Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, on February 14, 2008, I inadvertently failed to vote on rollcall No. 68. Had I voted I would have voted ``aye.''

Madam Speaker, on February 25, 2008, if I were present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall Nos. 69, 70, and 71.

Madam Speaker, I rise today honor the great city of St. Louis Park, Minnesota for winning the America's Promise Alliance's 100 Best Communities for Young People competition for the third year in a row. St. Louis Park is one of the cities in the Fifth Congressional District of Minnesota.

St. Louis Park is an amazing community for young people because residents engage youth with meaningful artistic, cultural and civic opportunities. One such opportunity is the Friends of the Arts program, which pairs youth with donated musical instruments and offers creative writing classes for teens. A local church, the Lutheran Church of the Reformation, offers young artists the ability to improve their artistic skills and a platform to perform or display their work.

Residents of St. Louis Park's Lake Forest Neighborhood organize a program called ``Arts Crawl'' which sponsors family art programs and raises scholarship funds for youth. Additionally, the city government makes an effort to invite young people to community events and meetings.

The City of St. Louis Park and its residents are committed to a brighter future for their city, their state and their country. I applaud Mayor Jeff Jacobs, the residents of St. Louis Park and especially the young people for their hard work and dedication to improving their communities.

Madam Speaker, on January 22, 2008, I failed to vote on rollcall Nos. 19 and 20 because my flight was unexpectedly delayed. Had I voted, I would have voted ``aye'' on rollcall No. 19 and ``aye'' on rollcall No. 20.

Madam Speaker, on December 13, 2007, I inadvertently failed to vote on rollcall No. 1156. Had I voted, I would have voted ``aye.''

Madam Speaker, on December 5, 2007, I inadvertently failed to vote on rollcall No. 1130. Had I voted, I would have voted ``aye.''

Madam Speaker, on November 14, 2007, I inadvertently failed to vote on rollcall No. 1103. Had I voted, I would have voted ``aye.''

Madam Speaker, on October 31, 2007, I inadvertently failed to vote on rollcall No. 1023. Had I voted, I would have voted ``aye.''

Madam Speaker, on October 22, 2007, I inadvertently failed to vote on rollcall Nos. 983-985. Had I voted, I would have voted ``aye'' on rollcall No. 983; ``aye'' on rollcall No. 984; and ``aye'' on rollcall No. 985.

Madam Speaker, on June 13, 2007, I inadvertently failed to vote on rollcall No. 465. Had I voted, I would have voted ``aye.''

Madam Speaker, on March 9, 2007, I inadvertently failed to vote on rollcall No. 133. Had I voted, I would have voted ``no.''

Madam Speaker, on February 12, 2007, I inadvertently failed to vote on rollcall Nos. 93-94. Had I voted, I would have voted ``aye'' on rollcall No. 93; and ``aye'' on rollcall No. 94.

Mr. Speaker, at a time when more and more Americans are struggling to obtain affordable health care, the President's budget drastically slashes health care for seniors and low-income working Americans.

Today, 36 million seniors get health care coverage through Medicare. The President's budget takes a swipe at their pocketbooks by proposing to save nearly $6 billion by increasing the monthly premiums that seniors pay.

If the President was concerned about seniors, he would instead go after the vast overpayments made by Medicare to private managed care plans. Instead, he has raised premiums on our seniors and focused his cuts on our Nation's hospitals, skilled nursing facilities, and other health care providers. The President also cuts Medicaid by $33 billion over the next 5 years.

Today, Medicaid serves 55 million low-income and disabled Americans. Such cuts force cash-strapped States to either reduce benefits or cut provider payments.

Mr. Speaker, as our economy continues to face uncertain times, this is the worst time for the President to promote drastic cuts in Medicare and Medicaid.

Rest assured, the Democrats would not allow these cuts to become law. These provisions are as good as dead as they come to Capitol Hill.

Madam Speaker, on January 22, 2008, I failed to vote on rollcall Nos. 19 and 20 because my flight was unexpectedly delayed. Had I voted, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall No. 19 and ``yea'' on rollcall No. 20.

Madam Chairman, let me start by thanking Chairman Frank and Chairwoman Waters for bringing this critical and much-needed legislation to the floor.

The HOPE VI program was developed as a result of recommendations by the National Commission on Severely Distressed Public Housing, which was charged with proposing a national action plan to eradicate severely distressed public housing. The commission recommended revitalization in three general areas: physical improvements, management improvements, and social and community services to address resident needs. As a result, the HOPE VI program was developed in 1993.

Grants are used by public housing authorities to fund capital costs of major rehabilitation, new construction and physical improvements, demolition of severely distressed public housing, acquisition of sites for off-site construction, and community and supportive service programs for residents. Any public housing authority that has severely distressed public housing units in its inventory is eligible to apply.

In each of the past 5 years, the Bush administration has proposed elimination of the HOPE VI program, requesting no money for this successful program, threatening to strand tens of thousands of low- income families and children to live in substandard public housing.

But the Congress, under both Republican and Democratic majorities, has continued to fund the program. In 2006, $100 million was appropriated, and last month, $100 million was included in the Omnibus Appropriations Act. This reauthorization of HOPE VI is long overdue.

In the Fifth Congressional District and in the City of Minneapolis alone, my local public housing authority has estimated that they need over $205 million just to maintain 5,883 public housing units at only a fair condition. Again, let me repeat this. My district needs $205 million to keep these public housing units from not falling below basic standards. The backlog of units in desperate need of refurbishment and rehabilitation is a result of 7 long years of neglect of public infrastructure.

This is why I urge all of my colleagues to vote for this bill. By passing H.R. 3524, we move a step closer to recognizing the rights for all citizens.

Well, Doctor, let me just add my voice and say I love to be on the House floor with my colleagues. You guys are servants of the people of the United States, whether we're from the upper Midwest or Iowa, Kentucky, or all the way out in Colorado, it's a joy to be in the company of people who care about the American working class and are willing to get out there strong to speak up for what working class people need.

You know, this stimulus package is to signal change in a broader sense to make our economy fair and more productive. It's signaling change. One hundred billion dollars is a whole lot of money, but when you think about this trillion-plus-dollar economy we live in, it's not a whole lot by comparison. But it's not designed to solve every problem, it's supposed to spark economic change, signal an overall change in the way our economy is structured so that we can have working class people prosper and grow.

My colleague from Colorado pointed out that it's not a matter of trickle down, it's bubble up. You put the money in the hands of middle- class people, they go out and buy washing machines, they go out and buy food, they go out and buy groceries, they put

their kids in school, and the next thing you know more deals are being done and you see an overall increase in the economy, a rising tide lifting all boats. You take care of the middle class and the rest will take care of itself.

If you give tax cuts to the wealthiest of the wealthy, the very definition of being rich is that you don't need the money. So, what do you do? You don't spend the money. You merge. You go buy some company overseas and then they take advantage of comparative wage differentials and the next thing you know we're exporting jobs. The fact is is that an economic stimulus targeted to people who really will spend that money and really do need that money and can spend that discretionary income will spark our economy. But it will only be a signal of an overall shift of economic fairness that has to do with our innovation agenda, that has to do with increasing the minimum wage, that has to do with decreasing the cost of college loans, an overall economic package that is big and that is structural that has to do with making changes to predatory lending laws, that has to do with our housing markets, an overall package that will take a little more time to implement, but an economic stimulus package that will happen soon and will spark economic growth directly affecting the unemployment numbers that jumped in December, and as Mr. Perlmutter correctly points out, directly affecting the increase in the Consumer Price Index as well.

Now, you know, the underlying source of this economy's weakness is the collapse in the housing market. In 1995, what happened to the housing market? Bam, straight to the moon. People thought it would never end. As a matter of fact, people bought houses, some of them subprime. Some of them found themselves thinking, well, if I buy this house right now, get into this subprime mortgage, the increasing housing values gives me wealth; I can refinance when this house is even worth more. But, you know, everything that goes up must come down. And as a matter of fact, when we saw people refinance these homes, they consumed that increased wealth in their house. That helped drive the consumer sector, but eventually these things come down and we are hitting the wall.

People are not making it, folks. We have a negative savings rate in America. Negative savings rate. That means if you get paid on Friday, you're out of money Wednesday night. That means you're hanging on and you're hoping that you can stretch that penny out to get to the end of the week. That means that instead of steak you're eating hamburger and instead of salmon you're eating tuna fish. And it's not funny. It's serious business. People are really, really struggling.

And so the fact is, folks, that we have a negative savings rate and that is why people are turning to the credit cards. That's why, when they get a big purchase, they've got to refinance their homes, although that's tough to do today, and that's why they go to title loans, payday loans and pawnshops. This is what is driving that move. We are drying up the consumer sector.

And I just want to say that we have seen record foreclosures in America, record foreclosures. We haven't seen this many foreclosures since the Great Depression.

Absolutely.

I want to respond directly to your point, Congressman, because I think this is one of the things that in a very palpable feeling way really struck home to me, and that was when I was campaigning back in 2006. I met a gentleman who kind of came to the front door when I knocked on his door. And he came in a very gingerly way; it was clear that he had suffered some kind of injury and wasn't feeling very good. And he said to me, you know, Keith, about a year ago I was up on my roof because me and my partner make a little more than minimum wage, not that much more than minimum wage, but we were able to get into the house because we got into the subprime mortgage. We got some credit cards that they sent to us that we didn't ask for. But because I didn't have a whole lot of money, I climbed up on that roof to fix it because it was leaking. I didn't want to see more damage happen to the house, we had to patch it. And I, as you might guess, fell off that roof. The guy fell off the roof and sustained some serious injuries. The injuries were too bad, his partner was going to try to put him in the car but he couldn't move him because he was hurting, and it was dangerous, and so he called the EMS truck, Emergency Medical Services. They came to get him. That was about 1,800 bucks right there. He didn't have health care insurance. He put the medical bills on the credit card as long as he could, couldn't pay that; as a matter of fact, paid one credit card, but on the other one he was late. Guess what happened to the interest rate on the credit card that he was on time for? It went up. That's called universal default. So, now he's paying 32 percent interest. He's getting further and further behind. He's not working. His partner is struggling to keep the mortgage paid. They see a reset in the mortgage. Now they are totally up. They are just really in bad shape now, and they are facing foreclosure.

When the man told me this story, he was dry in the eye but I was misty. I couldn't believe, I said, you know, not in America. People who work hard, 40 hours a week every week, cannot be in this situation. It's wrong. And I felt it was my responsibility to do something about it.

So when I stand on the floor to talk about working class prosperity with you here tonight, six Members of Congress, and when I heard our Speaker talk about this stimulus package, I was reminded of what happened when the great President Franklin Delano Roosevelt died. Back in those days, Representative Yarmuth, they used to have the coffin of the President loaded up on the trains. You know what I am talking about, Representative Walz? And that train was carrying that casket across the country. And there was a man who appeared at one of those train stops where that casket was being carried across the country, and there was a journalist there too, and the man was crying about the President. He was in tears over President Roosevelt. And as you know, he was the President during the Great Depression.

And the journalist walked up to the man and said to the man, ``Sir, I see that you're crying and very emotional over what happened to the President. Did you know President Roosevelt?''

And the man gathered himself, cleared his threat, and he said, ``No, I didn't know President Roosevelt. But he knew me.''

Will the gentleman yield?

How much is your debt for this big debt that he has run up?

How about little Gus, your son?

Madam Speaker, earlier this week President Bush showed us that his view of the economy does not match that of the overwhelming majority of Americans. That is when he tried to convince the Nation that the economy was strong for everyone.

Does the President realize that on his watch, poverty has increased every single year, and that overall household income has decreased?

Does the President realize that at a time when Americans have less money in their wallets, they are trying to squeeze every dollar to pay higher food, gas, education and health care bills?

Madam Speaker, how bad does the economy have to get for the average working man and woman before the President realizes that there is a problem?

This Democratic Congress is not satisfied with the status quo. Over the last year, we have made progress to ease the economic crunch for middle-class, working-class families. We have passed legislation to make college education more affordable, increased the minimum wage, addressed the subprime mortgage crisis, and cut taxes for middle-class families.

We are proud of these accomplishments. We also realize that with most Americans struggling, this economy is just not working.

Madam Speaker, tonight, as I stand to pay respects and honor to Julia Carson, I don't believe I will take 5 minutes, but I will say that as a freshman Member, I really can't recall some of the great stories that I've heard my friends tell about the great Julia Carson, but I do have my own recollections of her.

The most important thing I want to share with people tonight is that, when I just started here and I started getting on my feet and figuring out where the bathrooms were and how to get around the House a little bit, Julia Carson took a moment, Julia Carson had time, Julia Carson and I sat in the chairs of this gallery and talked. And she told me about the struggles that she had to overcome. And she also told me, when I had my first bill, ``if you don't put me on that bill right now, boy, I don't know what I'm going to do.'' And I had to laugh, because the spirit that she had was remarkable, given some of the health problems she was facing.

The health problems she was facing may have been a burden, but they were not too great for her to show kindness to a new freshman here in Congress. And so I will always remember Julia Carson, very fond memories of her, and I will always be inspired by the great example that she gave us.

Certainly.

It is certainly my honor. Many, many people loved Julia Carson, and I want to thank the Congressman from Connecticut for sharing his sentiments as well.

First of all, let me thank the gentleman from Massachusetts for leading this important debate in our country. No doubt, the American Dream has always been homeownership and yet, with exploding ARMs, with prepayment penalty and other such exotic products, that dream of homeownership has become an American nightmare.

Mr. Chairman, I'd love to be able to take every Member of this body through a tour of north Minneapolis. There are blocks on my community where every other house is boarded and vacant. The fact is that for the people who have made every single mortgage payment, and never late, they suffer because of this crisis because their home values have been dropping and plummeting.

We have seen our cities suffer, we have seen communities become unattractive nuisances, which were once vibrant places where people owned their own homes and did well. It's not because the market worked right; it's because it worked wrong. It's because of defective financial products, defective financial products which are addressed in this bill.

It's important to understand that this bill is not designed to harm the subprime market. It's designed to reform and correct it and make it work properly, Mr. Chairman. The fact is that it does not help any homeowner who gets into a 227 with a prepayment penalty, who eventually can't pay the mortgage after it explodes in their face and then lose their home. We are not better off because of something that happens like that. That is what this bill is here to stop.

So, Mr. Chairman, let me say that this is an important part of making the American Dream come true for middle-class Americans, making sure that when they buy a home, they can actually keep that home and that it will be a product that can enhance themselves and their families and the communities they come from.

Madam Speaker, on November 6, 2007, I inadvertently failed to vote on rollcall No. 1043. Had I voted, I would have voted ``aye.''

Madam Chairman, today is a very proud day for me. I am proud to be an American today because when this ENDA bill passes, what we will be doing is affirming traditional values, traditional values like tolerance, traditional values like minding your own business, traditional values like allowing fellow Americans to rise to the full measure of their ability, traditional values, values that have made this country endure and pass the test of time.

Opportunity and traditional values is what this ENDA bill is all about. This bill has nothing to do with the institution of marriage. This bill is about giving opportunity to fellow Americans so that we can reap the full benefit, the talent, the creativity, this hardworking ethic of both gay and lesbian and all Americans. All.

This bill today makes me proud to be an American and makes me very, very happy to vote for it, and I do hope all of our Members do.

Mr. Speaker, like many of my colleagues, I am for fair trade, not simply free trade. And I would associate myself with comments already made today, ``free trade for free people.'' Yet already reported recently, miners in Peru are facing having their strike declared illegal and shut down. That doesn't sound very free to me.

This Peru FTA, I will acknowledge I am happy to see the positive developments in the labor and environmental standards. For me, however, they don't go quite far enough. I believe that the Congress has a constitutional role and responsibility to be able to amend these trade agreements no matter whom they are with or how large or small they may be.

Trade negotiations have successfully passed before without fast track authority or closed rule type of treatment, and I think that should be the case today.

The Peru agreement, as currently structured, to me is symptomatic of the larger problem: allowing an unelected trade representative, and not the duly elected representative of the American people, to decide what is best in our trade policy.

The current agreement does not provide for enforceable environmental protections, especially with regard to the lumber industry in sensitive areas of Peru's environment. The agreement, as currently written, would help force the privatization of Peru's Social Security system. The agreement would devastate Peru's already faltering rural agricultural economy.

Congress forced the trade representative to include minimal standards, in my opinion, and these things have been called a breakthrough. I think there should be credit where credit is due, and they have been an improvement. But at the end of the day, if we are to rely on the trade representative and the Bush administration to enforce the trade agreement, I don't think that's an enforceable agreement.

I tried to offer an amendment which would allow for a private right of action to allow American citizens to enforce the provisions of the trade agreement to be carried out and enforce those labor and environmental provisions to be fully fulfilled. But, however, due to the nature of this debate, no such amendment was allowed, and I think that's to the detriment of us all.

I believe that we must work to return to a time when Congress and the elected representatives of the people were allowed to amend our trade agreements. Organized, negotiated and fair trade amongst nations is one of the most important issues facing our Nation, indeed, our world. Its great importance demands that it be given the attention that such an issue deserves.

Madam Speaker, on November 6, 2007, I inadvertently failed to vote on rollcall No. 1044. Had I voted, I would have voted ``yea.''

Stated against: