Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, we have just completed our third motion to adjourn the business of the House today, in addition to other procedural motions to delay action.

While we will not be deterred, we are going to continue to fight for families throughout America who are suffering in this housing crisis. We are going to provide the tools that our communities need to purchase these foreclosed homes and turn them into affordable housing for families.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank), the Chair of the Financial Services Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I would note for the record that the Committee on Financial Services heard from local government officials and housing experts across this country during committee markup and after that. There is no secret that communities across this country need a little bit of help in turning those dilapidated, empty, foreclosed homes into productive, safe, secure housing for families.

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

Mr. Speaker, just for purposes of clarifying the record, I think it is important to note that a number of amendments were considered in the full committee, the Committee on Financial Services. And indeed, in the Rules Committee, we considered a number of amendments, and have accepted consideration of seven amendments in this bill that will be voted on later on. Three are Republican amendments.

Now I know the other side has focused a lot on delaying tactics and procedural maneuvers today, and they would love to open this up and have hundreds of amendments considered. A number of amendments filed with the Rules Committee were duplicative. We have tailored this structured rule in a fair manner.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I do not yield for that purpose.

I object.

I am the last speaker for my side, so I will reserve the balance of my time until it is my turn to close.

Mr. Speaker, we have suffered through delaying and procedural tactics today, and the business of the American people in this housing crisis should be delayed no longer. I do not yield additional time.

I am the last speaker on my side, so I will reserve the balance of my time to close.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the Neighborhood Stabilization Act of 2008 and this rule today so that we can provide our communities with the tools they need to protect our neighborhoods during these economically turbulent times.

And I urge my Republican colleagues not to turn a blind eye to the hardworking families across America that are being squeezed, and your delaying tactics and your procedural maneuvers that are simply delaying our efforts to address the housing crisis for America's hardworking families.

I salute the leadership of Chairman Frank and Chairwoman Waters during this housing crisis and our swift action through this comprehensive housing package that has been encouraged by Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke and under Democratic leadership. This demonstrates that we are committed to ensuring that families across America can obtain and keep the American dream of homeownership in a safe and secure neighborhood.

I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Mr. Speaker, I move to lay the motion to reconsider on the table.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act, and I would like to thank the chairwoman of the Rules Committee, Chairwoman Louise Slaughter, for her leadership, for her perseverance in moving this critical legislation. She has been fighting for the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act for over 13 years. So we will herald her leadership today on behalf of American families and all hardworking folks across this country.

I am fortunate to serve on the Committee on Rules under her leadership. The folks across this country should be very proud that we have such a dedicated chairwoman leading the committee in the people's House. I'd also like to salute Congresswoman Judy Biggert for her participation and perseverance as well in moving this legislation and fighting for it for so many years.

Madam Speaker, this New Direction Congress already has done a great deal to strengthen antidiscrimination efforts for our Nation this year, such as legislation that outlaws inequities in medical coverage for mental health care. Today, we will end another form of discrimination in the workplace and by health insurance companies.

The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act protects our neighbors from being denied health coverage or being hired or keeping a job based upon their God-given personal genetic traits. In my district in Tampa, Florida, the University of South Florida Regional Genetics Program has been doing great work in genetics research. Now they can do so much more. People will be more willing to participate in genetics research. The testing, the genetic counseling for families with genetic conditions, now they will not be so afraid and hiding because they fear they would be discriminated against if someone learned that they might have an inclination for breast cancer or diabetes or some other disease.

The scientific research opportunities are endless, and under this bill people will be protected and employers will not be able to request or purchase genetic information about employees or their families. Any information found indirectly may not be used against an employee or disclosed. Further, this legislation would outlaw health insurance companies' ability to cancel, deny, or change the terms of individual plans based upon their genetic background.

This is a civil rights issue and a privacy issue, and this legislation is an absolute necessity to provide protection for Americans in the workplace and within their health coverage. The cost of health care in America is burdensome enough without an added concern that coverage may be unethically jeopardized based on genetic information.

Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this rule and the underlying bill and again salute the leadership of Chairwoman Louise Slaughter and Congresswoman Judy Biggert.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in honor of a great educator and leader, Alfred ``Al'' Barnes. The Tampa Bay community suffered a great loss on April 22, 2008 when he passed away.

Mr. Barnes grew up in the North Boulevard Homes in West Tampa and graduated from Middleton High School in 1956. He went on to Fort Valley State College on a full football scholarship, where he completed his Bachelor of Science. Upon graduation, Mr. Barnes began his career in education. His first assignment was as a P.E. teacher at the all-black Progress Village Elementary. But as segregation ended and Tampa worked to integrate its schools, Mr. Barnes was transferred to the then all- white Riverhills Elementary in 1965. It was a difficult time to be a black man in a white school, but Mr. Barnes' dedication to children and love of teaching moved him onward. In 1969 he became Tampa's first black varsity coach at Hillsborough High School, and for 25 years, he was the human relations specialist at Plant High School, helping at risk students.

Over his 40-year career in education. Mr. Barnes taught generations of Tampa students about acceptance and understanding, and his efforts are well remembered by them today. As Olga Barnes, his wife of 45 years puts it. ``The children fell in love with him, and he fell in love with them.'' Tampa Mayor Pam Iorio, Mr. Barnes' former student, considers him a role model and appointed him to the Tampa Sports Authority. Carlye Morgan, a member of my staff in DC, is a graduate of Plant and was a member of the Student Advisory Committee, a student club that Mr. Barnes started to promote race relations and leadership at the school. She remembers his capacity to bring students of all backgrounds together to work on common goals. ``He gave me the chance to be a leader at my school and taught me the power of mutual respect and acceptance. And students knew he was the type of teacher they could always come to if they needed help.''

Outside of school. Mr. Barnes loved to scour flea markets for jewelry. A pocket watch and antiques collector, neighbors and friends rarely saw him without a healthy dose of his latest finds glittering back at them. As a member of First Baptist Church of College Hill, his collection of African artifacts was always a hit with the congregation during Black History Month.

Madam Speaker. Al Barnes will he greatly missed by me and my community. Tampa is a more loving and accepting place because of his dedication to our children. My thoughts are with Olga, his children Alfred and Zane, and his grandchildren, Luisa, Angelita, Andy, Brian, Kayla, and Kelsey.

Madam Speaker, I would like to express my strong support of National Minority Cancer Awareness Week. This week increases awareness about the effects of cancer in minority communities and is dedicated to emphasizing the importance of early cancer detection.

Today, minorities are more likely to be diagnosed and die from cancer in comparison to the rest of the United States population. According to the American Cancer Society, African American men have a 37 percent higher cancer death rate than white men, and death rates for African American women are about 17 percent higher than rates for white women, despite the fact that African American women have lower cancer incidence rates than white women.

Disparities in breast cancer for minority women are among the most common. Studies have highlighted that African American women are 1.9 times more likely to be diagnosed with an advanced stage of breast cancer than white women. Hispanic women are 1.4 times more likely to be diagnosed with an advanced stage of breast cancer than white women. It is clear that, although there have been efforts to eliminate disparities in breast cancer related care, substantial disparities remain.

Today, in accordance with National Minority Cancer Awareness Week, I introduce, the Eliminating Disparities in Breast Cancer Treatment Act of 2008. This legislation will promote the implementation of standardized health care practices for breast cancer patients and help to eliminate inequities based on race, education, income, and health insurance status.

In order to eliminate unacceptable gaps in treatment quality, it is necessary that we create real incentives and requirements for doctors to provide the best care. All patients should receive the best treatment for their conditions. Quality care should be provided for everyone, not just patients that know to ask for it.

Madam Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Madam Chairman, this amendment ensures that hardworking families who are feeling the strain of skyrocketing health care costs can still afford to send their children to college. The amendment applies to the Federal parent PLUS loans. PLUS loans are the non-need- based, federally guaranteed, low-interest loans available to parents for their children's undergraduate tuition, room and board and other expenses.

Our neighbors are really getting squeezed these days. They are socked with the rising cost of housing and health care. And many families are very concerned that a college education may be out of reach for their children due to these rising costs.

This amendment allows parents to continue to access low-interest PLUS loans even if they have fallen behind on medical bills only up to 180 days. This extenuating circumstance exemption is identical to the one already provided in the bill for mortgage payment delinquencies.

Housing and health care are the primary sources of financial hardship for families. Late mortgage payments and uncollected copayments for doctors' visits are among the primary reasons for bad debt. But these short-term and temporary extenuating circumstances should not bar parents from assisting their children with attending college.

By adding this amendment to section 4, special rules for PLUS loans, we ensure that hardworking families feeling the strain in this economy of skyrocketing health care costs can still afford to send their children to college.

I would like to thank Chairman Miller, Ranking Member McKeon, all of the members on the Education and Labor Committee and the professional staff for their work.

I yield to the gentleman from California.

Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

I would like to thank, again, the gentlemen from California for their work on this legislation and their work on behalf of students and parents across this country.

I urge adoption of the amendment.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 1107 and ask for its immediate consideration.

For the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Florida, my colleague from the Rules Committee, Mr. Diaz-Balart. All time yielded during consideration of the rule is for debate only.

I yield myself such time as I may consume. I also ask unanimous consent that Members be given 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on House Resolution 1107.

Madam Speaker, House Resolution 1107 provides for consideration of H.R. 5715, the Ensuring Continued Access to Student Loans Act of 2008, under a structured rule.

The rule provides 1 hour of general debate controlled by the Committee on Education and Labor. The rule makes in order four amendments in the Rules Committee report, each of which is debatable for 10 minutes. The rule also provides one motion to recommit, with or without instructions.

Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 5715, the Ensuring Continued Access to Student Loans Act of 2008, and the underlying rule. Under this act, the Congress will ensure that low-interest student loans remain available for college students and their families even in the face of the credit crunch. In doing so, the Congress will build on the new commitment to college and university students and their hardworking families that this new Democratic majority has provided.

See, our action today comes on the heels of the historic College Cost Reduction and Access Act that was signed into law a few months ago that saves college students an average of $4,400 on student loan interest. We increased the Pell Grant, and we now will forgive student loans for students that commit to a 10-year career in public service.

This single largest investment in college financial assistance since the GI Bill in 1944 comes at no new cost to taxpayers. The new Congress promised to make college more affordable for all Americans, and we have delivered on that promise.

Our next step today is to ensure that families can continue to access the loans they need to pay for college. See, in today's economy, a college education is as important as a high school diploma was a generation ago. And with college costs growing by nearly 40 percent over the last 5 years, students are graduating from college with more debt than ever before. It is estimated that 200,000 students do not go to college every year because they simply cannot afford the costs. Well, our efforts today will restore the American dream for those families.

We know that many families across this great country are facing severe financial strains. The economic downturn, the cost of housing, the cost of health care, gas prices have hit our families especially hard. Middle class families are especially being squeezed in this unfortunate Bush economy.

In addition to these basic needs, the rising cost of a college education has left many families very concerned that a college education may not be within reach for their children. A recent press report noted that 70 percent of parents said that they are very concerned about how they're going to be able to afford the cost of a college education for their kids.

Families now are forced to pull from many different sources to pay for college and to simply make ends meet. They're drawing on their savings account, Federal loans, private loans, and the equity in their homes all at the same time to send their kids to college. And despite all of their hard work and the fact that they've set money aside, they're still unable to come up with the cost of tuition because these costs are rising. The costs of sending their child away to school or just down the street to the community college is simply out of reach for so many so they turn to the loans.

In 2007, families borrowed almost $60 billion in Federal student loans. Now, in this credit crunch, banks are tightening their loan requirements and raising rates. We want to make sure that families have access to the low-interest loans, that they remain available for these hardworking families so their kids can attend college.

Madam Speaker, this bill has a number of very significant improvements under our Federal college loan program. The best deal going in college loans these days is the Stafford loan. We are going to increase the annual loan limit for the Stafford loan by $2,000 for undergraduates and graduate students. These loans are the most affordable and available to students with the best interest rates.

Currently, there's a cap on the amount that a student can receive, so our legislation today will raise that cap. It increases the total loan limit, as well, over the course of a student's college education from $31,000 for dependent undergraduates to $57,500 for independent graduate students.

The other significant loan available to families these days is the Parent PLUS loan. The Parent PLUS loan, the primary benefit for the PLUS loan for parents is that they can borrow Federally guaranteed low- interest loans, not tied to the students, but that's a loan for the parents. The parents can borrow the total cost of undergraduate education including tuition, room and board, supplies, lab expenses, and travel, and other aids. It's a non-need-based loan. Well, we're going to give parents a little more flexibility under our actions today to pay off their PLUS loans.

Currently, those loans become due 60 days after the bill is sent to them. We're going to give them a little extra time and allow the student to complete their college education before that loan becomes due. We're going to help struggling homeowners pay for college because right now, it is not clear under the law that parents that are struggling with pending foreclosure or difficulty in paying their housing costs can also access the great PLUS loans to help their kids get through college. So we're going to allow for that today.

We're also going to give the Department of Education additional tools so that these, the cost of college and the access to student loans, remain available for America's hardworking families.

I would like to thank Chairman George Miller of the Education and Labor Committee here in the House for his leadership on making sure that families continue to have access for student loans but for also being a champion for American families, colleges, and our entire educational system which is in better hands now that the Democrats are in charge here in the House.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Vermont (Mr. Welch).

Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller), the chairman of the Education and Labor Committee.

I yield the gentleman an additional 2 minutes.

Madam Speaker, today the Congress will build on the new commitment to college and university students and their hardworking families that this new Democratic majority in the Congress has provided. Our efforts to ensure continued access to low-cost student loans for families comes on the heels of the historic College Cost Reduction and Access Act that was signed into law a few months ago that will save college students an average of $4,400 on student loan interest, will increase the Pell Grant, and will forgive loans for those who provide 10 years of public service to their community.

This is the single largest investment in college financial assistance since the

GI Bill in 1944 and comes at no new cost to taxpayers. The new Congress promised to make college more affordable for all Americans, and we have delivered on that promise.

Our next step today is to ensure that families can continue to access the loans they need to pay for college. And let me provide you with one example from my hometown in Tampa, Florida: a student at the University of South Florida, a large public university of over 40,000 students. This student is a communications major and is one semester away from graduation. But she has reached her loan limit. She can't access that Stafford Loan that provides the lowest interest rate available out there. She is the first in her family to ever attend college. She only lacks 11 credit hours to graduate, and she plans to graduate this summer, but she has been forced to apply for a higher interest rate, private loan, to cover the expenses of her summer tuition. Well, this legislation is ready-made for her and thousands of other students across America and their families. It gives them that extra-added flexibility to be able to put the money to good use and graduate on time rather than end up paying higher loans and interest rates.

You see, Madam Speaker, we're not just Members of Congress. We are also parents ourselves. And we are also concerned about the increasing cost of college, especially given the fact that college costs have been increasing more rapidly than available grant and financial aid, Federal loans, and families' ability to pay. Well, our efforts today will restore the American Dream for many families. And we know and appreciate that many families are facing extreme financial strains. The economic downturn, the cost of housing, the cost of health care, gas prices have hit our families hard. Families are really being squeezed in this unfortunate Bush economy.

But there is a reason to hope because we will continue to fight for a new direction for our country, a direction that values access to education, values better jobs, and values an opportunity for all Americans.

With that, Madam Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote on the previous question and on the rule.

Mr. McKeon. Madam Speaker, this rule will allow consideration of a bill that takes a critical first step in addressing disturbances in the student loan financial markets brought on by broader market turmoil.

We've all read the headlines and spoken with our constituents about this difficult economy. Our economic confidence has been shaken, and people are nervous. But what may be overlooked is that students and families thinking about how to pay for college are in a particular bind.

It's hard enough to pay for college when tuition regularly rises at two or three times the rate of inflation and textbooks can run close to $1,000 each year. Add to that the idea that lenders are scaling back on student loans, and it's easy to see why Americans are nervous about paying for college.

Like most challenges to our economy, there's no easy answer to the difficulties in our student loan programs. We will need a combination of actions--maybe some legislatively, others through regulation--that will increase liquidity and restore confidence among investors and consumers.

This bill is a first step, and one that deserves bipartisan support. It signals our commitment to a strong Federal Family Education Loan program, and should help ease the minds of students and families. And it does these things without a cost to the taxpayer.

Madam Speaker, I am disappointed that the bill is not being brought up under an open rule. H.R. 5715 was developed on a bipartisan basis, and is stronger because of it. The idea that members will not be permitted to collaborate on this effort to protect college students and their families is disappointing, if not surprising given the track record of the 110th Congress.

I will oppose this rule because it limits the full participation of all members. But I will strongly support the underlying measure, H.R. 5715, when it is brought to the floor and I urge all my colleagues to join me in telling students and families that we are committed to college access.

Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

I thank my good friend and colleague from the Rules Committee.

Mr. Speaker, oftentimes there is great irony here in Washington, and here is another example. The House will consider today this rule and the Beach Protection Act. The intent of the Beach Protection Act is to protect America's beautiful coastlines from water pollution. But here is the irony: Big oil interests have filed an amendment that puts our beaches and America's coastlines at risk. Their proposed amendment seeks to open up our beautiful coastlines to offshore drilling of oil and gas. New offshore oil and gas drilling represents a real hazard to our marine environment, especially in my home State of Florida and the Tampa Bay area.

The beaches, the coastal environment, marine resources and our billion-dollar tourism industry in Florida should not be sacrificed for a small amount of oil and natural gas because the oil and natural gas that is projected to be recovered if we open up our offshore areas to drilling, it is projected to provide less than 1 month, 1 month supply of oil and gas.

In addition, researchers at the Department of Oceanography at the University of South Florida have warned that it would only take 24 hours for an petroleum spill in the eastern Gulf of Mexico to sully Florida's panhandle beaches and then sweep through the gulf's powerful loop current, travel through the Florida Keys and contaminate estuaries and beaches from the Everglades to Cape Canaveral.

We only have to look back to 2005, Hurricane Katrina, Hurricane Rita, and Hurricane Wilma ended up resulting in many oil and gas pollutants seriously affecting the beaches in the Gulf of Mexico. The storms caused 124 oil spills into the waters of the Gulf of Mexico. During Hurricane Katrina alone, 233,000 gallons of oil were spilled. There was 508,000 gallons of oil spilled during Hurricane Rita. A full year after Hurricane Katrina, BP admitted that a damaged oil well valve in the Gulf of Mexico was still leaking oil.

The knee-jerk reaction to take every opportunity, even a bill called the Beach Protection Act, to open up our beautiful coastline to additional oil drilling, especially in hurricane-prone waters like Florida's gulf coast is ridiculous, not just ironic.

So let's stay true to the Beach Protection Act, fight water pollution, strengthen our natural resources and our tourism economy and vote down the Peterson amendment today.

Madam Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Beach Protection Act, and I salute Chairman Oberstar, Chairman Johnson, and Congressman Pallone for their leadership.

The intent of the Beach Protection Act is to protect America's beautiful coastlines from water pollution. Yet big oil drilling interests have once again filed an amendment that puts our beaches and America's coastlines at risk.

New offshore oil and gas drilling represents a real hazard to the marine environment of the State of Florida, but all across the country, beaches, our coastal environment, our marine resources, the billion dollar tourism industry in Florida should not be sacrificed for a small amount of oil.

It would only take 24 hours after a petroleum spill in the eastern gulf for the oil to sully Florida's panhandle beaches. If the spill was swept up in the gulf's powerful loop current, the spill would pollute the Florida Keys, contaminate estuaries and beaches from the Everglades to Cape Canaveral.

We only have to look back to 2005 when we had three Category 5 hurricanes, Katrina, Rita, and Wilma, that caused massive oil spills and pollutants in the Gulf of Mexico. It destroyed 150 petroleum production platforms in the gulf and damaged 457 pipelines.

Drilling off of our beautiful beaches is the energy policy of the past. If President Bush and my colleagues on the other side of the aisle truly wanted to address high oil prices, you should have voted with the Democratic majority to take the huge tax breaks away from the big oil companies at a time that they are making record profits.

We are fighting for a new direction on energy policy, renewable sources of energy. We value our natural environment, and we value the public health of our communities.

Madam Speaker, Martin Luther King, Jr. is a national hero. He embodied the tenacious spirit and compassionate understanding of the American ideal. The power of his words has moved millions to live with hope in their hearts and welcome in their embrace.

Dr. King fought for racial equality and desegregation with nonviolent protest. Peace, he taught us, is our most powerful weapon. He helped communities begin to heal the wounds of hatred and indignity by replacing them with cooperation and tolerance. The mark he left on our society is indelible. When an assassin took him from us on that April day in 1968, Americans mourned a terrible loss. Sooner than expected, we had to enact the lessons he taught us without his guidance to show us the way. But his ink was already imprinted on our moral fiber, and our country continued his fight to end discrimination and segregation.

Madam Speaker, let us, as an American community, pause today to remember the legacy Dr. King left for each of us to carry--to dream, to love, and to accept.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to herald the lifetime achievements of Tampanian George Lackman. Mr. Lackman was a jack of all trades. He made contributions to our community ranging from shipbuilding to banking to philanthropy.

Mr. Lackman was born in Palmetto Beach in 1931. He spent most of his career as a shipbuilder. He worked his way up the ranks from a mechanic's assistant to vice president at Tampa Ship Repair and Dry Dock, and he oversaw construction of Tampa's legendary pirate ship, the Jose Gasparilla. For 35 years he served as the ship's captain during Tampa's annual pirate invasion and festival, ``Gasparilla.'' He also built submarines and stern-wheelers and refurbished a steam locomotive for the opening of the Magic Kingdom at Walt Disney World in 1971.

Working with bass pro Doug Hannon, Mr. Lackman invented an electric boat propeller that prevents seaweed from becoming entangled in the blades. Many anglers swear by this invention, and Mr. Lackman would joke that it raised enough money to put his kids, son Peter and daughter Nancy, through college.

In a new career endeavor, Mr. Lackman founded Citrus Park Bank, where he served as president. Later, he started the private banking program for First Union Bank in

Tampa. He retired from First Union as vice president of corporate development. He also served as president of Nutri-Sol Chemical Company, Marine Insulation Company, Corban Industries, and Acetogen Gas Company of Florida.

In his philanthropic efforts, Mr. Lackman started Genesis Clinic to provide prenatal care to mothers who were unable to afford proper health care. Infant mortality dropped in Tampa as a result of the services provided at Genesis. He also served as chairman of the Hillsborough County Hospital Board for two terms and helped save Tampa General Hospital when it faced the possibility of closing its doors.

Madam Speaker, Mr. Lackman's death on March 29 marked a great loss to his wife Patricia, to Peter and Nancy, to his grandchildren George III, Caroline, and Grace, and to the entire Tampa Bay area. His unique contributions to our community and his common sense and intelligence will not soon be forgotten.

Madam Speaker, in these challenging economic times, Americans everywhere are feeling the negative impact of President Bush's economic policies. More Americans are looking for work, millions have lost their homes or they are at risk, gas prices are at an all- time high, and in Florida property insurance is out of sight.

Now, the House has already taken action to address these issues, the housing crisis, credit, gas prices, but the Bush administration has been silent, or they have been actively opposed. That is until yesterday, when Treasury Secretary Paulson finally offered a proposal. But one bank analyst back home cautioned that the proposal is a political ploy. The Bush administration is just trying to reassure consumers that it has the financial crisis under control. ``All he's doing is moving the deck chairs,'' he said.

Well, I am very concerned as well that the announcement falls short in one key area. It does not address the immediate needs of American homeowners facing imminent foreclosure and the impact on our neighborhoods and communities.

We are going to work over the next few months for real action, as opposed to President Bush's hands-off approach.

Madam Speaker, in recognition of Women's History Month, I rise today to honor Delia P. Sanchez, a champion for children in Florida. Ms. Sanchez is a wonderful example of the power of women to shape future generations and make a difference in their communities.

Ms. Sanchez is a lifelong learner. She obtained her bachelor's degree from Florida State University in social work with minors in education and spanish in 1945 and went on to get her master's in social work at Columbia University in 1947. Until 1991, nearly 50 years later, she took graduate level courses in areas such as pupil personnel services, education, and rehabilitation.

All the while, Ms. Sanchez was affecting enormous change in lives of hundreds of children in the Tampa Bay area. One of the greatest services that Delia Sanchez provided to the Tampa community was to work with Congressman Sam Gibbons to bring the first Head Start program to Hillsborough County. She began her career as a child welfare worker for the Florida State Welfare Board. From there Ms. Sanchez went on to work for the School Board of Hillsborough County as a school social worker and a case work consultant, working her way up the ranks to eventually serve as the administrative supervisor for Head Start for 9 years. Then, in the last 3 years of her career, she went into private practice to counsel troubled children.

Throughout her career and in her retirement, Ms. Sanchez has served as a board member or local representative to a number of community organizations. The list is too large to mention them all, but they range from the University of South Florida's Latin Community Advisory Committee, the Citizen's Advisory Council, the Child Abuse Council, the Ybor City Museum Society, to the National Association of Social Workers.

For all of her hard work for the education and welfare of children, countless organizations have recognized her. Ms. Sanchez is the recipient of the U.S. State Department Fellowship Award, the American Red Cross Service Award twice, the Mayor's Brotherhood/Sisterhood Award, the USF Social Work Alumni Society Award for Outstanding Community Service, the Channel 8 WFLA Volunteer of the Year Award, the Commemoration Committee Award for Dedicated Community Service, the Retired Social Worker Outstanding Achievement Award, the St. John Presbyterian Early Childhood Hand Print Award, the Ybor City Museum Society Pizzo Award to preserve Tampa's Latin heritage, the Hillsborough County Martin Luther King, Jr. Award, the Louis De La Parte Mental Health Advisory Council Award, and the National Head Start Association Lifetime Achievement Award.

And, if all of that wasn't enough, she is also a member of Sigma Delta Pi Spanish Honor Society, was named Social Worker of the Year by the National Association of Social Workers by the Tampa Bay Unit and then again by the Florida Chapter, received an honorary Doctorate from the University of South Florida School of Social Work, and in 1993 she was Hispanic Woman of the Year.

Madam Speaker, Delia P. Sanchez is a woman of the highest regard who has dedicated her life to helping others. I am proud to call her my neighbor, and I join many others to applaud her lifetime contribution to the Tampa Bay community.

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 1014 and ask for its immediate consideration.

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

I strongly oppose the gentleman's point of order.

This point of order is being raised today for one purpose and one purpose only, that is, to block this rule and ultimately the underlying bill, an underlying bill that prohibits discrimination against Americans with mental illness.

I'm heartened by the fact that I do not believe the gentleman's point of order comes from a unanimous opinion of the other side of the aisle because the underlying bill is a bipartisan effort cosponsored by 274 Members of the House of Representatives. Yet there are opponents of this bill, and they will raise these dilatory tactics. The opponents don't even want to allow a debate or a final vote on this critical measure. They simply want to stop the process and kill the bill through this procedural maneuver.

So despite whatever dilatory procedural devices the other side tries to use to stop this bill, we will stand up for the millions of Americans who need parity in mental health coverage, and we will vote to consider this important legislation today.

We must consider this rule, and we will pass the Paul Wellstone Mental Health and Addiction Equity Act today.

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

Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased at this time to yield 2 minutes to my colleague from Tennessee (Mr. Cohen).

At this time I will reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote on the consideration of the resolution so we can move forward on the rule and to consider the bill.

Those that oppose our efforts to end discrimination when it comes to mental health services will get their opportunity to debate the bill and to vote against these measures.

So with that, Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote to consider the rule.

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

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to my colleague from the Rules Committee, the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Hastings). All time yielded during consideration of the rule is for debate only.

General Leave

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members be given 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on House Resolution 1014.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 1014 provides for the consideration of H.R. 1424, the Paul Wellstone Mental Health and Addiction Equity Act of 2007, which expands the Mental Health Parity Act of 1996 to provide for equity in the terms of employer-sponsored health benefits for mental health and substance-related disorders compared to medical and surgical disorders.

Mr. Speaker, this is an anti-discrimination bill, this is a health care bill, this is a pro-business economic development bill, this is also a pro-family bill, and this is a bill that supports our veterans. This is a bipartisan effort, with 274 cosponsors in the House, of which I am proud to be one.

Unfortunately, Federal action is necessary because Americans who suffer from illnesses like depression, postpartum depression, severe anxiety, bipolar disorder, and many other diseases are being discriminated against. You see, HMOs and many health insurance companies have been more focused on their bottom lines than on the health of our families. Mental health is just as critical to our lives and well-being as any physical ailments or disease. And yet health insurers continue to treat mental illness differently from physical illness.

In America, more than 50 million adults, at least 22 percent of the U.S. population, suffer from mental health issues or substance abuse disorders. In addition, one out of every 10 children or adolescents has a serious mental health problem and another 10 percent have mild to moderate problems. Untreated mental illness harms our families and children, emotionally and financially. Untreated mental illness results in higher costs for businesses in lost productivity. Untreated mental illness often leads to criminal activity, which is very costly. Mental disorders are the leading cause of disability for individuals aged 15 to 44 in the United States.

A study sponsored by the National Institute of Mental Health revealed that mental and addictive disorders cost our country more than $300 billion annually. This includes productivity losses of $150 billion, health care costs of over $70 billion, and $80 billion for costs such as criminal justice.

Unfortunately, less than one-third of the people with a mental disorder who seek care receive adequate treatment. Despite the losses suffered in our society as a result of mental illness and all of the studies that demonstrate this, national employer survey data indicates that mental health coverage still is not offered at comparable coverage to other medical conditions.

Even after passage of the 1996 Mental Health Parity Act and all of the efforts of the States, the Government Accountability Office found that 87 percent of plans had more restrictive design features for mental health benefits than for medical and surgical benefits. In addition, many employers have adopted restrictive measures, such as limiting the number of covered outpatient visits for mental illness. This is so shortsighted. It is so costly.

Former Surgeon General Dr. David Satcher found that when health insurance plans unevenly impose higher costs for mental health services, the result, of course, is a reduction in treatment for those who need it, lost productivity and higher costs in the long run. Dr. Satcher stated that this is a true issue of fairness in coverage.

Similarly, another recent study found that deductibles and outpatient cost sharing were much higher for substance abuse than for general medical care. Well, this legislation addresses those inequities and provides a cost-effective way of providing increased access to mental health care. The bill prohibits discrimination by diagnosis by requiring coverage of all mental illnesses and substance-related disorders, just as we provide for Members of Congress and others covered by the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program. Treatment for mental illness is a proven money-saver. In fact, for every $1 spent on treatment, we save over $12.

Mr. Speaker, we all owe a debt of gratitude to Mr. Kennedy of Rhode Island and Mr. Ramstad of Minnesota for their bipartisan leadership on this legislation and their work to provide for the mental health needs of our families, our neighbors, our veterans and our children. We also owe great thanks to the Wellstone family. But, most of all, we can't forget the families throughout America who have a modest request of their Congress, and that is that they be treated fairly.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, this is truly a good-news story for American families today, because not only are we going to outlaw discrimination against those who suffer from mental illness, but we adhere to the pay-as-you- go rules that were adopted by this Congress, led by Democrats, at the beginning of this Congress. Pay-as-you-go means that this bill is paid for.

And while I certainly respect the gentleman from Washington for speaking up for a medical center which operates in his district, there is a bigger picture here. And to explain that bigger picture, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone), who chairs the Subcommittee on Health for the Energy and Commerce Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from the powerful Rules Committee and the State of California (Ms. Matsui).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Ellison).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California, a champion for America's families, children, and veterans, and the Speaker of the House, Ms. Pelosi.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis).

(Mr. DAVIS of Illinois asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cummings).

Mr. Speaker, I have the right to close, and we do not have any additional speakers, so I will reserve the balance of my time until my colleague has made his closing remarks.

Mr. Speaker, back on the Paul Wellstone Mental Health Equity Act, I submit for the Record a letter of support from the Federation of American Hospitals along with a related letter from the American Hospital Association, Coalition of Full Service Community Hospitals and Federation of American Hospitals.

Federation of American Hospitals,

March 3, 2008.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi,

U.S. Congress,

Washington, DC.

Minority Leader John Boehner,

U.S. Congress,

Washington, DC.

Dear Speaker Pelosi and Leader Boehner: The Federation of

American Hospital (FAH), representing America's investor-

owned and managed hospitals and health systems, supports

swift passage of the Paul Wellstone Mental Health and

Addiction Equity Act of 2007 (H.R. 1424). This 1egislation

will provide greatly needed access to mental health treatment

for Americans who need it most.

This bipartisan legislation would end prevalent forms of

health insurance discrimination against patients with

debilitating chronic mental illnesses. Additionally, H.R.

1424 will assist millions of Americans in obtaining the

necessary hospital care they need and were previously denied

because of inadequate mental health coverage.

H.R. 1424 is paid for, in part, by prohibiting physician

self-referral to a hospital in which a physician has an

ownership interest. Physician self-referral presents an

inherent conflict of interest, creates an unlevel, anti-

competitive playing field; threatens patient safety; fails

low-income and uninsured patients; and, has resulted in the

overutilization of limited Medicare resources. We strongly

support this provision.

We deeply appreciate Congress's ongoing commitment to

mental health parity and strengthening the Medicare program.

Sincerely,

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Mr. Speaker, ``Here are no lofty peaks seeking the sky, no mighty glaciers or rushing streams wearing away the uplifted land. Here is land, tranquil in its quiet beauty, serving not as the source of water, but as the receiver of it. To its natural abundance we owe the spectacular plant and animal life that distinguishes this place from all others in our country.''

These were the words of Harry Truman, 60 years ago at the dedication of the Everglades National Park. And it is in the same spirit that I support H. Res. 845, recognizing the 60th anniversary of Everglades National Park. The Everglades are a completely unique treasure for Floridians, and all Americans. So it is fitting that they should also be unique in the national park system. The Everglades were the first unit of the park system to be designated not for their scenic beauty alone, but for the extraordinary diversity of their wildlife.

One of the largest bodies of fresh water in the United States, Lake Okeechobee, sits at the top of the Everglades. During the wet season, Okeechobee slowly pours water over its southern edge, and it flows out in a slow flood that slides south and spreads out over hundreds of square miles. The water flows south, but very slowly, sometimes as little as a hundred feet in a day. And it is remarkably shallow, as little as a foot in depth, which allows the incredible diversity of plant and animal life, unrivaled in the Nation.

In 1947, when Marjory Stoneman Douglas published ``Everglades: River of Grass'' and Harry Truman dedicated the Everglades as part of the parks system, it was with the intention of preserving the Everglades for future generations. Douglas continued to fight for the Everglades for the rest of her life, and she led an ever growing chorus of voices, advocating for our environment. The Everglades became a touchstone for an entire movement of Floridians and other Americans who continue to fight to save our natural places, not only for future generations, but also for their own sake.

Unfortunately, the Everglades still faces threats of the attrition of development, and the redirection of its waters. In the Water Resources Development Plan of 2000, Congress included a comprehensive restoration plan to bring the Everglades back to its natural state. The Everglades remain one of the Nation's greatest natural treasures, and I am proud to stand in recognition today of their 60th anniversary as part of the park system.