Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 3996, legislation that will provide critical tax relief to millions of middle class Americans. I support the Democratic majority's commitment to passing sensible legislation that will provide a solution to the looming Alternative Minimum Tax crisis. I am disappointed that President Bush and the Republican minority have opposed our efforts on this matter every step of the way. If this bill is not signed by the President, more than 60,000 families which I have the honor of representing here in the House will be required to pay the AMT when filing their 2007 return--an increase of almost 1000 percent since 2005.

I also support the Democratic majority's continuing commitment to responsible fiscal policies. Last week when the House passed AMT relief, it was paid for by closing tax loopholes that allow hedge fund managers and corporate CEOs to use offshore tax havens as unlimited retirement accounts. Unfortunately, the President and our Republican colleagues in the Senate once again sided with a few of the wealthiest individuals over millions of middle class American families. This speaks volumes about their misplaced priorities, and we are left with an AMT bill that does not meet paygo rules. However, I understand Chairman Rangel--for whom I have the utmost respect--has committed to finding an offset for this fix next year as he continues to find a permanent solution to the AMT crisis.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 2764, the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2008. While this is a vastly different package than the 11 stand-alone appropriations bills that the House passed earlier this year, it is a package that for the first time in over eight years focuses on the priorities of the American people.

Without a doubt the budgetary process is never easy. This year, however, the process has been exacerbated by the fact that this Administration has been unwilling to come to the negotiating table to hammer out the details of this legislation, instead barking orders at Congress--the people's representatives--from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Furthermore, this process has been held up by the inability of the Senate to pass these bills as stand-alone measures. As a result, Congress has no choice but to consolidate the remaining appropriations bills in order to complete our budget work.

Like many of my colleagues, I had hoped that this Administration would have worked with Congress to find a compromise that would have reflected the domestic needs of our country and the priorities of our working families. Unfortunately, the budget proposal the Administration sent to Congress earlier this year proposed cuts to many important domestic programs including: Medical research grants at NIH; Grants for low-income schools; Vocational education programs in high schools and community colleges; Homeland Security Grants for police, firefighters and medical personnel; Renewable energy programs; and Community Health Centers.

Yet after proposing cuts to these vital programs, the President had the nerve to request another blank check for the war in Iraq.

The truth of the matter is our troops have the funding they need. Congress passed and the President signed a Defense Appropriations bill last month that contained more than $450 billion in funding for the military. Moreover, the House passed an Iraq supplemental last month that would provide $50 billion worth of funding for the war efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan. Unfortunately, that bill has been blocked by Republicans in the Senate because it contains important provisions that would require the President to begin to plan for the withdrawal of American troops from Iraq.

I would note that recently, the Congressional Budget Office has reported that costs related to the Iraq war could reach $2.4 trillion over the next decade, even if the number of troops is cut by half. Furthermore, we have seen more than a billion dollars gone unaccounted for in Iraq due to fraud and misuse on the part of contractors and poor accounting by our own government.

By threatening to veto any spending bill that does not give him a blank check in Iraq, it is the President who is playing politics-- playing politics with our service men and women and their families, and playing politics with critically important domestic programs.

The bill before us today is significantly better than what the President sent us at the beginning of this year. It does, as I mentioned earlier, focus on the priorities of the American people. For example, the bill invests in:

Medical Research: $607 million above the President's request to study diseases like Alzheimer's, cancer, Parkinson's and diabetes.

Healthcare Access: $1 billion above the President's request, making targeted increases to programs like Community Health Centers to provide 280,000 more underinsured Americans with access to healthcare and High Risk Insurance Pools to help 200,000 more people afford health insurance.

Rural Healthcare: $147 million above the President's request to help 1,200 small, rural hospitals.

K-12 Education: $767 million above the President's request with targeted increases to Title 1, Special Education, Teacher Quality Grants, After School Programs, and Head Start.

Student Aid: $1.7 billion above the President's request for Pell Grants and other student aid programs.

Vocational Education: $575 million above the President's request for technical training at high schools and community colleges.

State and Local Law Enforcement: $1.2 billion above the President's request, to help local communities across the country.

Homeland Security Grants: 41.8 billion above the President's request, recognizing that fighting terror must be a top priority.

Highway Infrastructure: Meets the guaranteed levels set in the authorization bill and provides a $1 billion initiative for our bridges.

Renewable Energy & Energy Efficiency: $486 million above the President's request for important investments in Solar Energy, Wind Energy, Biofuels, and Energy Efficiency, with a careful blend of new scientific investments and conservation efforts.

Chairman David Obey deserves our thanks for plowing through what many of us would consider unworkable circumstances and producing a bill that puts the American people first.

Now, it is unfortunate that Senate Republicans have chosen to give the President the blank check he requested in terms of war funding. I cannot, however, in good conscience, hold the rest of the federal government--and the above investments--hostage to Iraq funding. Instead, I will continue to work with my colleagues in the coming year to bring an end the President's failed Iraq policy.

Mr. Speaker, it is the duty of Congress to pass spending legislation each year, and it is a duty we take very seriously. I would like to take just a moment to remind President Bush that Congress is a co-equal branch of government. Our founding fathers intended that no one branch should set the course for our country, and in fact compromise has long been one of the hallmarks of our government. It is time that the Administration recognizes that a seat at the negotiating table can accomplish much more than the wave of the veto pen.

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 877 and as the designee of the majority leader, I call up from the Speaker's table the bill (H.R. 6) to move the United States toward greater energy independence and security, to increase the production of clean renewable fuels, to protect consumers, to increase the efficiency of products, buildings, and vehicles, to promote research on and deploy greenhouse gas capture and storage options, and to improve the energy performance of the Federal Government, and for other purposes, with a Senate amendment to the House amendment to the Senate amendment thereto, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 877, I offer a motion.

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

Mr. Speaker, at this time, I yield 1 minute to my friend, the distinguished majority leader of the House, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer).

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 3 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, the legislation before us today takes measurable and concrete steps to reduce energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions. Most importantly, it is a piece of legislation that will be signed into law by the President. And as such, it represents a glimmer of hope that we will be able to get beyond the gridlock that has afflicted us for far too long in far too many areas.

Despite the birth pains of this legislation, and there have been many, it is a good bill. Is it a perfect bill? No. But it is good enough to be supported by the Members. More has to be done, and we will do it. This is, then, a good bill. Its core is a series of requirements that will improve energy efficiency of almost every product and tool and appliance that is used in the United States from light bulbs to light trucks. We are requiring a 40 percent increase in the fuel economy of our motor vehicles, and we are doing it in a way that gives manufacturers the flexibility they need to get the job done while preserving American jobs.

Congress is establishing specific numbers and targets, including new categories of vehicles, in a comprehensive approach to fuel efficiency. Along with the efficiency standards for homes, appliances and lighting, we will be removing from the atmosphere 10 billion tons or more of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere by 2030. That is the equivalent of taking all cars, trucks and planes off the road and out of the skies for 5 years.

This legislation is not the final word on energy security or climate change. We will be needing to do more, and we will. To be specific, I believe that it is possible for us to craft renewable energy requirements for electrical utilities, something which was dropped in the final stages of the bill because of the imperfections of the Senate's work, and a low carbon fuel standard. These are matters we will be addressing next year as we craft comprehensive climate change legislation on which the Committee on Energy and Commerce is now working. But that takes nothing away from today's achievement, which represents solid accomplishment and an essential downpayment towards reducing our dependence on foreign sources of oil and reducing greenhouse emissions.

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

Mr. Speaker, before I yield to my good friend, the next speaker, I want to say a word of gratitude and praise for our distinguished majority leader who leads us so well. Mr. Hoyer is an outstanding Member of this body, and I express my personal gratitude, affection and respect for him.

At this time I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished chairman of the subcommittee, Mr. Boucher, who has worked so hard and so diligently on this legislation.

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

Mr. Speaker, I want to yield the gentleman 30 seconds.

I just want to say a word of gratitude to the gentleman from California for the fine work he has done on this matter and how much the country owes him for his labors on this.

I also want to say a word of praise for both Mr. Hill and Mr. Terry who have done a superb job in working for a better piece of legislation.

I want the gentleman to be aware of my personal gratitude and appreciation. I think the country also will have reason to thank the gentleman.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman, my good friend from California (Mr. George Miller).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Velazquez).

Mr. Speaker, at this time I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Minnesota, the chairman of the Agriculture Committee, my good friend, Mr. Peterson.

Mr. Speaker, at this time I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from California, the

chairman of the Committee on Government Reform, my friend, Mr. Waxman.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Maryland, a member of the committee, my friend Mr. Wynn.

Mr. Speaker, at this time I yield to the distinguished member from New Hampshire, the Honorable Ms. Shea-Porter, 2 minutes. She is a valuable Member of the body, and we are glad to hear from her.

Mr. Speaker, at this time I yield to the distinguished gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the distinguished gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Hill), who has provided such extraordinary leadership in the consideration of this legislation, 2 minutes.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Langevin).

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Lampson) 2 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, we have no remaining speakers save my strong desire to yield the remainder of our time to our distinguished Speaker who will close for our side, but I want to say a nice word about my good friend, the gentleman from Texas. He is a valuable Member of the body and a great friend of mine and it is always a pleasure to work with him, even when we are on opposite sides.

If he would proceed to close, then I would yield to our Speaker for our closing remarks.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to my good friend. I don't agree with what he is saying, but I love him dearly and I think even though he is making a bad speech, I want him to have another minute. So I yield him, at this time, 1 additional minute.

Mr. Speaker, with appropriate thanks to her and with great respect for her and appreciation of her extraordinary leadership in this very difficult matter, it is with a great deal of pleasure that I yield to our distinguished Speaker the balance of our time on this side.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in honor of Michael K. Wheeler, who is retiring on January 3, 2008, as Director of the John Dingell VA Medical Center in Detroit. Mr. Wheeler's career is marked by numerous hospital administration roles and a dedication to our men and women who have served in the Armed Forces.

Mr. Wheeler was born in Detroit and moved to Canton, Ohio, when he was a teenager. He received a BS in business administration from the University of Dayton and an MA in hospital administration from Xavier University in Cincinnati. Mr. Wheeler began his career as a Hospital Administration Specialist in the U.S. Air Force and has served in an impressive number of VA Medical Centers, including Durham, North Carolina; Portland, Oregon; Prescott, Arizona; Coatesville, Pennsylvania; Cleveland, Ohio; and Dayton, Ohio. Prior to assuming the position of Director of the John Dingell VAMC, Mr. Wheeler was the Medical Center Director of the VAMC Battle Creek, Michigan. Additionally, Mr. Wheeler has conducted seminars in postgraduate education in management principles, strategic planning, and quality assurance for the VA, Duke University, and the American College of Health Care Executives.

Undoubtedly, Mr. Wheeler was more than prepared when he began his tenure at the John Dingell VAMC in 2001. There, he oversees all operations of the 108 bed primary, secondary, and tertiary care medical center which provides acute medical, surgical, psychiatric, and other inpatient care as well as both primary and specialized outpatient services, including substance abuse, among others. His job necessitates flexibility and strong decisionmaking abilities.

Mr. Wheeler is a patriot and a role model for us all. His colleagues and associates know him as an approachable, humorous, and very hard- working Director. I am proud to call him a friend. The John Dingell VAMC has been lucky to have him for these past 6 years. Madam Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring Mr. Wheeler for his dedication to the VA and to the men and women who have served our country. I wish him well as he moves on to new adventures.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 4351, legislation that will provide critical tax relief to millions of middle class Americans. I support the Democratic majority's commitment to passing sensible legislation that will provide a solution to the looming Alternative Minimum Tax crisis. I am disappointed that President Bush and the Republican minority are opposing our efforts to pass this legislation. If this bill is not passed by the Senate and signed by the President, more than 60,000 families which I have the honor of representing here in the House will be required to pay the AMT when filing their 2007 return--an increase of almost 1000 percent since 2005.

I also support the Democratic majority's continuing commitment to responsible fiscal policies. The relief provided in this bill is paid for by closing tax loopholes that allow hedge fund managers and corporate CEOs to use offshore tax havens as unlimited retirement accounts. That the President and his party would side with a few of the wealthiest individuals over millions of middle class American families speaks volumes about their misplaced priorities.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 2601, the ``Do-Not-Call Registry Fee Extension Act of 2007'', of which I am the lead Democratic sponsor. This bill enjoys wide bipartisan support. Its passage will help to ensure the continued operation of one of the most popular Federal consumer protection programs ever adopted by the Congress, the registry that allows consumers to list their phone numbers and thereby protect themselves from unwanted telemarketing phone calls.

Congress originally assigned the task of implementing and enforcing the Do-Not-Call Registry to the Federal Communications Commission, but they proved less than enthusiastic and nothing ensued. Congress then directed the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to perform these tasks. To date, the Registry established by the FTC includes more than 145 million telephone numbers, and the FTC has initiated 27 cases alleging Do-Not-Call violations, resulting in orders totaling $8.8 million in civil

penalties and $8.6 million in redress or disgorgement. This is a proud record indeed.

To maintain the success of this program, however, legislative action is needed. The authority of the FTC to collect fees to support maintenance of the Registry and the related enforcement program expired at the end on September 2007. H.R. 2601, whose lead sponsor is Rep. Stearns, will provide the FTC with a permanent fee structure for this purpose, contingent on approval of the fees in annual appropriations acts. This will provide appropriate oversight over the funding mechanism. The bill also requires the FTC to prepare two reports on the use and effectiveness of the Registry, including allegations regarding abuse surrounding a number of exemptions. The Committee takes these consumer complaints seriously and intends to look into them, in connection with review of the FTC reports.

I urge my colleagues to vote for this important consumer protection bill.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 3541 the ``Do-Not-Call Improvement Act of 2007''. This bill enjoys wide bipartisan support. Along with H.R. 2601, legislation considered by the House immediately before this bill, these measures will strengthen and ensure the continued operation of one of the most popular Federal consumer protection programs ever adopted by the Congress, the registry that allows consumers to list their phone numbers and thereby protect themselves from unwanted telemarketing phone calls.

Current rules provide that telephone numbers be removed from the list after 5 years, thus requiring consumers to re-register their numbers in order to fend off pesky telemarketing calls. Most consumers are unaware

of this requirement. And I would observe that it places a particular burden on the elderly, the group most often victimized by telemarketing frauds.

The FTC testified before our Committee last month that they would not remove any expiring numbers from the Do-Not-Call Registry, that is, phone numbers will stay registered, pending action by Congress to address this issue.

To that end, H.R. 3541 will eliminate the automatic removal of telephone numbers registered on the Registry, subject to certain common sense exceptions, such as at the request of the individual to whom the number is assigned. To maintain the accuracy of the Registry, H.R. 3541 directs the FTC to ``periodically'' check telephone numbers on the Registry against national or other appropriate databases, and remove from such Registry telephone numbers that have been disconnected and reassigned. The Committee intends for the FTC or any subcontractor to check these numbers at least once a month and preferably more frequently as technology allows. Nothing in this bill prohibits the FTC from removing invalid telephone numbers from the Registry at any time. The Committee expects the FTC to work with industry and technology experts to ensure the accuracy of the Registry. The legislation directs the FTC to report to Congress, not later than 9 months after date of enactment, on efforts taken by the agency to improve the accuracy of the Registry. I commend Representatives Doyle and Pickering for their strong bipartisan leadership on this legislation.

I urge my colleagues to vote for this strong package of important consumer protections. Let us hope for swift action on H.R. 3541, as well as on the legislation establishing a permanent funding mechanism, leading to quick enactment so that Americans are not once again inundated with unwanted calls from telemarketers.

Madam Speaker, in accordance with clause 2(a) of rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives, I respectfully submit the rules of the Committee on Energy and Commerce for printing in the Congressional Record. The Committee on Energy and Commerce adopted these rules by a voice vote, a quorum being present, at our organizational meeting on January 10, 2007.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this legislation, and am proud to join my colleague, the gentleman from Massachusetts and Chairman of the Committee on Financial Services, Rep. Frank, in sponsoring this bill. It represents an important first step in improving the protection of consumers of depository institutions. H.R. 3526 was referred to both of our Committees (Energy and Commerce has Rule X jurisdiction over consumer protection and consumer affairs) and reported unanimously by both. I urge its adoption by the House.

The Supreme Court's ruling earlier this year in Watters v. Wachovia Bank N.A. upheld a regulation by the Department of Treasury's Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) that permits operating subsidiaries of national banks to violate State laws with impunity. The Court ruled that the bank's operating subsidiary is subject to OCC superintendence, even if there effectively is none, and not the licensing, reporting, and visitorial regimes of the States in which the subsidiary operates. The practical effect of the OCC's far-reaching preemption authority as interpreted and blessed by the courts is that it prevents States from using their historical authority to protect consumers and communities in large parts of the financial services marketplace, a huge consumer protection gap that evildoers have exploited and the Federal banking regulators have not shown an inclination or an ability to fill.

As explained more fully in our respective Committee reports, banks are covered by the Federal Trade Commission Act's prohibition against ``unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce,'' but the rule writer for them is not the Federal Trade Commission, the expert agency who implements and enforces this provision across the vast majority of the U.S. economy, but rather the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve. It has done very little. Given the tide of complaints about abusive practices with respect to loans, credit cards, checking accounts, and other products, this is clearly unacceptable. H.R. 3526 therefore includes all Federal baking regulators, and not just the Federal Reserve, within the existing mandate under Section 18(f) of the FTC Act to adopt rules identifying and prohibiting unfair or deceptive acts or practices by depository institutions.

The Committee on Energy and Commerce was pleased to adopt improvements to this legislation. We amended it to require the banking regulators to consult with the FTC when promulgating any such rules, to allow the FTC to use the notice and comment procedures of the Administrative Procedure Act in concurrent rulemakings with the bank regulators, and to require GAO to report on the status of bank rules under these authorities.

I want to assure Members that the Committee on Energy and Commerce and its Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection intend to engage in vigorous oversight, in consultation with the Committee on Financial Services, to make sure that this authority is aggressively used. The public will greatly benefit from it.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in honor of the Dixboro First United Methodist Church, located in Superior Township, MI. This year marks the 150th anniversary of this proud institution. The Dixboro United Methodist Church has a long and honorable history of service to its community, one which has both strengthened the faith of its members and solidified the church's place as an integral part of the Dixboro area.

The earliest known religious service in the recently-formed Village of Dixboro took place in 1828 It and subsequent services throughout the next three decades were led by Methodist Circuit riders. Traveling a 40-mile route stretching from Nankin (Canton) to Ann Arbor, these preachers on horseback would arrive every 3 to 4 weeks, lead worship in a private home or 1-room schoolhouse, then move on to the next point on the circuit.

The dedication of these traveling preachers inspired those they served and in 1857 a group of local citizens met and formed a board of trustees to authorize the building of the church. Dixboro United Methodist was then built the following year, in 1858. The original building is now listed in the National Registry of Historical Buildings and Places and it is still utilized as the sanctuary for services.

Dixboro United Methodist has historically had a strong rural congregation, made up largely of local farmers. The rural character of Dixboro began changing with the advent of the building boom of the 1950s. New subdivisions and residential developments have brought fresh perspectives into the community and growth to the congregation. The present Dixboro United Methodist congregation is a diverse mix of young and old, traditional and contemporary; many are descendents of the original congregation.

The people of Dixboro United Methodist put their motto. ``People Helping People'' to work. A strong commitment to mission and community outreach is a hallmark of this congregation. Throughout a century and a half of growth, change and development, Dixboro United Methodist Church has remained a warn and welcoming member of its community. With such a rich history, one full of service, compassion and fellowship, I am proud to recognize Dixboro First United Methodist Church as it celebrates its first 150 years.

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 846 and as designee of the majority leader, I call up from the Speaker's table the bill (H.R. 6) to reduce our Nation's dependency on foreign oil by investing in clean, renewable, and alternative energy resources, promoting new emerging energy technologies, developing greater efficiency, and creating a Strategic Energy Efficiency and Renewables Reserve to invest in alternative energy, and for other purposes, with Senate amendments thereto, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 846, I have a motion at the desk.

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

Mr. Speaker, at this time I yield 1 minute to my distinguished friend and colleague, the majority leader of the House, the Honorable Mr. Hoyer, a great Member of Congress and a great friend of mine.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 3 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, it is not unknown that I have had some reservations about the bill and about the procedure that has brought us to the floor. I note to you, Mr. Speaker, that this is, however, a good bill and one which I support. Indeed, this is legislation which the Nation has to have, and, for that reason, I urge my colleagues to vote for it.

I begin with proper commendations to our Speaker, to Mr. Hoyer, to Mr. Rangel, Mr. Gordon, Mr. Peterson of Minnesota, Mr. Oberstar, Mr. Rahall, and Mr. George Miller of California, the Chairs of our colleagues' committees, for their good work and leadership on this matter, and I do salute you, Madam Speaker, for your leadership here.

I would note that the perfection of this matter or how it was handled is not a question before us, but, rather, it is what we should do about a major problem which this Nation confronts. In my extension of remarks, I will talk about the costs of failure to act at this time.

This is not a bill that the Committee on Energy and Commerce and my colleagues and I would have written if it had followed the regular order, nor, indeed, is it achieved under the order which we would have followed. Indeed, it is a process which is brought about in good part because of the lack of interest by the White House and, very frankly, the incompetence and the indifference and the arrogance of the other body.

I will be voting for this legislation because it contains a number of significant landmark achievements. It will raise fuel economy standards by 40 percent, to 35 miles per gallon, and it will do it in a way which achieves and protects American jobs and it gives manufacturers proper flexibility in achieving our goals.

It also closes what has been misleadingly, and I think dishonestly, called the SUV loophole. It expands incentives for the production of cars and trucks that run on renewable fuels, and it will help American factories to retool to build the cars and trucks of tomorrow.

I want to, at this time, pay particular compliment and congratulations to two of our very able colleagues and those who have joined them in their efforts to protect this legislation; Mr. Hill of Indiana, an extremely valuable Member of this body, and Mr. Terry, another very valuable Member of this body. These two Members from Indiana and Nebraska have provided extraordinary leadership in this matter in the Hill-Terry bill, and they deserve the thanks and the congratulations of this Congress.

This legislation includes efficiency standards for buildings and appliances that will remove more than 10 billion tons of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, an amount equal to five times the annual emissions of all cars on the road today in the United States.

For those who are concerned about portions of the bill dealing with renewable fuels and renewable electricity generation, I would simply say that this is far from the final work, and the committee will carry forward its oversight on these matters vigorously.

I reserve the balance of my time and at this time, Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to yield the remainder of my time to the distinguished gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Boucher), the chairman of the Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality, and I ask that he be permitted to control the time.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the city of Dearborn for the dedication of the Michael A. Guido Theater at the Ford Community & Performing Arts Center.

On November 16, 2007, the City of Dearborn will hold a gala celebration honoring the life of the late Mayor Michael A. Guido. It is at this gala event that the magnificent theater at the Ford Community & Performing Arts Center will be dedicated in Mayor Guido's name. This is a fitting tribute as the state-of-the-art Ford Community & Performing Arts Center was the crowning achievement in the impressive career of Mayor Guido. The center is the largest municipally owned recreation center in North America.

Along with the dedication ceremony, the evening will also include a fundraiser for the Michael A. Guido Pancreatic Cancer Research Fund at the Karmanos Cancer Institute. That the funds will go to pancreatic research is especially meaningful to our late ``friendly mayor'' and his family.

For 21 years Mayor Guido served the city of Dearborn with enthusiasm, devotion, and a sense of humor. Throughout his career he accomplished much. Known for his commitment to the people of Dearborn, fiscal responsibility, and leadership skills, among his many achievements, Guido served as president of the U.S. Conference of Mayors and held various leadership positions with the National League of Cities. During his battle with pancreatic cancer, Guido continued to work tirelessly in City Hall on behalf of the people of Dearborn. He also sprouted growth throughout Dearborn. A short list of his accomplishments includes the devolvement of downtown Dearborn, the creation of recreational facilities like the Dearborn Ice Skating Center, the construction of a new police headquarters, the redesign of Ford Wood Park, and the expansion of Esper Branch Library.

I ask that all of my colleagues join me in congratulating the city of Dearborn for the dedication of the Michael A. Guido Theater, as well as joining me in remembering the devoted public servant who served the people of Dearborn for 21 years.

Mr. Speaker, I support the legislation before us today because I believe it represents a safe and responsible way to bring our troops home from Iraq. The President has had more than four years to demonstrate leadership in Iraq, but at every turn his decisions have dragged us deeper into an ethnic and sectarian crisis that the President seems incapable of solving. Eleven months ago, the bipartisan Iraq Study Group released its report, which offered a comprehensive plan to build up the Iraqi government and create the political and security stability needed to bring our troops home. Unfortunately, the President rejected this bipartisan approach and instead implemented his troop surge. As a result, 2007 was the deadliest year for our troops since the beginning of the war, and we are no closer to a political solution to the problems in Iraq than we were when the troop surge began. Because the President refuses to take responsibility for his failed strategy, I believe it is time for Congress to act.

The legislation before us today provides our troops with the funding and equipment they need to safely do their job. This includes funding for our continued efforts to provide security and support for the government of Afghanistan. However, it is a far cry from the blank check that the President requested. It requires the President to begin redeploying troops out of Iraq within 30 days of enactment, and sets a goal for total redeployment by December 15, 2008. The bill also requires the President to undertake diplomatic efforts designed to engage other regional and international actors in providing for a secure Iraq. It includes important provisions that ensure the first troops sent home are the ones who have served in Iraq the longest, and that no more troops can be sent to Iraq unless they have all of the equipment and training that they need.

I had hoped that this bill would also include funding to address the growing refugee crisis in Iraq. While I am disappointed this issue is not being addressed today, I have been assured that Congress will act soon to assist the millions of Iraqis who have been displaced because of sectarian fighting.

This legislation is not perfect, but I believe that it is worth supporting because it will require the President to do something he has so far refused to do: explain to the public how he plans to get our troops out of Iraq. In fact, this bill would make it clear to the President that he will not get one more dime from Congress until his redeployment plan has been submitted. I applaud Chairman Obey for staying true to his pledge to send the President an Iraq spending bill with accountability and timelines built in. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation because it represents an important first step towards holding the President accountable and safely bringing our troops home from Iraq.

Mr. Speaker, I voted against the original Patriot Act, I voted against the reauthorization of the Patriot Act in 2005, I voted against the President's Protect America Act that was signed into law last August, and I was prepared to vote against the RESTORE Act if it did not adequately protect our constitutionally guaranteed civil rights. I had strong reservations about this legislation when it was first reported out of Committee, particularly with respect to the degree it appeared to give the Administration the ability to monitor the conversations of U.S. citizens without an individualized warrant. However, after reviewing the changes made to this legislation in the managers' amendment, I am satisfied that the RESTORE Act now contains adequate Fourth Amendment protections.

I applaud Congressman Holt for working with Chairmen Conyers and Reyes to address this issue. While this legislation is not perfect, I believe that it represents a substantial improvement over existing law. I realize it is likely we will find ourselves revisiting this issue again in the coming months when the Senate is finished with its own legislation on this matter. As this debate continues, I will continue to insist that any legislation I support contains adequate protections for civil rights.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to support the Temporary Tax Relief Act, a much-needed piece of legislation that will provide relief to millions of working families across the country.

The tax bill before us is a far cry from the irresponsible tax cuts my Republican colleagues have supported in the past. While their tax plan permitted hundreds of wealthy Americans to construct new wings for their summer homes and add new sports cars to their garages, our tax plan provides financial relief to millions of working-class Americans. The alternative minimum tax was never meant to harm the hard-working middle-class families of America, but unfortunately, years of wage inflation and economic change have placed an enormous burden on the shoulders of these families. While my Republican colleagues have spent the past decade providing the wealthiest Americans with new yachts, these middle-class families have been crying out for help, a cry that this Congress will finally address here today.

Without this legislation, 23 million working-class families will be subjugated to the Alternative Minimum Tax. My colleagues have made a proposal that will not only provide relief to these Americans, but will do it in a responsible manner. Unlike the reckless tax cuts that were brazenly supported by the President, this tax proposal will not burden our children and grandchildren with debt. This tax bill is completely revenue-neutral.

I urge my colleagues to stand before the American people and demonstrate where this Congress' priorities lie. Are we fighting for a handful of wealthy millionaires while the middle-class families languish with an incredible tax burden? Or are we with 23 million hard- working American families across the country, including more than 61,000 in Michigan's 15th Congressional District? I urge my colleagues to support the middle-class families and support this bill.