefit of waiver of the pre- filing counseling requirement to ensure minimal delay in accessing the court. As a condition of filing, homeowners must certify that they requested a loan modification from their bank.

The ability to restructure the debt of all assets in bankruptcy has long been enjoyed by businesses. There is no reason that the American people should receive fewer protections than businesses do in bankruptcy. The ``Protecting Homeowners and Foreclosure Stabilization act of 2010'' will help put American homeowners on equal footing with the banks when working to save their homes.

Madam Speaker, may I ask what the division of minutes is at the moment?

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

I rise in support of H.R. 6419, which will extend current unemployment insurance benefits through February of next year and will provide much needed help to unemployed Americans during the holiday season.

From the beginning of the unemployment insurance program 75 years ago, we have never cut off benefits for out-of-work Americans when the unemployment rates have been this high. Without this extension, temporary Federal extended benefits will shut down shortly after Thanksgiving, the 27th, denying benefits to 2 million of our fellow citizens over the holiday season. It is unthinkable to me that we can allow these benefits to lapse during the holiday season and before the economic recovery is on solid ground.

Despite the severity of the Republican economic collapse, which started under Mr. Bush, there have been 10 straight months of private sector growth under this Democratically controlled Congress and administration. Despite the huge accomplishment of digging the American economy out of the Republican economic ditch, too many Americans remain unemployed. There is still only one available job for every five unemployed Americans. To make matters worse, the press is now carrying reports that employers around the country are refusing to hire the unemployed.

They're saying to the unemployed, We want to hire somebody who has a job to come over and fill our job because we know you were laid off because you weren't a good employee, and that's why they let you go. We don't want to hire people who aren't worth anything.

That's the message that's going out in this country now to the unemployed. Many of those people are middle class people who have worked very hard, and through no fault of their own, their industries have collapsed--banking, housing--as a direct result of what the Bush administration did--or didn't do, really, which is to have regulated Wall Street.

Unfortunately, the Republicans have already made it clear that, instead of helping the middle class, one of their top priorities is to give millionaires and billionaires a huge $700 billion break. Now, the same people who are saying this should be paid for will be out on this floor sometime in the next couple of weeks, saying, We don't have to pay for a tax break. Why, that'll pump jobs into the world. All we have to do is cut taxes everywhere and give $700 billion to people who make more than $500,000 a year--that's okay--but an unemployment check for somebody to keep bread on the table and keep a mortgage paid is not okay.

We can't not fund that. This is an emergency.

People who talk like that on the floor of this House have never been unemployed or have never known anybody who has been unemployed. You would not talk that way about unemployed people if you knew them.

Now, this should give every middle class American a lot to think about with the results of this last election. This is your first chance to observe what you can expect in the next 2 years. The minority leader in the other body said, My number one priority is to prevent Barack Obama from having a second term. Not public policy. Not jobs for people. Not health care for people--but political gain.

And that's what this is all about. The experts agree--two out of every three people who get unemployment benefits are in the middle class. We're not talking about people who weren't trying or weren't working or weren't doing their part as Americans.

While the Republicans were bankrupting the country to help the rich with one hand, giving tax breaks all over the place, the Republicans were using the other hand to push the unemployed middle class of America out of their homes and never dealt with the foreclosure issue to prevent them from having food on their tables and to keep their children from being properly clothed.

On the campaign trail Republicans called the unemployed ``lazy.'' Boy, you haven't met an unemployed person or you would never say that a second time to them. And they said that unemployment benefits ``spoil'' out of work Americans. They get lazy and they just sit around the house and wait for their unemployment check. Those checks aren't that big in the first place, and secondly, people don't like to be unemployed in this country. People look for work, and they are looking for work and they are now being told you've been unemployed for 2 years, we're not interested in hiring you. We want somebody who's got a job over here. That was on NPR just yesterday. So it isn't made up. That's what's going on.

Some Republicans even question the constitutionality of the Unemployment Insurance Program. The health and welfare of the American people is unconstitutional, according to some people.

Fortunately, the American people don't feel the same way. A recent poll showed that 86 percent of Americans believe the unemployed really want to work. That's what the people think. That's not the political rhetoric of people running for election. That's what the people really think.

The election is over now, and Americans have said we want both parties to work together to get things done and do it by listening to the American people. Americans don't want to push American families whose breadwinners lost their jobs through no fault of their own into poverty during the holidays.

I think we should end these debates and extend benefits longer and allow benefits to be scaled back as the economy improves. The reason we've had all these votes out here is because the Senate is unable to do anything. We've tried to extend this for extended periods of time, and over in the Senate, they say, well, let's extend it for a month, let's see if we can starve them for a month, and then we'll go in. They let this program lapse for 3 months over there, and you're telling me that we're going to work together. Well, I think we ought to work together.

This is a short-term extension in an effort to see if our Republican colleagues will support any kind of help for the unemployed. I am told by the other side that there's no plan in the Senate to take up this bill. Well, they're waiting to see if we can get it out of here. If you don't help, maybe it won't get out of here, but the message to 4 million Americans will be the Republican Party doesn't care whether you have a Christmas or a way to fund your mortgage or a way to put food on the table for the first three months of the next year. I hope my Republican colleagues will join the American people in supporting this bill.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I yield myself 30 additional seconds.

My friend on the other side clearly understands, I'm sure, the legislative process. We put a bill over to the Senate. They can make a change. If they want to pay for it, they can pay for it. They are safe, they're comfortable, because they know you're going to stop the bill or try to stop the bill. They know that the House Republicans are determined that they're not going to let this bill through here. So they say, all right, we can say we don't have any way to do anything with it. My belief is that we put a bill over there, they will pass a bill.

I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis).

Madam Speaker, could you tell us how much time we have left?

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney).

I yield the gentlelady an additional 30 seconds.

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

I have found that the other side is very adroit at finding some reason not to do anything to help the middle class. Now, there is plenty of evidence to suggest that the people in this country are not interested in cutting off food and housing and medical coverage for people who are unemployed in this country. And to use these arguments about, Oh, we're going to get the money from the stimulus money, I defy anybody on this floor at this moment to stand up and tell me where that stimulus money is and what the impact would be if you cut it because that money was allocated to various agencies, some to pay salaries for schoolteachers, some to pay salaries for policemen and firemen and local governments, some to pay the States for Medicaid.

All this money is out there. Maybe some of it hasn't yet been spent, but it's allocated. Some of it is for construction projects. I suppose, just like that Governor in New Jersey who thinks it's really politically smart to stop a public works project under the Hudson River because then he can use that money to pave potholes in New Jersey, and he puts the construction workers out of work all over the place.

Those infrastructure projects, you can't spend all the money on the first day. It does take a little while to build it, and you pay it out as you build it. Now, you know that. Republicans are just being deceptive. They think because it still is there in the Treasury, it can be used for something else. Well, it might have been committed for something else.

But not my Republican friends. This emergency that these 4\1/2\ million people have over here who have no benefits coming by the end of March, ``You folks understand that you shouldn't worry about this. I mean, the Speaker will explain it to you that you just have to wait until we can find where that money is in the budget.''

This is an emergency for people who have no check coming.

We would all like this thing to be all over. There isn't anybody on this floor, Republican or Democrat, who wouldn't like the mess that was created by the Bush administration to be over with. It isn't.

And the problem is, a guy in my district said, you know, Jim, I can tell you what the problem with America is, and your Republican side has a bad dose of this. He said, It's the belief in the microwave. If they have a problem, they come down to the refrigerator. They open the refrigerator, pull something out, close the refrigerator, open the microwave, throw it in, hit two buttons and wait 30 seconds and they've got lunch. They think everything can be solved like that.

It took a long time for Mr. Bush to create the mess that we are now dealing with, and it isn't going to be over in 30 seconds like the microwave dinner is.

And the fact is that you've got people who contradict you directly. The real budget--no one's going to ever accuse me of being a big budget warrior or a deficit warrior. I'm no deficit hawk. But Bob Bixby, President of the Concord Coalition, that organization dedicated to eliminating Federal budget deficits said, and I quote: ``As a deficit hawk, I wouldn't worry about extending unemployment benefits. It is not going to add to the long-term structural deficit, and it does address a serious need. I just feel like unemployment benefits wandered into the wrong street corner at the wrong time, and now they're getting mugged.''

He's absolutely right. For us to pick on the unemployment benefits as the problem for this deficit, wait till we have the debate on taxes on this floor and I hear people whining and whining around here about people making more than half a million dollars and we've got to give them a tax cut.

I urge my colleagues to vote for H.R. 6419.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 1648) supporting the goals and ideals of National Adoption Day and National Adoption Month by promoting national awareness of adoption and the children in foster care awaiting families, celebrating children and families involved in adoption, recognizing current programs and efforts designed to promote adoption, and encouraging people in the United States to seek improved safety, permanency, and well-being for all children.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H. Res. 1648.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H. Res. 1648, which supports the goals and the ideals of National Adoption Day and National Adoption Month. Children deserve nothing less than to grow up in a safe, stable, and loving home. While the vast majority of children are raised in such settings, there are a number of vulnerable children who are victims of child maltreatment or may have lost their parents in a tragedy and are now in search of a new home to call their own.

Today, there are more than 423,000 children in the foster care system in this country. Many of these children will be reunited with their biological parents when it is safe for them to do so, while others will find a permanent home with a grandparent or other relative. Meanwhile, more than 114,000 children will be unable to safely return to their biological parents and need to find a new home.

Over the last several years, Congress has worked in a bipartisan manner to provide services that promote foster care outcomes for children in foster care that are positive and to facilitate the timely placement of a child into an adoptive home. In 2008, Congress passed the Fostering Connections to Success and Increasing Adoptions Act, which provided an array of new services to strengthen the foster care system. The legislation expanded the number of permanency options made available to children who are in search of new homes by allowing States to use Federal assistance to relatives to agree to become the legal guardians of foster children. The bill also extended and improved the Adoption Incentives Program and required States to inform prospective adoptive parents of their potential eligibility for the Federal Adoption Tax Credit.

So far, we have seen positive results in the area of adoption. Last year, 57,000 children were adopted out of foster care. That's a 3.5 percent increase over the previous year. The increase in the number of children adopted out of care reflects a trend that occurred over the last several years. Since 2006, the number of children adopted out of foster care has increased by 10.5 percent. Remarkably, this increase has occurred as the number of children who are served by the foster care system has steadily declined by 14 percent over the same period.

Earlier this year, as part of the landmark legislation that provided for health care coverage to all Americans, additional incentives and initiatives were taken to promote adoption. The Affordable Care Act included legislation that repealed the sunset date on the adoption tax credit for 1 year--from 2010 to 2011--and increased the maximum amount under the credit. The legislation also made the Adoption Tax Credit refundable for tax years 2010 and 2011.

While Congress has had great success in promoting the adoption of children out of foster care, there are still far too many children in foster care who are waiting far too long to find a permanent home. We need to continue to work together to ensure that States have the resources they need to swiftly move children into adoptive homes when it is appropriate to do so.

I look forward to continuing to work with all my colleagues to achieve that goal. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H. Res. 1648.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I think in closing it's important to point out that children are children, and while we may talk about some Haitian children who want to be adopted in the United States, we have an immigration policy in this country that is sending children back from my district to their country because we have got an immigration system that does not work. I actually think we ought to think a little bit more about people in this country and how we get the immigration policy rather than trying to say, well, we've got to worry about these people somewhere else. Part of this election was fought over the issue of immigration policy, and this country needs a fair way for people to proceed toward an ability to become a citizen.

Now, you want these Haitian kids to come in here. What about their citizenship? I mean, they just get here; they're going to sit here forever and never get citizenship? I have a boy in my district who was 6 years old when he came here, and no one told him he had to go down and fill out some papers when he got to be 18 and choose his citizenship. So now we're trying to send him back to a country that he never lived in since he was 6 when he came, and so there are real problems with children in this country, and I think we can deal with this one and we'll deal with the other one.

The other body has kept their foot on these issues over and over and over again, and I think we ought to deal with this issue and then we'll deal with the other issue. We'll see whether they're really serious about all children.

I urge my friends and the Members of the Congress to vote for this resolution.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (S. 3774) to extend the deadline for Social Services Block Grant expenditures of supplemental funds appropriated following disasters occurring in 2008.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on S. 3774.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of S. 3774, which extends the deadline for the use of supplemental social service block grant funds, also known as SSBG, that were made available following the disasters that occurred in 2008.

This extension would provide a 1-year extension for the use of supplemental SSBG grant funds that were appropriated in the Disaster Assistance and Continuing Appropriation Act of 2009 in response to the natural disasters that occurred in 2008. The legislation provided $600 million for disaster recovery for States affected by hurricane, floods, and other natural disasters that occurred in the year 2008.

Over 60 percent of the money that was appropriated has been spent, leaving a great deal of funding available to address the ongoing needs in States that have been adversely affected by natural disasters. While a number of States have been successful in quickly drawing down the funds that were available to support disaster cleanup, many others need additional time to utilize the resources effectively.

The legislation follows a precedent that was established by the Congress in recent years when we acted to extend the availability of supplemental SSBG funds that were appropriated for the recovery efforts following Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. These funds were extended for a 2-year period to allow additional time for affected States to make use of these resources.

Additionally, the legislation is PAYGO compliant and will not add one dime to the Federal deficit. The funding has already been allocated. The bill simply makes the appropriation available for an additional year.

The legislation, which passed the Senate in late September by unanimous consent, is very similar to a bill

that was introduced in the House by Representative Pete Olson that has bipartisan support. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting S. 3774.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).

Mr. Speaker, I urge passage of this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, there is an old Chinese proverb that says, ``A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step,'' and I rise today in support of this legislation which is before us to take the first step toward addressing the egregious imbalance between China's currency and our own.

For too long, the Chinese have not been playing fairly in the international trade arena, and this Congress has to send a clear message that China must become a responsible player in a multilateral trade. The Chinese export-driven strategy is smart, but subsidizing by suppressing their currency is an unfair way to do it.

This legislation is a good step, but it's not my preferred step. I would prefer the United States, together with our partners, bring a multilateral WTO case against China on the currency issue. Absent that, this commonsense legislation helps the Commerce Department do a fair job of making the multilateral mechanisms more available to U.S. businesses.

This legislation sends a clear signal that the American people respect international agreements and expect fairness. After years of an unlevel playing field, it is time to act, and this legislation is the right kind of measured first step we must take now.

I urge the passage of this bill.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the Seattle Storm for winning the 2010 WNBA National Championship Title, their second national championship in six years. After a record- breaking season, the Storm swept the Atlanta Dream in three close games during the WNBA finals, winning on Thursday night in Atlanta, 87-to-84. Their victory is not only a tribute to the hard work of the players but also the determination and gumption of our team's female owners, who bought the team in 2008, refusing to make the move to Oklahoma City with the Sonics. I applaud our players, owners, and fans for allowing our team to grow and thrive in Seattle.

While none of the athletes on the Storm were born when Patsy Mink wrote and worked to pass Title IX, in 1972, all have reaped the benefits of her efforts. Title IX gave women and girls greater opportunities to participate in high school and collegiate sports, which the talented and dedicated women of the WNBA have parlayed into professional careers.

I am so very proud of our team and their accomplishments. As we all learned in grade school, it's not just if you win, but how you win. Too many of our professional athletes have forgotten this lesson, but not the women of the Storm. As ESPN's Mechelle Voepel put it: ``The Storm weren't a team that was dominant in the sense that it throttled all its opponents. To the contrary, the Storm made rallying an art form this summer. But the Storm were a team that always seemed to figure out how to get the job done whenever it really mattered.'' Congratulations.