Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, international trade is an integral part of the Southeast Michigan economy, with nearly $113.3 billion worth of surface trade passing between the United States and Canada at the Detroit-Windsor border every year. I am, however, concerned that other nations' unfair trade practices have significantly hurt American workers. This is why I rise in support H.R. 2378, the ``Currency Reform for Fair Trade Act,'' which will address currency manipulation.

Countries such as Japan and China have both manipulated their currencies and hurt American exporters. For example, Japan's currency has been undervalued by up to 25 percent in the past. This means that a car imported from Japan for $20,000 has a hidden subsidy of up to $5,000. According to General Motors' chief economist, Mustafa Mohatarem, ``Japan's policies provided anywhere from a $2,000 to $14,000 cash windfall for each of the 2.2 million vehicles Japan's automakers exported to the U.S. in 2006.''

Even worse, China has undervalued its currency by up 40 percent in the past, which has put American manufacturers at a severe disadvantage. China's currency manipulation also attracts foreign investment into China and away from American manufacturing facilities. A recent study found that the U.S. has lost more than 2.3 million jobs since 2001 just as a result of the U.S. trade deficit with China. On a recent trip to China, President Obama urged the Chinese Yuan to appreciate and prevent global imbalances.

The Currency Reform for Fair Trade Act will take important steps in helping to address these unfair trade practices. The Act would empower the Department of Commerce to make findings that identify currency manipulation as an export subsidy. Today's legislation would make it easier for the Department of Commerce to add a countervailing duty to offset the amount of the export subsidy from currency manipulation. I believe American manufacturers can have honest and fair competition with foreign imports and thrive in global markets.

Mr. Speaker, in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, we hailed the investments in green and renewable technologies. However, many Americans green technology firms are being hurt by currency manipulation and other subsidies. Just last week, the Steel Workers filed a petition with the United States Trade Representative regarding China's currency manipulation and other subsidies to the green technology manufacturing industry. If the United States is to lead in this industry as well as revitalize our manufacturing base, we need to make sure American firms can compete on a level playing field in the international market. I urge my colleagues to support today's legislation.

Madam Speaker, congratulations to Taiwan as they celebrate their 99th anniversary on October 10, 2010. We are happy to see such a vibrant democracy blossoming in East Asia.

Due to the ubiquitous tension between Taiwan and China (neighbors across the Taiwan Straits) Taiwan's President Ma is in a very difficult position. Every day he must walk the tightrope between improving the relationship with mainland China and making sure that Taiwan does not lose its unique identity that makes their county so special.

To this end, President Ma is handling the challenge masterfully. Many areas of the relationship between the Republic of China (Taiwan) and the People's Republic of China (mainland China) have improved dramatically since President Ma took office.

Without question, the most significant evidence of the improved relations between China and Taiwan is The Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA). This is a formal agreement between the two sides that aims to reduce commercial barriers and increase trade between the two countries. Three years ago this would not have been even thought of as possible, yet today this agreement is in effect as of September of this year.

Additionally, the following are further evidences the improving relationship between Taiwan and China:

Daily flights between the two countries are not only now occurring, but due to high demand, the number of flights and destinations have had to be increased.

China, who blocked Taiwan's access to participate in any part of the World Health Organization (WHO) for the last 38 years, has granted Taiwan the honor of observer status at the World Health Assembly (WHA) arm of the WHO.

Both China and Taiwan have agreed to share crime data and law enforcement services with one another to help reduce illegal activity in the area.

All of this has been done while still allowing Taiwan to operate as an independent nation with its own government, military and currency.

I ask my friends in Congress to congratulate Taiwan on their 99th anniversary as we hope to continue our friendship with them for their next 99 years.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1347, the ``Concussion Treatment and Care Tools Act of 2009'' or the ``ConTACT Act of 2009.'' This legislation directs the Department of Health and Human Services, acting through the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, to establish concussion management guidelines for preventing, identifying, treating, and managing concussions in children between the ages of 5 and 18.

As Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, I convened four hearings and forums beginning on October 28, 2009 to examine and highlight the growing evidence linking concussions sustained while playing football to long-term brain damage.

Brain injuries are the leading cause of death and disability for children in our Nation. According to research by The New York Times, at least 50 high school or younger football players in more than 20 States since 1997 have been killed or have sustained serious concussions on the football field.

With 1.2 million high school athletes and approximately 3 million American youngsters between the ages of 6 and 14 playing tackle football, many kids continue to be at risk.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that more than 300,000 athletes lose consciousness from concussions every year in the United States, and that the total number of concussions could be as high as 3.8 million.

Since most brains aren't fully developed until age 25, a concussion is even more dangerous for a youth than for an adult.

Furthermore, a repeat concussion--one that occurs before the brain recovers from a previous concussion--can be even more devastating.

Research indicates that younger, less-developed brains are at even greater risk of second-impact syndrome. This syndrome may include brain swelling, permanent brain damage, and death.

Given that young athletes are more susceptible to second-impact syndrome, it is troubling that there is a shortage of trainers available to attend to young players on the football field.

According to the National Athletic Trainers' Association, 58 percent of high schools nationwide do not have a certified athletic trainer available for players.

And as former National Football League player Merril Hoge testified at our first hearing on football head injuries last year, trainers are virtually non-existent at the youth level, where he coaches his children.

Even if high school or youth teams do have a sideline trainer available, these individuals often have little experience in the subtleties of concussion management.

This fact may explain the alarming results of a recent study by the Center for Injury Research and Policy at Nationwide Children's Hospital in Columbus, Ohio. The study found that as many as 41 percent of high school athletes who suffer concussions on the field may be returning to play too soon.

In part because of the Judiciary Committee's scrutiny, the National Football League has made significant changes with respect to concussion prevention, identification, treatment, and education. However, it is not clear whether these changes are filtering down to younger levels of football or to other contact sports.

That is why I applaud Representative Bill Pascrell's effort to bring some nationwide uniformity for the management of concussions in school- aged children. I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 1347.

Madam Speaker, below is a description of legislation I have introduced today.

Sec. I. Short Title. Section 1 sets forth the short title of the bill as the ``Bankruptcy Technical Corrections Act of 2010.''

Sec. 2. Technical Corrections Relating to Amendments Made by Public Law 109-8. Section 2 makes a series of technical corrections to the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 (2005 Act).

Subsection (a)(1)(A) amends section 101(13A) of title 11 of the United States Code (Bankruptcy Code), which defines ``debtor's principal residence.'' The amendment clarifies that the definition pertains to a structure used by the debtor as a principal residence.

Subsection (a)(1)(B) amends Bankruptcy Code section 101(35), which defines ``insured depository institution.'' The amendment corrects erroneous statutory references in this provision.

Subsection (a)(1)(C) amends Bankruptcy Code section 101(40B), which defines ``patient records.'' The amendment clarifies that the term means a record relating to a patient, including a written document or an electronic record.

Subsection (a)(1)(D) amends Bankruptcy Code section 101(42), which defines ``petition.'' The amendment deletes the reference to section 304 of the Bankruptcy Code, which was eliminated as a result of the 2005 Act, and adds a reference to section 1504, which was added by the 2005 Act.

Subsection (a)(1)(E) amends Bankruptcy Code section 101(51D), which defines ``small business debtor.'' The amendment clarifies that the debt limit specified therein is determined as of the date of the filing of the petition.

Subsection (a)(1)(F) redesignates paragraphs (56A) and (53D) of Bankruptcy Code section 101 as (53D) and (53E), respectively.

Subsection (a)(2) amends Bankruptcy Code section 103(a), which pertains to the applicability of chapters of the Code. The amendment corrects an erroneous statutory reference in this provision.

Subsection (a)(3) amends Bankruptcy Code section 105(d)(2), which pertains to status conferences. The amendment makes a grammatical correction.

Subsection (a)(4) amends Bankruptcy Code section 106(a)(1), which pertains to the waiver of sovereign immunity. The amendment deletes a reference to Bankruptcy Code section 728, which was eliminated by the 2005 Act.

Subsection (a)(5) amends Bankruptcy Code section 107(a), which pertains to public access to bankruptcy cases. The amendment corrects a drafting instruction error.

Subsection (a)(6) makes several amendments to Bankruptcy Code section 109, which sets forth the eligibility criteria for a debtor. Subsection (a)(6)(A) amends Bankruptcy Code section 109(b)(3)(B) to add a missing parenthesis. Subsection (a)(6)(B) makes a conforming amendment to Bankruptcy Code section 109(h)(1) to clarify that Bankruptcy Code section 109(h)(4) is an exception. In addition, subsection (a)(6)(B) clarifies that the 180-day period ends on the date of the filing of the petition.

Subsection (a)(7) amends Bankruptcy Code section 110, which pertains to bankruptcy petition preparers. It makes conforming amendments to Bankruptcy Code section 110(b)(2)(A) and (h)(1) so that they conform to other provisions in section 110 with respect to fees received by a petition preparer on behalf of a debtors. In addition, subsection (a)(7) restructures section 110(h)(3) to clarify the court's authority to disallow fees under this provision.

Subsection (a)(8) amends Bankruptcy Code section 111, which concerns nonprofit budget and credit counseling agencies and financial management instructional courses. The amendment corrects two typographical errors in Bankruptcy Code section 111(d)(1)(E). The first error concerns incorrect punctuation and the second error pertains to incorrect indentation of the subparagraph.

Subsection (a)(9) amends Bankruptcy Code section 303, which pertains to involuntary bankruptcy cases. The amendment corrects the misdesignation of subsection (l) by redesignating it as subsection (k).

Subsection (a)(10) amends Bankruptcy Code section 308, which concerns reporting requirements for small business debtors. The amendment restructures subsection 308(b)(4) to clarify its intent.

Subsection (a)(11) makes two amendments to Bankruptcy Code section 348, which pertains to the effect of conversion of a case. First, it amends Bankruptcy Code section 348(b) to strike references to Bankruptcy Code sections 728(a), 728(b), 1146(a) and 1146(b) as these provisions were eliminated by the 2005 Act. Second, it amends Bankruptcy Code section 348(f)(1)(C)(i) to clarify that the provision applies with respect to the date of the filing of the petition.

Subsection (a)(12) amends Bankruptcy Code section 362, which pertains to the automatic stay, in several respects. First, the amendment makes a stylistic correction to subsection 362(a)(8) with respect to its reference to a debtor that is a corporation. Second, it adds a missing article in subsection 362(c)(3). Third, the amendment conforms the reference in subsection 362(c)(4)(A)(i) to ``reified'' with subsection 362(c)(3) so that it applies to a case filed under a chapter other than chapter 7 after dismissal of a prior case pursuant to Bankruptcy Code section 707(b). Fourth, it corrects an erroneous conjunctive in subsection 362(d)(4). Fifth, it corrects a spelling error in subsection 362(1).

Subsection (a)(13) amends Bankruptcy Code section 363, which concerns the use, sale, or lease of property. The amendment restructures subsection 363(d) to clarify its intent.

Subsection (a)(14) amends Bankruptcy Code section 505, which pertains to the determination of tax liability. The amendment corrects the provision's use of terminology.

Subsection (a)(15) amends Bankruptcy Code section 507, which pertains to priorities. The amendment corrects a punctuation error.

Subsection (a)(16) amends Bankruptcy Code section 521, which pertains to the duties of the debtor. The amendment makes several revisions. First, it deletes redundant text in subsection 521(a)(2)(A) and (B). Second, it restructures section 521(a)(2) to clarify its meaning. Third, the amendment corrects grammatical errors in paragraphs (3) and (4) of subsection 521(a).

Subsection (a)(17) amends Bankruptcy Code section 522, which concerns exemptions. The amendment corrects two grammatical errors in subsection 522(b)(3)(A). In addition, it makes a conforming revision to subsection 522(c)(1).

Subsection (a)(18) amends Bankruptcy Code section 523, which pertains to the dischargeability of debts. The amendment corrects a punctuation error in subsection 523(a)(2)(C)(ii)(II) and corrects an erroneous statutory cross reference in subsection 523(a)(3).

Subsection (a)(19) amends Bankruptcy Code section 524, which concerns reaffirmation agreements, among other matters. The amendment makes several revisions. First, it corrects erroneous terminology in subsection 524(k)(3)(J)(i) and inserts a missing verb. Second, it corrects a punctuation error in subsection 524(k)(5)(B).

Subsection (a)(20) amends Bankruptcy Code section 526, which deals with restrictions on debt relief agencies. The amendment makes a conforming revision to subsection 526(a)(2). It also adds a missing article to subsection 526(a)(4).

Subsection (a)(21) amends Bankruptcy Code section 527, which concerns disclosures by debt relief agencies. The amendment makes a grammatical correction.

Subsection (a)(22) amends Bankruptcy Code section 541, which deals with property of the estate. The amendment corrects statutory reference to the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 in section 541(b)(6)(B).

Subsection (a)(23) amends Bankruptcy Code section 554, which concerns abandonment. The amendment corrects an erroneous statutory reference in subsection 554(c).

Subsection (a)(24) amends Bankruptcy Code section 704, which pertains to duties of the trustee. The amendment corrects an erroneous statutory reference in subsection 704(a)(3).

Subsection (a)(25) amends Bankruptcy Code section 707, which concerns dismissal of a chapter 7 case or conversion to a case under chapter 11 or 13. The amendment makes several revisions. First, it corrects an erroneous statutory cross reference in subsection 707(a)(3). Second, the amendment clarifies that the provision's reference to date means the date of the filing of the petition in subsection 707(b)(2)(A)(iii)(I). Third, the amendment corrects an erroneous statutory reference in subsection 707(b)(3).

Subsection (a)(26) amends Bankruptcy Code section 723(c), which pertains to the rights of a partnership trustee against general partners. The amendment strikes a reference to Bankruptcy Code section 728, which was eliminated by the 2005 Act.

Subsection (a)(27) amends Bankruptcy Code section 724, which concerns the treatment of liens. The amendment clarifies certain statutory references in section 724(b)(2) and makes other clarifying revisions.

Subsection (a)(28) amends Bankruptcy Code section 726(b), which concerns distribution priorities in a chapter 7 case, to add a statutory reference to section 507(a)(9) and (10).

Subsection (a)(29) amends Bankruptcy Code section 901, which concerns the applicability of the Bankruptcy Code to municipality cases. The amendment adds references to Bankruptcy Code sections 333, dealing with the appointment of a patient care ombudsman, and 351, concerning the disposal of patient records, both of which were added by the 2005 Act.

Subsection (a)(30) amends Bankruptcy Code section 1104, which pertains to the appointment of a trustee and examiner. The amendment restructures subsection 1104(a) to clarify the provision's intent and how it relates to Bankruptcy Code section 1112(6), as amended by the 2005 Act. In addition, it corrects an erroneous statutory reference in subsection 1104(b)(2)(B)(ii).

Subsection (a)(31) amends Bankruptcy Code section 1106, which pertains to the duties of a trustee and examiner. The amendment corrects two erroneous statutory references in section 1106(a).

Subsection (a)(32) amends Bankruptcy Code section 1111, which concerns claims and interests. The amendment corrects an erroneous statutory reference in section 1111(a).

Subsection (a)(33) amends Bankruptcy Code section 1112(b), which sets forth the grounds for converting or dismissing a chapter 11 case. The amendment restructures this provision to eliminate an internal redundancy. In addition, it corrects an erroneous statutory reference in section 1112(e).

Subsection (a)(34) amends Bankruptcy Code section 1127, which pertains to modification of a chapter 11 plan. The amendment corrects an erroneous statutory reference in section 1127(f)(1).

Subsection (a)(35) amends Bankruptcy Code section 1129(a), which sets forth the criteria for confirmation of a chapter 11 plan. The amendment makes a grammatical correction to section (a)(16).

Subsection (a)(36) amends Bankruptcy Code section 1141(d)(5), which concerns the effect of confirmation. The amendment clarifies the intent of this provision.

Subsection (a)(37) amends Bankruptcy Code section 1145(b), which pertains to the applicability of securities laws. The amendment corrects an erroneous statutory reference in this section.

Subsection (a)(38) amends Bankruptcy Code section 1202, which details the responsibilities of a trustee in a chapter 12 case. The amendment corrects several erroneous statutory references in section 1202(b).

Subsection (a)(39) amends Bankruptcy Code section 1302, which details the responsibilities of a trustee in a chapter 13 case. The amendment corrects several erroneous statutory references in section 1302(b)(1).

Subsection (a)(40) amends Bankruptcy Code section 1304, which concerns a chapter 13 debtor engaged in business. The amendment corrects an erroneous statutory reference in section 1304(c).

Subsection (a)(41) amends Bankruptcy Code section 1307, which sets forth the grounds for converting or dismissing a chapter 13 case. The amendment corrects several erroneous statutory references in this section.

Subsection (a)(42) amends Bankruptcy Code section 1308, which concerns the filing of prepetition tax returns. The amendment clarifies several statutory references in section 1308(b)(2).

Subsection (a)(43) amends Bankruptcy Code section 1322(a), which pertains to the contents of a chapter 13 plan. The amendment corrects an internal inconsistency.

Subsection (a)(44) amends Bankruptcy Code section 1325, which pertains to confirmation of a chapter 13 plan. The amendment adds a missing word to subsection 1325(a) and adds a missing parenthesis to subsection 1325(b)(2)(A)(ii).

Subsection (a)(45) amends the heading of Bankruptcy Code section 1511, to include a reference to section 302.

Subsection (a)(46) amends Bankruptcy Code section 1519, which pertains to the relief that may be granted upon the filing of a petition for recognition in a chapter 15 case. The amendment corrects an erroneous statutory reference in section 1519(f).

Subsection (a)(47) amends Bankruptcy Code section 1521(f), which concerns relief that may be granted upon recognition in a chapter 15 case. The amendment corrects an erroneous statutory reference.

Subsection (a)(48) amends Bankruptcy Code section 1529, which concerns the coordination of a case under title 11 and a foreign proceeding. The amendment adds a missing word to section 1529(1).

Subsection (a)(49) amends the table of sections for chapter 3 of the Bankruptcy Code to correct an erroneous description of section 333.

Subsection (a)(50) amends the table of sections for chapter 5 of the Bankruptcy Code to correct an erroneous description of section 562.

Subsection (b) amends section 157 of title 18 of the United States Code, which concerns bankruptcy fraud. The amendment removes superfluous references in this section.

Subsection (c)(1) amends section 158 of title 28 of the United States Code, which pertains to bankruptcy appeals. The amendment corrects a grammatical error in section 158(d)(2)(D).

Subsection (c)(2) amends section 159 of title 28 of the United States Code, which pertains to the collection of bankruptcy statistics. The amendment adds a missing word to section 159(c)(3)(H).

Subsection (c)(3) amends section 586 of title 28 of the United States Code, which concerns the United States Trustee Program. The amendment corrects a punctuation error in section 586(a)(3)(A)(ii), corrects erroneous terminology in section 586(a)(7)(C), and eliminates redundant language in section 586(a)(8).

Sec. 3. Technical Correction to Public Law 109-8. Section 3 amends section 1406(b)(1) of the 2005 Act to correct a spelling error.

Madam Speaker, Ranking Member Lamar Smith and I are introducing a bill to codify into positive law as title 54, United States Code, certain general and permanent laws related to the National Park System. This bill was prepared by the Office of the Law Revision Counsel, as part of its ongoing responsibility under 2 U.S.C. 285b to prepare, and submit to the Committee on the Judiciary one title at a time, a complete compilation, restatement, and revision of the general and permanent laws of the United States.

The bill gathers provisions relating to the establishment and administration of the National Park System, outdoor recreation programs that the Secretary of the Interior administers, and the responsibility of the Secretary to preserve historic sites, buildings, objects, and antiquities--all of which are currently found in various places throughout title 16 of the United States Code--and restates these provisions as a new positive law title of the Code. The new positive law title, along with conforming provisions, replaces the former provisions, which are repealed by the bill.

This bill is not intended to make any substantive changes in the law. As is typical with the codification process, a number of non- substantive revisions are made, including the reorganization of sections into a more coherent overall structure, but these changes are not intended to have any substantive effect.

The bill, along with a detailed section-by-section explanation of the bill, can be found on the Law Revision Counsel website at http:// uscode.house.gov/cod/t54/. Interested parties are invited to submit comments to Tim Trushel, Senior Counsel, Office of the Law Revision Counsel, U.S. House of Representatives, H2-303 Ford House Office Building, Washington, D.C. 20515-6711, (202) 226-9058, as well as to the Committee.

Madam Speaker, pursuant to H. Res. 1493, as chair of the Committee on the Judiciary, I submit the following highlights of ``changes in law'' enacted in the 111th Congress within the jurisdiction of the Committee that ``help achieve deficit reduction by reducing waste, fraud, abuse, and mismanagement, promoting efficiency and reform of government, and controlling spending within Government programs.'' These enacted changes in law include:

(1) Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act (Public Law 111-21). This law clarifies and strengthens the criminal penalties for various forms of fraud, including fraud in connection with the Troubled Asset Relief Program and other federal assistance programs, including economic stimulus funds. It also strengthens incentives and protections under the False Claims Act for private citizens to help root out fraud against the federal government and help bring the perpetrators to justice. See 111 Cong. Rec. H5260-67 (May 6, 2009).

(2) Antitrust Criminal Penalty Enhancement and Reform Extension Act (Public Law 111-30). This law extends and strengthens a temporary program that promotes more effective and efficient detection and prosecution of illegal price-fixing cartels, by giving secondary participants in the cartel legal protection for blowing the whistle on the cartel and cooperating in the investigation and prosecution. This program has been demonstrated to substantially enhance the reach of the Justice Department's cartel enforcement resources. See 111 Cong. Rec. H3716-7 (May 24, 2010).

(3) Human Rights Enforcement Act (Public Law 111-122). This law consolidates Justice Department jurisdiction over serious human rights crimes into one section within the Department's Criminal Division. This will enable the Department to employ its enforcement resources with greater efficiency and effectiveness to vigorously prosecute perpetrators of serious human rights crimes. See 111 Cong. Rec. H14892- 4 (December 15, 2009).

(4) Foreign Evidence Request Efficiency Act (Public Law 111-79). This law promotes greater efficiency and cooperation in international law enforcement by streamlining the process by which the federal government responds to requests for evidence by foreign governments in their investigations. Instead of having to file and process a request separately in every federal judicial district where the evidence or witnesses might be found, which could require involvement by a dozen or more different U.S. Attorneys on a single request, the request can now be handled centrally by one or two U.S. Attorneys. See 111 Cong. Rec. H10092-4 (Sept. 30, 2009).

In addition, other proposed legislation within the jurisdiction of the Committee has been approved by the House and would reduce waste, fraud, abuse, and mismanagement, promote efficiency and reform of government, and control spending within Government programs. This legislation includes:

(5) H.R. 2247, the Congressional Review Act Improvement Act, which would provide for federal agencies to more efficiently promulgate final rules, while ensuring effective Congressional review;

(6) H.R. 3632, the Federal Judiciary Administrative Improvements Act of 2009, which would improve the efficiency of the federal court system, including by improving the control and protection of confidential information and the reporting of criminal wiretapping orders; and

(7) H.R. 3808, the Interstate Recognition of Notarizations Act of 2009, which would improve the efficiency of federal and state courts by requiring them to recognize documents lawfully notarized in any state where interstate commerce is involved.

In addition to the legislative activity described above, the Committee has conducted extensive oversight aimed at reducing waste, fraud, abuse, and mismanagement and improving federal government efficiency. A primary focus of the Committee's oversight efforts is the Department of Justice (DOJ) and its component divisions and agencies, including the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). Both the Committee and the DOJ Inspector General have devoted considerable attention to the FBI, DOJ, and other agencies, with several Committee hearings held relating to the Bureau and other agencies this year, including:

(8) Committee Oversight Focusing on FBI-ATF Problems. The Committee's Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security Subcommittee held a hearing on February 24, 2010, focusing on three recent Inspector General reports raising concerns about long-standing problems in FBI and other DOJ operations. These include wasteful and potentially dangerous overlap and rivalry between the FBI and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) on explosives investigations, backlog and related problems concerning the FBI's foreign language translation work, and coordination and related problems concerning DOJ and FBI anti-gang activities. The hearing and related oversight of the FBI and DOJ have revealed significant progress in addressing these difficulties, and DOJ indicated at the hearing that it was moving forward vigorously to complete its efforts to resolve the decade-long FBI-ATF problems. In fact, in early August, 2010, the acting Deputy Attorney General issued a memorandum and protocol specifying the division of responsibility between FBI and ATF on explosives-related matters, including the conduct of investigations and the maintenance of a single national explosives database.

(9) Other Committee Oversight Concerning the FBI. On March 24, 2010, the Committee held a hearing including representatives of the FBI's Terrorist Screening Center, as well as the National Counterterrorism Center and the Departments of Homeland Security and State, which focused on efforts to improve the sharing and analyzing of information to prevent terrorism. On May 20, 2010, the Committee's Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security Subcommittee held a hearing at which an FBI representative provided an update concerning national efforts to eliminate the DNA backlog in forensic casework and the Combined DNA Index System that supports the national DNA database. A staff briefing on FBI efforts to remedy the backlog is scheduled for September 20, 2010.

(10) Committee Oversight on the Department of Justice and its Divisions. Other Committee oversight hearings have focused on DOJ and its divisions. On May 13, 2010, the Committee held a DOJ oversight hearing at which Attorney General Eric Holder testified and answered a full range of questions from Committee members about many aspects of DOJ operations. The Committee has submitted followup written questions, including questions focusing on efforts to improve DOJ efficiency with respect to financial and grant funds management. On March 4, 2010, the Committee's Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security Subcommittee held a hearing on efforts to enforce criminal laws against medicaid fraud, which included testimony from the Department's Criminal Division. Overall, the Committee has held 12 oversight hearings during this year alone focusing on DOJ, including testimony from officials from the Antitrust, Civil, Criminal, and Civil Rights Divisions, the FBI, and the Executive Office of Immigration Review.

(11) Committee Oversight on Other Federal Agencies. The Committee has also held a number of oversight hearings focusing on agencies within its jurisdiction that are outside DOJ. For example, focusing on hearings during this session, on March 23, 2010, the Committee's Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law held an oversight hearing on the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), which included testimony from the Department of Homeland Security's Inspector General and the Government Accountability Office on efforts to improve information technology, fees, and other aspects of USCIS management. On May 5, 2010, the Committee held an oversight hearing on the United States Patent and Trademark Office (PTO), which led to the PTO-related legislation discussed above. On May 20, 2010, the Committee's Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law held a hearing on the recently revived Administrative Conference of the United States (ACUS), which featured testimony by the Chairman of ACUS and Supreme Court Justices Stephen Breyer and Antonin Scalia. On June 29, 2010, the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security held an oversight hearing featuring testimony from the Secret Service. And on July 27, 2010, the Commercial and Administrative Law Subcommittee held a hearing on Federal Rulemaking and the Regulatory Process, which included testimony from Cass Sunstein, Administrator of the federal Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs.

Madam Speaker, I rise to recognize the life and career of a friend and fellow Detroiter, Marcus Belgrave. He will be honored at the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation's Annual Legislative Conference Jazz Issue Forum and Concert on September 16, 2010. Belgrave is a living jazz impresario; he plays, writes, composes, and teaches. In doing so, he has inspired other artists such as Geri Allen and Kenny Garrett.

In 2009, Marcus Belgrave was honored by the Kresge Foundation as their Eminent Artist. Belgrave's career has spanned many generations. During this time, he has worked with many of the great musicians of our time: Ray Charles, Ella Fitzgerald, Charles Mingus, McCoy Tyner, Dizzy Gillespie, Eric Dolphy, Aretha Franklin, Wynton Marsalis and Joe Henderson. Every musician he has played with can attest to his skill as a musician and composer.

Belgrave's career started at the age of 18 with several collaborations with Ray Charles. He was given a solo on the song Alexander's Ragtime Band on the album The Genius of Ray Charles. We have heard Belgrave's talents as a musician demonstrated on some of Motown's greatest hit records such as My Girl and Dancing in the Street. Belgrave is also an original member of Lincoln Center Jazz Orchestra.

In 1997, as a jazz ambassador, Belgrave carried the sounds of American jazz to Latin America, Europe, Asia, Africa, and the Middle East. In 1997, he traveled with five other Michigan jazz masters to Egypt, Ivory Coast, Senegal, Syria, Tunisia, and Turkey as part of a six-nation cultural exchange sponsored by the U.S. Agency for International Development.

Belgrave gravitated toward working with young musicians in Detroit during the 1970s. He established the Jazz Development Workshop and co- founded the Jazz Studies Program at the Detroit Metro Arts Complex. He is also a professor of Jazz studies at Oberlin College in Ohio. Many of his young proteges have established successful careers in the music industry.

Madam Speaker, Marcus Belgrave's career has been nothing short of legendary. He has had a lasting impact on the music community of Detroit and is recognized and appreciated around the world. His contributions as a performer, composer and educator deserve the recognition of this body. I urge all Members to acquaint themselves with this great artist and his music.

Madam Speaker, in 1990, the Congress recognized the importance of jazz in American culture when it authorized the establishment of the Smithsonian Jazz Masterworks Orchestra (SJMO).

As the Nation's jazz orchestra, the SJMO regularly performs the great works of jazz. Throughout its 20 years, the orchestra has distinguished itself as one of the crown jewels of the Smithsonian--which is itself, a pre-eminent national treasure.

The band has performed for audiences at the Smithsonian Institution, Kennedy Center, White House, U.S. Capitol, Harlem's famed Apollo Theater, the 1996 Olympic Games in Atlanta, and prestigious music festivals like Ravinia and the Monterey Jazz Festival. The ensemble has traveled prolifically and performed at many American schools and colleges, as well as in Canada, Europe, and the Middle East. On a 2008 State Department-sponsored tour of Egypt, the Orchestra won many new friends for the United States. After an outdoor performance at the Pyramids and Sphinx, the Cairo Daily News raved, ``The backdrop was incredible, the band was superb.''

Other critical reaction has been enthusiastic. Wrote The New York Times: ``Culturally important. . . . spectacular musically. After being embalmed on recordings, the music suddenly came alive.'' Syndicated columnist David S. Broder wrote, ``The impact of these live performances is everything the showmen, scholars, and politicians who brought this small miracle to pass imagined it might be. It is electrifying. . . .''

While the SJMO is not the only jazz orchestra in America, it is unique. As the only federally-chartered jazz orchestra, it enjoys a position of prestige and influence. As the only such ensemble with resident status at a museum, it's in a unique position to bring the jazz legacy to life.

The Smithsonian Jazz Masterworks Orchestra educates the public about the history and development of jazz as an art form and means of entertainment. It promotes a greater appreciation for jazz as a valuable American treasure by performing jazz masterworks, and presenting educational activities that engage the public with this great music.

Further contributing to its status, the orchestra is led by the internationally famous Maestro David Baker--the world's leading jazz educator, author of over 70 books and 400 articles, and recent recipient of the prestigious American Jazz Masters Award given by the National Endowment for the Arts.

Madam Speaker, the orchestra has special expertise in engaging and educating its audiences--young and old--about this vital part of American culture. I am pleased to recognize its service and accomplishments over the past 20 years.

Madam Speaker, legendary jazz artist Gerald Wilson will be honored at the 2010 Congressional Black Caucus Foundation's Annual Legislative Conference Jazz Issue Forum and Concert. This event will take place on Thursday, September 16, 2010, at the Walter E. Washington Convention Center, in Washington, D.C. The concert will feature selections from Mr. Wilson's masterwork ``Detroit,'' performed by the Smithsonian Jazz Masterworks Orchestra. While not a native of Detroit, Mr. Wilson was raised in my home town. He has had an outstanding career that deserves the recognition of this body. Let me share some of the highlights from his biography.

Gerald Wilson is a premier composer, trumpeter, arranger, bandleader and educator. His work, during his rich and varied seven-decade career, has supported some of the greatest names in jazz including Ella Fitzgerald, Ray Charles, Bobby Darin, Duke Ellington, Count Basie, Benny Carter, Nancy Wilson, and Sarah Vaughn, as well as a scorer for motion pictures and television shows such as Otto Preminger's ``Anatomy Of A Murder'' and ABC's variety program ``The Red Foxx Show.'' Wilson also scored a top 40 pop hit with El Chicano's version of his song ``Viva Torado'' in 1971. Recently, Wilson was in the studio recording new material for his sixth release for the Mack Avenue Records label, a follow up to 2009's ``Detroit.''

The perennially inexhaustible bandleader will be included in two upcoming documentaries; the first about Cab Calloway produced by ARTE France and expected to air in America on PBS, and the other about Los Angeles' storied Million Dollar Theater.

Wilson has earned seven Grammy Nominations, a recent NAACP Image Award nomination, a NARAS President's Merit Award, top Big Band and Composer/Arranger honors in the Downbeat International Critics Poll, the National Endowment for the Arts' American Jazz Masters Fellowship, two American Jazz Awards for Best Arranger and Best Big Band, and currently his masterpieces are ensconced at the Smithsonian Institution in Washington, DC. His love for jazz and his 30 year educational career in teaching music also earned him the Teacher of the Year award at UCLA in 2008. Most recently, The Gerald Wilson Orchestra's ``Detroit'' (Mack Avenue, 2009) won ``Record of the Year'' at the 2010 Jazz Week Awards.

Despite earning such various accolades throughout his career, his road to success hasn't always been easy. At 91 years old, Gerald Wilson has struggled through more than 9 decades of opposition to contribute to the fight for civil rights and to share his passion for music with the world. Born in 1918 into a hotbed of racial tension in Shelby, Mississippi, Wilson was sent by his mother to live with family in the more tepid Detroit, where his musical talents afforded him the rare opportunity to attend the performing arts school, Cass Tech High School (a school that was second only to Juilliard for musical education at the time). As Wilson will tell you, this is where his musical career truly began.

By the age of 26 Wilson had toured the United States with Jimmie Lunceford's band, served time in the Navy during World War II, and wrote and played trumpet for Benny Carter and Les Hite before starting his own successful band, The Gerald Wilson Orchestra.

After reaching commercial success in the late '40s and marrying his Mexican-American soul mate, Josefina Villasenor Wilson, Wilson's passion for cultural immersion came to life both emotionally and creatively. Wilson began composing for more than half a dozen professional bullfighters. These masterpieces bonded Wilson in a lifelong kinship with the bullfighting community and afforded him the opportunity to be a member of the exclusive international bullfighting club, Los Aficionados des Los Angeles, and then honored with an award for contributing something positive to the world of ``tauromaquia'' (the world of the bull fight).

Hopping from one creative outlet to the next, in 1969 after intense study of his own on the art of classical music, Wilson was honored to receive an invitation from Zubin Mehta to compose a number for the Los Angeles Philharmonic Orchestra.

Wilson's passion to incorporate his art into his selfless crusade for civil rights has remained paramount in his life and has touched the lives in countless cultures and countries around the world. When asking this humble legend about his great successes, Wilson, who will be 92 years old this September, responds with sincere humility, ``I just try to be a person worthy of being a part of this great art form.''

Madam Speaker, I am very proud of the accomplishments of Gerald Wilson. I urge all Members to acquaint themselves with this great artist and his music.

Madam Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to thank one of the most dedicated and productive members of the Judiciary Committee staff for her service to the House, Andrea Culebras. For 3\1/ 2\ years, Andrea has worked with exceptional ability and attitude for the Judiciary Committee, and I rise to commend her for her achievements.

After graduating from Fayetteville-Manlius High School in Manlius, New York, Andrea attended George Washington University, and graduated in 2005.

Following graduation, Andrea began her Congressional career. She first interned for former Congressman James T. Walsh. She soon found a staff position on the Hill, and worked for my colleague on the Judiciary Committee, the Gentleman from New York, Anthony Weiner. After her time in Mr. Weiner's office, she worked for the Gentleman from Texas, Henry Cuellar.

At the beginning of the 110th Congress, when I became Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, Andrea was one of the very first new employees I hired. As a member of the committee's staff, Andrea has played a central role in the operations of the committee, coordinating the work of the subcommittees and full committee and assisting the Staff Director and General Counsel with the day to day organization of the committee. Recently, she has been instrumental to the committee's work on modernizing federal stalking laws.

Andrea is leaving the committee to attend Columbus School of Law at Catholic University this fall. On behalf of the Judiciary Committee, its staff, and this distinguished body, I would like to thank her for her exemplary work, grace under pressure, sense of humor, and relentlessly positive attitude. She will be sorely missed as a colleague and friend, but we wish her the best of luck and extend to her our deepest gratitude for her service. We know she will do well.

Madam Speaker, one of the things I have noticed over the past year, as our country has faced some of the greatest economic difficulties imaginable, is that there have been very few easy or inconsequential votes taken on this floor. Our nation's problems are vast and deep and they have tested this Congress, as we have again and again been forced to rise and meet unforeseen challenges while, at the same time, working to restore the promise inherent in the American dream to our fellow countrymen and women.

Today is no different. The bill we bring to the floor today is a necessary measure. The fiscal fate of our states and over 300,000 jobs weigh in the balance. If we do not act, many of our nation's children will be left without teachers when they return to school in a few weeks. Worse, inaction could exacerbate an already unfolding crisis in our state and local governments, where budget shortfalls have cost 100,000 public servants their jobs in the past three months.

So, we must act. It is unfortunate that in doing so, we must also cut $11 billion in benefits from the food stamp program to offset the cost of this necessary state aid. Indeed, this is a bitter pill to swallow.

In real terms, this means that monthly benefits for a family of three will drop by $47 dollars in April 2014. Now, $47 dollars may not seem like a lot of money to many in this chamber, but during this recession this additional funding has served as a lifeline for many of those who have been hit the hardest by this recession. Our food stamp program is already chronically underfunded. At current levels, these benefits are often insufficient to allow a family to purchase enough food to last an entire month.

Madam Speaker, this is why many of our fellow citizens are frustrated with Washington. It is why they think we are out of touch. We offer aid with one hand and take from the neediest with the other. It makes no sense whatsoever. As my friend, the Chairman of the Appropriations Committee, noted the other day: those who need help the most had finally caught a break, only to now have it taken away.

That said, I want to reiterate that this bill, taken as a whole, is a good bill and I will support it. This is the burden of governing; we have a duty to make tough decisions and live with them. While I disagree with the decision to phase out these important benefits in 2014 and pledge to work to ensure that they are reinstated, I respect the work my colleagues on this side of the aisle have put into crafting this necessary jobs package. It is certainly much more admirable and serious than what the other side offers: a resolution calling for Congress to shut down and take a paid two-month vacation.

I may not agree with the choices some of my Democratic colleagues make, but never for a moment do I doubt their commitment to facing down and solving the challenges facing the American people. This debate, frankly, illustrates the choice offered to our fellow citizens this fall: serious, difficult, deliberation and governance or silly and trivial gimmicks aimed at scoring political points. The American, people will have to decide.

I encourage my colleagues to support this necessary, job-saving bill.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to support, H.R. 5874. The purpose of H.R. 5874 is simple: it would allow the USPTO to access more of the fees that it will collect in FY2010.

This year, the United States Patent and Trademark Office, also known as the USPTO, is expected to collect more in user fees than they are permitted to retain. As everyone in the patent community is aware, I, with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, have worked to ensure that the USPTO has the resources it needs. Part of that equation is for the USPTO to retain the user fees that they collect from patent and trademark applicants.

While not perfect, H.R. 5874 significantly moves the United States Patent and Trademark Office in the right direction by enabling the USPTO to continue the progress they have made already in reducing the backlog and shortening pendency.

I would have liked to see the President requested buffer of $150 million also included in this legislation because that is the only way to ensure that ALL user fees collected in FY2010 will be retained; however, H.R. 5874 is a big step forward and is undeniably better than the current situation.

I thank the Appropriators for working with us on this Presidential request and for honoring the spirit of the gentlemen's agreement.

I urge my colleagues to join IPO, AIPLA, ABA IP Section, ACT, the Motor & Equipment Manufacturers Association, the National Association of Manufacturers, the National Treasury Employees Union, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, among others, and support this important legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 847, the James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act of 2010. This legislation will provide care for the thousands of 9/11 responders and others who are sick because of Ground Zero toxins.

Within hours of the collapse of the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001, fire fighters, police officers and EMTs, construction workers, and volunteers from every state in the Union labored together without regard for their own health or safety.

As they set about searching for survivors and then continued the task of clean up, they were told the air was safe to breathe.

Unfortunately, we know better today.

The cloud they worked in was a poisonous cocktail of thousands of tons of coarse and fine particulate matter, pulverized cement and glass, asbestos, lead, and other toxic pollutants.

Now, almost nine years later, we are seeing the potentially deadly effects of those toxins. Thousands of responders and people from the community surrounding Ground Zero are currently sick and receiving treatment. Tens of thousands are undergoing medical monitoring, and many more are enrolled in the World Trade Center Health Registry.

H.R. 847 helps the World Trade Center responders and members of the community who were exposed to the toxins of Ground Zero by providing medical monitoring and treatment. I strongly support these provisions.

This legislation also provides compensation for those who suffered economic loss. It reopens the September 11 Victims Compensation Fund and provides liability protection to the World Trade Center contractors.

Without the Victims Compensation Fund, those who need and deserve compensation have no alternative to the current litigation system. So, it's no surprise that some 11,000 workers are suing the World Trade Center contractors and the City of New York because of their illnesses.

The contractors, now subject to suit and potential financial loss, came in to help our nation in our time of need. They were told by the government that their liability would be taken care of and we need to make good on that promise.

To that end, H.R. 847 provides liability protection to the World Trade Center contractors. As with the original Victims Compensation Fund, people can either participate in the Victims Compensation Fund or litigate, but they cannot do both.

The solution offered in H.R. 847 is neither easy nor inexpensive. We must, however, take care of the people who took care of us following 9/ 11. If we don't, not only will we have failed in our moral obligation to our nation's responders and volunteers, we risk the possibility that others will not answer the call when we need them in the future.

I wish to thank Speaker Pelosi, Mrs. Maloney, Mr. Nadler, Chairman Rangel, and Mr. Peter King for their steadfast commitment to help.

I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, in 1990, I cosponsored the Americans with Disabilities Act, legislation intended to prohibit discrimination against individuals with disabilities and ensure that they are able to claim their rightful place as equal members of our society.

Our legislative mandate was purposefully ambitious. We sought--for once and for all--to prohibit unfair discrimination based on disability.

Last week, at a hearing in the Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties, we heard from people whose lives have been changed by the Americans with Disabilities Act:

Former Attorney General Dick Thornburgh, who both supervised the enforcement of the ADA in its infancy and has raised a son with a disability;

Lt. Col. Gregory Gadson, a man with 20 years of active duty service who lost both legs

in Iraq in 2007, and has recently been named the Director of the Army's Wounded Warrior Program;

Adrian Villalobos, a young man from El Paso, Texas, whose spinal injury occurred shortly after the ADA was enacted;

Casandra Cox, a woman with a mental disability who has advocated for housing for individuals with mental disabilities that fosters their independence and dignity;

Cheryl Sensenbrenner, past board chair of the American Association of People with Disabilities;

and Jonathan Young, the chairman of the National Council on Disability.

Majority Leader Hoyer, Congressman Langevin, and Thomas Perez, the Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division, also testified about the history and future of the ADA.

Each witness had something unique to say about how the Americans with Disabilities Act has changed their lives, and what remains to be done to live up to the Act's mandate of inclusion, dignity and nondiscrimination.

What have we learned in the 20 years since the Americans with Disabilities Act was passed?

First, civil rights legislation has the power to create substantial and necessary change. Before the enactment of the Americans with Disabilities Act, individuals with disabilities were routinely discounted, and their gifts were routinely ignored.

Fundamental human rights--the right to work, the right to live where you want to live, and the right to enter the stores, schools, and government buildings where everyone else shops, learns, and participates--were arbitrarily denied to individuals with disabilities.

Those obstacles were created by ignorance, indifference, and actual prejudice. The effect was the creation of a second-class citizenry, excluded from society in all meaningful ways.

We know that isolation breeds stigma. We also know that inclusion promotes productivity, mutual understanding, and equality.

Civil rights legislation is built on creating a more just society, by empowering and requiring equal access to all that American society has to offer--to every individual.

Second, the Americans with Disabilities Act reminds us that our concern with civil rights legislation does not end once a bill becomes law.

The Act did not magically erase the barriers to equality for individuals with disabilities. All doors and all minds were not instantly opened wide enough to encompass this diverse group.

Progress under the Act was slowed, and even blocked, by Supreme Court decisions that contravened our legislative intent, by narrowing the Act's scope and applicability, time and time again.

But we came together, on both sides of the aisle and in both chambers, to make it clear that we meant what we said: Americans with disabilities must have complete legal equality.

I proudly cosponsored the Americans with Disabilities Act Amendments Act in response to those Supreme Court decisions, and ultimately, a law correcting the Court's misconstruction of the ADA was passed in 2008.

This anniversary is a time to recognize one of our most significant civil rights achievements.

But as the circumstances surrounding the ADA Amendments Act remind us, Congress must remain a vigilant steward of the civil rights laws we have passed.

Third, we cannot celebrate our accomplishments without recognizing future challenges.

One issue impeding the fulfillment of the Act's promise is the failure of some States to comply with their obligations to offer integrated housing, where appropriate, to persons with mental illness.

The Olmstead case on this issue has correctly been called the Brown v. Board of Education for individuals with disabilities, because it condemned the practice of indiscriminately directing all individuals with mental disabilities into separate, segregated housing as inconsistent with the core purposes of the ADA.

Segregation from mainstream society, default warehousing in institutions, and enforced dependence are unacceptable conditions to impose on individuals with mental disabilities who have the ability to live more independent and integrated lives.

The Americans with Disabilities Act demonstrates that civil rights laws not only protect personal dignity, they enrich society as a whole.

In these hard economic times, what can be more important than easing obstacles that prevent individuals with disabilities from becoming productive members of the workforce?

We must continue to attend to the implementation of the Americans with Disabilities Act to ensure that future anniversaries can make us equally proud.

Mr. Speaker, due to urgent business in the 14th congressional district, I was unable to vote today. If I were present, I would have voted ``aye'' to the following bills: H.R. 1320--Federal Advisory Committee Act Amendments; H. Res 1504--Recognizing and honoring the 20th anniversary of the enactment of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990; H.R. 3101--Twenty-first Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act.