Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2749) to amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to improve the safety of food in the global market, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and insert extraneous matter into the Record.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 2 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, this is a remarkable piece of bipartisan work. I want to pay tribute to my dear friend Mr. Barton, the ranking minority member of the committee; my good friend, the chairman of the committee, for his outstanding leadership on this, Mr. Waxman; and also Mr. Pallone, as chairman of the subcommittee, for their leadership.

I want to tell the House how important the labors of my dear friend Mr. Stupak have been in the Oversight Investigations Committee in creating the basis from which this legislation can move forward. This has been a piece of legislation which moved unanimously out of the committee. It is something which we would hope this House would always be able to emulate.

I want to congratulate Representatives Sutton, Nathan Deal, and John Shimkus for their labors, and the outstanding staff on both sides of the Commerce Committee.

I want to express my appreciation to Collin Peterson and Mr. Cardoza of California for their labors, and Representative DeLauro and President Obama and the White House food safety group.

The legislation is supported by the Consumers Union, the Centers for Science and Public Interest, the National Consumers League, and a large number of other organizations, including the Grocery Manufacturers, GMA, and United Fresh Produce. Jeanie Ireland and my good friend Virgil Miller have worked very hard at the staff level, and they deserve thanks.

This is a piece of legislation that will stop Americans being killed by bad foods. It is a piece of legislation that will see to it that the Food and Drug Administration has both the authority and the funds to address not only American foods but foods being imported from places like China. It will stop harmful seafood, E. coli in spinach, tainted peppers from Mexico, and a large number of other things.

I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished chairman of the Committee on Energy and Commerce, Mr. Waxman, whose leadership in this matter has been appreciated.

Mr. Speaker, I will have a full rebuttal for the remarks of the gentleman who has just spoken.

I yield 1 minute at this time to my dear friend, the chairman of the subcommittee, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone).

If the gentleman will yield, I want to tell the House how important the labors of the gentleman have been, and also those of Mr. Barton and Mr. Deal. We owe a great debt to the gentleman.

Mr. Speaker, I am very delighted at this time to yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Stupak), chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, who has done so much to make the investigations which have brought us to the point where people understand the need for this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro).

If the gentleman will yield, I want to compliment the gentleman on his comments and I want to praise him for his valuable and important contribution to the legislation. As he has said, this is how legislation should be done, bipartisan; and we have gone across the aisle. But we have also gone between committees, working with the distinguished chairman of the Agriculture Committee. I commend the gentleman and thank him.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to my distinguished friend, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. DeGette), a Member who has worked very hard on this legislation for a long time and who was one of the original sponsors and has been a valuable contributor to the process of bringing it forward.

(Ms. DeGETTE asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, just for administrative purposes, does my friend on the Republican side have a sufficiency of time? I speak about Mr. Barton.

I will try to see if we can share, if it is necessary.

Mr. Speaker, at this time I yield to one of the original sponsors of the legislation, the distinguished gentlelady who has done much work to get this legislation to the floor, the distinguished gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Sutton) 1 minute.

At this time I yield 1 minute to the distinguished chairman of the Agriculture Committee's subcommittee on food safety, the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Scott), with thanks and appreciation for his good work.

Mr. Speaker, at this time I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Costa), one of the great leaders in food safety, a distinguished member of the Committee on Agriculture, a man who has worked very closely with me and with the others who have been working on this, including the distinguished chairman of the Agriculture Committee.

With a great deal of pleasure and pride, at this time I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Peterson), my good friend, the distinguished chairman of the Committee on Agriculture who has worked so hard not only on food safety but also with us to make this bill something which is acceptable to the House, to him and to American agriculture.

I yield the gentleman 30 seconds.

Would the gentleman yield to me?

I would just observe to my good friend that we have talked about this before, and I have assured the gentleman that we will continue to work together to address the concerns that he and the very able gentleman from Florida (Mr. Putnam) have expressed their concerns about. It has been a privilege to work with the gentleman, and I thank him.

I thank the gentleman.

Mr. Speaker, at this time, I am happy to yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky).

Mr. Speaker, I am the last speaker on this side, so I am going to reserve my time, but I want to yield 2 minutes to my dear friend, Mr. Barton. And I want to commend him for his courage, his decency, and the extraordinary way in which he has worked with the distinguished Agriculture Committee and its great chairman, and also with me and the Democrats. We are handling this bill the way it should be handled, in a proper bipartisan fashion, and I want to commend him.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of the time to close.

Mr. Speaker, this is a bipartisan bill. It has been worked on long and hard by three committees, including the Ways and Means. The chairman, Mr. Rangel, and subcommittee chairman, Mr. Levin, have been extremely cooperative in resolving questions between the two committees.

I would note that staff at all levels of our committee, in the minority and on the majority--Rachel Sher and Eric Flamm--have been of enormous value in these discussions.

The complaint made by my colleague about exclusion of Members I can't comment on. I can only say we have tried to include everybody in this process as much as we could, and we have brought in industry, which supports the bill. But more importantly--and I say this to my friend with affection and respect--the reason for a lot of the changes that they're talking about have been that, right up to the time that we have brought this bill to the floor, we have sought to see to it that we included everyone and took advantage of the wisdom of all the Members that we could possibly take advantage of.

The legislation will address from the point of origin to the consumer's table. It will enable us to get at unsafe foods, not just in this country, but in China, in India, and other places where these foods are coming in. It will provide Food and Drug with the resources they need to address these problems in terms of personnel and money. It will also keep their laboratories open. More importantly, it will see to it that the public comes first, and for the first time in years, know that the foods that we are bringing into this country and that are being made available to the American people are in fact safe. No major reviews of the food provisions of the Food and Drug Act have been done since 1938, and, as was wisely pointed out by my colleagues, some not back to 1912.

This is an important step which will protect the American people, who are today being killed, sickened, and hurt by unsafe foods brought in by unscrupulous people.

It will do something more than this. It will protect the American food industry, the processors, the manufacturers, and the growers, against unfair competition in places like China where they are adding melamine to food and delivering patently unsafe food.

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

Madam Speaker, I rise today to offer a tribute in honor of The Ann Arbor News, which has shut its doors after 174 years of service.

Since 1835, the Ann Arbor News and its employees served Washtenaw County creating a forum for educated discussion, thoughtful articles, and current events. I want to thank the employees and journalists of The Ann Arbor News for their fine work, and I wish them the very best in their future endeavors.

The Ann Arbor News lived to see its town of only 1,000 expand to a city of 110,000 and has watched the University of Michigan become one of the finest universities in the world. It predates the Civil War and covered that historic struggle during the 1860s. In the 1950s it covered the announcement of the groundbreaking polio vaccine in Ann Arbor. The News also spread word of two landmark Presidential programs, Kennedy's Peace Corps and Lyndon Johnson's Great Society, also unveiled in Ann Arbor. Later on, the News was recognized as one of the best small newspapers in the country out of a field of about 1,350 papers with daily circulations of 50,000 or less (about 85 percent of all daily papers in America).

I am pleased that some of the News' fine journalists will be joining a new venture, AnnArbor.com, which will serve many similar functions as the News, and will guide the Ann Arbor community into the age of digital web information. I would like to offer my tribute to the thousands of people who worked at The Ann Arbor News and established its fine journalistic tradition from 1835 until its close.

Mr. Chairman, I begin by thanking my good friend from New York and the distinguished chairman of the full committee for their kindness and their graciousness in making this time available.

I have rarely voted against the rule and rarely voted against the previous question. I am very much troubled by what we see happening here today. I recognize the goodwill of the gentleman from New York and the gentleman from Wisconsin, but I would observe that we are playing with fire here.

My friend from Wisconsin mentioned billions of dollars we've made available to the auto industry. He's correct. We have. Now the question is do we, by what we are doing here with regard to the auto dealers, jeopardize those expenditures and jeopardize the well-being of our auto industry? That is what is at stake here.

This is a serious matter. If the auto industry goes down because we have taken sides in a quarrel between the auto industry and the dealers, we will have destroyed not only the dealers that complain but all of the other dealers and all of the people who work for the auto industry, who are associated with it, all of the suppliers. Frankly, we are playing with fire here.

I recognize that there is the intention to use this as a lever to help the dealers, and I applaud that. But I think that this is the wrong lever, the wrong time, and the wrong way to use this kind of lever.

The result of this playing with fire can be a serious disaster which we visit upon ourselves, upon the auto industry, upon all of those who are dependent upon it. And I would urge my colleagues in dealing with this to be exquisitely careful with this kind of exercise because it imposes upon all of us and upon the Nation an incredible level of danger which I hope will be avoided, and we are now putting ourselves in a position where all of the good that has been done to try and preserve this important auto industry is being put at risk.

Mr. Chair, it is with sadness and great dismay that I rise in opposition to H.R. 3170, the ``Financial Services and General Government Appropriations Act of 2010.'' The bill's legislative language, which would force auto manufacturers that have received federal funding to reinstate terminated dealer franchises, has the grave potential to do significant harm to the already suffering national economy. Thanks to the timely intervention of the Administration and extraordinarily speedy bankruptcies, Chrysler and General Motors (GM) are once again on the path toward viability. Nevertheless, section 745 of this bill threatens to undo the delicately wrought restructurings achieved in bankruptcy court for both companies and could very well bring about their collapse. Should section 745 become law, I fear far more dealers, not to mention auto suppliers and other ancillary businesses, would be forced to close than would have otherwise under Chrysler's and GM's original dealer termination plans. Although I recognize that both companies, particularly Chrysler, did a poor job in achieving dealer rationalization, it remains my strong preference to resolve this matter outside of statute. I urge my colleagues to take heed of this warning.

Madam Chair, I rise today in support of H.R. 3082, the Military Construction, Department of Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2010. This legislation continues the Democratic-Congress' dedication to our veterans by providing $109 billion to the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).

I am proud to support the passage of a bill which does so much for our veterans. This year, like every other year, our veterans deserve quality and affordable health care, the services needed to transition into civilian life and prevent homelessness, and other important benefits that will help them succeed in their personal and professional lives. I am particularly pleased the bill provides $4.6 billion for mental health care treatment, especially in light of the growing number of returning Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) and Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) veterans with post traumatic stress disorder. The bill also provides $440 million to increase access for veterans who live in rural areas, $580 million for research in prosthetics, $533 million to expand eligibility for VA health care to an estimated 266,000 ``Priority 8'' veterans, or those non-service-disabled veterans earning more than $30,000 a year, and $1.1 billion for improving our VA medical facilities.

Madam Chair, of particular concern to me are VA medical facilities in Southeast Michigan, where many of my constituents receive care. The Department of Veterans Affairs Ann Arbor Health System (VAAAHS) staff believe that any plan to make the Toledo Community-based Outpatient Clinic administratively separate will have the effect of reducing their budget and inhibit their ability to provide services, including specialty services to their constituencies.

I share this concern. The VAAAHS is the only VA medical facility in Michigan providing cardiac surgery, interventional cardiology, and neurosurgery. We must ensure they can continue doing so. The VAAAHS has a plan that would double the size of the existing clinic in Toledo, allowing Toledo-area veterans to receive an increased amount of care at the Toledo clinic, from 75 percent currently to 90 percent. We must ensure that we move forward with plans for the existing clinic without impairing the care that is provided to veterans by VA hospitals in Southeast Michigan, including the VA hospitals Battle Creek, Detroit, and especially the one in Ann Arbor.

Madam Chair, as a veteran of World War II, I have the utmost respect for those who have served our nation. I also believe that the VA provides veterans with excellent health services, and should continue to stand out as a

leader in health care provision in our country. I urge my colleagues to join with me in supporting this legislation.

Madam Speaker, I send to the desk a resolution and ask unanimous consent for its immediate consideration in the House.

Madam Speaker, I yield 30 minutes for purposes of debate only to my good friend, the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Daniel E. Lungren).

Madam Speaker, I yield to myself 4 minutes.

Madam Speaker, this a great institution in which we all take great pride in serving. And it is that because of the great Constitution, but also because of the Members who have served here over so many years. And we can be proud of

those who have served as elected Members. Beyond those Members who have been elected, there are large numbers of people who have served here by appointment as essentially servants of the House, or perhaps more better said, as public servants.

None of those has been more distinguished than the resolution honors. I am very proud to handle this time and to have the privilege of honoring a dear friend. I am also very proud and very happy that we are able to send him off with the dignity, respect and the affection that his long and distinguished service has done.

One of the things that enables us to be very proud of people like Pope Barrow is the dedication, the decency and the integrity that they bring to their job. In the case of Pope Barrow, he has done this with extraordinary dedication. But beyond that, he has also done it with extraordinary ability, indeed, remarkable ability. One of the things I like to chuckle about is the way that he and the people who have worked for him have made it possible for the House to serve well and Members of this House to serve well, by giving us the best possible legal advice on the handling and the construction of legislation.

From his first day of nearly 40 years of service at the Office of Legislative Counsel, Pope Barrow has been an outstanding public servant. He served first as a law assistant and then more latterly in higher and higher positions until he served as Legislative Counsel. He has served this country, this Chamber and all of the Members of this body with great distinction and wholly selflessly.

I have worked together with him, as have most of the Members, throughout my years in Congress. He worked on the complicated and arduous Clean Air Act amendments. At that time, I promised him that no longer would we ever allow this legislation to be opened up to public consideration. And those of you who remember the 1990 Clean Air Act will understand how he would thank me profusely for that commitment.

All of us, including myself, have much relied on his expertise in energy, in the environment and public lands. He has been impartial. He has been nonpartisan. He has shown extraordinary judgment. And he has expressed in his deeds an extraordinary sense of duty that has proven to be invaluable to this Chamber. These qualities are reflected in the high regard in which he is held by Members and staff all across the political spectrum and all during his long period of service.

If you speak to the attorneys and staff in the Office of the Legislative Counsel, you will see the impact of Pope's leadership and guidance. He has set high standards in the Office while supporting the attorneys and the staff in their professional and personal pursuits. This balance has set a positive, proactive tone at the Legislative Counsel and has served us all, the Congress and the public at large, extraordinarily well.

I remember years ago, when Pope and I were young, perhaps we were as young as 50, members of my staff would run back and forth to the Office of the Legislative Counsel to drop off drafting requests.

I yield myself 2 additional minutes, Madam Speaker.

Today, in no small part of because of the extraordinary leadership of Pope, the Office of Legislative Counsel has been modernized. The dedicated and hard-working staff members of the Legislative Counsel are able to utilize technology to provide the critically important service upon which we all rely.

I want to wish him well, on my own behalf and on behalf of my wife, Deborah, as well as the entire body of the House, as he retires to spend more time with his children, Isabel, Pope and Rebecca, and to express to him our good wishes for happiness and to give him a chance to spend more time with the family which he treasures. Perhaps retirement will allow him more time to kayak white-water rivers and to sail across seas. I will surely miss Pope, and I will wish him well on behalf of myself and all of us.

I want to also congratulate Sandy Strokoff on her appointment as Legislative Counsel, and I look forward to working with her in the future.

I reserve the balance of my time, and I ask unanimous consent, Madam Speaker, that my good friend, the distinguished gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Barrow) may control the remaining time on this side.

Madam Chairman, I rise to enter into a colloquy with my dear friend, the distinguished chairman of the subcommittee, regarding language contained in the House report, Veterans Affairs and Related Appropriations Bill for 2010.

I'm concerned the language could have the effect of postponing activation of a much-needed clinic for our veterans in Toledo. Clearly, it is not in the best interest of our veterans to postpone activation of a new clinic that will better address a higher workload, especially in light of the increasing numbers of veterans returning from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

I yield to my good friend.

To continue, the existing clinic is undersized for its current caseload. The VA has been working for several years to establish larger replacements. It is my understanding if we move forward with the current plans, which have been reviewed by the majority of the impacted veterans service organizations, the VA is prepared to have a new, larger LEED-certified clinic in the fall of 2011.

I will yield to the gentleman.

I want to also express great respect and affection for the gentlewoman from Ohio, Ms. Kaptur. As a veteran myself, I couldn't agree more that we need more quality care for our veterans in a timely manner. As already mentioned, given the increased workload because of the veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan, doubling the size of the existing clinic will help us to meet that goal.

Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of H.R. 2965, the Enhancing Small Business Research and Innovation Act of 2009.

Since 1982 the Small Business Innovative Research (SBIR) an the Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) programs have assisted thousands of innovative, cutting-edge small businesses in successfully getting their products to the marketplace.

The SBIR and STIR programs provide small businesses the ability to compete for federal funding, thus ensuring the best companies are getting their products to the market. Firms across all fields, from alternative energy and biotechnology to national defense, have benefited from the ability to get seed money from the government to fully develop and market their products and technology. The modest investments the government makes in these firms have provided tremendous rewards, allowing 1500 new companies each year to get off the ground. In my home state of Michigan, the SBIR/STTR programs have invested $534 million, $215 million of which Michigan has received since 2003. Overall, 450 Michigan companies have benefited from SBIR/ STTR, including two thriving firms in Michigan's 15th Congressional District, Adaptive Materials and Al23Systems.

Not only does H.R. 2965 reauthorize the SBIR/STTR programs which are set to expire on July 31, 2009, it also modernizes them, placing an emphasis on commercialization, expanding access for minority-owned and rural business, and creating a more efficient and streamlined process for participating companies.

The SBIR program is designed so that technology-driven firms have the chance to advance their ideas, develop them, and ultimately commercialize their products. This legislation is critically important for companies in Michigan, and across the country, as it gives them the ability to continue to get their products to the market, especially at a time when the economy is so badly hurting. I urge all my colleagues to vote for this important legislation.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to acknowledge, honor, and celebrate the Fish and Loaves Community Pantry for serving its one millionth pound of food to people in need from across the Downriver area. Since its opening in 2007, Fish and Loaves continues to collaborate with churches, food banks, and hundreds of volunteers to provide cost-free, quality groceries to thousands of families and individuals.

Tough economic times have made acquiring even basic necessities difficult for many residents of Southeastern Michigan. Many of the people that Fish and Loaves serve are below the poverty line, lack medical coverage, and struggle to pay for essential services.

The organizers of the Fish and Loaves Community Pantry recognized this and, in response, churches and volunteers joined together in remarkable collaboration to construct a special kind of food pantry. The facility, located in Taylor, is arranged as a small grocery store in which individuals may select the items they need most, which include quality products like fresh produce, dairy products, frozen meat, and perishable items. Of course, everything is still provided at no cost to the client. The pantry serves the residents of Taylor, Romulus, Allen Park, Southgate, Dearborn Heights, and Brownstown.

Fish and Loaves provides assistance to those in need with both efficiency and dignity by providing a wide variety of foods and household products from which to choose. The hard work and dedication of the Board and volunteers is the source of its great success and support it gives to the thousands of individuals and families it helps to feed.

Madam Speaker, I ask that all of my colleagues join me in honoring the Fish and Loaves Community Food Pantry on its millionth pound of food served. It is an exemplary organization that continues to be an invaluable member of the Southeastern Michigan community and for which I, and thousands others, are truly grateful.

I thank my good friend from California for his kind remarks, and I express my appreciation to him.

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of the Clean Energy Security Act. But before I address my remarks, I want to congratulate you on your distinguished service here and wish you well in the future and express my personal distress that you are leaving us.

Now, my colleagues on the Republican side, they are very anxious to criticize the bill. And there are criticisms that can be had. There is not one of the 435 of us that could not come forward with statements in saying that

the bill could be improved and that there are faults in the bill. Both of those statements are true.

But the harsh fact of the matter is it is urgent that we commence acting upon this legislation. It is based largely on the recommendations of USCAP, which is a diverse group of environmental groups and industry with a shared desire for a commonsense bill to address climate change. That process began last year with the drafting of the initial versions of this legislation, which were taken and which were then handled by my friend from California. I would note that those proposals have undergone significant improvement by reason of the work of Members of this Congress and this committee.

Now, there are some hard facts to be addressed. There's a scientific consensus that we need to address climate change quickly and effectively. We need and industry needs certainty. This bill gives certainty to American industry. Without this certainty new expansion and new investment in this difficult time is not going to occur. There will be jobs which will flow from this legislation.

Actions by the Supreme Court, and I urge my colleagues to be scared to death of this----

Actions by the Supreme Court in a recent endangerment finding by EPA makes it critically important that we act. Otherwise, greenhouse gases will be regulated by EPA. And if you want something to shudder about, I beg you to take a look at that because we will see better than 300 different kinds of regulations coming from Federal and State bodies if we're charged with this.

Now, the bill does protect the consumers. It's going to cost consumers about $175 a year. It will also protect American manufacturing, and there are provisions in the legislation for that. And it has, in addition to that, additional programs which will meet the concerns of all of our branches of industry--coal, electric utility, manufacturing, chemicals--and also the securities market, which will be controlled under an amendment offered by our good friend and colleague Mr. Stupak.

I am happy that this bill does have a dedicated allowance for natural resource adaptation and significant protection in acquisition of lands.

This is a good bill. I urge my colleagues to support it.

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of the American Clean Energy and Security Act.

Is the bill before us perfect? No. But I have long told my friends on both the right and the left, we must not let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

The legislation before us is largely based on the recommendations of USCAP, a diverse group of environmental groups and industry with a shared desire for a commonsense bill to address climate change.

One might ask why such a diverse group would agree on a matter like this. Well, the answer is three-fold:

1. There is scientific consensus that we need to address climate change quickly and effectively.

2. We need, and industry needs, certainty. Without this certainty, expansion and new investment is not going to happen.

3. Actions by the Supreme Court which led to the recent endangerment finding by EPA makes it critically important we act. If we do not, we will face regulation under the Clean Air Act--and I assure you, the Clean Air Act was not designed to regulate greenhouse gases.

I am pleased with the provisions of the bill to protect consumers-- the legislation will cost consumers on average only $175 per year--and protect American manufacturing and pave the way for the green jobs of the future. In fact, my home state of Michigan just had some wonderful news today: General Electric has decided to locate a new research & development facility, working on renewable energy technologies and other green jobs in the 15th District, which I have the honor of representing. We have the best workers in the world in Michigan and I look forward to many more green job announcements just like this thanks to provisions in this bill. However, job protection and creation warrants a very watchful eye to ensure the United States does not face job leakage and these matters will need to be readdressed if we do see such consequences.

We have seen remarkable innovations from our automakers and this bill builds on those successes by providing allowance values for retooling existing plants to make the cars of the future and new, green job creation here at home.

I am very pleased the bill includes an amendment I offered to establish a Clean Energy Bank. As we transition to clean energy, we must fund the R&D as well as deployment of these energy sources to meet the mounting demand for zero-carbon technology to dramatically reduce our greenhouse gas emissions.

Finally, I am very pleased that this bill includes a dedicated allowance for natural resource adaptation. The great conservationist and the 26th President of these United States, Theodore Roosevelt, taught us that conservation is a great moral issue--that it is our duty, as it insures the safety and continuance of the nation.

This is a good bill and I urge my colleagues to support it.

Madam Speaker, I ask my good friend to join in a colloquy about the electric transmission provisions. I support renewable power, as does he. However, there is a delicate State-Federal balance of authority in this area.

I yield to my good friend.

I have concerns about the wisdom of splitting the country in two parts, into eastern and western interconnections, for the purpose of regulating transmissions. Does my colleague agree we should have a unified national transmission policy?

I thank my good friend. I have a further question. I am also concerned that wilderness areas and conservation easements be fully protected, particularly in the eastern interconnection.

Reclaiming my time, finally, the effect of this language on existing law is unclear, which might only lead to more litigation and delay.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday was a sorry day in the history of the House. Repetitious, unnecessary, unwise votes set about to obfuscate the business of this body was the order of the day. We set a record for the number of votes cast in a single day, but we also set a record for irresponsible, mischievous and obfuscatory behavior. It was a sorry use of the time of this institution.

The time of this institution is a public resource during which we are supposed to do the Nation's business. We are supposed to conduct that business on the floor, in the committees and in our offices. No opportunity was made available for the Members of this body to do that. The institution has not been helped by that behavior, nor has its reputation been helped.

I say that if this kind of behavior persists, we will fall lower in the respect of the American people, as very well we should.

Yesterday was a sorry event. The business of the Nation was obfuscated. The necessary actions that need to be taken on important concerns of the Nation, like health care, like the economy, like the budget, like some 12 or 13 appropriations bills that need to be addressed, were not done.

There are hundreds of items upon which the committee and the Congress could well be using its time. Yesterday we could not because of willful, obfuscatory and mischievous behavior by Members of this institution. It is time to bring that to a stop.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Conference Report to H.R. 2346, the Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2009.

The agreement reached by the House and Senate negotiators provides our troops needed equipment on the battlefield and adequate pay for their service through the remainder of the 2009 fiscal year, compensation of $500 for every month they were forced to remain on active-duty for longer than planned since 2001, funding to fulfill President Obama's promise to end the Iraq War, support for refocusing our military and civilian operations in Afghanistan, and assistance for new counterterrorism, economic, and diplomatic initiatives in Pakistan.

In addition, this legislation contains much-needed funding to respond to urgent humanitarian crises involving refugees and internally displaced persons (IDPs). While I thank the Committee for including this assistance, I am hopeful such funding is just a sign on more to come. I am especially hopeful the U.S. will continue to respond to the dire needs to Iraqi refugees and IDPs, the largest refugee crisis since Palestinian Diaspora of 1948.

I would also like to thank Chairman Obey for providing $1 billion for the program authorized by the Consumer Assistance to Recycle and Save Act (also known as ``cash-for-clunkers.'') I was pleased to cosponsor and help craft the cash-for-clunkers legislation which will result in meaningful reductions in vehicle fleet carbon emissions and fuel consumption, while providing much-needed stimulus for our ailing automakers and economy.

Finally, as a long-time supporter of the Department of Health and Human Services and front-line public health agencies such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, I am pleased that the Supplemental Appropriations Act includes $1.5 billion for these Federal programs, along with an additional $5.8 billion in contingent emergency appropriations for priority efforts to respond to the pandemic flu. Further, it provides $350 million to assist State and local governments, who play an important role in protecting the public, in preparing for and responding to a pandemic.

After the recent outbreak of H1N1, which has been confirmed in 75 countries, it became apparent that the United States must work swiftly to ensure our readiness. The funding provided in the bill will allow the United States to take important steps forward in protecting Americans from a dangerous outbreak, including the expansion of detection efforts, shoring up Federal stockpiles, and securing sufficient vaccinations.

I thank Chairman Obey, the Appropriations Committee, and the conference negotiators for including these provisions, and I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the Conference Report to H.R. 2346.

I thank my good friend and colleague, the chairman of the committee, Mr. Waxman; and I commend him for his leadership on this matter. I am also delighted that we have this bill on the floor today. I urge my colleagues to support the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act. I would point out that we will be shortly following it up with legislation to protect Americans from dangerous foods and to give the Food and Drug Administration the authority and the money which it needs. That will be followed by additional legislation to address the question of pharmaceuticals.

I urge my colleagues to recognize that this not only does what needs doing, but it also gives to the Food and Drug Administration the authority and the money which it needs and the personnel which it needs to carry forward its mission as it goes about its business. I would point out, for too long we have starved them for authority, resources and personnel. It is time something be done about this. I am not going to give you an argument about this situation--that will be in my written extended remarks--but I want to tell my colleagues that the graveyards are full of people who occupy those places because they smoked and because we tried volunteerism.

Well, volunteerism filled the graveyards, and the constant attacks that have been made on the Food and Drug Administration and the deprival of proper authority to carry forward its responsibilities and the personnel it needs have brought us to the situation where we have to do the kind of thing that we are saying.

So don't talk to me about volunteerism. Understand that it has failed calamitously and people are dying every day because they have smoked.

Having said that, I want to tell you a little story about when we passed the first legislation to begin to warn people about the dangers of tobacco that were found by the Surgeon General in his report to the United States and to the Congress.

A little guy came before the committee, and he testified before my dear friend John Moss and I, who were the major proponents of that particular legislation at that time. He said, Now, you don't know me, but I am a pathologist and an internal medicine man. That means that I can tell you why you are going to die, or I can tell you why you did die.

He said, I don't have a prepared statement here today, but I do have a number of exhibits I would like to present to the committee.

So he reached in his briefcase and he pulled out a human lung. He said, Now, this is a normal person's human lung. It had a certain life to it.

The next exhibit he pulled out was one of a fellow who had died of squamous cancer. He said, These are squamous cells. It looked like a bowl of caviar, a painful way to go.

He then showed us the lung of somebody who had died of emphysema. It was white. It lacked life. He said, This man literally strangled because he did not have the ability to derive the oxygen from the air.

I thank the gentleman.

He pulled out another lung. He said, Now, this is the lung of a smoker. It was black, dirty and nasty, and you would not want to have it inside of you.

He said, Now, my message to the committee is very simple. If you smoke long enough, you are going to die of cancer of the lung or you are going to die of some other kind of ailment which is induced by your smoking, whether it is of the lung or whether it is of some other organ, including the mouth, the throat, or another part of the body as far away as the fingertips.

I just want my colleagues to understand, finally we are doing something. If a person wants to be silly enough to smoke, he can still do so; but he is going to get a warning, and the tobacco companies are going to have to provide proper, decent, honorable behavior, and they are going to have to do the things that warn the American people of this.

We have a responsible agency which this legislation will properly fund and finance. We will give them the authority and the personnel and the capabilities of doing what they need to do. We are going to follow it with other legislation.

I urge my colleagues to support this and support the other legislation when it comes.

I rise today in strong support of the Senate Amendment to H.R. 1256, ``Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act''.

The decision to vote in favor of today's bill is a very easy one. It was an easy one, because I am convinced that the ``Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act'' will go a long way in regulating the most unregulated consumer product on the market today. A product which:

Is the leading preventable cause of death in the United States;

Kills more than 400,000 Americans annually; and

Accounts for more than $96 billion in health care costs every year.

Every day, approximately 3,500 kids will try a cigarette for the first time, and another 1,000 we become new, regular habituate smokers.

The legislation will restrict marketing and sales to youth; grant FDA authority to restrict tobacco marketing; require detailed disclosure of ingredients; and allow FDA to require changes to tobacco products to protect the public health.

I commend Chairman Waxman and my dear friend, Senator Kennedy, for their persistent leadership on this legislation in the Congress. I am honored to have my name associated with the legislation and for the opportunity I had to work with them on this issue.

Madam Speaker, I know firsthand that the ``Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act'' is good piece of legislation. I had the distinct pleasure of shepherding it through the Energy and Commerce Committee last year. Today's legislation largely reflects the work we did then.

Madam Speaker, this legislation has been in the works for a long time. Nothing stands in our way to send it to the President's desk. I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of the ``Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act''--the American people need it and they deserve it.

Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of this fine, bipartisan bill, the Consumer Assistance to Recycle and Save Act, authored by my friend and colleague, Ms. Sutton of Ohio. I commend her and her bipartisan cosponsors for their work on behalf of this.

The bill has the support of the Obama administration, the UAW, domestic and foreign automobile manufacturers, suppliers, and dealers.

It also will result in meaningful reductions in vehicle fleet carbon emissions and fuel consumption while providing much-needed stimulus to our ailing automakers and economy.

I express my deep gratitude to Chairman Waxman, Mr. Markey, Mr. Stupak, as well as Representatives Sutton, Israel and Inslee, for their collaborate, collegial approach during the negotiations on the legislation. And I want to commend my friend, Mr. Upton, and others of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle as well as the entire Michigan delegation, for their work on behalf of this.

This legislation cannot wait. The longer it is put off, the more auto sales will be depressed. And consumers who are excited about this proposal will continue to wait for Congress to pass this bill before buying that new car that we want them to have.

In view of the unprecedented turmoil faced by the domestic automakers and growing imperatives to address global warming, Ms. Sutton's fleet modernization bill stands out as a really practical mechanism by which to achieve consumer savings, reduce fuel consumption, lower carbon dioxide and criteria pollutant emissions, as well as increase sales for a critical sector of the national economy. Indeed, in countries such as Germany, fleet modernization programs have been wildly successful in all of these areas.

This is a good bill. It will help us with the environment, and it will help us with employment. It will see to it that the United States moves forward rapidly towards a full and adequate recovery from this terrible recession in which we find ourselves.

I urge my colleagues to support the bill, and I commend its author again.

We all know the terrible situation in the auto industry and in the Nation in general. On Monday, General Motors filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. I know that GM will emerge from the court poised to again lead the world in the automotive sector, but the process will be painful. The company will cut 21,000 employees, 34 percent of its workforce; and this does not include elimination of 2,600 more dealers. Furthermore, it comes on the heels of Chrysler's layoffs and downsizing.

Unfortunately, this problem is not at an end. A recent study for the Center for Automotive Research shows that when you include jobs losses from suppliers and other companies tied to GM and Chrysler, we could see 250,000 jobs, or more, lost over the next 19 months.

This week GM announced they are closing the Willow Run transmission plant in Ypsilanti Township, Michigan, in my district, along with 13 other plants, six of them in Michigan. By 2010, 1,110 more GM workers will lose their jobs in my district. This is associated with not just loss of jobs and retirement, but loss of comprehensive health care for our people. This becomes now a major reason for us to pass major health care reform and a greater reason to see to it that we address this problem of health care reform and legacy costs so that our industry will not be destroyed.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 627, the ``Credit Cardholders' Bill of Rights Act of 2009,'' a bill of which I am a proud co-sponsor. My friend and colleague, Representative Carolyn Maloney, who is the bill's author, has been a tireless advocate for protecting consumers from the abuses of the credit card industry. This legislation will mandate meaningful reform for an industry that has been permitted to run wild for far too long.

We hear daily of countless Americans, who are struggling to pay their bills. My home state of Michigan has an unemployment rate of around 13 percent, the highest in the nation. Compounding this lamentable state of affairs is the fact that workers in this country have suffered a decline in real wages over the past decade. As a result of being stretched to their financial breaking point, many families have had to resort to using credit cards to pay for unforeseen costs, such as car repairs or emergency room bills. Far too often, these families are subjected to arbitrary interest rate increases and also forced to pay iniquitous late fees.

The Credit Cardholders' Bill of Rights will help put an end to these shameful practices and require credit card companies to treat consumers fairly. Importantly, this legislation will restrict the practice known as ``universal default,'' whereby a credit card company uses information about a cardholder's financial status, such a change in his or her credit rating, to raise the cardholder's interest rate, even if the cardholder has not defaulted on payments or made them late. Moreover, H.R. 627 will also ban what is known as ``double cycle billing,'' which is the collection of interest on amounts already paid by consumers to credit card companies.

In this time of severe recession, I feel it imperative that consumers be afforded fair protection from unfair credit card industry practices. I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this common-sense legislation, which will help stem the tide of unscrupulous and predatory lending, interest rate increases, and other deceitful practices that have brought our nation to an economic precipice of gargantuan proportions.