Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on the Judiciary, I call up House Resolution 1031 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include therein extraneous material on the resolution under consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 minutes to my friend the distinguished ranking member, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Smith), and ask unanimous consent that he be allowed to control the time on his side for purposes of debate.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Members of the House, it is a sad day that we must find that a Federal judge has betrayed his office and should be impeached, and yet that is our task today. It is assigned to us by the Constitution to protect the institutions of government from those who show themselves unfit to hold positions of public trust, and, of course, we take this duty very seriously.

The judge in question is G. Thomas Porteous, who has cast a long shadow on the administration of justice under his watch. Your House Judiciary Committee has completed an independent investigation conducted with thoroughness by a special task force on our committee chaired by Adam Schiff, with much distinction. I also thank his co- Chair, Bob Goodlatte, and Hank Johnson, the subcommittee Chair on Judiciary from which this matter arose.

Members of the House, our investigation has demonstrated that Judge Porteous has engaged in misconduct in various spheres of his public life spanning decades. His misconduct is described in detail in the report filed by our committee, which is available to any Member that wishes a copy, and our committee has subsequently voted unanimously to recommend four articles of impeachment. Our Chair of the Impeachment Task Force, Adam Schiff, is going to expand on the details.

Since so many Members want time, I just want to make this opening comment: The Department of Justice and the Judicial Conference have determined that Judge Porteous had clearly committed serious misconduct in various spheres of his personal and professional life. The Judicial Conference referred the matter to the House for possible impeachment. The Fifth Circuit suspended him from sitting on the bench.

This committee, through a specially appointed task force, has thoroughly and independently investigated the facts, held detailed factual hearings relating to the judge's misconduct in connection with his relationships with lawyers, in connection with his personal bankruptcy filing, and his relationship with bail bondsmen. Additional hearings included testimony from experts on judicial ethics and on the constitutional standards that surround impeachment.

So the four separate articles before us today are laid out in detail and include a variety of offenses that we will go into shortly. The misconduct, I am sorry to say, easily satisfies the constitutional standard of being high crimes and misdemeanors, and clearly renders the judge unfit to continue service.

I bring this resolution to the floor with regret that we are called upon to take this action, but I have no doubt that we must take action. The grounds for impeachment are overwhelmingly established, and, therefore, I urge my colleagues' careful consideration in support of the resolution.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from California, Adam Schiff, who was our task force chairman and who had ample time over these many months to display his legislative and judicial skills.

Mr. Speaker, how much time remains on both sides?

I yield such time as she may consume to a member of the committee, the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).

(Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

I reserve the balance of my time.

I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I want to commend my colleagues on both sides of the aisle for the very thoughtful discussion that has gone on around this matter.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 4621, the ``Prevent Deceptive Census Look Alike Mailings Act,'' and commend Representative Maloney for bringing this issue to the Floor. Like my colleague from New York, I am concerned about any mailing that could cause confusion and impact the response rate in the 2010 Census. Because of the importance of the Census, with its count determining many important calculations for federal funds and political representation, we must make every effort to ensure the integrity of the process.

I believe this legislation will mitigate some of the confusion and fraudulence that could cause underreporting, especially among targeted populations. The requirement for organizations that include ``Census'' on their mailings to provide a disclaimer that they are not writing on behalf of the federal government will help our constituents know that those materials are not part of the official 2010 United States Census.

I encourage my colleagues to support this legislation.

Madam Speaker, there are few issues of state as weighty as those we discuss today. The decision to engage in military conflict affects us all in innumerable ways. There are the obvious effects on our military men and women who risk their lives abroad, while also giving up many of the small joys associated with sharing life's meaningful moments with family and friends.

Similarly, each of us bears the costs associated with domestic investments sacrificed at home when we decide to instead spend vast sums of money abroad. Each dollar spent in Afghanistan on a Blackwater mercenary is a dollar that could be spent keeping a teacher in the classroom, putting a cop on the beat, or retraining a Detroit steelworker so he or she can compete in the emerging industries that will underpin the global economy.

Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, waging war tests our values as a nation. During these periods of conflict, the eyes of the world, rightly, are trained on our actions abroad. The ability to inflict violence upon large numbers of our fellow human beings demands that the American people be allowed to sit in judgment about what is being done in their name--to determine if the potent weapons at our disposal are wielded in a just manner. The question of whether or not we are living up to this highest of burdens could not be more important and that is why we must debate the War in Afghanistan here on the House Floor today.

While the number of Members who will join my good friend from Ohio and myself in supporting this resolution may be small, this vote will not accurately represent the views of the public at large. A poll commissioned by CNN this January found that a majority of the American people oppose the War in Afghanistan. Apparently, as with many issues in Washington, those who are forced bear the costs of war are the first to recognize a flawed policy, while those who profit from perpetual war do their best to blunt any change in course.

As a co-founder of the Out of Iraq Caucus, I remember that it took some time for official Washington to comprehend the scope of the public's opposition to that war. Thankfully, that caucus eventually grew to bloc of 70 Members and we were able to successfully match the will of the people with the priorities of the Congress. As a result, our troops will pull out of Iraqi cities this summer and leave the country by the end of the year.

I believe that, as with Iraq, the Administration and Congress will, and must, adopt a course in Afghanistan that will benefit both the Afghan and American people. That is why I have founded the ``Out of Afghanistan Caucus,'' which acknowledges that peace and security in Afghanistan will only occur when the United States reorients its commitment to the Afghan government and people by emphasizing indigenous reconciliation and reconstruction strategies, rigorous regional diplomacy, and swift redeployment of the US military.

It is increasingly clear that our military presence in Afghanistan inflames ethnic Pashtuns--many of whom would have nothing to do with the Taliban if they did not view the United States as an existential threat to their distinctive tribal culture and way of life. By picking sides in a 35-year-old civil war, the United States has made the necessary reconciliation between all parties in Afghanistan all but impossible. Similarly, I oppose the constant Predator drone strikes in both Afghanistan and Pakistan, in which one in three casualties is an innocent civilian. This violence will breed enmity, when we really need to be bringing these warring parties together.

I hope that the House votes today in support of this War Powers Privileged Resolution. Regardless of the outcome, I and many others in the Congress will continue to organize against additional troop funding and for Afghan-centric development policies that will speed peaceful and permanent reconciliation. I hope that you will join me as a Member of the Out of Afghanistan Caucus and you will support this historic resolution.

Madam Speaker, on March 10, 2010, I was called away on personal business. I regret that I was not present to vote on H. Res. 1146, H. Res. 1088, H.R. 4621, H. Con. Res. 248, and H. Con. Res. 249.

Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on all votes.

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 4573. This legislation would direct the Secretary of the Treasury to instruct the United States Executive Directors at the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, the Inter-American Development Bank to immediately cancel Haiti's debts and urge donors to disburse grants. While Haiti is rebuilding, we should allow them to turn a new leaf and not be burdened by overwhelming debt.

Last month I visited Haiti and witnessed firsthand the destruction caused by the massive earthquake of January 12, 2010. It is estimated by the Haitian government that well over 200,000 Haitians have been killed and 3 million have been affected by the natural disaster. It is imperative that this body help its neighbor in its time of need and make a significant long-term reconstruction commitment.

Haiti has had a long history of multilateral institutions distributing aid in the form of loans. At its peak, Haiti had a total external debt of $1.8 billion. In recent years the United States has advocated debt forgiveness and the international community recently responded last summer by forgiving $1.2 billion in debt to multilateral institutions.

I strongly support the legislation, which rightly argues that future aid to Haiti should be in the form of grants instead of loans. This must be kept in mind at the Haiti donor conference scheduled for later this month at the United Nations.

Madam Speaker, I am heartened by the public and private support given to the victims by millions of our generous fellow Americans. I also commend President Obama's unwavering commitment to alleviate the suffering.

Passing today's legislation would help free our struggling neighbor from the shackles of debt and offer a glimmer of hope during this time of need.

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3650, ``The Harmful Algal Blooms and Hypoxia Research and Control Amendment Act of 2009.'' This bill requires the Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere to utilize the resources of the Inter Agency Task Force on Harmful Algal Blooms and Hypoxia Task Force to establish and maintain a National Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Program. This program will help to develop and promote a national strategy to address and respond to one of the major problems facing our marine and freshwater ecosystems: algae blooms.

The need to address the ongoing harmful blooms and hypoxic events that increase daily, in our oceans, lakes, rivers and waterways, is long overdue. I applaud the fact that this bill allows for closer coordination between state and federal agencies through the use of innovative demonstration projects. Similarly, I also support provisions in this legislation that focus our efforts to educate our citizens about the causes and harmful environmental effects of pollution and algal blooms in our oceans, rivers, lakes, and waterways.

Water is our most critical natural resource and this legislation will improve our Nation's ability to provide safe water to all. As we continue to experience climate change, the threat posed by algal blooms will be a continuing challenge. This legislation addresses this threat in a measured, scientific manner and will improve our ability to address this issue in the future. I encourage my colleagues to support the bill.

Mr. Speaker, on March 9, 2010, I was called away on personal business. I regret that I was not present to vote on H.R. 3650, H. Res. 1069, and H. Res. 935. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on all votes.

Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 2847, the ``HIRE Act.'' While I am sensitive to the excruciating economic pain felt by many in my district and around the country, I cannot in good conscience support this flawed bill.

I applaud the House and Senate leadership for including some common sense job creation provisions in this bill. In particular, I support the inclusion of language that frees up $77 billion dollars worth of surface transportation investments and another provision that gives the recipients of qualified clean energy, school construction, and energy conservation bonds a direct payment from the federal government to cover their interest costs.

I wish that these provisions were enough to secure my support for this legislation and help those who cry out for additional economic aid. Unfortunately, the originators of this legislation--my colleagues in the United States Senate--decided to set aside the remaining $13 billion dollars of this $17 billion dollar bill for an ineffective and wasteful hiring tax credit. As with many previous efforts in the upper chamber, the Senate has yet again sacrificed effective policy in order to tout some small measure of bipartisan support.

During my 45 years in this body, we have debated whether or not to raise the minimum wage countless times. As we know from these reoccurring debates, companies do not respond to small changes in the cost of labor. This is why the periodic 15 to 20 percent increases in the minimum wage enacted into law by the Congress over the years have not effected employer hiring decisions. Unfortunately, the very economic reality that makes the minimum wage good policy also makes the Schumer-Hatch hiring credit bad policy.

If a 15 to 20 percent increase in the minimum wage doesn't affect employer decision-making, logic dictates that an even smaller payroll tax break--6.2 percent to be exact--for companies that hire recently unemployed workers will similarly have a nonexistent effect on hiring. This bill will create yet another failed corporate ``trickle-down'' tax break and Congress will hand out a new benefit--paid with scarce taxpayer resources--to employers who hire workers they would have hired anyway.

This is not to say that a properly conceived tax policy couldn't receive bipartisan support or play an important role in spurring hiring. For example, I have proposed legislation that is supported by many economists and organizations on both the left and right that would save millions of jobs at minimal cost to the federal government. My ``SHARE Credit Act'' would provide a tax credit to employers that shorten hours instead of firing workers. For a mere $22,000 dollars a worker, we could cheaply and efficiently stem the monsoon of layoffs reported each month by the Labor Department.

However, above and beyond mere tax policy, Members on both sides of the aisle know that we need to do more. Ending the unacceptably high levels of unemployment that plague our economy will require us to attack this epidemic using all the tools of the federal government. This means coupling progressive tax measures with public works job hiring initiatives and a commitment to full employment. To do anything else would be a betrayal of the fundamental trust given by those who elected us. Each of us comes to Washington with a simple task: Address the most critical issues that face the Nation by using the most effective tools at our disposal. No bonus points are awarded for bipartisan legislation that does not meet this high standard.

A bill whose major component is a meaningless giveaway to corporate America cannot be called a jobs bill. At a minimum, the Senate should conference the $150 billion dollar jobs package that that the House passed last December. Uneven and piecemeal legislative efforts like this bill must be the exception, not the norm. I encourage my colleagues to oppose this bill.

Mr. Speaker, today I rise to commend Chairman Miller and Congresswoman McMorris Rodgers for their work and dedication on this issue. We all want our children to have the highest quality education and educational experience available. That cannot happen in an environment where students, paraprofessionals, teachers and administrators are not safe.

This bill establishes standards that will ensure that those in classroom settings are safe and will prevent and reduce inappropriate restraint and seclusion by establishing minimum safety standards in schools, similar to protections already in place in hospitals and non- medical community-based facilities. By establishing minimum standards for situations that require the seclusion of students, this bill offers support to the nineteen states that have no standards set for such situations.

Special education students are at a higher risk of being harmfully restrained. Because minority children are disproportionately placed in special education, this bill will offer them protection against harmful actions such as being denied food in order to punish or preempt behaviors. By setting minimum standards that apply to the whole student body, H.R. 4247 protects students without singling out anyone or placing a stigma on a child or a group of children.

I am sensitive to the concerns of those who worry that they may lose the ability to implement certain behavioral interventions. I wish to continue this discussion with an eye toward further improvements in safety. This bill's parent notification provision is a positive step towards a continual dialogue between educational stakeholders that we in Congress can participate in. To those who have expressed concern over this bill, I want you to know that this bill is part of the on going conversation about students' safety in school and does not signal the end of our efforts to protect students.

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1109, I call up from the Speaker's table the bill (H.R. 3961) to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to reform the Medicare SGR payment system for physicians, with the Senate amendments thereto, and ask for its immediate consideration.

I have a motion at the desk.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to insert extraneous material on this matter.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker and Members, this measure before us will extend three provisions of our foreign intelligence surveillance laws for 1 year. The provisions are section 206 of the PATRIOT Act, governing roving wiretaps; section 215, which addresses the collection of business records; and the so-called ``lone wolf surveillance law.''

Without extension, these provisions will expire on Sunday coming.

As we consider this short-term extension, I make these observations:

As one who has found that the USA PATRIOT Act needs a great deal of improvement and that there have been many excesses and sometimes abuses of these broad powers over the years, I have found that too little consideration of the impact of this type of surveillance on our civil liberties has been looked into. And that's why the Judiciary Committee has undergone an extensive process over the past year and reported out a bill that attempts to reform these provisions and enhance congressional oversight. In the other body, the Judiciary Committee has also passed out a bill that improves, in my view, the PATRIOT Act. So we're very close to real reform.

The House bill has new protections for library and bookseller records. It clarifies the reach of roving authority to prevent ``John Doe'' blanket wiretaps. It tightens the standards for national security letters that have been abused in the past. It has extensive new reporting oversight and sunset provisions to greatly strengthen congressional oversight and makes other changes to the related provisions of law.

Please understand, Members, that this extension is not the final word on the PATRIOT Act, and what we will do is use the time between now and the year that will elapse to improve and pass real reform.

Now, while I would prefer to do this now, it is not to me strategically wise nor logistically possible to accomplish this at this time. And with the provisions expiring in a matter of 3 days, the other body has sent us this extension bill, so there is no reasonable possibility that they could pass a broader measure such as a Judiciary- passed bill at this time.

In other words, we have no other choice but to go along with this extension because there isn't sufficient time. Well, tomorrow is the last day of the week. It's physically impossible. So under these circumstances, it seems to me the best course is to merely maintain the status quo and work with the other body and the administration towards some improvements that I have in mind. I can announce we've made progress towards reaching common ground, and I believe an orderly path forward between now and during the next year will lead us to a much better result.

Now, although this extension doesn't reform underlying law, we recognize there's some value in a process that brings us quickly to another sunset date. Experience has taught that there's nothing like an approaching sunset to bring both the executive branch and the other body to the table with the will to see this resolved. So while I'd rather pass the Judiciary Committee bill out and truly make the reforms that I think are necessary, because of the time constraints that we find, I recommend that we take the next year and continue the process.

I urge your careful consideration of this very important measure.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased now to yield such time as he may consume to the chairman of the Intelligence Committee, Mr. Sylvestre Reyes, who has served on this committee for 10 years.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield as much time as he may consume to the chair of the Constitution Subcommittee on the House Judiciary, the gentleman from New York, Jerry Nadler.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased now to yield to Sheila Jackson Lee, a senior member on the Judiciary Committee, who will be our closing speaker; and I will yield to her as much time as she may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve.

I'm pleased now to recognize a former senior member of the Intelligence Committee for over 10 years--she served as ranking member--and I yield now to Jane Harman as much time as she consumes.

How many minutes remain?

I reserve my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield the remainder of our time to the distinguished gentleman from Ohio, Dennis Kucinich.

Madam Speaker, today I rise in strong support of H. Res. 944, expressing the sense of the House of Representatives on religious minorities in Iraq. Today's resolution highlights the struggles of Iraqi minorities since the invasion of Iraq in 2003 and offers solutions for peaceful reconciliation for the Iraqi people.

Madam Speaker, Southeast Michigan has one of the largest Arab- American populations outside the Middle East. It is estimated that there are well over 300,000 in Michigan, many of whom are Iraqi- American and are concerned on the future of Iraq. Specifically, the bill calls on the United States and United Nations to urge the Iraqi government to provide religious minorities with safe places of worship, guarantee protection of religious minorities, and ensure legal and political rights of this vulnerable population. This is vital because many of the more than 2.7 million Iraqi refugees are religious minorities.

Today's resolution will compliment President Obama's commendable plan to withdraw from Iraq in the summer of 2011. While withdrawal will do much to stabilize and empower the sovereign nation of Iraq, it is also important that the United States do its part to actively assist the Iraqi people in establishing policies that protect the civil rights and liberties of all Iraqi citizens.

Madam Speaker, on February 20, 2010, we lost a dedicated and tireless voice for the pursuit of peace and global sharing and cooperation, Linda Grover. I joined Ms. Grover in the founding of Global Family Day, an effort to celebrate and promote harmony within the global family every January 1st, but it was Linda whose every undertaking was in the name of Global Family Day.

Linda Grover, an author, writer, and activist, was resolute in her belief that all people, regardless of race, culture, religion, or economic status, celebrate life on earth together as one human family. It was in the promotion of this ideal, that Linda Grover and her children conceived Global Family Day, One Day of Peace and Sharing, an international holiday that would allow people around the world to engage in global fellowship.

Linda's Global Family Day initiatives were supported by the Congress and United Nations. In 2000, the 106th Congress unanimously passed S. Con. Res. 138 and in 2006, the 109th Congress unanimously passed H. Con. Res. 317 and S. Res. 582. These Congressional resolutions urged the President of the United States to issue an annual proclamation calling upon the people of the United States to observe Global Family Day. In 1999 and 2001, United Nations General Assembly resolutions, UNRes54/29 and UNRes56/2, were passed, recognizing a day of peace on January 1st and encouraging Member states to observe the global holiday.

This Congress, I introduced another Global Family Day resolution, H. Con. Res. 221. In this purpose, I was joined by Representative Dennis Kucinich and Senators Harry Reid and Daniel Inouye. It was Linda's hope, as well as ours, that there finally be a proclamation issued by the President asking that the citizens of the United States celebrate Global Family Day, thereby resulting in the Day's widespread observance.

In advancing Linda Grover's legacy, we will continue to pursue this proclamation and recognize Global Family Day every January 1st. Just as Ms. Grover believed, I think that, despite our differences, each of us has an interest in pursuing peaceful solutions to many of our contemporary world problems. A better appreciation for one another, practiced at the start of a new year, can only lead to the eradication of human suffering that results from violence, hunger, poverty, and other social ills.

Even in the weeks right before she died, Linda worked diligently to spread the Global Family Day message. Linda said, ``it's [Global Family Day] is going to improve our global attitude and give us a slightly better chance to overcome all these global crises that are demanding global solutions. Economy, Environment, Energy, Ethnic Enmity, Education, Employment, Epidemics--and those are just the ones that start with the letter E.''

Linda's fight and determination to spread the message of peace and sharing through Global Family Day will be missed. However, I will work to make sure that the message is not forgotten. Linda is survived by three children, who I understand will continue their mother's work to champion Global Family Day, and I will join them in this effort. We must all understand, as Linda did, that by working together as one global family, we can better meet the challenges humanity will face in the years to come.

Madam Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1098, I call up the bill (H.R. 4626) to restore the application of the Federal antitrust laws to the business of health insurance to protect competition and consumers, and ask for its immediate consideration.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and insert extraneous material on H.R. 4626.

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

Madam Speaker and my colleagues, the bill before us will allow, for the first time, competition to take hold in the health insurance marketplace, an important and vital step in the road to fixing our broken health insurance system and containing costs. I want to commend, in particular, my colleagues Tom Perriello of Virginia and Betsy Markey of Colorado for working with our committee on this important effort.

Experience has shown that Congress--and we hate to admit having made mistakes in the past, but we did make an error in 1945 in adding an antitrust exemption into the McCarran-Ferguson Act at the last minute during the debate. Not many of you were here at that time, and neither was I, but leading consumer groups and senior citizen groups, State attorneys general and others for years have been urging that we in the legislature fix this error that has been made so long ago.

The bipartisan Antitrust Modernization Commission established by this body and President Bush in 2002 echoed this call in its 2007 report. And now, as we work to fix what everyone mostly agrees is a broken health insurance market, it is about time to bring into that market what is an essential ingredient of any well-functioning market-- competition. And the way we make sure that happens here is the same way we made sure it happens in every other industry--to have the antitrust laws apply. These laws are the principal protector of free market competition and the prosperity it provides, the principal guarantee that businesses who want to offer choice and value to consumers can do so.

The blanket antitrust exemption in the McCarran-Ferguson Act shields health insurance companies from legal accountability for fixing prices, dividing up markets and customers they serve so as to deny meaningful choice, and using monopoly power to sabotage anyone who seeks to offer meaningful competitive choice to consumers. This, ladies and gentlemen, must end.

Antitrust court actions alleging each of these practices, and more, have been blocked routinely in the courts by invoking the McCarran- Ferguson antitrust exemption, and that is what we are here to repair today.

Now, an antitrust expert attorney, David Balto, with antitrust enforcement experience acquired both at the United States Justice Department and the Federal Trade Commission, has found that State insurance commissioners have not brought any actions in any State against health insurers for anticompetitive conduct during at least the last 5 years.

Health insurance premiums continue to spiral ever-upward each year, and copayments and deductibles keep taking further bites out of tight family budgets. Those families have a right to know that they are not being victimized by insurers any longer who should be competing to offer them choice and value but, instead, are, unfortunately, conspiring against them.

In its famous Topco ruling, the United States Supreme Court refers to the antitrust laws as the Magna Carta of free enterprise. The health insurance industry should not be exempt from them.

The Judiciary Committee has been working to remove this harmful exemption for a number of years. We made a lot of headway under the distinguished chairman, our former colleague, Jack Brooks of Texas, who

headed the committee after Peter Rodino and after Emanuel ``Manny'' Celler, and it is time to complete this effort in the area of health insurance since this is the number one subject, legislatively, before us being watched carefully by everyone in the Nation.

Last fall, our Judiciary Committee reported a similar bill which was incorporated into the comprehensive health care bill passed by the House. And so I commend my colleagues, Representatives Perriello and Markey, for their leadership in bringing this effort back to the House floor today as a freestanding measure.

With more and more people having to choose between having health insurance or food on the table, isn't it about time the health insurance companies' cozy antitrust exemption be taken off the books?

So I urge all my colleagues to support this long-overdue, pro- consumer legislation that will affect citizens and families in every State.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, before I yield to Sheila Jackson Lee, I yield myself 1 minute because my dear friend, the ranking member, asked, What is the point of this legislation?

We have made a long list of points of this legislation. To begin with, it is to increase competition in the health care industry. It also is to shine a light on industry practices that are currently unavailable and undetectable because of the exemption. That's why we are on the floor today.

I yield 3 minutes to a distinguished member of the committee, the gentlewoman from Houston, Texas, Sheila Jackson Lee.

Madam Speaker, the former chairman emeritus has raised a number of points that amount to verbal jujitsu that I will be addressing very shortly, but for now I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished chairman of the Judiciary Subcommittee on Courts and Antitrusts, a former magistrate in the courts of Georgia himself, Subcommittee Chair Hank Johnson.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself 2 minutes.

I want to respond to the senior member of the Judiciary Committee, a former attorney general of California and a friend of all of us on the committee, an effective member, and all I want him to know is that we approved his provision in the Judiciary Committee because we thought it was a good provision. It was unanimous. I don't recall that anyone voted against it or spoke against it. The problem, though, is that when we got to the Rules Committee, our leadership on both sides of the aisle, I hope, had come up with another bill and that bill omitted it. We were not able to get that put back in.

We think that their reasoning is not altogether strange or out of order or violating any procedure, but here's what it was. This is what they told me: They said, if there are no antitrust exemptions in this measure, then you don't need to specifically retain a part of the antitrust exemption relating to the safe harbors provision, because if it isn't an antitrust provision, they aren't going to be affected anyway.

So it's in that spirit that I appreciate the comments of the gentleman from California, and I hope that we can continue to work together as much as we can, and perhaps the final vote here will be more bipartisan than many thought that it would.

Madam Speaker, I now would like to yield 2 minutes to a senior member of the Congress from Iowa (Mr. Boswell).

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

Madam Speaker, no one has worked harder on this measure that is not a member of the Judiciary Committee than Peter DeFazio of Oregon. And I yield to him 3 minutes.

Madam Speaker, I am inclined to yield to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio) 1\1/2\ minutes.

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to recognize a senior member of the House Judiciary Committee from Los Angeles, Ms. Maxine Waters, for 3 minutes.

Madam Speaker, no one comes before the Judiciary Committee that I can think of offhand more frequently than Bill Pascrell of New Jersey. He's worked with us on a number of other issues besides this one, and we welcome his counsel. We yield him 2 minutes.

I yield the gentleman another 30 seconds.

Madam Speaker, I am pleased now to recognize David Scott, the gentleman from Georgia, who has been waiting patiently to get time here on this. I yield him 2 minutes at the point.

Madam Speaker, I am pleased now to recognize the gentleman from Rhode Island, Jim Langevin, a former Secretary of State, for 2 minutes.

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

Madam Speaker, I am very pleased to recognize the most experienced member of the civil rights struggle in the 20th century, the gentleman from Georgia, John Lewis, a strong advocate of universal health care, and I yield him 2 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased now to recognize the distinguished Member of the House who has had insurance experience as a State commissioner, Earl Pomeroy of North Dakota, for 2 minutes.

If the gentleman will yield, I want to commend him for clearing up something that perhaps in more reasonable circumstances should not need to be cleared up.

I still have confidence in the courts that they can read the simple understanding that when we say ``health insurance,'' we don't mean life insurance. I mean, this is getting pretty fundamental here. But, of course, you are correct, Mr. Pomeroy. It's health insurance only; no disability income insurance, no long-term care insurance, no property insurance.

I yield the gentleman an additional 1 minute.

No casualty insurance, no other kind of insurance but the one plainly listed in a two-page

bill. So my confidence in the courts is unrestricted that they can get this right.

The lack of a statutory definition is intended solely to give the courts the ability to ensure that all forms of health insurance are appropriately included so that unreasonable and artificial distinctions do not arise between two essentially equivalent kinds of insurance products and how they are treated under antitrust laws.

I am glad that the gentleman raised this issue in the hearings.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia who has done so much in working with the committee on this bill, Mr. Perriello, who has been great.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield to Paul Kanjorski of Pennsylvania for a unanimous consent request.

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

Mr. Speaker, I recognize the distinguished Member who allowed us to testify in his subcommittee on universal single-payer legislation, Rob Andrews of New Jersey, and I yield him 2 minutes.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am now pleased to recognize Betsy Markey of Colorado. She has done yeoman's work on this measure in her first term, and I will yield her 3 minutes.

I yield the gentlewoman an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. Speaker, Mary Jo Kilroy of Ohio has worked hard on this legislation, and I would like to recognize her for 2 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the leader of the Progressive Caucus in the House for so many years, the gentlewoman from California, Lynn Woolsey.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Garamendi).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to a former member of the House Judiciary Committee, the gentlewoman from Ohio, Betty Sutton.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Canton, Ohio, John Boccieri.

Mr. Speaker, this has been an important debate, and I would like to take this opportunity to commend the leader of the Republicans in the House, and especially one Member on the Judiciary Committee, Lamar Smith.

We have had a very civil debate. I think, in the course of the incredible amount of time that we have been allotted for this bill, that we have reached closure on some issues. There are now more things that we agree to on both sides of the aisle than there are things that we may have differences about.

I attribute it to the goodwill and the cooperation of my Republican colleagues on the House Judiciary Committee. I also solicit their vote, but I will respect any way that they may choose to dispose of this matter and our friendship will not be diminished or impaired in any way whatsoever.

Now, Lamar Smith mentioned the fact that there were other exemptions, and to be perfectly candid, I did not know that there were more than two exemptions, and it turned out that there are. As a matter of fact, there are 27. But many of them--and I haven't researched this yet. Many of them are partial exemptions. Many of them are very small exemptions that are very limited in terms of the economic scope of our reach in the United States. But they, nevertheless, exist.

Mr. Smith may remember that the baseball antitrust exemption was given very close scrutiny only 2 or 3 years ago, and it reminded them of the fact that their conduct hadn't always been such that deserved a continuation of the exemption, and I'm hopeful that baseball will still deserve it.

But here in the field of health care, I think it's hard to defend any argument that the health insurance industry deserves or requires or needs an exemption, and for that reason I am urging all of my colleagues to examine this two-page bill and scrutinize it. Let's see if we can get a refreshingly large bipartisan vote that could lead the American people to reflect on the fact that we can be liberals and conservatives without rancor or animosity or personalizing our philosophical differences, and that's the appeal that I offer to my colleagues on the other side.

There are those that wonder if this would create some kind of a chill or curtailment of creativity if this exemption were removed, and I don't think that that is very logical. We think that the antitrust laws are fairly elementary. They don't conspire against competition. They don't try to reserve creativity. We want competition, and it is the exemption from antitrust liability that this becomes very, very critical.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Maryland, Mr. Frank Kratovil.

Mr. Speaker, Nancy Pelosi is the first female Speaker of the House in American history. She is the third ranking person in our Federal Government. And we are all honored to recognize her for 1 minute at this time.

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

Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 1010) celebrating the life and work of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. during the 30th anniversary of the Stevie Wonder song tribute to Dr.

King, ``Happy Birthday,'' and for other purposes.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker and Members, I have been doing this for quite a number of years now, and I asked my chief of staff how many years specifically it's been. But we're here again with the ranking member, Lamar Smith; with John Lewis, the last remaining King disciple that worked with Dr. King longer than any of us. Today, we rise to salute not only Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., but also recalling those days when we were marching for a King holiday. We salute Dr. King and Stevie Wonder for the wonderful inspiration he gave us all with his musical tribute to Dr. King, ``Happy Birthday.''

On Monday, we observed for the 25th year the Federal Martin Luther King, Jr., holiday bill that started off 3 days after his assassination when I made this proposal. It also coincides with the 30th anniversary of Stevie Wonder's 1980 song tribute to Dr. King. Stevie's song became the rallying cry for those fighting for a holiday for Martin Luther King, Jr. He was one of our greatest advocates.

I just wanted to recall--I don't know if John Lewis remembers--the day at that march we got a call from the White House and they wanted Stevie Wonder to come to the White House. Stevie Wonder said, Well, how come they haven't invited you to come to the White House instead of me? I said, Stevie, that doesn't matter. They want you, and this is what we have been marching for. So you come to the White House. He said, No, I'm not going. And we went back and forth. Finally, he didn't come.

But later, shortly thereafter, we began the negotiations with Jack Kemp of New York, with the Republicans in the White House, and this agreement was struck: That if the House and the Senate could pass a King holiday bill, the President would sign it into law. We felt we could get it through the House, but the other body was another story entirely. Finally, it did happen.

I don't know if you remember the day that Coretta Scott King and all the kids, and Abernathy, Lowery, Julian Bond, we were all over in the other body and the speeches went on and on. Everybody was acclaiming King. You'd have thought he was a native son of all the speakers. It finally ended. They had far more time to consume than we did. A reporter asked me, What took you so long? Everybody seemed to have been for this bill all the time. Of course, I resisted losing my nonviolent disposition to respond to him, because

it took 15 years before that bill was finally taken up by the body. But it was because of the people, it was because of the spirit of the people in the public schools and the city councils, the counties. And the States even passed resolutions for us to do that.

Finally, the pressure built up so much throughout the country that we finally had the bill passed in the other body. The President then, true to his word, signed the bill. It was a great moment in history. I am still proud to say that we seriously honor King with this third Monday of every January. I will put the rest of my remarks in the Record.

House Resolution 1010 celebrates the work of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., and salutes Stevie Wonder for his song tribute to Dr. King, ``Happy Birthday.''

On Monday, we observed, for the 27th year, the Federal Martin Luther King Jr. Holiday. This particular commemoration of the King holiday coincides with the 30th anniversary of Stevie Wonder's 1980 song tribute to Dr. King.

Stevie Wonder's song became the rallying cry for those fighting for a Martin Luther King, Jr. Federal holiday, and he proved to be one of the holiday's greatest advocates.

And so, 30 years later, it is fitting that we consider a resolution both honoring Dr. King and saluting Stevie Wonder.

Today, I would like to touch on three significant points. First, having just observed the King Holiday, we are reminded of the more equal and just society that we live in today as a result of Dr. King's life work.

Dr. King's struggle led to the enactment of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, the 1965 Voting Rights Act, and the 1968 Fair Housing Act. From buses to motels, his work brought an end to state-sanctioned segregation and discrimination in public accommodations that were the hallmark of the Jim Crow system.

Personally, and I'm sure like many, I pursue my own life's work in the spirit of Dr. King.

When I first ran to represent the 14th Congressional District of Michigan in 1963, it was with the endorsement of Dr. King that I won.

It was through Dr. King that I got to know Rosa Parks, the mother of the Civil Rights Movement, who would work in my Detroit office for over 20 years.

On my second point, despite the great contributions Dr. King made, the pursuit of a Federal holiday in Dr. King's honor was long fought.

Significantly, it was Stevie Wonder's song tribute to Dr. King, ``Happy Birthday,'' that played a large role in galvanizing public support for a Federal holiday.

Just four days after the assassination of Dr. King, on April 8, 1968, I introduced legislation to observe the life and work of Dr. King with a Federal holiday. Until it became law in 1983, there was a persistent legislative drive for the King Holiday.

Stevie Wonder was one of the leading advocates at the helm during this fight. On September 29, 1980, he released the album, ``Hotter than July,'' containing a song he wrote in honor of Dr. King ``Happy Birthday.''

Mr. Wonder dedicated the album sleeve for ``Hotter than July'' to Dr. King with an inscription, and also encouraged the establishment of a Federal holiday in recognition of Dr. King.

Right on the album cover, he wrote, ``I and a growing number of people believe that it is time for our country to adopt King Holiday legislation, both in recognition of what he achieved and as a reminder of the distance which still has to be traveled.''

That growing number of people equated to 6 million signatures in support of the King Holiday, which Stevie Wonder and Coretta Scott King presented to Congress in 1982.

On the 15th anniversary of Dr. King's assassination, and the 20th anniversary of the March on Washington, Congress passed King Holiday legislation in 1983, with a vote of 338 to 90 in the House and a vote of 78 to 22 in the Senate. That November, it was signed into law.

At the first King Holiday observance, on January 20, 1986, Stevie Wonder headlined a concert in honor of Dr. King. And his commitment to advance the King legacy did not stop there.

Stevie Wonder has gone on to address such social and racial ills as apartheid in South Africa, hunger in Africa, and HIV/AIDS. In fact, his musical and social contributions are so significant that I feel Stevie Wonder is deserving of a Congressional Gold Medal.

Finally, we must continue the legacy of Dr. King--not just on the third Monday in January each year, but every day. It is each and every day that we should work to advance the ``Beloved Community'' that Dr. King envisioned.

Dr. King said, ``Life's most urgent and persistent question is: What are you doing for others?'' Let us ask ourselves this question, and act; and not just today, but every day.

I would like to commend my colleague, the gentleman from Georgia, John Lewis, for joining me in introducing this bipartisan resolution.

I would also like to acknowledge the many Members of the Judiciary Committee that join us in supporting this resolution--in particular, the gentleman from Texas, our Ranking Member, Lamar Smith.

I urge my colleagues to support this important resolution.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I thank my friend Lamar Smith for his significant contribution and his work as a co-leader on the Judiciary Committee for all the other things that we work on as well.

I now yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Lewis), a gentleman whom I knew before he was a Member of Congress, and he knew me before I was a Member of Congress as well.

Madam Speaker, I just want to tell our colleague from Tennessee, Mr. Zach Wamp, that that was the most amazing recapitulation of what happens to people when they go and trace these incredible moments in history that many of us have lived through. I particularly appreciate his recollection and his feelings and how they have impacted on his work here in the Congress. I just wanted to thank him for that myself.

And for all of our colleagues, many of whom are submitting statements, I'm going to put into the Record the remarks of President Obama on January 17 as he recalled that day of celebrating the life and legacy of Martin Luther King, Jr., and the article in Politico that also recapitulated the history of the struggle that King led, which is not over.

And although the raw violence that accompanied that struggle in those days--remember, the men, women and children who were in the struggle were risking their lives. This wasn't a philosophical discussion or a theoretical examination of where they were in history. This was an unbelievably brutal period of our history.

We recall that not in bitterness, but in honest reflection. I remember the trilogy written on King. Taylor Branch wrote three volumes on King, and I recommend it strongly to anybody who wants to read it. There have been many, many other records of this part of our history, but to John Lewis and me, Taylor Branch seemed to capture it with the detail and passion that few others were able to summon up.

[From the White House, Jan. 17, 2010]

Remarks by the President in Remembrance of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

THE PRESIDENT: Good morning. Praise be to God. Let me begin

by thanking the entire Vermont Avenue Baptist Church family

for welcoming our family here today. It feels like a family.

Thank you for making us feel that way. (Applause.) To Pastor

Wheeler, first lady Wheeler, thank you so much for welcoming

us here today. Congratulations on Jordan Denice--aka

Cornelia. (Laughter.)

Michelle and I have been blessed with a new nephew this

year as well--Austin Lucas Robinson. (Applause.) So maybe at

the appropriate time we can make introductions. (Laughter.)

Now, if Jordan's father is like me, then that will be in

about 30 years. (Laughter.) That is a great blessing.

Michelle and Malia and Sasha and I are thrilled to be here

today. And I know that sometimes you have to go through a

little fuss to have me as a guest speaker. (Laughter.) So let

me apologize in advance for all the fuss.

We gather here, on a Sabbath, during a time of profound

difficulty for our nation and for our world. In such a time,

it soothes the soul to seek out the Divine in a spirit of

prayer; to seek solace among a community of believers. But we

are not here just to ask the Lord for His blessing. We aren't

here just to interpret His Scripture. We're also here to call

on the memory of one of His noble servants, the Reverend Dr.

Martin Luther King, Jr.

Now, it's fitting that we do so here, within the four walls

of Vermont Avenue Baptist Church--here, in a church that rose

like the phoenix from the ashes of the civil war; here in a

church formed by freed slaves, whose founding pastor had worn

the union blue; here in a church from whose pews congregants

set out for marches and from whom choir anthems of freedom

were heard; from whose sanctuary King himself would sermonize

from time to time.

One of those times was Thursday, December 6, 1956. Pastor,

you said you were a little older than me, so were you around

at that point? (Laughter.) You were three years old--okay.

(Laughter.) I wasn't born yet. (Laughter.)

On Thursday, December 6, 1956. And before Dr. King had

pointed us to the mountaintop, before he told us about his

dream in front of the Lincoln Memorial, King came here, as a

27-year-old preacher, to speak on what he called ``The

Challenge of a New Age.'' ``The Challenge of a New Age.'' It

was a period of triumph, but also uncertainty, for Dr. King

and his followers--because just weeks earlier, the Supreme

Court had ordered the desegregation of Montgomery's buses, a

hard-wrought, hard-fought victory that would put an end to

the 381-day historic boycott down in Montgomery, Alabama.

And yet, as Dr. King rose to take that pulpit, the future

still seemed daunting. It wasn't clear what would come next

for the movement that Dr. King led. It wasn't clear how we

were going to reach the Promised Land. Because segregation

was still rife; lynchings still a fact. Yes, the Supreme

Court had ruled not only on the Montgomery buses, but also on

Brown v. Board of Education. And yet that ruling was defied

throughout the South--by schools and by States; they ignored

it with impunity. And here in the Nation's capital, the

Federal Government had yet to fully align itself with the

laws on its books and the ideals of its founding.

So it's not hard for us, then, to imagine that moment. We

can imagine folks coming to this church, happy about the

boycott being over. We can also imagine them, though, coming

here concerned about their future, sometimes second-guessing

strategy, maybe fighting off some creeping doubts, perhaps

despairing about whether the movement in which they had

placed so many of their hopes--a movement in which they

believed so deeply--could actually deliver on its promise.

So here we are, more than half a century later, once again

facing the challenges of a new age. Here we are, once more

marching toward an unknown future, what I call the Joshua

generation to their Moses generation--the great inheritors of

progress paid for with sweat and blood, and sometimes life

itself.

We've inherited the progress of unjust laws that are now

overturned. We take for granted the progress of a ballot

being available to anybody who wants to take the time to

actually vote. We enjoy the fruits of prejudice and bigotry

being lifted--slowly, sometimes in fits and starts, but

irrevocably--from human hearts. It's that progress that made

it possible for me to be here today; for the good people of

this country to elect an African American the 44th President

of the United States of America.

Reverend Wheeler mentioned the inauguration, last year's

election. You know, on the heels of that victory over a year

ago, there were some who suggested that somehow we had

entered into a post-racial America, all those problems would

be solved. There were those who argued that because I had

spoke of a need for unity in this country that our nation was

somehow entering into a period of post partisanship. That

didn't work out so well. There was a hope shared by many that

life would be better from the moment that I swore that oath.

Of course, as we meet here today, one year later, we know

the promise of that moment has not yet been fully fulfilled.

Because of an era of greed and irresponsibility that sowed

the seeds of its own demise, because of persistent economic

troubles unaddressed through the generations, because of a

banking crisis that brought the financial system to the brink

of catastrophe, we are being tested--in our own lives and as

a nation--as few have been tested before.

Unemployment is at its highest level in more than a quarter

of a century. Nowhere is it higher than the African American

community. Poverty is on the rise. Home ownership is

slipping. Beyond our shores, our sons and daughters are

fighting two wars. Closer to home, our Haitian brothers and

sisters are in desperate need. Bruised, battered, many people

are legitimately feeling doubt, even despair, about the

future. Like those who came to this church on that Thursday

in 1956, folks are wondering, where do we go from here?

I understand those feelings. I understand the frustration

and sometimes anger that so many folks feel as they struggle

to stay afloat. I get letters from folks around the country

every day; I read 10 a night out of the 40,000 that we

receive. And there are stories of hardship and desperation,

in some cases, pleading for help: I need a job. I'm about

to lose my home. I don't have health care--it's about to

cause my family to be bankrupt. Sometimes you get letters

from children: My mama or my daddy have lost their jobs,

is there something you can do to help? Ten letters like

that a day we read.

So, yes, we're passing through a hard winter. It's the

hardest in some time. But let's always remember that, as a

people, the American people, we've weathered some hard

winters before. This country was founded during some harsh

winters. The fishermen, the laborers, the craftsmen who made

camp at Valley Forge--they weathered a hard winter. The

slaves and the freedmen who rode an underground railroad,

seeking the light of justice under the cover of night--they

weathered a hard winter. The seamstress whose feet were

tired, the pastor whose voice echoes through the ages--they

weathered some hard winters. It was for them, as it is for

us, difficult, in the dead of winter, to sometimes see spring

coming. They, too, sometimes felt their hopes deflate. And

yet, each season, the frost melts, the cold recedes, the sun

reappears. So it was for earlier generations and so it will

be for us.

What we need to do is to just ask what lessons we can learn

from those earlier generations about how they sustained

themselves during those hard winters, how they persevered and

prevailed. Let us in this Joshua generation learn how that

Moses generation overcame.

Let me offer a few thoughts on this. First and foremost,

they did so by remaining firm in their resolve. Despite being

threatened by sniper fire or planted bombs, by shoving and

punching and spitting and angry stares, they adhered to that

sweet spirit of resistance, the principles of nonviolence

that had accounted for their success.

Second, they understood that as much as our Government and

our political parties had betrayed them in the past--as much

as our nation itself had betrayed its own ideals--Government,

if aligned with the interests of its people, can be--and must

be--a force for good. So they stayed on the Justice

Department. They went into the courts. They pressured

Congress, they pressured their President. They didn't give up

on this country. They didn't give up on Government. They

didn't somehow say Government was the problem; they said,

we're going to change Government, we're going to make it

better. Imperfect as it was, they continued to believe in the

promise of democracy; in America's constant ability to remake

itself, to perfect this union.

Third, our predecessors were never so consumed with

theoretical debates that they couldn't see progress when it

came. Sometimes I get a little frustrated when folks just

don't want to see that even if we don't get everything, we're

getting something. (Applause.) King understood that the

desegregation of the Armed Forces didn't end the civil rights

movement, because black and white soldiers still couldn't sit

together at the same lunch counter when they came home. But

he still insisted on the rightness of desegregating the Armed

Forces. That was a good first step--even as he called for

more. He didn't suggest that somehow by the signing of the

Civil Rights that somehow all discrimination would end. But

he also didn't think that we shouldn't sign the Civil Rights

Act because it hasn't solved every problem. Let's take a

victory, he said, and then keep on marching. Forward steps,

large and small, were recognized for what they were--which

was progress.

Fourth, at the core of King's success was an appeal to

conscience that touched hearts and opened minds, a commitment

to universal ideals--of freedom, of justice, of equality--

that spoke to all people, not just some people. For King

understood that without broad support, any movement for civil

rights could not be sustained. That's why he marched with the

white auto worker in Detroit. That's why he linked arm with

the Mexican farm worker in California, and united people of

all colors in the noble quest for freedom.

Of course, King overcame in other ways as well. He remained

strategically focused on gaining ground--his eyes on the

prize constantly--understanding that change would not be

easy, understand that change wouldn't come overnight,

understanding that there would be setbacks and false starts

along the way, but understanding, as he said in 1956, that

``we can walk and never get weary, because we know there is a

great camp meeting in the promised land of freedom and

justice.''

And it's because the Moses generation overcame that the

trials we face today are very different from the ones that

tested us in previous generations. Even after the worst

recession in generations, life in America is not even close

to being as brutal as it was back then for so many. That's

the legacy of Dr. King and his movement. That's our

inheritance. Having said that, let there be no doubt the

challenges of our new age are serious in their own right, and

we must face them as squarely as they faced the challenges

they saw.

I know it's been a hard road we've traveled this year to

rescue the economy, but the economy is growing again. The job

losses have finally slowed, and around the country, there's

signs that businesses and families are beginning to rebound.

We are making progress.

I know it's been a hard road that we've traveled to reach

this point on health reform. I promise you I know.

(Laughter.) But under the legislation I will sign into law,

insurance companies won't be able to drop you when you get

sick, and more than 30 million people--(applause)--our fellow

Americans will finally have insurance. More than 30 million

men and women and children, mothers and fathers, won't be

worried about what might happen to them if they get sick.

This will be a victory not for Democrats; this will be a

victory for dignity and decency, for our common humanity.

This will be a victory for the United States of America.

Let's work to change the political system, as imperfect as

it is. I know people can feel down about the way things are

going sometimes here in Washington. I know it's tempting to

give up on the political process. But we've put in place

tougher rules on lobbying and ethics and transparency--

tougher rules than any administration in history. It's not

enough, but it's progress. Progress is possible. Don't give

up on voting. Don't give up on advocacy. Don't give up on

activism. There are too many needs to be met, too much work

to be done. Like Dr. King said, ``We must accept finite

disappointment but never lose infinite hope.''

Let us broaden our coalition, building a confederation not

of liberals or conservatives, not of red states or blue

states, but of all Americans who are hurting today, and

searching for a better tomorrow. The urgency of the hour

demands that we make common cause with all of America's

workers--white, black, brown--all of whom are being hammered

by this recession, all of whom are yearning for that spring

to come. It demands that we reach out to those who've been

left out in the cold even when the economy is good, even when

we're not in recession--the youth in the inner cities, the

youth here in Washington, D.C., people in rural

communities who haven't seen prosperity reach them for a

very long time. It demands that we fight discrimination,

whatever form it may come. That means we fight

discrimination against gays and lesbians, and we make

common cause to reform our immigration system.

And finally, we have to recognize, as Dr. King did, that

progress can't just come from without--it also has to come

from within. And over the past year, for example, we've made

meaningful improvements in the field of education. I've got a

terrific Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan. He's been

working hard with states and working hard with the D.C.

school district, and we've insisted on reform, and we've

insisted on accountability. We we're putting in more money

and we've provided more Pell Grants and more tuition tax

credits and simpler financial aid forms. We've done all that,

but parents still need to parent. (Applause.) Kids still need

to own up to their responsibilities. We still have to set

high expectations for our young people. Folks can't simply

look to government for all the answers without also looking

inside themselves, inside their own homes, for some of the

answers.

Progress will only come if we're willing to promote that

ethic of hard work, a sense of responsibility, in our own

lives. I'm not talking, by the way, just to the African

American community. Sometimes when I say these things people

assume, well, he's just talking to black people about working

hard. No, no, no, no. I'm talking to the American community.

Because somewhere along the way, we, as a nation, began to

lose touch with some of our core values. You know what I'm

talking about. We became enraptured with the false prophets

who prophesized an easy path to success, paved with credit

cards and home equity loans and get-rich-quick schemes, and

the most important thing was to be a celebrity; it doesn't

matter what you do, as long as you get on TV. That's

everybody.

We forgot what made the bus boycott a success; what made

the civil rights movement a success; what made the United

States of America a success--that, in this country, there's

no substitute for hard work, no substitute for a job well

done, no substitute for being responsible stewards of God's

blessings.

What we're called to do, then, is rebuild America from its

foundation on up. To reinvest in the essentials that we've

neglected for too long--like health care, like education,

like a better energy policy, like basic infrastructure, like

scientific research. Our generation is called to buckle down

and get back to basics.

We must do so not only for ourselves, but also for our

children, and their children. For Jordan and for Austin.

That's a sacrifice that falls on us to make. It's a much

smaller sacrifice than the Moses generation had to make, but

it's still a sacrifice.

Yes, it's hard to transition to a clean energy economy.

Sometimes it may be inconvenient, but it's a sacrifice that

we have to make. It's hard to be fiscally responsible when we

have all these human needs, and we're inheriting enormous

deficits and debt, but that's a sacrifice that we're going to

have to make. You know, it's easy, after a hard day's work,

to just put your kid in front of the TV set--you're tired,

don't want to fuss with them--instead of reading to them, but

that's a sacrifice we must joyfully accept.

Sometimes it's hard to be a good father and good mother.

Sometimes it's hard to be a good neighbor, or a good citizen,

to give up time in service of others, to give something of

ourselves to a cause that's greater than ourselves--as

Michelle and I are urging folks to do tomorrow to honor and

celebrate Dr. King. But these are sacrifices that we are

called to make. These are sacrifices that our faith calls us

to make. Our faith in the future. Our faith in America. Our

faith in God.

And on his sermon all those years ago, Dr. King quoted a

poet's verse:

Truth forever on the scaffold

Wrong forever on the throne . . .

And behind the dim unknown stands God

Within the shadows keeping watch above his own.

Even as Dr. King stood in this church, a victory in the

past and uncertainty in the future, he trusted God. He

trusted that God would make a way. A way for prayers to be

answered. A way for our union to be perfected. A way for the

arc of the moral universe, no matter how long, to slowly bend

towards truth and bend towards freedom, to bend towards

justice. He had faith that God would make a way out of no

way.

You know, folks ask me sometimes why I look so calm.

(Laughter.) They say, all this stuff coming at you, how come

you just seem calm? And I have a confession to make here.

There are times where I'm not so calm. (Laughter.) Reggie

Love knows. My wife knows. There are times when progress

seems too slow. There are times when the words that are

spoken about me hurt. There are times when the barbs sting.

There are times when it feels like all these efforts are for

naught, and change is so painfully slow in coming, and I have

to confront my own doubts.

But let me tell you--during those times it's faith that

keeps me calm. (Applause.) It's faith that gives me peace.

The same faith that leads a single mother to work two jobs to

put a roof over her head when she has doubts. The same faith

that keeps an unemployed father to keep on submitting job

applications even after he's been rejected a hundred times.

The same faith that says to a teacher even if the first nine

children she's teaching she can't reach, that that 10th one

she's going to be able to reach. The same faith that breaks

the silence of an earthquake's wake with the sound of prayers

and hymns sung by a Haitian community. A faith in things not

seen, in better days ahead, in Him who holds the future in

the hollow of His hand. A faith that lets us mount up on

wings like eagles; lets us run and not be weary; lets us walk

and not faint.

So let us hold fast to that faith, as Joshua held fast to

the faith of his fathers, and together, we shall overcome the

challenges of a new age. (Applause.) Together, we shall seize

the promise of this moment. Together, we shall make a way

through winter, and we're going to welcome the spring.

Through God all things are possible. (Applause.)

May the memory of Dr. Martin Luther King continue to

inspire us and ennoble our world and all who inhabit it. And

may God bless the United States of America. Thank you very

much, everybody. God bless you. (Applause.)

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