Floor Statements

Mr. Chairman, on July 27, 2007, I inadvertently voted ``aye'' on Davis Amendment to H.R. 2419 (rollcall No. 751). I intended to vote ``no'' on the amendment.

Amendment No. 21 Offered by Mr. Udall of Colorado

Madam Speaker, on July 24, 2007, I inadvertently voted ``aye'' on rollcall No. 692, an amendment to the Transportation and Housing and Urban Development Appropriations Bill, H.R. 3074. I intended to vote ``no'' on the amendment, which would impose an unacceptable cut to Amtrak. I am pleased that my colleagues did not support this amendment, and I congratulate the gentleman from Massachusetts, Transportation and Housing and Urban Development Chairman John Olver who provided such important support for transportation and Amtrak.

Madam Speaker, on July 24, 2007, I inadvertently failed to vote on Flake Amendment to H.R. 3074 (Rollcall No. 694). Had I voted, I would have voted ``no.''

Madam Speaker, on July 18, 2007, I inadvertently failed to vote on Price Amendment to H.R. 3043 (Rollcall No. 653). Had I voted, I would have voted ``no.''

Madam Speaker, today is a good day. The Majority Maker Freshmen are here tonight at this late hour to celebrate the increase in the minimum wage for the first time in 10 years. The minimum wage, the amount of pay that the lowest paid workers in our country receive, now will be able to claim an increase in pay.

Madam Speaker, I am joined today by our colleagues, Mr. Ron Klein of Florida and Mr. Paul Hodes of New Hampshire, to talk about this question of economic justice, this issue of a shared prosperity in our economy and in our country. And I can think of no more important and no better topic to kick off the conversation than a send-up and salute to the hardworking folks of this country who do it on minimum wage every day.

Today, Madam Speaker, there is a mom who can say to her son, ``Yes, son, you can go on that field trip because Mom has the money. Here you go.'' There is a dad who can say, ``Honey, yes, you can go in and play softball this summer because we can work it out.'' There is an aunt who can afford to buy her nephew or niece maybe a birthday present which she just couldn't afford before.

There is a hardworking mother and father who do not have to rely upon the goodness of charity, which we admire that, but everybody also wants to earn their way, don't they? And they are not going to have to go to those food shelves, although I am glad that those food shelves are there because we need them. But this week they don't have to go because the minimum wage has been increased, and the hardworking people, the people who make this country really go, have gotten the edge up.

And so I just want to yield, take it to one of our fellow new members of the Majority Makers, and talk about this idea of a shared prosperity of America, and how the Democratic Congress is going to return our country to a time when everybody can feel that you can really make it, you have a real shot in the American economy not just for the few, but for the many.

The minimum wage is a good thing. We all three of us feel good about it, and we all three are members also on the Financial Services Committee, so we are focused on these issues.

But there have been some other things that have happened here in this Democratic Congress that have really helped improve the lives of average working Americans. I have in mind the bill that was passed recently, the Labor-HHS-Education appropriations bill. Is there anything in there that you think the American people ought to know about or the Speaker ought to know about?

I know these bills are all separate, Madam Speaker. There are different bills that go through to appropriate monies for the different category areas. But I think it's important for the American people, Madam Speaker, to understand them as a whole. As we increase minimum wage, as we increase funding for health research for education, this is a general approach to help the average, working American, the average working family, do better, be more prosperous, reach their goals, help their children be prosperous and have a secure and good retirement.

I wonder, would you yield to a question, Mr. Hodes?

Given that we have about 37 million people who are in poverty in America today, and looking at some expenses, you know, we see that bread prices have risen 25 percent, health insurance costs have risen 97 percent, and the price of regular gasoline has jumped 149 percent.

Are the folks who are in poverty in America today, who are some of these folks? Are these hardworking folks, or are those folks who don't work so hard? Who are the people who we categorize as poor today, this 37 million?

Mr. Klein, it's an important point you make, and I just want to add to this idea that for so many of the working, the people who are in poverty, we are talking about working poor folks, folks who are really struggling hard every day. And you know, Mr. Klein, housing as you well know is one of the most central things that everyone needs.

Poor, inadequate housing leads to a lot of serious problems. I'll list a few of those, but then we'll get to what we did. Children who don't have stable and adequate housing tend to move around a lot. As they move around, they are having their lessons disrupted in their school district every time they move, which means they fall further and further behind, which has an implication for how they're being educated.

Health issues, whether it be exposure to lead, mold, all kind of things that are inadequate housing, very serious issue for young people and for families. Poor housing has a significant impact on health.

Of course, issues of crime and exposure to violence has a lot to do with where you live and the quality of the housing that you may happen to live in. And so because these problems are so important in order for families to be prosperous, in order for families to grow and do well, this Congress has taken on some important initiatives. One is section 8 vouchers. The President's inadequate budget for section 8 would have been, would have forced between 40 to 80,000 families and individuals to lose their housing vouchers. The bill that we dealt with provides for an increase above the President's budget of $330 million for tenant-based vouchers and nearly $667 million for projected base vouchers in order to renew all current section 8 vouchers so no one that has a tenant-based voucher will lose it.

It's important also to talk about how we were making good strides on housing for seniors. We've seen increases. We've seen seniors struggling with housing, and we're making strong commitments, seniors will benefit from the increase in section 8 vouchers as well.

And also I just want to say that we're looking at, we had a lot of discussion in the Financial Services Committee about what we're going to do about the foreclosure crisis. As you know, about 20 percent of the mortgages, subprime mortgages are going to result in foreclosure. That's a tremendous amount. And what it means is that people who thought they had the American Dream ended up in the American Nightmare with these foreclosures. And we've been talking in the Financial Services Committee about what we're going to do to stave off these kinds of predatory loans so that people can have a fairer, more realistic loan they can get into, so that when these loans, these 228s, 327s, these kinds of loans that adjust upward in a dramatic way, that people will have better information, that there'll be greater responsibility on the mortgage originators, that there'll be greater standards applied to these originators and that people can be able to keep their homes or will be able to be in a mortgage they can actually afford.

So housing is a critical issue. This Congress we're dealing with it, and it's something I'm very proud to be associated with.

So we have about five more minutes left, and I think that we've had kind of an abbreviated evening this evening. But we've been talking about issues that are of vital concern to the average American working person. I think it's important for each one of us to take about 1\1/2\ minutes to just talk about what we feel we want the American people, Madam Speaker, to go away with as we wrap up this important Special Order by the majority freshman class.

Why don't we kick it to you, Mr. Klein. About 1\1/2\ minutes. What do folks really need to go to bed with tonight as we think about this powerful middle class that fuels our American economy and life?

Mr. Hodes, parting words, sir.

Madam Speaker, this is going to conclude our Special Order hour. The difference-makers are going to be on the job for the American people. We can be counted on to make that difference that we were brought here to make. And, Madam Speaker, I just think it's important for the American people to know that this Democratic caucus will be standing up for them. So with that, thank you all.

Madam Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

The motion was agreed to; accordingly (at midnight), the House adjourned until today, Friday, July 27, 2007, at 9 a.m.

Mr. Speaker, the National Intelligence Estimate makes it clear that the United States confronts grave challenges to our national security. Al Qaeda grows stronger with each passing day and remains intent on inflicting harm on the American people and others around the world.

The NIE confirms what many of us in this Chamber already know: the war in Iraq has stretched resources thin and continues to distract from the global war on terror. It is nearly 5 years since President Bush proclaimed ``mission accomplished.'' In that time, over 3,600 Americans have lost their lives and 26,000 more have been wounded. Despite the courageous efforts of our men and women in uniform, Iraq today is a distraction from our mission to destroy the al Qaeda network. How many more lives must be lost until the President and our colleagues realize that we must change course?

Mr. Speaker, around the world right now, our brave troops are fighting to protect this country and win this war. If we are going to prosecute the war to the best of our ability, it is time to face facts and reevaluate our strategy and begin a gradual redeployment of our troops.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to the life of Grace James of Minnesota, a tireless activist whose contribution to the North Side of Minneapolis cannot be overstated. Though it saddens me to report that Mrs. James passed away recently at the age of 93, I am humbled and inspired by the example she has set through her advocacy for the North Side, a neighborhood she endlessly fought to support, a community she tirelessly worked to build.

It is hard to think of a facet of community that Mrs. James didn't work to improve. During her career she served on numerous housing boards where she strived to ensure that everyone could find a place to live and that the North Side had open arms to those needing a home. Through organizations such as Minnesota Cooperative Housing and the North Side Residents Redevelopment Council, the work she began in the 1950s to this day helps to maintain and benefit the community she loved.

Mrs. James was also an activist in local education, working as a teacher's aide in the 1960s and as an organizer for the teachers union in the 1970s. Her work for North Side youth didn't stop at the schoolhouse doors, however; she once worked as a member of the board of the YWCA, supported the Campfire Girls, and served as the president of the Jack and Jill Club, introducing black children to cultural sites and events--and raising scholarship money along the way.

Part of what makes Mrs. James so remarkable, her example so admirable, is how she fought on a personal level. Her daughter Noel remembers that, outside of the councils and non-profits, the schools and unions, Mrs. James made the time to make sure neighborhood kids kept out of trouble. She defines what it is to fight at the grassroots level, leaving former Minneapolis City Councilwoman Jackie Cherryhomes to remark how ``she believed in the power of community long before anyone talked about it.''

In closing, Madam Speaker, I wish to express my condolences to those surviving Mrs. James: her daughters, her grandchildren, her great- grandchild, and the community she worked for, the community she loved. It is an honor to stand in recognition of the memory and life of such an illustrious woman as she. Mrs. James, thank you.

Madam Speaker, it is with great humility that I rise today to honor Norman Borlaug, the noted agricultural scientist and plant pathologist. Mr. Borlaug's contribution to humanity cannot be overstated. No one can be entirely certain how many lives he is responsible for saving, but the number often noted is well over 1 billion people--an unprecedented feat in world history. The honorary titles and acclimations Mr. Borlaug has received throughout his illustrious career are too many to enumerate, and such a list would be too prestigious to truncate. Instead, I simply request that the record state how pleased and honored I am to be able to stand here today and recognize the occasion of Mr. Borlaug's receiving the highest honor this body can bestow, the Congressional Gold Medal. It's doubtful that this institution could find a more deserving recipient.

Mr. Borlaug came from humble roots, working on his family farm until the age of 19. After some prodding from his grandfather, Nels Olson Borlaug, he enrolled at the University of Minnesota. One cannot help but wonder whether his grandfather knew when he advised his grandson, ``you're wiser to fill your head now if you want to fill your belly later on,'' how literally Mr. Borlaug would take it.

Affording a college education can be difficult, and was especially so for Mr. Borlaug, who obtained his undergraduate degree during the Great Depression. Despite the best efforts of the federal government towards relief and recovery, times were still rough, and many of the men he worked with were literally starving. Mr. Borlaug would later recall how much food meant to the young men he worked with--17- and 18-year-olds who had for months and months been unsure where their next meal would come from. Mr. Borlaug later noted how he ``saw how food changed them . . .'' and how ``. . . all of this left scars on me.''

There is no doubt that Mr. Borlaug understood the importance of something as simple as food in peoples lives, how it brought hope as well as nourishment to the impoverished and less fortunate. Toward the end of World War II, he rejected offers that would double his salary so he could research wheat in Mexico. Devastating crop yields in the early 1940s had led the country to resort to importing up to 60 percent of its wheat. Various plant diseases decimated entire crops, bringing discouragement and fear to the lives of Mexico's farmers. Mr. Borlaug was determined to make sure that Mexico could feed itself through a new kind of strong, high yield wheat.

Wheat is naturally long-stemmed, and if the wheat is too heavy, the stem cannot bear the load and the crop collapses and spoils. This spoilage was common, especially if a farmer attempted to use modern fertilizers. After numerous attempts and years of trial and error, Mr. Borlaug was able to cross a strain of dwarf wheat--which is shorter and has a thicker, stronger stalk--with regular wheat. Due to the prevention of losses from disease and top-heavy spoilage, yields tripled. By 1956, Mexico was able to be totally self-sufficient in wheat production.

In the sixties and seventies, demographers and environmentalists were predicting that India and Pakistan would inevitably face widespread hunger, resulting in millions upon millions of deaths due to famine and starvation. As India and Pakistan raced towards deadly conflict over the Kashmir region, both countries were headed toward an even more deadly famine. Rather than dodge the war zone, Mr. Borlaug headed toward the conflict, his team working fields in sight of falling artillery shells. As Borlaug's ``Green Revolution'' swept across Asia, tensions of famine and instability eased. Due to Mr. Borlaug's ingenuity and perseverance, both countries are now self-sufficient producers of cereals.

The environmental benefits of Mr. Borlaug's techniques have saved 100 million acres of untouched land from being plowed to grow crops, preserving the natural habitat of an area equivalent to that of the entire State of California. Since 1961, worldwide land devoted to growing wheat has increased by only 4 percent, while output has increased 2.3 times over, saving countless acres of natural habitat worldwide for future generations.

As Mr. Borlaug receives the Congressional Gold Medal, we are recognizing both his previous accomplishments as well as those yet to come. Mr. Borlaug is continuing his efforts to end famine and hunger in the developing world by spreading his efforts to African nations long plagued by food insecurity. There are further mountains to move, further horizons to reach, further fear to extinguish and further hope to bring. Madam Speaker, it is a pleasure to be able to honor Mr. Borlaug not just as a product of the University of Minnesota, or as a great scientist or instructor, or as a great American, though he is all of these

things. It's a bigger honor to recognize him as a man who saw people starving when they didn't have to--who in the process of an act of human compassion, single-handedly changed the world. Mr. Borlaug, on behalf of the State of Minnesota, the United States of America, and a grateful world, I thank you.

Mr. Speaker, for weeks now, the Republican Senators have been coming forward saying that the status quo in Iraq cannot continue. They're right. This week they have an opportunity to act on those words. We'll see if they join us in changing the course of the war, or if they find another excuse as to why they must continue to support President Bush's failed policy. I would hope that they would stand by their words.

Senator Lugar correctly stated, ``The President and some of his advisers may be tempted to pursue the surge strategy to the end of his administration, but such a course contains extreme risks for United States national security.'' Senator Voinovich correctly stated, ``A policy of responsive military disengagement, with a corresponding increase in nonmilitary support, is the best way to advance our Nation's interests in Iraq and achieve our primary goals.'' Senator Domenici again correctly stated, ``There's nothing to wait for.''

We agree. That's why this House voted last week to bring most of our troops home by next April. The Senate has the chance to take that same action this week. I hope that these Senators will stand by their words and join us in changing the course.

Madam Speaker, today I would like to pay tribute to Mr. Charles Lindberg, an honorable soldier and citizen, a great Minnesotan and American. Mr. Lindberg passed away on June 24, at the age of 86, the last surviving member of the squad who raised the original flag on a mountaintop during the Battle of Iwo Jima.

Charles Lindberg, with five other men, climbed his way to the top of Mount Suribachi during the morning of February 23, 1945. He dodged enemy fire, engaged enemy pillboxes and for his valor and bravery was awarded the Silver Star. At the foot of the mountain he repeatedly exposed himself to machinegun fire and hand grenades, almost surprised to make it to the top. Years later he would express wonder for merely having survived the day, which saw some of the most intense fighting of the war: ``We thought it would be a slaughterhouse up on Suribachi, I still don't understand why we were not attacked.''

It wasn't planned ahead of time, they hadn't been ordered to do it; but after a long, arduous climb, during a brief reprise in the gunfire, two members of Lindberg's squad noticed a long pipe up on top of the mountain--and it just so happened that one of them was carrying a flag. They scoured the mountaintop for the highest point, and raised the Stars and Stripes up over the island--the first American flag to make it on Japanese soil. Lindberg would later recall the reaction of the American forces that day, lamenting how ``down below, the troops started to cheer, the ships' whistles went off, it was just something that you would never forget.''

As such moments always seem, the peace and celebration was too soon shattered. Enemy troops began emerging from their caves, and Lindberg's squad continued the fight. Three of the six men wouldn't survive to see the photographs taken on the mountaintop that morning. Lindberg himself survived a gunshot wound through the arm a week later, for which he received a purple heart. When he was discharged from the Marines he went home to South Dakota, and in 1951 moved to Richfield, MN, to become an electrician. He spent his life speaking to school groups and veterans, ensuring that the story of his fallen comrades lives on in memory as an illustration of the price we pay for our democracy.

Madam Speaker, I am honored and humbled in recognizing Mr. Charles Lindberg in the event of his passing, and as a Minnesotan, proud to claim such an illustrious American as one of our own. Charles, on behalf of a grateful nation, I thank you.

Well, Mr. Speaker, I'm always happy to join my colleagues, the difference-makers, who heard the call of the American people and came to Congress to really make the case for a safer America, a stronger America; an America that is not mired down in the quagmire which is Iraq; an America that says, look, we are ready to defend American interest around the world, but that does not include being mired down in a war we never should have been in in the first place.

I'm proud to have voted for this safe redeployment act today, but I just want to point out something that's so very important; and that is, that while dollars and cents clearly are important in this debate, no one can calculate the loss of a loved one. Since this surge began, 600 families have received the most devastating news that any family can ever receive, 600 spouses, 600 sets of parents, 600 sets of children, 600 communities lost a loved one because of this surge that was wrong- headed from the very beginning.

We can't calculate the costs of this war in dollars really. It must be calculated in terms of the lives of our fellow Americans that have gone forward in this horrible conflict. We have to calculate this war in terms of the injuries and the casualties that have been faced, in terms of the young people who have lost limbs, who have lost their strong sense of mental health, their ability to discern reality, their ability to have a calm frame of mind because, for so many of these young people, the helicopter sounds don't stop even after they come home. For so many young people, the explosions, a car backing up, any sort of sound sends them back to that war zone they used to be in. And it's a horrible tragedy, it's a human tragedy, and no amount of calculation of dollars and cents will ever truly capture what we have lost as a Nation.

So, Mr. Speaker, as we stand here, the difference-makers, today we want to state to the American people that we are here to keep the faith with the American people. We will never forget all of our fellow Americans, our brothers and sisters who have gone forward in this conflict, who have lost lives, who have lost limbs, who have lost their health and their families, who have received an injury that is so impossible to ever heal from. But we know the resilience and the strength of the American people, and we know that they expect us to put their best interests first forward always, and that means a safe, responsible redeployment out of this conflict.

So, Mr. Speaker, just as I say that the losses in this war cannot simply be calculated in dollars and cents but in terms of real human lives, it is also true that they be calculated in dollars and cents as well.

And before I yield back, Mr. Speaker, I just want to point out this very important graph that I have right to my right, and this shows very clearly the costs of this war. It wasn't the $8 billion that we thought it was.

Now, we know it's 10 billion per month, but just look here. Per year we're talking about a number with so many zeros behind it I think that my young children will be very hard pressed to be able to pronounce this number. This is a huge number. What is this, this number is about 120 T, trillion? Billion. I think I need an arithmetic lesson, and I'm a fellow that's had a little bit of schooling.

But as I look at this big number, it will be a challenge for any fifth grader, Mr. Speaker. It's a whopper of a number and it can't even begin to calculate the true losses of our country in this war.

No doubt, Mr. Speaker. That's an excellent point. What does it mean to care for a 20-year-old quadriplegic for the course of his or her life?

This chart speaks for itself, but I just want to go to the bottom line if I may, Mr. Speaker. We're looking at $3,816 per second.

Madam Speaker, there's an easy civics pop quiz for the summer break. How many branches of government are there in the United States?

Well, any high school civics student can tell you that there are three. But it seems like our Vice President is confused about the facts. House investigators have revealed that since 2003, the Vice President's office has failed to provide data on its classification activities as required under an executive order claiming that the Vice President's office is not, ``an entity within the executive branch.''

It seems that the Vice President's office believes that his office is its own branch of government above the law.

Madam Speaker, in light of this confusion, perhaps the President will see fit to give the Vice President some time off to improve his understanding of civics in the United States.

Mr. Chairman, let me thank the gentlewoman and commend the gentlewoman for her good wisdom and excellent intentions behind section 699 which would conditionalize aid to Egypt. However, I must rise in support of the amendment that has been brought by Mr. Boustany because I believe that the impact of this piece in the bill would signal to the region a very hostile and unhealthy message.

The message that we should be sending to allies in the region is that we want to work constructively and productively to seal that border. I would point out that sealing borders is no easy enterprise. But I also believe that with a greater amount of help and with proper resources that the border could well be sealed between Gaza and Egypt.

This conditionalizing sends a signal that Egypt, that it is criticism of Egypt, that Egypt is somehow not putting forth the proper effort. Given that Egypt is such a long-standing and important ally, I think this is not the right message to send.

Mr. Speaker, this weekend, General David Petraeus acknowledged that we will not see any significant improvements in the situation on the ground in Iraq by September.

When President Bush first proposed the troop escalation plan at the beginning of this year, he said we should know if it's actually working by the beginning of the summer. A couple of months later, when the troops were actually on the ground, the President revised that time frame, saying that we should have a good grasp if the plan is working by September.

Now we have confirmation from the President's top general on the ground that positive signs in Iraq will continue to be elusive.

The question now is, will the administration do as it has in the past and change the deadline?

Moving deadlines are simply no longer acceptable. President Bush has been promising for months that we would see significant changes come September, and since that is no longer possible, a significant change in direction is needed in Iraq.

It is time for the President and the congressional Republicans to realize that Petraeus is now admitting that no improvements will be seen by September.