Floor Statements

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, LaShawn Warren. For 2\1/ 2\ years, LaShawn served as Oversight Counsel for the Committee on the Judiciary.

LaShawn graduated magna cum laude from Savannah State College in Savannah, Georgia. She earned her law degree from Howard University, where she served as co-editor-in-chief of the Social Justice Law Review and rose to the leadership ranks of many of the law school's societies and associations. In addition to her law degree, she earned a certificate in non-profit management from Georgetown University's Center for Professional Development.

Prior to joining the staff of the Judiciary Committee, LaShawn served as Legislative Counsel for Civil Rights for the American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU. As Legislative Counsel, she prepared congressional testimony for the U.S. Congress and the United Nations Human Rights Council, UNHRC, and lobbied Members of Congress, UNHRC members, and their respective staffs on voting rights, education equity, racial profiling, employment, housing, domestic violence policy, welfare reform, privacy, international human rights, and civil rights enforcement. She chaired advocacy and legislative coalitions, worked with national and local media, and served as the lead strategist for the civil rights community's successful effort to reauthorize the Voting Rights Act in 2006. Prior to her tenure at the ACLU, she served as a legislative analyst for the Seattle City Council and as an Assistant Attorney General for the Washington State Office of the Attorney General.

During her time with the Judiciary Committee, LaShawn led the Congress' investigation into the enforcement of Federal civil rights laws, hiring practices, and resource management issues in the Civil Rights Division, CRT, of the Department of Justice. By the end of the 110th Congress, her work had exposed massive politicization of the CRT's operations, including its hiring practices and case-prosecution decisions. Cleaning up that division--so central to the equal rights of all Americans--is a great legacy of LaShawn's work at the Committee. She additionally served as the Committee's lead counsel on voting issues and conducted investigative and legislative

work related to voting, employment, housing, predatory lending, bankruptcy, civil rights and criminal law enforcement, international law compliance, and civil rights in immigration policy. She authored large portions of the Committee staff's report ``Reining in the Imperial Presidency: Lessons and Recommendations Relating to the Presidency of George W. Bush'' and supervised the drafting and editing of the Committee's bipartisan amici brief in Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District No. 1 v. Eric H. Holder (2009).

On behalf of the Judiciary Committee, its staff, and this distinguished body, I would like to thank LaShawn for her service and for her unwavering commitment to protecting and advancing civil rights and liberties for all Americans. We are losing a dear colleague, mentor, and friend--her generosity, optimism, professionalism, and warmth shall be sorely missed. We wish her the best of luck and extend to her our deepest gratitude.

Madam Speaker, today I rise to introduce a resolution 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.'' Joining me in this effort is the gentleman from Georgia, John Lewis, and I would like to acknowledge him at this time.

For over 40 years, we have commemorated the life and work of our nation's greatest civil rights leader, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Since 1986, we have recognized Dr. King with a Federal holiday in his honor--a holiday that I worked hard to achieve. As we approach this year's King Holiday, which coincides with the 30th anniversary of Stevie Wonder's song tribute to Dr. King, ``Happy Birthday,'' I am honored to introduce this resolution for a few reasons.

First, we celebrate Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. for pursuing a dream of equality that made our nation a more free and just society. In his short life, Dr. King laid the foundation for a society that could live up to the ideal that ``all men are created equal.'' It is on the shoulders of Dr. King and others at the forefront of the Civil Rights Movement, that we are here today, able to acknowledge that much of Dr. King's dream has been realized.

Our 44th President, President Barack Obama, is a testament to Dr. King's pursuit and struggle for equality. At his Inauguration, President Obama acknowledged that he was a product of Dr. King's legacy, when he expressed that the historic day be explained by ``why men and women and children of every race and every faith can join in celebration across this magnificent Mall, and why a man whose father less than sixty years ago might not have been served at a local restaurant can now stand before you to take a most sacred oath.''

Second, we are able to commemorate the life and work of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. on the third Monday in January every year because of the commitment to continue Dr. King's legacy by people like Stevie Wonder. Stevie Wonder's 1980 song tribute to Dr. King, ``Happy Birthday,'' became a rallying cry for those supporting the campaign to honor Dr. King with a Federal holiday. It was that song that led to the collection of 6 million signatures in support of a Federal holiday that Stevie Wonder and Coretta Scott King presented to Congressional Leadership in 1982.

After legislation providing for a Federal holiday in honor of Dr. King had been enacted in 1983, and was first observed in 1986, it was Stevie Wonder that headlined a concert during that first official commemoration of Dr. King. Significantly, Stevie Wonder's work to advance the legacy of Dr. King did not end here. Mr. Wonder went on to address such racial and social ills as apartheid in South Africa, famine in Africa, and the AIDS epidemic.

Finally, I introduce this resolution commemorating the life and work of Dr. King during this 30th anniversary of ``Happy Birthday'' because, while the legacy of Dr. King lives on in Stevie Wonder and so many of us, we must realize that we still have work to do to live up to the ideal that ``all men are created equal.'' Advancing Dr. King's mission of equality means eliminating the disparities that exist in so many aspects of our society, like healthcare, housing, employment, and education. Advancing Dr. King's mission of peace means encouraging our nation to be a peaceful democracy.

Therefore, it is with this resolution that I ask the people of the United States to renew pledges to advance those principles and actions that are consistent with Dr. King's dream, those principles of equality, freedom, peace, courage, and compassion. Let us allow Dr. King to live on in each of us, not just on the third Monday in January, but every day.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to express my deepest condolences to the people of Haiti who have lost family, friends and loved ones in yesterday's earthquake. I understand that the island as a whole has been devastated, and that the capital city of Port-au-Prince was particularly severely hit. I greatly appreciate the efforts of the Administration and many non-governmental organizations who are working tirelessly to provide emergency aid and assistance.

However, as I have long worked in partnership with Haiti to assist in the development of the country, I strongly believe that the Administration's efforts to ameliorate the damage suffered by Haiti should not be limited to simply initial emergency response and aid. The recovery of Haiti will be a lengthy process, particularly since yesterday's earthquake served to further exacerbate the existing humanitarian crisis that was the result of crippling damage inflicted by four hurricanes and tropical storms in late 2008. In this environment, Haiti is simply not in a position to adequately provide for the safety of Haitian nationals upon their return to the country from the United States.

Therefore, I will, along with a bi-partisan group of Members of Congress, be asking the Administration to designate Haiti for Temporary Protected Status, or TPS. TPS will allow Haitian nationals currently in the U.S. to remain until this time of crisis has passed and Haiti is adequately able to handle the safe return of its nationals. I hope that the Administration recognizes that TPS designation for Haiti will be a significant step towards rebuilding after yesterday's tragedy. Again, I would like to extend my most sincere condolences to the Haitian people, and reassure them that I will do everything in my power to ensure that the U.S. government will provide any and all necessary assistance towards the rebuilding of Haiti.

Madam Speaker, the Judiciary Committee's Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security Subcommittee Chairman Robert C. ``Bobby'' Scott and I would like to take this opportunity to thank Karen Wilkinson for her work with the Committee for the past 2 years.

Karen came to us as a detailee from the Administrative Office of the United States Courts. At the end of December, Karen will return to Phoenix, Arizona to continue her work as an Assistant Federal Public Defender representing indigent clients in federal criminal cases, where she worked for eight years before coming to the Committee. Prior to that, she clerked for the U.S. District Court for Arizona and then joined the law firm of Brown & Bain. Karen graduated magna cum laude from Arizona State University Law School, received a Masters in Business Administration from NOVA University and her Bachelor of Science degree from the University of Michigan.

Karen's accomplishments during her tenure with the Committee include a number of bills that are very important to improving our country's criminal justice system. During the 111th Congress, she was responsible for guiding several legislative measures to approval on the floor of the House of Representatives, including: H.R. 448, the Elder Abuse Victims Act of 2009; H.R. 632, the National Silver Alert Act 2009; H.R. 748, CAMPUS Safety Act of 2009; H.R. 908, the Missing Alzheimer's Disease Patient Alert Program Reauthorization Act of 2009; H.R. 1333, which amends chapter 40 of title 18 of the United States Code to exempt the transportation, shipment, receipt, or importation of explosive materials for delivery to a federally recognized Indian tribes; H.R. 1727, the Managing Arson Through Criminal History, MATCH, Act; H.R. 1933, a Child is Missing Alert and Recovery Center Act; S. 1289, the Foreign Evidence Request Efficiency Act of 2009, and H.R. 2661, the Court Security Enhancement Act of 2009.

In addition, she is shepherding several very important bills pending before the Judiciary Committee, such as: H.R. 503, the Prevention of Equine Cruelty Act of 2009; H.R. 3327, the Ramos-Compean Justice Act of 2009; H.R. 2289, the Juvenile Justice Accountability and Improvement Act of 2009; H.R. 2095, the Restitution for the Exonerated Act; H.R. 1149, the Child Protection Reauthorization Act of 2009 and H.R. 1422, the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Reauthorization Act of 2009. Karen is also developing the Literacy Education and Rehabilitation Act, LERA, and the Department of Justice Reauthorization Act, legislation that would require a criminal defense representative to be appointed to the United States Sentencing Commission, as well as bills that would correct the firearm recidivist sentencing guidelines and the computation of good time credit in federal prison system.

We would like to thank the Administrative Office of Courts and the Federal Public Defender's Office of Phoenix for their generosity in allowing such a dedicated, responsible, and committed person to become such an integral part of our team. We are deeply grateful to Karen for her service, professionalism, and friendship during the past 2 years. She possesses that rare balance of humility, warmth, wit, and passion without a trace of ego, and she will be sorely missed. We wish her the best of luck and give her our thanks.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor George C. Elliott for his two years of dedicated service to the Committee on the Judiciary. As a detailee from the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), George spent a year with the Committee in 2007 and was gracious enough to come back for another year when I requested him again in 2009. George will be returning to the USPTO at the end of 2009, where he will resume his duties as a Director.

George came to work for the Committee to support Congress' efforts to pass patent reform legislation. George's knowledge and experience in patent law proved invaluable to this endeavor. In the 110th Congress, George's tireless work in advising and crafting policy options contributed greatly to passage of the House of Representative's patent reform legislation, H.R. 1908. His dedication to this task continued in the 111th Congress, where he has played an equally important role in advancing patent reform legislation.

In addition to patent reform, George has worked on a variety of other intellectual property policy and legislative matters, including patent settlements, technology transfer, gene patents, and USPTO appropriations. George's expertise, work ethic, and friendly nature have earned him the respect and admiration of his colleagues. He has become a fixture of the Committee's staff and a valued member of the Committee's intellectual property team.

We were privileged to have this opportunity to work with George and we wish him all the best in his future endeavors.

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to introduce, on behalf of myself and my colleagues Dan Lungren of California, Sheila Jackson-Lee of Texas, and Alcee Hastings of Florida, the National Emancipation Commemoration Act of 2009. This legislation will establish an 18-member National Emancipation Commemoration Commission to provide for an appropriate national observance of the 150th anniversaries of the Emancipation Proclamation in 2013, the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution in 2015, and related events, and to conduct a study exploring why modern slavery continues to exist in the United States and elsewhere.

Our Nation's history is unfortunately intertwined with the story of slavery and the slave trade. For hundreds of years, men, women and children were captured and taken from Africa and enslaved in the American colonies. Yet alongside the history of slavery in the United States, we also remember the stories of those who fought against the abhorrent practice--some with the pen, and some with the sword. The work and lives of historical figures like Frederick Douglass, Sojourner Truth, and Harriet Tubman are familiar to our classrooms and history books. Other abolitionists are less well-known, such as Levi and Catherine Coffin, a Quaker couple in Indiana who helped over 3,000 slaves escape to freedom.

The struggle for freedom for all Americans reached a new height on January 1,1863, when President Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation. With it, he declared ``that all persons held as slaves'' within the States rebelling against the Union ``are, and henceforward shall be free.'' As the Union Army advanced on the Confederate territory, thousands of slaves gained their freedom each day. Shortly after the war ended, the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution was adopted, prohibiting slavery and involuntary servitude throughout the United States.

Despite these milestones, slavery has not yet been relegated to the pages of history. An estimated 27 million people are still in servitude worldwide--including an estimated 50,000 or more people enslaved in the United States.

The National Emancipation Commemoration Commission's work is two- fold. It will advise the Attorney General on making grants available to government and non-profit entities for activities and programs related to the commemoration. These activities may include the publication of scholarly research, production of a commemorative stamp or coin, and the development of informational displays and programs at National Parks and historic sites related to slavery, the Underground Railroad, and the Emancipation throughout the United States.

The Commission created by this bill is also tasked with connecting the commemoration of Emancipation with the problem of modern slavery in the United States and around the world. The Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution is a living promise of freedom that places a duty on all of us to prevent involuntary servitude. In support of that duty, the Commission will conduct a study addressing why slavery in all its forms still exists, analyzing the persistence of modern slavery in the United States from 1865 to the present, and make recommendations to address issues and concerns highlighted by the study.

For as long as there have been slaves in this country, there have been justice-minded individuals and groups dedicated to the abolition of slavery. It is appropriate that we commemorate their work and the 150th anniversaries of the Emancipation Proclamation and the Thirteenth Amendment, and in so doing, renew our commitment to ending modern slavery in the United States and around the world.

Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 3326, the Fiscal Year 2010 Department of Defense Appropriations Act.

The President's announcement last week came as no surprise to me and many of my colleagues; he has consistently stated throughout the Presidential campaign and during his first year in office that he is committed to shifting military resources from Iraq into Afghanistan. Nonetheless, I am disappointed the President has moved ahead with, what I believe to be, an incorrect course of action.

As we move forward in this process, it is imperative that the House consider all options about how to best succeed in Afghanistan. It is in this spirit today that I want to announce the creation of a new ``Peace and Progress in Afghanistan Caucus'' that will give Democrats and Republicans a place to organize and advocate for a new strategy that recognizes the need to redeploy our troops, while strengthening our civilian and diplomatic approaches.

The presence of military troops in Afghanistan is having a detrimental effect on our efforts to secure a lasting peace in the region and diffuse the threat of international terrorism. Our military presence only inflames anti-American resentment.

Only by pursuing a wide-ranging policy that focuses on reorienting the United States' commitment to the Afghan government and people by emphasizing indigenous reconciliation and reconstruction strategies, rigorous regional diplomacy, and swift redeployment of the US military, will we ultimately succeed in Afghanistan.''

I was extremely heartened that two of the three prongs of the President's new strategy focus on a civilian surge and on diplomacy with Pakistan. It is a shame that the funding in this bill will not support these worthy approaches. The President believes that the United States can transform resentment into hope by working with our humanitarian and local government partners on the ground to give the Afghan people access to education, strong civic institutions, and a sustainable, legitimate source of income.

I believe that a new focus on a civilian surge should also empower local NGOs and initiatives that directly benefit the Afghan people, like the highly successful National Solidarity Project, an Afghan-run community development program.

Similarly, if the Pakistani people understand that we are committed to helping secure their safety and prosperity, they will step up their efforts to combat terrorism within their borders. Additionally, I believe we must expand our thinking beyond Pakistan to include other actors and countries that affect the greater region. One of the least discussed aspects of this conflict is the role India must play in promoting regional peace. For years, the Pakistani military and intelligence services have been hesitant to crack down on Taliban militants operating in the tribal regions because they fear the establishment of an Afghan government that would be susceptible to Indian influence. Such a worst case scenario, in their view, would give one of their traditional regional foes a foothold on both their northern and southern borders.

In order to secure a long-term regional peace, the President must engage India and Pakistan to seek a final political agreement on Kashmir. Only when Pakistan feels secure in the south, will the Pakistani army be able to focus its efforts on defeating the Taliban who dwell along the Afghan border.

I look forward to working with the President to promote and expand these critical approaches to securing victory.

The President has committed to ending the war in a responsible manner. Although we disagree on the means being employed to reach that laudable goal at the moment, I believe that I and other pro-peace, pro- national security Members of Congress can help him can craft a successful policy that will bring our troops home as soon as possible.

In the meantime, I will continue to oppose funding a war that emphasizes a heavy military footprint. No amount of additional troops can bring a war with no military solution to an end.

Madam Speaker, today, I inadvertently cast a ``yea'' vote during rollcall vote 985. My intention was to cast a ``nay'' vote on H.R. 3326, a bill making appropriations for the Department of Defense for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2010, and for other purposes.

Madan Speaker, I rise in support of passage of the Jobs for Main Street Act of 2010.

I believe this legislation is one of the most cost effective ways to provide cities across this country with desperately needed federal funding to help create and stabilize jobs, assist families who need their unemployment benefits extended, and to ensure that they can keep their health insurance.

Passage of the Jobs for Main Street Act of 2010 is critically important for America's working families, and unemployed individuals, given the current economic status of this country.

The Nation is experiencing extreme difficulties leading to high unemployment rates, especially in my home State of Michigan. Passage of this bill will provide real tangible relief for those who are depending on the Federal Government to help them survive in a time of financial crisis--not empty rhetoric and promises that help nobody.

The Jobs for Main Street Act of 2010 will help reduce these problems by stabilizing and creating jobs through infrastructure investments, an increase in public service jobs, and provide emergency relief for families hurt by the economy.

The bill will provide billions of dollars to create or save jobs with targeted investments for highways and transit, school renovation, hiring teachers, police, and firefighters, small business, job training and affordable housing which are essential elements in promoting economic growth.

However, passage of the Jobs for Main Street Act of 2010 is just the beginning of the process to put America back to work. We must act quickly to establish a full-employment economy, where every American who wants a job should be able to find one; and at a livable wage. This can and must be done if America is ever going to become a truly productive country.

During the depression, President Roosevelt put millions of Americans to work by creating public service jobs such as building roads, national parks, and rural electrification systems. We can do the same by creating a 21st century public works jobs program for America that can quickly employ the millions of citizens in this country who simply cannot find employment in the private sector.

The passage of this legislation will help put our Nation on the road to recovery. Therefore, I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Madam Chair, as the Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, I would like to highlight some of the contributions made by our Committee to this important legislation. The Committee considered over the course of several months a range of legal issues posed by this legislation, and held two days of hearings this fall on its bankruptcy and antitrust law ramifications--on October 22 in the Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law, and on November 17 in the Subcommittee on Courts and Competition Policy. Below is a summary of some of the more significant provisions added to the legislation, or revised in it, at the request of the Committee.

Bankruptcy Law

The bill's new emergency procedures for dealing with financial institutions posing imminent toxic danger to our Nation's financial system is an exemption from the bankruptcy laws in favor of a receivership managed by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC). While appreciative of the need for the government to be able to act with dispatch when the stability of the entire financial system is in jeopardy, and while respectful of the considered judgment of the Treasury Department, the FDIC, and the Financial Services Committee to devise an approach outside the Bankruptcy Code for this purpose, the Judiciary Committee believes it is important to remain mindful of fundamental due process and equitable considerations that are embodied in bankruptcy procedure. The Committee has accordingly limited the availability and extent of this bankruptcy exemption.

First, because this departure from well-established bankruptcy procedures and protections is justified only in the exigencies of an extraordinary emergency threatening stability of the financial system, the Judiciary Committee added a new ``purpose'' section to the emergency dissolution title to mandate that there be a ``strong presumption that resolution under the bankruptcy laws will remain the primary method of resolving financial companies, and the authorities contained in this subtitle will only be used in the most exigent circumstances.'' The Treasury Secretary is required to explain any determination that such an extraordinary emergency exists, to the House and Senate Judiciary Committees, along with other committees.

Our Committee also added provisions ensuring that bankruptcy remains available as the preferred option. There are new provisions authorizing the FDIC, at any time, with the approval of the Treasury Secretary and after consultation with the Financial Services Oversight Council, to convert an emergency receivership into a case under either chapter 7 or chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code, while clarifying that doing so will not affect any of the FDIC's powers with regard to any bridge financial company created under the receivership. Upon its appointment, and periodically during the receivership, the FDIC will be required to report to the House and Senate Judiciary Committees, as well as to other committees, why a receivership is necessary rather than using bankruptcy, and the consequences for the rights of other creditors.

The Committee also added amendments to the Bankruptcy Code to clarify how a case brought by the FDIC proceeds, including authority for the FDIC to serve as trustee, with accommodations to certain trustee obligations in order to make it feasible for the FDIC to serve.

The Committee also adapted a number of key protections from the Bankruptcy Code into the FDIC's new dissolution procedure. These protections include:

Priority protection for unpaid wages and benefit plan contributions for employees of the financial company, who do not have the same recourse against their employer as business creditors have against the company.

Protection of collective bargaining agreements from repudiation by the FDIC, unless the FDIC determines repudiation is necessary for the orderly dissolution of the financial company, taking into consideration the cost to taxpayers and financial stability of the U.S.

Appointment of a consumer privacy advisor to protect the privacy of consumers whose personal information is in the possession of the financial company.

The Committee also directed the Government Accountability Office to undertake two studies and reports:

The first is a report in the event a financial company is taken into emergency receivership and assets are removed by the FDIC, on the extent to which claims against the company for violations of the Truth in Lending Act have been satisfied.

The other is a report on the ``safe harbor'' provisions for derivatives, swaps, and securities under federal law, that excludes them from bankruptcy and receivership proceedings, on how they have affected the ability of businesses to reorganize.

Antitrust Law

One major impetus of this legislation is to address the problem faced last year by financial institutions that were deemed ``too big to fail.'' The emergency efforts to deal with those institutions led to infusions of billions of federal dollars, and federal guarantees of billions more, putting the Treasury at significant risk.

But ``too big to fail'' has another aspect that places our nation at significant risk--and that is the potential danger to competition when the marketplace becomes concentrated in the hands of so few competitors that consumers no longer have meaningful choice, and the healthy influence of competition on price, quality, and innovation are lost.

It is important to the Judiciary Committee, as the Committee in charge of the laws protecting our economic freedoms against monopolization and other anticompetitive restraints of trade, that should our nation ever be faced with a similar financial system emergency in the future, that antitrust protections remain in place to ensure that our response does not leave us, when the dust clears, with an even more concentrated market, with companies that are even bigger, with more market power, and less responsive to the consumers they are supposed to serve.

Accordingly, the Committee revised the emergency FDIC dissolution procedures for financial institutions posing imminent toxic danger to the broader financial system, to ensure that any proposed sale of significant assets to a competitor that occurs after the initial urgency has passed would be subject to effective pre-merger antitrust review when warranted, under the procedure developed for reviewing sales of assets during a bankruptcy proceeding. This procedure expedites the initial review, while permitting the antitrust enforcement agency to extend the period when more information is needed to make its assessment. The Committee also clarified that the federal antitrust enforcement agencies would retain their legal authority to challenge a merger or acquisition that would harm competition in violation of the antitrust laws.

These changes balance the need for expeditious transfer of assets from a failing financial company to a safe new home with the imperative of preserving our competitive free market system.

The Committee also revised provisions in the title of the bill dealing with regulation of over-the-counter derivatives markets. Provisions in the legislation as introduced sought to prohibit entities involved in the derivatives markets from engaging in or facilitating anticompetitive conduct. These entities included derivatives clearing organizations, swap dealers, major swap participants, swap execution facilities, clearing agencies, security-based swap dealers, and major security-based swap participants. There was language in these provisions that appeared to create exceptions, and that the Committee was concerned might potentially be read to create exemptions from the antitrust laws.

The Committee revised these provisions to make clear that no antitrust exemptions are intended. In two instances, in parts of the derivatives title amending the Securities Exchange Act, the provisions were removed entirely. In three instances, in parts of the derivatives title amending the Commodity Exchange Act, the exception language was removed to make clear that the prohibitions apply without exception, and to further clarify that the antitrust laws remain fully in effect with respect to any conduct involved.

Practice of Law

The Constitutional freedoms and legal rights we enjoy as Americans are ultimately protected in our courts, through the advocacy of attorneys who are licensed to practice before them. In keeping with these critical responsibilities, the activities of these ``officers of the court'' are regulated by the States, through government bodies, generally overseen by the State's highest court, with specialized expertise in the duties imposed by the code of legal ethics.

Accordingly, the Judiciary Committee revised the Consumer Financial Protection Agency Act title to clarify that the new agency is not being given authority to regulate the practice of law, which is regulated by the State or States in which the attorney is licensed to practice. The Committee further clarified that this is not intended to preclude the new agency from regulating other conduct engaged in by individuals who happen to be attorneys or acting under their direction, as long as the conduct is not part of the practice of law or incidental to the practice of law.

Other Contributions

Other contributions by the Judiciary Committee include revisions to the Consumer Financial Protection Agency's new investigative authority to bring it closer into conformity with the Antitrust Civil Process Act, on which it is modeled; clarifications to the new revised procedures for FTC rulemaking in the unfair and deceptive acts or practices area, to bring them closer in line with the Administrative Procedure Act, as intended; clarifications to the FDIC's new rulemaking authority to ensure it is used in compliance with the Administrative Procedure Act; and revisions to the new authority for nationwide service of subpoenas by the Securities and Exchange Commission to ensure that the authority will be exercised consistent with due process.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 894) honoring the 50th anniversary of the recording of the album ``Kind of Blue'' and reaffirming jazz as a national treasure.

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

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

Today we honor Miles Davis, the trumpet player, and his sextet, recognizing the 50th year of the recording of one of the legendary jazz tunes, one of the most important too of the 20th century, that was an album called ``Kind of Blue.'' It was recorded in New York, a Manhattan church turned recording studio--and there were six other people with Miles Davis: John Coltrane; Julian ``Cannonball'' Adderley; Bill Evans and Wynton Kelly, pianists; Paul Chambers, bass; Jimmy Cobb, the drummer--and made musical history and changed the artistic landscape of this country and in some ways the world.

At the Congressional Black Caucus event this past September, we honored the only living artist of that recording date, Jimmy Cobb, the drummer, who was there and who performed, as a matter of fact. It was a great time for a great event that occurred 50 years ago.

The reason that it was great was that each one of these artists-- Coltrane, Adderley, Davis, Bill Evans, Wynton Kelly, Paul Chambers, and Jimmy Cobb--all became musical leaders in their own right. And they were experimenting with what was once called bebop, now progressive jazz, and some went on to modal jazz, which I'm still finding out what that's all about. They'd usually take chords of a song, sometimes a ballad or a popular song, and then substitute chords, and then you'd get this creative improvisation of what their interpretation of a song means to them. And that's what modern jazz is, of course, all about.

So with the event that the Congressional Black Caucus had with the only living musician from that historic recording, this gives us a chance and an opportunity to understand what this contribution to music means to the American cultural scene.

Jazz is celebrated all over the world. I introduced a concurrent resolution on jazz, H. Con. Res. 57--I have forgotten what year now, but it was passed in both the House and the Senate--and it celebrated this contribution, this musical contribution that's been appreciated, reinterpreted all over the world. Whenever and wherever I travel, I always try to locate the musicians, whether it's in Norway or Jamaica or Germany. This music is still going on and it's something that we celebrate, and I'm glad to bring before the House today this resolution, 894, for passage.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield as much time as he may consume to one of the people who knows a little about this music and who has come a long way from Memphis, Tennessee. He is the distinguished gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Cohen).

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 1 minute merely to say that I appreciate the gentleman from Tennessee because an earlier jazz started in his State, in Memphis and in Nashville. The roots of it were embedded in the modern jazz of the music that we reaffirm today as a national treasure.

Before I yield back the balance of my time, because I studied music as a young person, I owe these musicians a debt of gratitude because it was they who recommended that I go to law school, so I am grateful to them for helping my career.

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

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (S. 1472) to establish a section within the Criminal Division of the Department of Justice to enforce human rights laws, to make technical and conforming amendments to criminal and immigration laws pertaining to human rights violations, and for other purposes.

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

I yield myself as much time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, Members of the House, S. 1472 is an effort to improve our ability to identify and prosecute human rights abusers. It enhances the Justice Department's efforts to hold perpetrators of atrocities accountable, and it will help ensure that war criminals do not find a safe haven in our country.

This act would combine the two offices in the Justice Department with jurisdiction over human rights to create a new, consolidated human rights section. It would merge the Office of Special Investigations with the domestic security section, which has jurisdiction over human rights crimes. This would allow more efficiency and effective enforcement in a combination that would improve the use of our resources and that would give one section the necessary expertise and jurisdiction to prosecute or to denaturalize perpetrators of serious human rights crimes. It also amends a section of the Immigration and Nationality Act, and it makes several technical and conforming amendments needed in light of the enactment of other laws.

I commend the authors of this legislation, Senators Dick Durbin and Tom Coburn, who are the chairman and the ranking member of the Senate Human Rights and the Law Subcommittee, and the ranking member of the Judiciary Committee in the House, Mr. Smith.

I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 150) expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that A. Philip Randolph should be recognized for his lifelong leadership and work to end discrimination and secure equal employment and labor opportunities for all Americans.

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

I yield myself as much time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I am especially pleased to rise in support of this resolution honoring the life and work of A. Philip Randolph, whom I have had the privilege of meeting and working with indirectly.

I am pleased to be a cosponsor of the resolution with the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel), who introduced it.

A. Philip Randolph was a towering figure in the movement for social justice in this country, particularly in the fields of labor and civil rights. He is principally noted for his efforts in organizing the Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters on trains, porters who were all African Americans in the middle 20th century and earlier. There were nearly 10,000 of them who had never been unionized before. He was able to do that. Finally, he worked out a contract in 1937 with Pullman, and then went to the AFL-CIO where they were able to gain an international charter. That was his major contribution.

Yet, to me, what was so important was the work that he did with Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., because it was he who, with Bayard Rustin, organized the march on Washington for jobs and freedom on August 28, 1963. I was a lawyer who was at that march. It was the first one which drew over 200,000 people and which had a great effect on our moving to enact the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

There are books about him, but the story that I like to tell is about the time that he challenged President Roosevelt to end the desegregation in the military and in the military factories, which were the industries that were making war materials. In a historic meeting with President Roosevelt, President Roosevelt acknowledged the validity of his struggle, but then he said something prophetic. He said, Make me do it.

Amazingly, Randolph, after a period of time, assembled a huge number of people to march on Washington. As they got ready to march, word came from the White House that the President would accede to his demand, and he gave an executive order banning racial discrimination in the government and in the factories. That has been told many times over.

I am indebted to the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee. Randolph worked out of New York and I am hopeful that Chairman Rangel may have met him and knew him as well.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time and urge support for the resolution.

Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 1110) to amend title 18, United States Code, to prevent caller ID spoofing, and for other purposes, as amended.

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

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

Mr. Speaker and Members, this measure is aimed at the deceptive telephoning practice called ``spoofing,'' where a fake caller ID is used to hide one's true identity. Sometimes it can mean simply using the caller ID of another person or business without permission, but sometimes the purpose is to commit fraud or identity theft. Call recipients are sometimes tricked into divulging private, personal information to the spoofer. For example, the AARP has reported cases in which people received calls falsely telling them that they missed jury duty and they were told to avoid prosecution they needed to provide their Social Security number. The phone number that appeared on their caller ID was from the local courthouse, so people assumed that the call was made truthfully.

Recently, the technology needed to spoof has become readily available through the purchase of Internet telephone equipment, or through Web sites specifically set up for that purpose.

The measure before us today prevents this activity on two levels, with penalties that fit the seriousness of the offense. For providing the caller ID information of another person without consent with the intent to deceive, the penalties are fines and up to 1 year in prison; for providing false caller ID information with the intent to wrongfully obtain something of value, the penalties are fines and up to 5 years imprisonment. In addition, the bill provides for forfeiture of equipment used and proceeds gained by those involved in this activity.

Because it can be used for legitimate law enforcement and intelligence purposes, the bill allows spoofing for lawfully authorized activities of law enforcement. It also does not prohibit the simple use of a fake number to hide the caller's number. Many businesses have opted to use this feature to protect against abusive call-backs. As a matter of fact, the House uses this feature on calls to outside lines. This non-malicious practice is not intended to be reached by the legislation before us.

Finally, I note that the bill was developed in previous Congresses on a bipartisan basis, and I commend my ranking member and the entire Judiciary Committee for the work that has gone into this measure. I urge its support, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Madam Speaker, today I rise to introduce a resolution requesting that the President issue an annual proclamation that calls upon the people of the United States to observe Global Family Day, One Day of Peace and Sharing. Joining me in this effort is the gentleman from Ohio, Dennis Kucinich, and I would like to acknowledge him at this time.

Global Family Day, One Day of Peace and Sharing, is an annual observance, occurring on January 1st, that was conceived by children to further the cause of peace, sharing, and understanding among all members of the international community. As the year is coming to a close, I introduce this resolution for a few reasons.

First, I believe it is important that all people, regardless of race, culture, religion or economic status, celebrate life on earth together as one human family. A global holiday, like Global Family Day, One Day of Peace and Sharing, allows people around the world to realize this ideal by promoting global fellowship and cooperation.

A better appreciation for one another can only lead to the eradication of human suffering that results from violence, hunger, poverty, and other social ills. Practicing better global family values at the start of a new year may mean the realization of such concepts of goodwill and harmony throughout the year.

Second, I know that one day dedicated to global peace and cooperation is a day that every Member of Congress can support. Despite our differences, each of us has an interest in pursuing peaceful solutions to many of our contemporary problems. From worldwide hunger, to international human trafficking, to widespread religious intolerance, we are all impassioned by issues that call for a peaceful resolution to achieve a more desirable world.

Global Family Day, One Day of Peace and Sharing, can be one of the vehicles with which we unite to pursue these various missions for peace. A resolution calling for the recognition of Global Family Day, One Day of Peace and Sharing has always received bipartisan support as a bipartisan Congress adopted this resolution in 2000 and 2006. I am confident that there will be a similar reception this Congress.

Finally, while the Congress has adopted this resolution on other occasions, in the bipartisan spirit I have just described, we have yet to have a President issue a proclamation calling upon the people of the United States to recognize Global Family Day, One Day of Peace and Sharing.

We ask that the President and the First Family lead the nation in observing Global Family Day, One Day of Peace and Sharing

on January 1, 2010. Those participating in the global holiday can be invited to ring a bell, share a meal, and make a pledge in the name of peace. Through these acts we will become better neighbors within the global community.

In closing, I ask that my colleagues join me in support of this resolution recognizing Global Family Day, One Day of Peace and Sharing and requesting that the President lead the country in this holiday's recognition. By working together as one global family, we can better meet the challenges humanity will surely face in the years to come.

Madam Chair, last fall we witnessed the greatest financial collapse in American history since the Great Depression. As Main Street recovers from Wall Street's excesses, we must reexamine the laws that govern banks and other financial institutions and hold them accountable for their actions. The collapse of our economy shows the need for tough new regulations. Today, the House will vote on H.R. 4173, Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2009, a bill authored by Chairman Frank that aims to rein in the titans of finance's excesses and protect consumers from unfair and abusive practices.

The bill being considered today creates the Consumer Financial Protection Agency (CFPA) with the sole mission of protecting consumers from financial products and services. Banks, subprime mortgage companies, pay day lenders, and money transmitters will be under the supervision of the CFPA. The new agency will stop unfair, deceptive and abusive consumer financial products and services.

During the last bubble, executives at banks took on more risk because risk was profitable. No one paid much attention to what would happen when the speculation bubble burst. Today's bill will amend this practice by allowing shareholders of public companies to have an annual, nonbinding ``say on pay'' vote on compensation packages for executives. Federal regulators will be authorized to ban any inappropriate or risky compensation practices that pose a threat to the financial system and to the broader economy.

I am concerned this legislation does not go far enough. Specifically, today's bill will focus on empowering our financial regulators to manage and mitigate some level of ``acceptable risk'' within the present system, instead of correcting the structural flaws that make a collapse likely to recur. As a result, I am an advocate of a modernized Glass-Steagall act which would mandate that America's banking sectors and investment houses need to remain separate to prevent banks from gambling on the stock market with our savings.

Moreover, I am worried that consumers will not be allowed to address their grievances with financial institutions and banks through the CFPA. Banks rarely directly violate specific federal rules, but the same cannot be said for some of the smaller nonbank lenders, brokers, and other individuals and entities who will be governed by CFPA rules. Violations by smaller actors are less likely to be worth the investment of resources for a federal agency enforcement action, or even one by a state AG, but they can have a devastating impact on individuals nonetheless. Individual remedies are essential to holding all violators accountable and providing incentives for everyone to comply. The Federal Trade Commission received 78,000 complaints against debt collectors last year and took only 3 enforcement actions. Consumers must be able to stand up and defend themselves and hold wrongdoers accountable if CFPA rules are violated. For over 200 years, it has been a fundamental tenet of American law, derived from our Anglo-Saxon heritage, that ``for every right, there's a remedy.'' The concept is commonsense: wrongdoers who violate laws should be accountable to those they injure.

Madam Chair, even with all of the legislation's weak points, the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act makes great strides to shield Americans from the despotic behavior of Wall Street. I urge my colleagues to support today's bill.