Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I rise today, pleased to introduce a piece of legislation along with my co-sponsor and esteemed Ways and Means colleague, Congressman Wally Herger, that will repeal a law that unfairly burdens local governments with annual procurement spending over $100 million, which includes Miami-Dade County.

The legislation would repeal Section 511 of the Tax Increase Prevention and Reconciliation Act of 2005 which was slipped into the legislation without an up-or-down vote on the amendment.

Section 511 requires local governments that spend over $100 million in procurements, primarily located in large urban centers, to deduct a 3 percent withholding tax from payments made to their vendors for federal income tax purposes. This legislation will become effective in 2011.

We have the opportunity with this legislation to help repeal Section 511 which unfairly burdens our cities and urban centers where many people living below the poverty line reside. If Section 511 is not repealed, the poor will be further squeezed as the cost of future increased procurement contracts will be passed on to the neediest people, while services and day-to-day operations may be jeopardized too.

According to Miami-Dade County officials, the withholding tax will raise the cost of purchases by 3 percent or more and Miami-Dade County would have to absorb an annual increase in the cost of goods and services in excess of $57 million, given the annual value of contracts for goods and services awarded by Miami-Dade County will exceed $1.9 billion.

Small businesses and companies pursuing government contracts, many of whom operate on tight margins or irregular cash flows, would also be adversely affected in this bid process, while large companies with established reserves could better absorb this withholding tax.

Devolution of taxation down from the federal government to state and local governments is a problem that we must fix. This is but one small, but very important step toward doing just that.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor Carolyn Closs Walford on the occasion of her promotion to the rank of Lieutenant Colonel after 20 years of service in the U.S. Army.

LTC Walford is known to many of my colleagues, because she has served in the Army's House Liaison Division for more than 3 years. Many of us have had the good fortune of working with her on a wide variety of legislative initiatives and programs. She has also coordinated 14 Congressional Delegations to Iraq, more than any other Legislative Liaison currently assigned to the Chief of the Legislative Liaison Office. LTC Walford coordinated official visits I made to Morocco, Israel, and Egypt, and I can therefore attest from first-hand experience to her professionalism and commitment to duty.

LTC Walford was born and reared in Louisburg, NC. She is the daughter of the late William L. Closs and Fannie S. Closs, the littlest in a large and loving family of ten. Her oldest brother is 30 years her senior and her oldest sister is 18 years older.

LTC Walford is not the first in her family to honorably serve in this Nation's armed forces, although she is the first generation of her family to serve in an integrated military. Her father, SSG William L. Closs, served in WWII during the Normandy Campaign with the 443rd QM Trucking Company. He was awarded the Purple Heart for his bravery and commitment to duty.

LTC Walford was a daddy's girl who joined the Reserve Officer Training Corps, ROTC, while attending Winston-Salem State University. She was commissioned as a second lieutenant in the Signal Corps upon graduation and accepted a reserve commission in the Army Reserve. She completed the Signal Officers Basic Course at Ft. Gordon, GA, relocated to Washington, DC, to pursue a fulltime career in the private sector while fulfilling her military commitment in the Army Reserve and completing her graduate studies. LTC Walford later made the decision to branch transfer to the Quartermaster Corps, a branch more fitting to support the Army Reserve mission of combat service support. LTC Walford held various positions while serving as the ``Citizen Soldiers,'' to include Company Command, Aide-de-Camp to the Commanding General of the 352d Civil Affairs Command, Host Nations Support and a variety of logistics assignments. LTC Walford deployed and served seven months in Southwest Asia during Operation Desert Storm.

The Chief, Army Reserve requested her assistance in the start up of a new unit in 1999, the Logistics Civil Augmentation Program, LOGCAP. LTC Walford's civilian expertise in contracting and her logistical background made her a prime candidate to help facilitate this new unit. Once again, she answered the call to serve and became a fulltime active soldier. She has served in the Army's Guard/Reserve, AGR, Program since 1999.

LTC Walford has received numerous awards throughout her career, including the Meritorious Service Medal, the Joint Accommodation Medal, the Office of the Secretary of Defense Badge, and the Army Staff Badge. She is a graduate of the Army's Command and General Staff Officers Course, The Quartermaster and Civil Affairs Advanced course, and the U.S. Army Paratrooper School.

This soldier's unique skill set and extraordinarily diverse level of experience both in the public and private sector has been a tremendous asset to our great country. She is a pillar of strength for our Army, her fellow comrades-in-arms, and for her family and friends. My best wishes go out to LTC Walford on her well-deserved promotion, and to her husband, Raymond L. Walford, and her entire extended family on this important occasion.

Mr. Speaker, it is an honor to come before the House today in support of Resolution 131, to recognize Rafael Jose Diaz-Balart, grandfather of two of our great colleagues here in this great House, Lincoln and Mario Diaz-Balart.

Rafael Diaz-Balart was a native of Santiago de Cuba and completed his law degree at the University of Havana in 1919. Soon after he joined the bar, Rafael Diaz-Balart became the municipal judge in the city of Palma Soriano, where he served with great distinction. Four years later, he earned a post of civil law notary in the town of Banes in eastern Cuba, where he was later then elected city council president and mayor of the city.

Upon his election to the Cuban House of Representatives, he founded the law firm of Diaz-Balart, Diaz-Balart and Amador in Havana, with his son, Rafael Lincoln, Mario and Lincoln's father, and Rolando Amador. Years later, he earned the post Land Registrar, a prominent achievement for lawyers in Cuba.

After the 1959 coup, Rafael Diaz-Balart lived in exile and became a proud citizen of the United States. In exile, Rafael Jose Diaz-Balart entered law school at the University of Madrid, and in 1965, at age 66, earned his second law degree.

While Rafael Diaz-Balart had many great accomplishments, his greatest of all may have been the honor and sense of duty that he instilled his son Rafael Lincoln and his four grandsons: Lincoln and Mario, whom I proudly serve with here in the House; also Jose, who is a prominent journalist; and Rafael, a successful businessman in Miami.

This week Florida International University Law School will be dedicated in the name of Rafael Diaz-Balart Hall, a tribute to their grandfather. The keynote address will be given by Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader-Ginsburg, and there will be countless Federal, State and local municipal elected officials.

This honor to the Diaz-Balart family is a testimony to the American Dream. Here is a family in a bloodline that left Cuban exile, but came to the United States to make this country better.

The entire family has contributed not only to the south Florida community, but the entire State of Florida, and also this great country of ours, which is the United States of America.

I think the House is full within its right to be able to recognize this great American for what he was able to do in his contributions to those that not only serve here in the House of Representatives, but serve in the fields of journalism and in business. I am honored to bring this to the floor at this time.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to one of my great colleagues from the Florida delegation (Ms. Wasserman Schultz).

Mr. Speaker, I reserve my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, it is very interesting when you look at this resolution, because it is the American Dream. Some Americans don't have the opportunity to have a resolution brought before the House of Representatives honoring the memory of their bloodline, their father and their grandfather and their entire family. But I can tell you that, in the words of my grandmother, saying ``isn't God good,'' this resolution displays the American Dream.

As we start to look at this resolution, as we start to reflect on the contributions of the Diaz-Balart family to the United States of America, to find that it not only didn't start totally with Rafael Jose Diaz-Balart, but he had a lot to do with the pilgrimage to the United States of America and the contributions that his grandchildren have made and that his son made in this society, that have made America better. It has brought us together in many ways.

Understanding a story of some of the issues facing America right now, as some folks may feel about recent immigrants to this country, this is a perfect example to set up on the pedestal of how those that come to our country with the will and desire to serve this country, not to pull from this country, but to serve on behalf of this country, what can happen.

We have four individuals that are the grandchildren of the very man that we are recognizing here in the House of Representatives, this great country of ours, individuals fought to allow us to

salute one flag. Two are contributing to this country, serving at the same time in the U.S. House of Representatives in this Congress and in the last Congress and the Congress before that, and one is at the top of journalism as it relates to Spanish language international television, and another is a prominent businessman in South Florida. I think this is a time that the House is rightfully recognizing these great Americans for what they were able to do.

Mr. Speaker, to Mr. Diaz-Balart and to Mr. Keller and to all of my colleagues here, it is a great honor to bring this before the House, because I believe everyone can understand the reason why we are here, and it is justified. But this could be one of many examples of families that have contributed to our country. I know they will continue to do so, and I know their children's children will continue to do so, and this moment in history will just be one beacon of light to show how appreciative we are for not only the Diaz-Balart family for their contributions but other families like them.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, in closing, I just would like to thank Mr. Miller of the Education Committee, also the majority leader's office and the Speaker's office for allowing us to bring this resolution so that it can be timely for the dedication this weekend when the good people of Florida and this great country and the Supreme Court Justice will honor the memory of Rafael Jose Diaz-Balart at the naming of the hall of the law school.

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

Madam Speaker, it is an honor to be here on the floor once again on behalf of the 30-Something Working Group. I am glad to be joined by my good friend, Mr. Ryan, from Niles, Ohio, who has joined me on a number of occasions here. We have joined one another.

We look forward to other members of the 30-Something Working Group joining us here on the floor.

There is a lot going on in the Capitol Building today, a lot of committees meeting, Madam Speaker. A number of bills are moving through the process, and the American people are being served, with a new attitude of the U.S. House of Representatives, especially 110th Congress, that we will work as every American does. We will punch in at the beginning of the week and punch out at the end of the week and work on the weekends sometimes. So that is a good attitude to have, especially when you have two wars going on. You have the President passing on a budget that the American people don't see eye to eye with, nor this Congress sees eye to eye with. But we will work those issues out, and we will talk about them a little further as we move along.

One of the other things that I think that we can touch on are some of the findings, that now these committees are meeting and we have some level of oversight, Madam Speaker, that we are going to find out some things that have been happening in Iraq or what has not been happening in Iraq.

We are also going to learn more about the President's budget as we move along. And I am having a copy of the budget brought to us here on the floor because I want to make sure that the American people and definitely the Members get an opportunity to see this big document. Yesterday and today the Ways and Means Committee held hearings and had the Secretary of the Treasury and now the Office of Management and Budget Director here before the committee today. And there are a lot of questions that are being asked, and very few are being answered. And we will talk about a little of that today.

But once again, I yield to my good friend Mr. Ryan from Niles, Ohio. I am glad that you are here and am looking forward to talking about some of the issues that are facing this Congress and the American people.

Reclaiming my time, Mr. Ryan, I am just so glad you had those charts to really spell out what the President's budget wants to do to Americans versus for Americans.

And I think it is very, very important that we continue to march on and do the things that we need to do to represent the American people, Madam Speaker. The reason why we come to the floor to point some of these issues out, this is an unopened copy of the budget that we received this week here in the Capitol, in the House of Representatives and in the Senate, and it is our job to look through this budget and see what is good and what is bad for the American people.

The American people delivered this people's House a change. The change for accountability, the change for oversight, and the change to be able to make sure that this country moves in the right direction. America said they want to move in a new direction. We said we wanted to move them in a new direction and that we were going to be a part of that atmosphere.

The reason why we are pointing these things out, Madam Speaker, is because we want to make sure the Members know the work we have before us not only on the Ways and Means Committee, but also on the Budget Committee. Every Member of this House, their said committees are having hearings now, need it be the Secretary of Education or the Secretary of Labor or even the EPA Administrator, to come before their said committees of jurisdiction to talk about why they submitted certain things in the budget, need it be the environment or education or justice or what have you.

But I think it is very, very important to point out how this budget continues to move in the wrong direction, the President's budget, as it relates to the growth of our country and the health of our local communities and States. I learned a term about 8 years ago when I was in the State legislature, and it is called ``devolution of taxation.'' Cut the taxes at the Federal level, and pass unfunded mandates down to the States and local government. And in this budget I see the President continues to embrace that philosophy, devolution of taxation.

Let me go further on in that definition of ``devolution of taxation.'' Here in Washington, D.C., we have made a paradigm shift in this House to use the philosophy of pay as we go. We want to show how we are going to pay for it if we are going to fund it, not pay for it and continue to work on this chart and borrowing from foreign nations and owing foreign nations money, as the Republican Congress did and the President did. What we want to do is do it in a responsible way.

But as we start talking about devolution of taxation, when you cut opportunities for local government, and some statistics have shown that as it relates to this budget, from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, they estimate the total aid to States and local governments will decline, has declined $12.7 billion. So we pass this on to the States, and they have to fill the gap that we are not willing to fill, or obviously the President is not willing to fill, that we are going to try to do our best to fill here in this House of Representatives. They have to rob from Peter to pay Paul. Well, who is Peter? Nine times out of ten, it is a person that is trying to educate him or herself or their family, or grandparents that are trying to educate their children, that the tuition at the State university system is going to up.

The assistance for the elderly in a said State may end up being cut. Health care to children and other opportunities that States like to provide for the citizens of their State will end up being cut because they have to fill the gap that the Federal Government is not filling.

Then, on top of that, it continues to roll down, because, by constitution, by all State constitutions, they have to balance. They don't have the prerogative of saying, we will put it on a credit card or borrow from a foreign nation. They have to balance their budget. So they balance their budget on the backs of local government. Then the local government has to figure out how they are going to raise money, be it needed for education, school districts, or needed for local county or city commissions. Then they end up putting some sort of levy or penny tax or referendum on the local communities and voting for transportation needs or voting for parks and recreation.

The reason why that is happening more and more in U.S. cities is because of the kind of budget that the President sent to the Hill on the backs of the American people.

Now, what else is in this budget? You have to think about, this budget is standing for the individuals that are not even asking for tax cuts to be made permanent on behalf of wealthy Americans.

Mr. Ryan, once again, thank you for your charts, sir, because we need to make sure the Members know exactly what was handed down from the President of the United States to this Congress and the work that we have cut out.

Some tough decisions are going to have to be made, Madam Speaker. Some millionaire may not get all of the tax break they have been waiting and counting on from the President of the United States. We have hardworking Americans out there looking for a break. We have small businesses out there looking for a break. Meanwhile, the President says, make my original thoughts permanent because I had a rubber stamp Congress in the 109th and 108th and so on, that did what I said do, continue that, and let's cut assistance to State and local governments. Let's cut the COPS Program. Let's cut Medicaid benefits. Let's make life harder for veterans as it relates to their benefits and the clinics that are open out there, that we just did something about in the continuing resolution. Let's continue that philosophy.

But for those individuals that are being driven and buying new cars every other year, let's continue to make life wonderful for them. And, by the way, let me send an escalation of more troops over to Iraq, where we just had a hearing just yesterday here in the House of Representatives that we are now getting down to the nitty gritty on what happened to $8 billion that no one can account for that was cash money. Very little of it can be accounted for, very little. Eighty percent can't be accounted for. Let's continue to practice that philosophy in Iraq.

So, Mr. Ryan, the only, I guess, comfort that I have at this moment is the fact that the American people voted to move in a new direction, Madam Speaker, and we are willing to take them in that direction. But, at the same time, Mr. Ryan, the philosophy of the 30-Something Working Group, we want to make sure that every Member understands their responsibility.

We have Veterans' Day coming up. We have Memorial Day coming up. We have a number of holidays that are recognizing the contributions of Americans that allowed us to salute one flag. The least that we can do is break it down to the point that every Member understands his or her responsibility in the House of Representatives.

So, if you want to be on the side of the super, super billionaires and millionaires, you make that choice. If you want to be on the side of the American people that work hard every day, to give them some sort of break so hopefully they can pay for tuition to make sure their children can make it through college, and, as Mr. Ryan said, in the first 100 hours, we dealt with a lot of that. We dealt with the minimum wage, which is now coming back from the Senate that will be over here in the House either today or tomorrow, or is already here. We dealt with the issue of being able to make a reverse about face on the interest rates that the previous Congress put on students and their families. We rolled that back.

There are a number of things that we have already put through the process, pay-as-you-go principles here in this House, to put this country on the right track.

Yes, tough decisions have to be made. But, at the same time, we have to be responsible, and we can't just rely on sound bites as though, well, that will get us past the process.

I believe that we can make it to the promised land, not through doing the same thing expecting different results, but having the kind of oversight and having the kind of foresight and watching out for these individuals.

Weatherization. You mentioned weatherization, Mr. Ryan, as it relates to keeping our most frail and poor warm during the wintertime. The President is asking to keep a tax cut permanent for super billionaires but cut weatherization assistance for a lady on fixed income in Detroit, Michigan.

I am just trying to understand the balance here and the priorities as we start to look at this. The President is asking for a cut in a number of the Department of Justice programs, Madam Speaker, that assist local sheriffs and police chiefs in combating and preventing crime. The COPS Program, zeroed out.

The President last week, Mr. Ryan, had an announcement come out that we are going to move for the maximum Pell Grant. Then the budget comes out, and it is the same level of what he has recommended over the last 4 years. So, the words don't match the action.

So our job here in the House, Madam Speaker and Members, is to make sure that even if the President makes a commitment to the American people and we agree with that commitment, that we have to find some room in this budget, which I know that Chairman Spratt and other members of the Budget Committee and members of committees that have jurisdiction and oversight, will have some say in how we move in the new direction as it relates to America. So we are going to have a serious paradigm shift.

I see Mr. Ryan here has one of our favorite charts out right now just to illustrate what past budgets have done, Madam Speaker, and where it left this Congress in spending the majority of its money, not on the priority that the majority of the American people would like us to balance on but because of bad management.

Thank you, Mr. Ryan, for yielding to me. And I just think it is important that we have this dialogue here on the floor, Ms. Jackson-Lee, just to make sure that we prepare the Members for the decisions that have to be made.

We talk about bipartisanship a lot, and I have my information here to talk about some of the votes that we have moved on this floor in a bipartisan nature, and I know I will have it in a minute, that kind of set a tone through this Chamber that we can work together, Madam Speaker, when the ideas are good and when they are sound.

And I know that the budget is probably one of the most partisan votes that we have taken in past Congresses, especially the last two that I have been involved in, Mr. Ryan. But the way the President's budget has been drawn up, with cuts of 20 percent to first responder grants and high-threat and high-density areas, and a cut in State grants as relates to training and buying equipment and conducting exercises for their first responders by 64 percent, for many of the Members on both sides of the aisle that talk a lot about the war on terror, we have to make sure we are prepared.

All of these things, all of these speeches that people come to the floor and make, Members of Congress, this budget is not in the spirit of those speeches. And I think it is important that those Members on both sides of the aisle, and I would say mainly with my Republican colleagues, that they start preparing their leadership now on the things that they can vote for. And I know that making tax cuts permanent for the superbillionaires is not something that is going to fly back home.

Now, I was thinking about staying in the majority always, which is not a bad idea, but if that was my paramount reason for being here on this floor, then I wouldn't say out loud that they need to start telling their minority party, on the Republican side of the aisle, that there is things that I have to vote for. I am not willing to cut veteran benefits. I am not willing to not do the things that we need to do for the children of America. I am not willing to not give the middle class a tax cut or give billionaires a tax cut. I am not willing to cut local government assistance, especially in the area of homeland security and other areas of law enforcement. I am not willing to do those things because I don't think my constituents will send me back to Congress.

That is the kind of discussion they need to be having with their leadership, because one thing that I have seen, Madam Speaker, especially with the past votes that we have taken on the minimum wage, on taking big-time subsidies from oil companies, on the whole issue of cutting tuition, on the issue of a few of the other packages that we passed, but on the main issue as it relates to how we are going to move from this point of pay as you go, I have noticed that the leadership on the Republican side have voted opposite of the majority of the Members of the House, with some Republicans joining us on those votes, or we are voting together. I hate to say joining us, because it seems like it is something that was a last-minute thought.

No, they were great ideas, and they need to be passed, and they were passed overwhelmingly.

But as it relates to this budget, this is going to be one of the most important documents that we pass in the 110th Congress' first session, and I think it is important that Members start talking to their leadership now and saying this to the Republican side about the votes that they cannot and the votes that they will take.

Now, I have watched in the 109th Congress the moderate Members on the Republican side who went to their leadership and tried to make things happen, and you know something, if the leadership would have listened to some of the moderate Members of the Republican Party on the other side of the aisle, maybe, just maybe, the majority on the Democratic side would not be as wide as it is.

Now, the American people want us to move as one, not just as Democrats and Republicans. They want us to move in a responsible way that will lead this country in a new direction; not in a Democratic direction, not in a Republican direction, not in an Independent direction, but in a new direction.

Which is good and as American as apple pie and Chevy trucks and what have you. But I think it is important that we say this out loud, because when we get around budget time, there is a lot of interesting things that are said on the floor. Some Members are even gaveled down for some of these statements because they try to justify a good or bad vote.

With the continuing resolution that was passed, we saw a little spike in Members having to reflect back on to the rules, the Parliamentarian running around the floor saying, you cannot say that, you cannot do this. Before we get all animated and excited about this budget, I just want to make sure that the Members understand that you have to start having that discussion with your party leaders, especially on the Republican side of the aisle.

Now, let us just look at this. On the 9/11 Commission, 68 Republicans voted with 231 Democrats to do what the bipartisan Commission said we should do in protecting America, but the shocking part is that 128 Republicans decided not to vote with the majority of the Members of the House, Republicans and Democrats. What is going on there? The American people cannot understand that overwhelmingly.

Minimum Wage Act, 82 Republicans voted with the majority of the supermajority and every last Democrat, 233, voted to give the American people a pay raise after years and years and years, and as you can see here, Madam Speaker, over the years under the Republican Congress, Member of Congress did not have a problem in giving themselves a pay raise until the Democratic majority put a stop to it, saying that we will not agree to a pay raise until the American people get one. But 116 Republicans voted against it for people who were making $5.15 an hour. It reminds me of the President saying, let us make those tax cuts permanent for superbillionaires, and let us forget about the middle class, and let us cut programs on the local level for the most fragile Americans.

Stem cell research, again bipartisan vote. A number of Republicans voted against it. Medicare prescription drug price negotiating, 24 Republicans joined 231 Democrats; 170 Republicans voted against it. College Student Loan Relief Act, 232 Democrats voted for it, 124 Republicans voted for it, supermajority Members of the House, 71 Republicans, hard-core holdouts, on the bipartisan spirit. Held out again on creating long-term energy alternatives for the Nation Act; 228 Democrats voted for it, 36 Republicans voted for it, 159 Republicans voted against it.

I am saying all of this, and I am not trying to speak fast on this, Madam Speaker, I am just saying that if we are going to come together as a country, and we are going to work in a bipartisan way, now here I am in the majority saying that it is important that we work in a bipartisan way.

Madam Speaker, I know the officers of the House who have witnessed many of these 30-something sessions that we have had in the minority. They were like some of them Tivo'd it when we were on break because they just heard it so many times, and they wanted to hear it again. If I have said it once, I have said it 30 times: Bipartisanship can only be allowed when the majority allows it.

Now we have the will and the desire by the Speaker of the House of Representatives that has said that she wants to move in a bipartisan way, and we still have Republicans that are saying, no, we do not; we want to be different, even when we are wrong. And that is not the philosophy that the American people have embraced. I do not care if it is a Republican voter or Independent voter or Democratic voter, the American spirit will prevail, and that is what happened last November.

So we have some individuals that are saying, we are willing to continue to hold on to the old way versus moving in a new direction. I am not trying to be offensive. I am just saying, I am reading the Congressional Record and the vote chart. I am trying to encourage folks to work in a bipartisan way. So let us have the discussion now in the Budget Committee, in the Ways and Means Committee, and discussions in committees of jurisdictions standing. Let us have those arguments, but let us come together on the fiber of the budget and for us to be fiscally sound and for us to be able to move this country in a new direction.

That has nothing to do with what the Republican leadership may believe what is right or the Democrat leadership believes what is right. It is what is right for America.

So we are willing to do that. Pollwise, the American people are on the side of doing things that we are trying to outline here and that we are speaking against in this budget, and as we move through that process, I look forward to not only fruitful debate, but I look forward to a paradigm shift in the minority side, in a number of double-digit, hopefully triple-digit, Republicans voting for a budget that comes before this floor that this House hammers out.

Please mention Mr. Ryan's name. He gets a little jealous when folks started mentioning the fact I make a good argument on bipartisanship, so, please.

I thank Mr. Ryan for doing such an outstanding job. I thought Mr. Murphy had the assignment, but I can see you have taken responsibility to do that.

Madam Speaker, we would like to thank the Speaker and the majority leader and majority whip and others for allowing the 30-Something Working Group to come to the floor once again. It was an honor to address the House of Representatives.

Madam Speaker, I congratulate Mayor Manuel Diaz of Miami for receiving the ``Outstanding American by Choice'' award on January 24, 2007 at the White House.

The ``Outstanding American by Choice'' award recognizes the achievements of naturalized U.S. citizens who, through civic participation, professional achievement and responsible citizenship, have demonstrated their commitment to this country and to common civic values. The award is given to citizens who have made significant contributions to their community and to this country.

Mayor Diaz was born on November 5, 1954 in Havana, Cuba and immigrated to the United States with his mother, Elisa, in 1961. He grew up in Miami's Little Havana neighborhood and attended Belen Jesuit Prep School, Miami-Dade College, Florida International University and the University of Miami's School of Law.

Mayor Diaz was elected as mayor of the city of Miami in 2001 and re- elected to a second term in 2005. He has led the effort to reform Miami city government, improve public schools, and bring increased investment and business opportunities to Miami. Vanity Fair magazine has honored Mayor Diaz, calling him one of North America's leading environmentally conscious mayors. In recognition of his accomplishments, Mayor Diaz was honored by his fellow mayors and elected chair of the Advisory Board of the United States Conference of Mayors in 2006.

Mayor Diaz's achievements should make all Americans proud that, in this Nation of immigrants, success in life is attainable through hard work and the desire to achieve great dreams.

I am listening.

I thank you so very much. You know, I don't put a lot of value in folks coming down to the floor sharing inaccurate information. And it is very unfortunate, because one thing that I can say here of the 30-something Working Group, we actually meet off the floor and we make sure, Mr. Speaker, that information that we are sharing is factual, that it is factual and that if someone wants to challenge us on that particular fact, they can go to the Congressional Record, they can go to the Library of Congress, what have you. It is there. Or they can go to a piece of legislation.

To come down and make statements that could mislead Members of Congress or could mislead the American public, I think that it is very unfortunate and it is something that should be frowned upon. But I guess the only good reason why I can come up with the reason why some Members on the minority side will come to the floor and make some inaccurate statements of the essence of the continuing resolution today, I go back to what I have been talking about for the last 2 weeks and that is the bipartisanship that has been taking place here on this floor.

If I was a part of the Republican leadership, I would be concerned, too. I would wonder how would the American people think, I mean, what would they think, Democrat or Republican, on how Democrats can be in control of the House and then, at the same time, have this bipartisanship taking place with Democrats in control. Let me just clarify what I am saying.

Time after time, Republicans are voting with Democrats on good measures. Today, this continuing resolution was a good piece of legislation. It wasn't a partisan vote. It shouldn't have been a partisan vote. Two hundred twenty-nine Democrats voted for the continuing resolution; 57 Republicans voted for the continuing resolution. We should all be on the floor happy that we can come together on a piece of legislation that is so important to the country. What is the alternative? The government shutting down? We don't want that.

I will yield to the gentleman.

I don't have my notes right here. If you have it handy, go ahead and answer the question.

It is no problem at all. Clarification is very, very important in this process. And the Republican leadership seems to continue to have a problem with the bipartisan spirit that is in the Chamber now, because in the last Congress that wasn't the case; in the Congress before that, that wasn't the case. There were partisan votes every day. I mean, it was almost like, how can we send a bill to the floor to make the Democrats vote against the bill versus for the bill? And one of the things that the American people want is for us to work together. We are all Americans. We salute one flag. We walk into this Chamber, we all carry one voting card. And I think that is important.

But to the point, to show the difference between us and others that may come to the floor sharing this information off the cuff, and Ms. Wasserman Schultz is 110 percent right and accurate as it relates to the percentage, but she named off a piece of legislation that Republicans and Democrats voted for: 9/11 Commission Recommendations Act, 68 Republicans voted for it, 231 Democrats voted for it, which was 299 total for us to pass it. The Fair Minimum Wage, 82 Republicans voted for it, 233 Democrats voted for it, and brought the vote to 315. We looked at the issue of the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act; 37 Republicans, 216 Democrats brought that vote to 253, which was in the affirmative. The Medicare Prescription Drug Price Negotiating Act, 24 Republicans, 231 Democrats, 255, to make it an affirmative vote. And the College Student Relief Act, 124 Republicans, 232 Democrats, that brought that vote to 356.

These are major, major, major issues that are facing the country, issues that have been clogged up in the Republican Congress, 109th, 108th, 107th, 105th Congress. And now the American people said they wanted to move in a new direction and we are moving in that direction. And, unfortunately, there are some Members of Congress on the Republican side of the aisle that have a problem with that.

I told you that I am all excited, and Ms. Wasserman Schultz can tell you, Mr. Ryan can tell you: Lead us the opportunity to lead and we will lead.

Mr. Ryan how, many times: If you give us the opportunity to be in the leadership of the House of Representatives you will be served? West Coast.

Put me in, Coach. The Heartland of America, East Coast, Republican, Democrat, Independent, Green Party, thinking about

voting, now voting. You do it, we will make it happen, and it is happening.

So you have some that come to the floor and talk about, well, you know, this is not happening and I voted against it because I didn't get 2 hours to speak independently on the floor against it, and that is the reason why I voted against it.

I just want to lay it out because I want to make sure that the Members know and the American people know that it is just Washington rhetoric. We are here making it happen. We are happening.

I yield to my good friend.

What is it? You are saying, what is it? Just tell us.

You and Mr. Ryan are members of the powerful Appropriations Committee; and, today, watching Mr. Obey, the chairman, and seeing what he was able to do in moving this continuing resolution, which is the appropriations act which funds the government, to see that happen and to understand the history of it. Because when the Republicans took over in 1995 or 1994, went into power in 1995, they didn't have to deal with a continuing resolution because Mr. Obey and the Appropriations Committee passed all of their bills on time. They didn't leave unfinished business for the Republican Congress.

And, guess what, they also had a surplus as far as the eye could see. So whatever idea we wanted to implement, we had the money to do it because we had managers in this House of Representatives under Democratic leadership to make sure that the country was in the black and in good standing and did not have bad credit and did not owe foreign nations $1.05 trillion.

Then the Republican leadership comes in here and they hand things out, special projects, bridges to nowhere, all of these big items, and then come to the floor and grab it. That's fine.

The reason I am happy today is today is the beginning of getting the Appropriations Committee and this House in order and getting us on track under regular order. And I will guarantee as sure as my name is Kendrick Meek that the 2008 appropriations act will pass on time. There will be hearings. We will look at every project and make sure that everything is in order, because American taxpayer dollars are going towards those projects.

Very few appropriations committees met. They hardly met. Why do you want to ask questions and have hearings? As I said, the Foreign Affairs Committee only had one hearing on Iraq. They have had five thus far in this Congress, and counting.

So I feel very confident about the fact that we are talking about our vision and the leadership; B, we are pointing out the difference between some of the Members on the minority side that want to continue to carry out the old way and the Members on the minority side that want to move in a new direction. I am glad that they are there.

My last point, we have five Members in the majority here on a Wednesday afternoon when we are going to recess for the week that has the will and the desire. We have the will and desire to continue to let the American people and the Members know that we want to lead and we want to lead this country in a new direction and we want to work in a bipartisan way.

We could be home. We could be somewhere else. My kids are back in the cloakroom right now. I could be having dinner with them. But this is important. I want them to know, and when historians look at what was happening during a time when we had two wars going on, we have a President wanting to escalate with troops and the American people saying we don't want it, we have the country in a deficit, and then we have Members here crying about a project was cut out of the bill and I am upset about it.

I am glad, ladies and gentlemen, that we are here on this floor, and I am glad that we are representing on behalf of the American people. We are not the Democratic National Committee. We are Members of Congress. And it should not be the Republican National Committee, it should be Members of Congress. That is what makes this House

work, and that is the reason why it worked today on the continuing resolution.

I am very happy that we did pass this continuing resolution. I am so glad that 57 Republicans joined Democrats in passing this continuing resolution, because it is showing that we are actually moving in a new direction, not just Democrats are moving in a new direction, but the U.S. House of Representatives is.

Consistency.

Mr. Speaker, it is an honor to address the House once again. I just have come to the floor on behalf of the 30-something Working Group. As you know, and as the Members know, we work daily and weekly on issues that are facing the American people and also to not only inform Members of Congress but also allow the American people to get a closer glimpse of what is happening here in the Capitol dome and what is not happening here under the dome.

I am proud to report that there were a couple of days, we only worked 3 days last week, or 4, to allow the minority party to have their retreat. During that time, Speaker Pelosi and a number of other chairmen traveled to Iraq and Afghanistan to visit our troops and also our commanders in the field.

I can share with you that the trip will be talked about a little further by the Speaker tomorrow, but it is very, very important because it is the number one thing that is facing the Nation right now, and that is war in Iraq and also in Afghanistan.

Last week we spoke or talked here on the floor about the importance of the President's State of the Union, what was said and what was not said. There was some level of focus on the fact that Katrina was not mentioned not one time during the President's State of the Union, with me being from a hurricane State and representing a district that is constantly hit by hurricanes and natural disasters, just being one season away. Katrina, noted as one of the worst natural disasters of our time and one of the worst responses by this Federal Government, did not receive even a mention from the President of the United States.

I can say that there are several Members here in Congress that continue to be concerned about Katrina and the area of housing and follow-through and preparedness on behalf of our first emergency responders, or that they have the tools to respond, but making sure that FEMA has the proper oversight to be able to carry out the tasks needed in the event of a natural disaster or terrorist attack.

One other thing I think is important to be able to identify is veterans were not pointed out in this State of the Union. Looking at Katrina and the State of the Union, we must come to grips with there are two hard realities. One, if we have a natural disaster or a planned terrorist attack that takes place in this country, is the Federal Government ready to respond, especially on behalf of the executive branch? That question is still left unanswered.

At the same time, when we start looking at issues of veterans, looking at our troops, our men and women coming home, what will be the state of affairs on behalf of those veterans?

I am saying all of this to line up the debate that is going to take place after this week when we pass the continuing resolution that will be on the floor on Wednesday of this week, of what is going to happen the following week after that when the President sends his budget to Congress.

It is important within that budget to embrace some of the values of the American people and even legislation that we have filed in the 110th Congress and also that was filed in the 109th Congress.

I think it is important, also, to outline the fact that Americans continue to disapprove of the direction that the President is heading in dealing with the troop escalation in Iraq. I will be looking forward to hearing more about the Speaker's trip not only tomorrow in her press conference but also when she shares not only with the Democratic Caucus but with this House of Representatives.

And to see after the State of the Union, the President's polling numbers drop even to another low. What I understand from some reports, as low as 30, 28 percent. I know the President is not going to win a popularity contest, but I think it is important to be able to follow the will and desire of the American people and on behalf of the Congress.

Also, I took the opportunity today, Mr. Speaker, before coming to the floor, to take a look at what congressional leaders are saying, not just on the Democratic side of the aisle but even on the Republican side of the aisle, and there is a great debate that is going on. I pull here the Congressional Daily AM, which pretty much any staffer or Member of Congress involved in the process here in Washington, D.C., can pick it up and find out what is going on throughout the whole week; and on a number of the issues that are going to face the President, some of his strongest supporters here in Congress are disagreeing with him at this point. I think this could only boil down to Members of Congress using common sense and standing up on behalf of their constituents, either it be an entire State, if you are a Senator, or Member of Congress that represents a district. I think it is important that we exercise those values.

There will be an up-or-down vote on how the Senate feels about the troop escalation in Iraq; and I believe, reading here, that the Democratic leader, Mr. Reid, has said that that vote will be taken and that there will be a number of Republicans that are going to have to take that vote because there are going to be 21 seats to defend in the Senate in the 2008 elections.

Now, saying that, Mr. Speaker and Members, this is not about politics. This is about standing up on behalf of the American people. I think Senator Webb said it best, Mr. Speaker and Members, that if the President doesn't want to lead us in the right direction, then we need to show him the way, something along those lines. And I think it is important on behalf of the men and women that are in harm's way now and the fact that we have oversight as the legislative body in this three- branch government that we exercise our rights in this.

I want to read just a little bit here, continue from page 1 over to page 2: ``Warner's opposition to sending more troops was a heavy blow to the White House and administrative officials that hoped that the former Senate Armed Services chairman, one-time Navy Secretary would help convince colleagues to support the plan.'' I think it is important that the Senator and past chairman of that committee stand up on behalf of the American people in what is right, and I commend that on a bipartisan basis.

I think the American people and Members here in the House know exactly where Democrats stand on this issue of making sure that we bring about the kind of oversight but at the same time not just standing by and saying, well, the President is Commander in Chief; and he is making all the decisions.

I see my good friend, Congressman Murphy, is here.

If this was left up to politics, then we would just stand back and allow the President to continue to do what he is doing, and then we could have Ground Hog Day all over again, as we had in November, Democrats continuing to gain power because of the lack of leadership on behalf of the Republican leadership to stand up to the President of the United States.

But this is not about politics. This is about protecting the American people. This is about making sure that their will and desires are represented here in the people's House, in the U.S. House of Representatives, and I am pretty sure in the Senate.

And I am hoping that Democrats and Republicans will come together. As you know, Mr. Speaker and Members, here in the 30-Something Working Group, we embrace bipartisanship. We encourage bipartisanship. And the good thing about serving in an elected body is when you are right and you are on the side of the people, then you will return back to this body. If you are wrong, I used to play football down at Florida A&M, and we used to say the blind leading the blind and the two shall fall in the ditch.

So I think it is important that if we know that the American people are looking for a new direction versus the same direction that the President was taking in the 109th and 108th Congress, the wrong direction as it relates to Iraq, then that is a decision that every Member of Congress has to make.

Mr. Murphy, I am so happy that you are able to join us right now. I was just talking a little bit about what we finished off on last week. I talked about the fact that the Speaker was in theater, two theaters, in Iraq and also in Afghanistan. She just returned. She will be having a press conference tomorrow to talk about that a little more. The fact that on Wednesday we will be debating the continuing resolution and will be here on the floor. We will have a follow-up.

The President's budget will be handed down, I think, February 5, and some of the things which were not mentioned in the State of the Union, Hurricane Katrina and the victims of Hurricane Katrina and those Gulf States and also veterans that were left out of the State of the Union speech, which is going to be the next major wave that this country is going to be facing. How we are going to deal with the influx of new veterans coming into the system? And you pretty much heard the rest when you joined us.

But, welcome, and I yield to you.

Mr. Murphy, I can tell you right now that a number of those issues that we have been talking about over the last couple of 30-Something hours that we have had here on the floor, and we thank the Democratic leadership for allowing us to have this, this is a very pivotal time. And I always share with the Members, even though we come to the capital, Mr. Speaker, from our districts on a weekly basis, work together here on this highly secured complex, the sun rises and sets every day in this beautiful capital city as we look over the capital Mall, and sometimes we take the very freedom that others have provided for granted and the opportunity, Mr. Speaker, to lead.

I think when historians start to look at this time when there are two wars going on, when you have millions of Americans without health care, when you have Gulf States that are there that feel that they have been forgotten, when you have veterans in the heartland of America and urban America still sharing some of the same wounds of a lack of leadership on behalf of the Congress, when you have veterans that are waiting 3 months to see the ophthalmologist, and when you have veterans clinics, VA hospitals and clinics, some clinics that are only open twice a month with a staff that rotates between that region that serves those veterans, people will look back and say, what happened in the 109th Congress or what happened in 110th Congress? Who stood up? Who stood up on behalf of the American people?

I have a great deal of respect for the President and the Commander in Chief, because he is the President and Commander in Chief, period. That is where it is. I am an American. I am not an enlisted man, but I am a Member of Congress, and I feel that the office deserves the respect.

I also believe that the American people deserve, Mr. Murphy, the same level of respect or greater. And the great thing about our democracy, like I said, we celebrate the very freedom that others have provided us. Some of those paid the ultimate sacrifice for that to happen. Some are sitting in wheelchairs right now. Some are forever mentally wounded or injured by the whole experience in providing the kind of freedom that they provided for us. Some of us take for granted that we have veterans, some that are going into VA hospitals that are sitting there practically all day for mental health counseling. Some are not eligible. Some are still fighting for full benefits. And over the years, I know of some of my constituents all the way from the Korean War who are still fighting for full benefits to be granted by the Veterans Administration, seeing these individuals in the state that they are in now, under years of a Congress that has not paid attention.

And just a little history lesson here, I will just share with you, the chairman, I believe, in the 109th, the 108th Congress, the Republican chairman of the Veterans' Affairs Committee went against the Republican leadership saying, I believe this is what we should do on behalf of the veterans. I believe that they deserve it. And he was removed as chairman of that committee.

Those days are gone now. We are in control. We are going to stand up on their behalf.

I am just saying I don't want to point out the fact that the President did not mention anything about veterans, just that it is a bad thing. It is a bad thing. I think he should have mentioned it, especially at a time of war. But I want to make sure those veterans know, Mr. Speaker, that we are not going to leave them behind, that we are not going to let their memory kind of fade off, their contributions fade off into the sunset because the President did not prioritize enough to even put two words together to thank our veterans, or just ``veterans,'' period, just one word. Because he left that out of his speech doesn't necessarily mean that this House of Representatives is going to leave those veterans behind. So that is the reason why we mentioned it. That is the reason why we raise up the Katrina victims and those families that are still living through the nightmare.

And, Mr. Murphy, we are not even focusing on the whole family experience. I mean, think of those families of veterans that are out there. And the reason why I am mentioning the whole mental piece is because, when I traveled to Iraq, I can tell you I used to be a State trooper. I have seen some things in my 5 years being with the Florida Highway Patrol. I am pretty sure in one tour in Iraq, a young man or young woman or a middle-aged gentleman or what have you, when you see that kind of activity, it is going to affect you. You are going to need the kind of the assistance that this country should provide because you volunteered, taking your words, to fight on behalf of this country. So it is very, very important.

And those families that are having to live with those family members that are trying to wrestle with those issues, some of those issues don't make the local news, but they live it. Children are subjected to it, and many of our veterans need counseling when they come back.

And that is one of the hidden issues that is in this whole issue as we start talking about not leaving our veterans behind. We have plans to do that. We started this discussion just talking about the President's budget, about making sure that this is reflected in the President's budget.

Before I yield back to you in like 30 seconds, the President is going to go to Illinois tomorrow, and he is going to be in New York after that, visiting, pushing his economic plan. I can tell you right now, I wish I had an envelope, but I remember Johnnie Carson used to hold an envelope to his head and say a word, and I would say make tax breaks permanent for the superwealthy.

You know, I am pretty sure that is somewhere in that envelope. Even though we are going to go around, we are going to go to Caterpillar in Illinois and talk about trade and how the economy works, and then he is going to go over to New York and talk a little bit about the economy and how strong, this, that and the other. But in the end game, it is going to be about protecting the very individuals that have been rewarded and protected at a time of war, to make it permanent, so that the middle class will not have the benefits that they need.

So we highlight these things as a forecast of saying that there is some room for the American people, everyday Joe and Sue, and those individuals that are punching in and punching out every day, for those individuals that are trying to make it to the next level that there is something there to assist them.

Mr. Murphy, that is an outstanding segue to even talk about what has passed this floor already. You mentioned many of those measures. Eighty percent of the American people, overwhelmingly, Mr. Speaker, feel that the first 100 hours here in the U.S. House of Representatives have been very fruitful and have put forth a great surge of support and hope on behalf of everyday working Americans.

Speaking of the minimum wage, I understand that it is up for consideration in the Senate next week, hopefully next Tuesday. I know there are some discussions an $8 billion possible cost for tax breaks for businesses within that. I know that there will be some sort of discussion between the finance Chair in the Senate and Mr. Rangel over here in the House, Mr. Speaker, from Ways and Means.

We are going to continue to have hearings on the economy. We are going to talk about globalization tomorrow in the committee, I believe at 10 a.m., over in the Longworth Building. We are going to the effects of it, how does it deal with the American worker, how do we benefit here. And that is going to be a great discussion for us to continue to have, especially with the President moving around and speaking to different groups about trade.

I think it is also important as we start to look at this issue of the minimum wage that we keep at the forefront. So I want to make sure that the Members stay engaged; I want to make sure that the American people stay engaged and informed on what is happening.

I think another issue that is coming up and I mentioned it a little earlier, on Wednesday, we are going to be dealing with the continuing resolution. I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, some of the things that were mentioned in the State of the Union, it is interesting what we have already incorporated into the House.

Democrats led the way in making sure that we adopt pay-as-we-go rules. Democrats led the way by saying that there will be no earmarks in this continuing resolution that will come to the floor on Wednesday. And we talk about earmarks. And we are bringing about earmark reform.

But earmarks in some areas, especially when you look at the bad situation that the country is in right now, this does not go away. I mean, we are continuing to hold this chart up. I just want to make sure that the American people and Members understand that we had very little to do with the situation of the $1.05 trillion that has been borrowed from foreign nations, and more than has been borrowed over 224 years with 42 Presidents and a number of Congresses in between, of $1.01 trillion.

We did not just get there. We got there by giving unaffordable tax breaks that we could not afford to the superwealthy, giving away tax breaks to individuals who did not ask for it. So that just does not go away.

There is a lot of work between making sure that we are able to do what this Democratic Congress has done in balancing the budget and taking us into surpluses versus what the Republican Congress has done in taking us backwards.

Mr. Speaker and Mr. Murphy, we are joined by my good friend from Ohio (Mr. Ryan). Mr. Ryan, we have been talking about a number of issues surrounding not only the Speaker's visit to Iraq and Afghanistan with some other Democratic leaders and also chairmen, but also talking about the issue of the veterans not being mentioned in the State of the Union, nor the Gulf States. But we said we are not going to leave them behind. So we gave an update on the minimum wage. We are happy to hear from you, sir.

You gave a couple of speeches over the weekend.

Ms. Wasserman Schultz, I think it is important, and Mr. Murphy and Mr. Ryan, that everybody understand the reason we are here. We are going to play the legislative role. We talked about the lights being turned on in some of these committee rooms. And I was sitting here kind of looking through a few things, and I grabbed this February 5 edition of Time magazine, and it talked about, Madam Speaker, this upcoming Time I just received it in the mail, only 648 days until the election, why so many candidates are jumping in so early. And it talks about this being the most open Presidential race since 1928.

There is some interesting comments in here and obviously editorials, but I think that you see so many people getting involved because they see a vacuum here, a vacuum of the fact that things are not happening the way that it should happen. And Ms. Wasserman Schultz alluded to the fact that, being lap dogs, we sometimes say here on the 30-something Working Group rubber-stamp Congress, what have you, of the 109th Congress. We don't want to be that.

I ran into one of my Republican colleagues in the tunnel walking from the Cannon building over to the House today for a vote and I asked how is a certain piece of legislation. And she responded, well, you know, I have a post office bill. I am not going to belittle, I have done a post office bill before; it is good to identify outstanding Americans. But I just want to make sure that people understand, even here we have what we call suspension bills. Those are bills that we all agree on but it has to be passed by the Congress, Madam Speaker.

But what is happening now that has not been happening, I go back to, I alluded to this earlier, reading is fundamental. We know that some people here in Washington, D.C. don't bother to read newspapers, things of that nature; but we will leave that for another day. Congress Daily A.M., National Journal. And I just want to read what is going to happen tomorrow; today is Monday, what is going to happen on Tuesday. I can tell you, usually this would not be printed in this Congressional Daily Weekly because committees didn't meet. The Foreign Affairs Committee only had one hearing on Iraq in the 109th Congress; thus far, Mr. Lantos has had five hearings, and we are not even past the first month of the new Congress. This is still January.

Let's see what is happening tomorrow. Armed Services Committee is going to have a hearing on Afghanistan security and stability. Armed Services is going to also have a subcommittee hearing on military personnel. The Budget Committee will meet on the economic outlook of the country in full committee hearing. Education and Labor on generic discrimination of workers. That is happening. That is a subcommittee hearing that is taking place. Energy and Commerce will also have a hearing on the National Laboratory Security, Oversight and Investigation Subcommittee. Oversight Government Affairs and Reform Committee is going to have a climate change politics hearing; that is a full committee hearing. Science and Technology, Fuels, Infrastructures, Research and Development. That is a subcommittee on Energy. Transportation and Infrastructure, Coast Guard deepwater system, going to have a subcommittee. That is the Coast Guard and Maritime Subcommittee hearing that will take place. Transportation Infrastructure, Railroads, Pipelines, Hazardous Materials, that is a subcommittee hearing that is going to take place. Ways and Means, trade and globalization at 10:00 tomorrow, full committee hearing. Ways and Means once again, subcommittee will be meeting.

I just wanted to point that out, Madam Speaker. If we were in the 109th Congress and the 108th Congress, we wouldn't even be here right now, Monday. We wouldn't even be here on a Monday. People are paying our salary to legislate and to bring about the kind of oversight.

I just want to point that out, because Mr. Ryan spoke a little earlier of the fact that we are actually doing, Ms. Wasserman Schultz, what we told the American people we would do, Mr. Murphy, and that is lead. Six in 2006. Oh, it is a big dog and pony. It is not. We are giving the American people exactly what we told them we would do, which is accountability. And that is a paradigm shift for politicians here in Washington, D.C. I yield to Ms. Wasserman Schultz.

I am with you and the 40-something new Members of Congress.

Madam Speaker, it was an honor to come before the House once again. I want to thank the Democratic leadership for allowing us to have the hour, and we yield back the balance of our time.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. It is an honor to come before the House once again. We have finished our work for the week, and a lot has happened, a lot has been said. As you know, the 30- Something Working Group, Mr. Murphy, and I are here today, my good friend from Connecticut. We are going to talk about some of the issues that have been discussed over the last 24 hours on the floor, some of the votes that we have taken, even as it relates to last week, some of the challenges that are facing the country.

I know there will be other Members of the 30-Something Working Group

that may be joining us this afternoon. I can tell you as we continue to move forward in this 110th Congress, there is a lot that the American people have to be proud of at some level of accomplishment as it relates to issues that are truly facing the American people.

Yesterday, Mr. Speaker, we had an opportunity to hear from the President of the United States. Some say that there was some issues that he brought to the table that are not new. He has mentioned some of these issues before. Alternative fuel, the issue of Iraq, talking about health care, still holding onto the issue of savings accounts that have been proposed in past State of the Unions but haven't been acted upon to even bring about real changes as relates to health care.

The President talked about earmarks last night, Mr. Speaker. But it is interesting under the Republican-controlled Congress, that is when the earmarks were out of control. And it was under his watch and his party's watch. And now the President wants to be the chief, I guess, the chief person who says who gets an earmark and who does not get an earmark. Earmark reform was a part of the Democratic reform package, and was not even really given serious consideration until the Democrats took control of the Congress.

The glaring issue as it relates to Iraq, and Mr. Murphy and I and Mr. Ryan were talking about this just yesterday, it is obvious that the American people voted for change in the last election, and that the President continues to march in the opposite direction of the American people. The American people are ready to go in a new direction. The President seems like he is ready to go and continue to keep going in the old direction.

The new direction, redeployment of troops, working in a diplomatic way, following some of the Iraq Study Group recommendations of talking with Iran and Syria, and I would even add Turkey if we want to look at a diplomatic resolution to what is happening in the Middle East, making sure that our troops are safe, making sure that we take the training wheels off the Iraqi Government train, redeploy, diplomatic mission.

The President seems to think that the answer is to have an escalation in troops. The American people are looking for escalation in the truth, not the troops. And also the President has spoken of giving him a chance for his plan to work. Well, I can tell you that the American people have given the President a lot of latitude as it relates to Iraq. I think it is important, I take from Senator Warner's, and I can talk, I have a number of quotes here on the escalation of troops from Senator Warner, the former chairman, who is a Republican, the former chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee.

I can also take from our colleagues who spoke after the President spoke yesterday and prior to his speech yesterday, that contradict or are going in a new direction as it relates to Iraq and what the American people called for, versus what they did not call for, more of the same.

So hopefully, Mr. Murphy, we will talk a little bit about some of this today.

There are some other issues, as it relates to the State of the Union speech, that we can get into, but I think it is important, we spent a lot of time yesterday talking about bipartisanship, we spent a lot of time yesterday saying the President had an opportunity, and we hoped that he would come and share with us, hold up issues such as the minimum wage that we passed overwhelmingly on this floor that he is ready to sign. We thought that he would come to the floor saying, I want to work with the leaders here in the House on the minority and majority side on passing real health care on behalf of millions of Americans that are without health care. Those things did not come out.

I can say that the Americans, Mr. Speaker, that were pointed out yesterday in the gallery by the President, well-noted heroes and ``she- roes'' that were sitting up there, this State of the Union was about a state of the Union, and I can tell you, hearing last night's speech, we have a lot of work ahead of us, Democrats and Republicans. So I am excited about that opportunity.

I yield to my good friend, Mr. Murphy of Connecticut.

Mr. Murphy, will you yield for a moment?

I was kind of paying attention to the room last night when the President said, ``Give my plan a chance to work.'' Now, if you kind of look on the gauge of who stands up for that or who claps for it, I can tell you that it was lukewarm on the Republican side, and definitely over here on the Democratic side it was more of the same.

I mean, you made it to Congress, I made it back to Congress with a message that we were going to move in a new direction. And I believe that we will have a majority, and I am not just talking about a Democratic majority, if it comes down to a question, I know they had some action on the other side of the Capitol dome today, on this very issue of the escalation of the troops, and we have quotes here that will be on the 30-Something Web site I know, hopefully, by the end of the week of Senators, Representatives and others that have said just the contrary to what the President said last night. So I believe that there is some hope on the Iraq issue.

Now, the Republican leadership is not necessarily there where we need them to be. And you heard me say once before that I am not upset with certain Members that are not following the will and the desire of the American people. The good thing about the U.S. House of Representatives is we are all up for reelection in 23, 24 months from now, and we have to be accountable. And if Members want to follow leadership, or whoever they think that is going to share with them how they should vote and what they should stand for on all these different issues, then I think it is important that they realize that we are going to have an election, and that you have got to go home, you have to explain why you voted for more of the same.

I believe that we are getting to a head here. And the good thing about being in the majority is that we have the opportunity, we used to give speeches on this floor, Mr. Murphy, saying if we are blessed enough to have the opportunity to be in the majority to lead the American agenda, the American people, everyday Americans who wants accountability and who pray and look for bipartisanship, look for leadership, we will give it to them, and that is what we are going to have a chance to do.

Thank you for yielding. I just wanted to point that out because that was an observation. And while I am speaking, if you want, I will yield to you so that we can drive this home, because we want to break this down because we don't want Members to go back to their districts and say, you know, I didn't understand that. We want individuals to be able to pull the Congressional Record and say, wow, how couldn't you understand it; it was mentioned 10 or 12 times in a given day on the reason why we were doing what we did.

We can do it together. And I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, that it can be done.

Let's just put it this way: It is the new direction versus more of the same. There are Members of Congress that are saying that they are on board on the new direction. There are troops in Iraq that are saying that they are on board for a new direction. And I can tell you from 4 years on the Armed Services Committee that looking in the eyes of the commanders when they come, they are also looking for a new direction. And even, Mr. Speaker, when the President puts forth this Iraq Study Group that brought forth recommendations on the direction we should move in, the President says, thank you very much for your input, I appointed you, bipartisan commission, but we are going to send new troops to Iraq, and that is the answer.

I am not a Member of Congress with a conspiracy theory, but I will say that the President sent the 20,000 additional troops before we had an opportunity to really look at what is happening or what has been happening in the time that our committee rooms have sat with the lights off. We didn't have hearings in the 109th Congress. Nancy Pelosi wasn't Speaker of the House. The will and the desire wasn't there to find out what is happening with all the supplemental money that we have given towards Iraq and Afghanistan and other issues that we paid for that didn't go through the regular budget process.

Now we are going to have an opportunity, hopefully, in speaking with Mr. Murtha, who is the chairman of the Defense Subcommittee on Defense. He is asking questions. They are having hearings. Brass and suits together are coming in to answer the tough questions about, well, what happened to the money we have already given you?

When you look at companies like--we talked about Halliburton, and we talked about some of these other companies that have run away with these dollars, we talked about the U.S. troops that are being there, let's talk about the mercenaries that are there. Let's talk about the hired individuals that are there to carry out missions that are not wearing a U.S. flag on their shoulders, but they are contractors to carry out security missions for convoys. There are a number of those individuals that are dying, and they are not being counted in the troop calculation. And many of those individuals, Mr. Speaker, are former members of our military Armed Forces. I know for a fact that some of these companies are providing even better incentives, much greater, sometimes twice that our men and women are earning in uniform. So after their time is up, as we give the military their ability, because so many individuals have been deployed two and three times, and when their time is up as it relates to their service, to get them to reenlist we incentivize them not only through monetary means, but also the ability to move up the ladder.

At the same time you have the private sector that understands that same philosophy, Mr. Speaker and Members, and they are incentivizing them to go into the private side of it. And these individuals are securing the convoys, securing some of the facilities that are there, carrying out some missions. And they are replacing, because we talk about the coalition, if you want to break that down, I mean, we have U.S. men and women in uniform, and then U.S. contractors. It is not Great Britain, it is not some of the other folks that people are talking about, the coalition of the few, the United States of America and U.S. contractors. Guess what? U.S. taxpayers are paying for that. So I think it is important, the issues that we talked about.

I have Senator Warner here, I mentioned him earlier, the Republican from Virginia. Basically he is saying after the speech last night, to place our U.S. men in the middle of a fight between Sunnis and Shiites is not the right time to do that.

You also have Chuck Hagel. Senator Hagel has also said, Republican, has said that he thinks the speech that was given last night by the President represents the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since Vietnam. If it is carried out, he would have to resist it. He said, ``I will resist it.'' This is not what Democrats are saying. People have heard what we had to say. Now we have Republicans that have heard the voice of the American people that are saying, if I am going to stay in the U.S. Congress, I am not appointed, I am elected, if I am going to stay in the U.S. Congress, I have to follow the will and the desire of my constituents and the American people.

I always say, Mr. Murphy, when we are elected from our districts, we are federalized to represent an entire country and those that are in harm's way. We are talking about training. We are talking about tactical missions against terrorists or what have you, not everyday street patrol, security patrol on the block. That is where our men and women are losing.

We have been talking about training of the troops from the time that we were in Baghdad, Mr. Speaker. I can tell you, I am a witness to it, I have been on the committee, we have had the testimony. Oh, we are training them; and then all of a sudden we find out that the training is not keeping up with the need. Well, we have military bases not only in Mosul, but Tikrit, also in Baghdad and other spots throughout Iraq where those troops can be trained right there.

I look forward, Mr. Speaker, in going to Iraq within the next couple of months, Mr. Murphy, I would love to have you join me if you haven't gone already, to ask these tough questions on the issue of the training issues because now it is under our watch. The American people have empowered a majority of the Members who feel the way the American people feel, that we need to take care of our mission in Iraq. I am pretty sure we will have some presence of troops there for some time, but not at these levels, not at the level to where that is not an issue of redeployment.

Mr. Murphy, I hate to get preachy on this, but the President has said that is up to another President to deal with, another administration to deal with, I am not going to do it. Well, like our

good friend Senator Webb said last night, if he doesn't want to take the leadership way, then we are going to have to show him the way, the Congress.

And the good thing about it, Mr. Speaker, it will be in a bipartisan way. It won't be just Democrats. It will be Democrats and Republicans, and I welcome that bipartisan spirit

Mr. Murphy, I would tell you right now, and Members, I think it is important that we look at this for what it is worth. If I was thinking of the Iraq issue solely as a political issue, it would be let us go to the floor, Mr. Murphy, and as we talk, we meet in the 30-something Working Group, let us not talk about the politics of the Iraq issue. If this was about maintaining the majority as it relates to politics, Mr. Speaker and Members, if this was about capturing the White House, Mr. Speaker, we wouldn't come to the floor to talk about how we can work in a bipartisan way or come to the floor and promote leadership. And I think it is important that we promote leadership and move in this new direction and saying that we have to deal with the big issue of Iraq.

I get members of local government and State government saying, Congressman, I need more money in my city. You cut the COPS program. Your Federal commitment as it relates to dollars for health care, for security, for the environment, they are not there like they used to be there. And we put parameters on ourselves because we told the American people what we would do, pay-as-we-go philosophy or principles that we already passed, and we have this war going on and we have young men and young women. You have a lot of Reservists that are there that are 40, 50 years old, that are away from their families 15 months at a pop.

We come to Washington, D.C., most of us, our families are back in the district and we are here and we are missing for about 4 or 5 days, but we get to go back home at the end of the week, unlike those men and women when they board that chartered flight. When they go over to Kuwait or fly straight into Baghdad Airport or end up in Turkey at one of our staging bases there, or end up somewhere else as they feed into Iraq, they don't get the opportunity to say, Hey, kids, I am going to be back in a couple of weeks. So I think it is important that we look at this issue and treat it with the serious attention that it needs.

So for the President to come here last night and say, give me an opportunity, give me an opportunity for my plan to work, well, let me tell you something. It is almost like looking in the refrigerator and seeing a carton of milk there and you take it out and open the carton and you say, wow, that milk is sour; let me put it back in, maybe it will be fresh tomorrow. That logic doesn't work. So it is important.

And I am glad to see some of our Republican colleagues and many of our Democratic colleagues that are questioning the President, before he can even leave the Chamber, about the speech, what he did not say in the speech, that did November 7 happen? Did you hear it?

At the press conference after the November election, he said, you know, I guess it did have something to do with Iraq. And some of the tough talk ended. And I just want to say if I can commend the President, he didn't come

with the chest-beating that he usually does, but he did go back to scaring the American people.

So I think it is important. There are issues we have to deal with. But I am on record, Mr. Speaker and Members, on the issue of being a leader, having the courage, and representing the people that have sent us to Washington, DC to be able to govern in this government. Give our men and women what they need in Iraq, but at the same time push forth diplomatic talks. At the same time make sure that we start not only discussion but redeployment of our troops more sooner than later, because that message would not only get to the Iraqi Government but also to the world community because we all play a role in this.

I see my good friend from Florida. We have served together, and she is the chairwoman on the Rail Subcommittee under the Transportation Committee. I am so glad she has joined us. Mr. Murphy has had so much to say on this topic, and I am so glad you are here on the floor.

I yield to Ms. Brown from Florida.

Reclaiming my time, the bottom line is, Ms. Brown, that we have the responsibility to govern here. The President is the executive. He is the Commander in Chief. He was given the authority by the Congress, even though there were many votes that weren't in the affirmative of giving him that authority. He can send additional troops.

There has been a discussion in the Senate. I haven't quite read the briefing information on it or the report from the Senate session today. I know there will be sessions in the House dealing with that. I talked earlier in this Special Order about Mr. Murtha and what he is doing in his committee as it relates to defense oversight. We know that there will be a bill, a supplemental, I think a $99 billion bill coming to the floor, which will be, from what I understand, the last supplemental bill.

When we say ``supplemental,'' I want to make sure all the Members and everyone understands this is basically what we call emergency funding for the war. It is not necessarily in the budget. If it was in the budget, it would go through a process just like you do with your transportation dollars in your committee, giving authorization for certain spending. This is just pretty much a wish list from the administration that is given to the Appropriations Committee, and it really doesn't go through the full process. I understand this is the last supplemental that will come through for Iraq and Afghanistan. But what is also in his supplemental are ballistic missiles, other issues that they are spending money on.

So we have the power of the purse strings. But I can tell you, which I know that we are all together on and you mentioned, we will not cut money off to the troops that are on the ground there. But we said, leading up to the end of the 109th Congress, that we will not defund the troops that are in harm's way. But no one said anything about escalating the number of troops, adding more onto it.

So a lot of folks are upset. It is not just Democrats that are upset. The American people are. And the President is going against a 70-plus percent approval and heading in a new direction on this issue of Iraq, and he is still heading in the same direction that he was heading in prior to the November election. So it is up to us, Congresswoman Brown, to not only state within the Congressional Record but encourage our colleagues not only on our side of the aisle but on the Republican side of the aisle that we have to lead in the way that the American people want us to lead.

I am encouraged by something, seeing some of the comments by some of the Republicans about what the President said.

Ms. Brown, when you said 30-something-plus, you looked at me.

Ms. Brown, before you leave, I just wanted to say before yielding to Ms. Wasserman Schultz that I am glad that you came to the floor, because you have been given voice in this.

And I remember being a non-Member of Congress. You served with my mom; and I was in the senate, Ms. Wasserman Schultz and I were serving in the Florida Senate. I remember you going out to the mike by the Cannon Building where C-SPAN had a camera rolling, and it was a press conference, and you went out along with a number of Members saying that it is

wrong that we gave the President the authority to go to war; and that you have been a voice on this issue because you knew that this could possibly happen, the position that we are in now.

I also want to add, since you said he didn't mention anything about Katrina, he didn't say anything about veterans. And I know you have been up front and on target on veteran benefits. We have many from Florida; I know Mr. Murphy has them from Connecticut. And I think that it is important that even though, Mr. Speaker, veterans were not mentioned, victims of Katrina weren't mentioned, we picked up on it. And we are going to make sure that we continue to do the things that we need to do.

Thank you, Ms. Brown.

All I am going to do is do a close. I know we have the Web site and all, but I want to yield to Ms. Wasserman Schultz because I want to tell you, I am not from Connecticut, but if I was one of your constituents, I would vote for you. You are good. That is all I can say.

I was just saying if I was your constituent I would vote for you. It is good to have a Member of Congress that is as well informed into the issues that are facing the constituents and the American people. I yield to Ms. Wasserman Schultz because we are going to be closing out soon.

Well, it is an honor to be on the floor with Mr. Murphy and also Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Being in the majority brings about responsibility for all of us. So we have a lot to do. And Mr. Speaker, we want to thank the Democratic leadership, from the Speaker to the leader to the whip to the chair and the vice chair for allowing us to have this Special Order on the Democratic side. It was an honor addressing the House once again.

Madam Speaker, let me just say that this piece of legislation is an outstanding bipartisan piece of work. I know that it has bipartisan support, something that is going to help the private sector and be able to help us move forward in securing America.

I would like to thank my good friend Mr. Rogers for his outstanding work and also on the Republican side. We have had a great discussion. As you know, in the last Congress I was the ranking member on the oversight committee, and all of us that are involved in this bill have heard hours and hours of testimony on why this is important. Even going as far back as the 108th Congress in the select committee, we were hearing from members of the private sector, saying that we want to participate in protecting America, need it be bio or what have you, but we also do not want to end up losing our shirts in the process or giving away secrets.

So I think this legislation is going to help us move forward. I hope it has a speedy process in the Senate. I look forward to coming to the floor later on to vote on this very good piece of legislation.

I just wanted to come by and say, once again, this is another example on how we have and we are now working in a bipartisan way on behalf of securing America for future generations and this generation so that we can continue to move forward hand in hand.

I want to thank the bill's sponsor from Rhode Island for bringing this

legislation to the floor quickly, and also Mr. Thompson, the chairman of the committee, and ranking member of the committee on the Republican side for bringing this to the floor for speedy consideration.

I rise today in strong support of this legislation. H.R. 599, the Support for Antiterrorism by Fostering Effective Technologies or ``SAFETY'' Act would provide greater incentive to US companies that develop and produce domestic, antiterrorism technologies and would better ensure the integrity of our national security.

Congress enacted the SAFETY Act in 2002 to limit the liability of manufacturers of qualified, antiterrorism technologies. This was seen as an essential step to promote innovation in technology, and to ensure that our first responders received the very latest and best equipment.

However, the methods used by the Department of Homeland Security to implement the original legislation were markedly slow and burdensome to applicants. This created disincentive to companies to participate in the program, and negated the original intent of the legislation.

I raised this issue and others during a September 2006 joint hearing before the Homeland Security Subcommittees on Management, Integration, and Oversight and Emergency Preparedness, Science and Technology. In that hearing, questions were raised addressing these issues; however, little was done in the closing days of the 109th to enact sufficient change. The Department did take positive steps to alleviate some of these issues, by issuing improved application ``kits'' and approving the final rule.

Still more is needed, and H.R. 599 would be a significant step in that direction. Because procuring these vital technologies as they become available is imperative to national security, SAFETY Act certification must happen at the same time as production.

To ensure that both our companies and our first responders are protected, this bill would require the Department to formalize the coordination between its procurement office and the Office of SAFETY Act Implementation. This would stand to greatly improve the efficiency of the program and the application process. Moreover, this bill would also ensure that sufficient staff be made available for reviewing applications. Delays in certification can dissuade companies from bringing life saving technology to market for long periods of time.

The SAFETY Act, as it is named, is about the security of the American people. Improving this process will ensure that our Federal, State, and local authorities have the tools they need to protect the American people.

I urge my colleagues, to support this bipartisan measure and to further strengthen our defense from terror.

Mr. Speaker, it is an honor to address the House, and I can share with you on this day of the State of the Union we all look forward to hearing what the President/Commander in Chief has to share not only with the country but the world, and we hope that he will bring words of wisdom and unity to the House floor. This will be the President's seventh opportunity coming to the floor to share with us the needs of the Nation. And I hope that he speaks on behalf of the entire Nation.

As you know, the 30-Something Working Group has been coming to the floor for the last 3 years sharing with the Members about what was going on under the Capitol dome and what wasn't going on under the Capitol dome. And we come today in the spirit of bipartisanship, Mr. Speaker, and I would also like to continue to highlight bipartisanship, because that is what the American people have called for and that is what we have delivered.

And when I say ``we,'' I am saying a majority of the Members of the House of Representatives, and you can sprinkle in some Republican votes in achieving that. And I am glad that on a number of votes as relates to the Medicare prescription drug price negotiating, all Democrats on the floor voted for that, 24 Republicans voted for it, too. They voted with their constituents.

The Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act, just about all the Democrats on the floor voting on behalf, 216 with 37 Republicans joining us on that vote, it was 253, which is a good majority of the House voting in the affirmative. That is bipartisan.

The Fair Minimum Wage Act, Mr. Speaker, that passed on January 10, which was a recorded vote, there were 315 yeas in the affirmative, all Democrats on the floor at that time voted for it, 82 Republicans joined Democrats in voting on that bill together, Mr. Speaker.

Again, in the implementation of the 9/11 Commission recommendations, which we all know, Mr. Speaker, was a bipartisan piece of work by individuals that were appointed by the President, the leadership, and the House and Senate at that time, with two bipartisan chairmen, one Republican and the vice chair was Democrat, all Democrats on the floor voted, 231, and 68 Republicans. That brought that vote to 299.

I think it is important, Mr. Speaker, as we continue to move on and as we look at the student loan vote, as we look at a number of the votes that have come here to the floor, a great vote today as relates to pensions for those that step out of the line, Members of the House that step out of line and Members of the Senate, that their pensions will be on the line. Not one vote against that measure.

In that spirit, I know, on behalf of the Democratic side of the aisle, the Speaker, majority leader, Democratic whip, the chairman of our caucus, the vice chair of our caucus, and other elected leadership within the Democratic Caucus are looking to continue this bipartisan spirit that we have adopted here.

As you know, in the 109th Congress, Mr. Speaker, I used to always share with the Members that bipartisanship is only allowed if the majority allows it. I think that on some issues we will see issues where we won't be able to see eye to eye and there will be some partisan votes on this floor. That is just the reality of life here in Washington, D.C., but it should not be the rule. It should be the exception. And I want to commend all of those Members that are moving in a bipartisan spirit.

Now, I must say the winds of bipartisanship are here on the floor. I am sad to report that on many of those votes the Republican leadership did not vote with the majority of the U.S. House of Representatives, including Republicans that did vote on those measures. I say this to promote a bipartisan spirit here when the State of the Union, when the President comes in and gives his speech tonight; when he comes to speak to the American people in the U.S. House, the U.S. Congress, Judiciary, all branches of the military that will be represented here tonight, Cabinet officers that will be represented here tonight, hopefully deliver a message that we can move forward as a unit, as all Americans, so something we can all grasp.

I think it is important to move in that direction.

Now, on our side of many of these issues, when I say ``our side,'' I am saying the Democratic side where we have talked about six in 2006, where Republicans have joined us in those efforts because they wanted to vote for it all along but their leadership would not allow them to do that. We want to continue. We want to lead by example. We want the American people to know that we are leading on behalf of the country, not just one side versus the other. We do not want to create that kind of environment; but when it has to take place, it has to take place.

Tonight, Senator Webb, Virginia, will be delivering the Democratic response to the President, and I think it is important if we can see eye to eye on a policy in Iraq because right now, as you know, a number of the Senators on the other side of the Capitol dome have disagreed with the surge policy or with the escalation of troops policy that we have now that the President has stepped forward with. Many Members of the House on both sides of the aisle disagree with that policy.

As you know, Mr. Speaker, a number of Americans spoke not only to Democratic candidates but to Republican candidates about a solution in Iraq versus just identifying a problem and continuing to add on to the unfortunate situation of U.S. troops losing their lives in Iraq.

I think it is also important for us to know that for us to work in a bipartisan way the President cannot continue to say, just because I have the power to deploy troops along with my advisers that I am going to do it. I think a level of responsibility has to kick in.

Mr. Speaker, I was talking to a group earlier today, and I shared with them that the watch word for the 110th Congress should be ``responsibility,'' responsibility on both sides of the aisle to make sure that we can fight our way out of the record deficit that we have now and to be able to stick with our pay-as-we-go rules that we put in place; to make sure that we govern on behalf of all the American people need it be young or old, rich or poor; that we govern on behalf of Americans and not on behalf of the special interests; and to make sure that our children's children and we have safe, clean water, air to breath; and that we can provide health care.

Now, saying all of that, it cannot be my way or the highway. Mr. Speaker, the President has put forth a commission to look at Social Security more than two times, and at the end of all of those commissions, the President has come back and said we need to privatize Social Security. That is a my-way-or-highway approach to governing.

I think it is important that the President come to this floor tonight and the Congress respond in a way that we can work together, we can work together to make America better. We can work together to make sure that our troops in Iraq, hopefully more sooner than later, can be redeployed, and that we can call not only on the Iraqi Government but other countries throughout the world to take part in the security of that region. As long as we continue to have an escalation in troops without any questions asked, we are going to have problems.

Now, I am glad to be joined here by my good colleague and friend from the great State of Ohio, Niles, Ohio, and we have spent many an hour on the floor here talking about these issues, but I was sharing with the Speaker and with the Members the fact when the President comes here tonight that it is important that it is a message that all Americans can embrace, that we deal with the serious issues so that we can get on with the work of the American people, because shortly after he gives his speech, he is going to send his budget to Capitol Hill, and that is going to have a lot to do with the way this Congress is going to function in this first session of the 110th Congress.

Hopefully, we will be able to pass a budget that will work on behalf of the American people, but it cannot be a my-way-or-the-highway kind of approach that it has been in the past. That did not work well, even when his party had the majority here in the Congress. Imagine what will happen, and they do have the minority in this Congress.

But we are willing, Mr. Speaker, to work in a bipartisan way to make sure we can get something done. I think that is very, very important. I think that is what the American people are asking for, and I yield to my friend.

Well, I think it is important that we have a real discussion back and forth on this very issue.

We talked about the President coming to the floor and hopefully bringing about and, well, promoting bipartisanship, coming to the floor and saying there are some good things that have happened here; you know, hey recognize the historical moment of having the first female Speaker in the history of the country; but secondly, dealing with some of the major issues.

I understand, Mr. Speaker, in his speech on Iraq he is going to say what he says and says he sent the escalation troops. He is going to stick with it or my way or the highway. It is the wrong approach and it is going to inflame the American people and Members of Congress on both sides of the aisle.

Also, I would like to say, even when it comes down to the issue of the minimum wage, I know that the President has said, well, you know, I like the minimum wage but there are some things that I would like to do. That is fine, but as far as I am concerned, when it comes down to the bill, signing it, he needs to be overjoyed to sign it because that is what the American people want. It is not just Democrats. I mean, the American people want to see folks that are making $5.15 an hour to make $7.15 or greater because when they make more, the American people make more, salaried workers, because their pay is going to go up.

I see Mr. Ryan has something there he is going to go a little further into it. Stem cell research, folks may have issues here and there, but the bottom line is the American people have spoken in many of these Senate races and many of these House races, and they have spoken because they want their loved ones to have a better chance in beating some of the terminal cancer that is out there right now and diseases that so many Americans are suffering through and their family members are trying to fight through those issues.

The bipartisan 9/11 Commission, Mr. Speaker, why fight on the commas and the periods saying that, well, we believe that we are already doing that. Well, apparently you must not be doing it because the 9/11 Commission has given you Ds and Fs in those areas that you say that you are already doing it.

So not just because we got to the cafeteria first we get an opportunity at the only oatmeal cookie that is left. It is the fact that we have to secure America. This goes beyond I thought of this first or I thought of this second.

The American people said they want the full implementation of the 9/ 11 Commission, and that is what we gave them. The majority vote here in this House and will be a majority vote in the Senate and will have the opportunity to go to the White House and hopefully the President will implement those recommendations, it is to make America safer. It is not because it was not your original thought to do it, and I am hoping that he comes to the floor and embraces that on behalf of all of our safety.

I do not think that I need to advise the President in any way, but I think that on behalf of all of us, if we are going to continue the spirit that we have started and bipartisanship and having the least friction as possible, especially on issues that we should not even be debating on, the issues that I have outlined, they are not even issues that are brand-new issues. These are issues that have been talked about in committee, talked about it in commissions, even as it relates to campaigns to get to Congress.

The issue of the investment on Big Oil, the billions of dollars in subsidies, and now we have reversed and put them in the clean, renewable energy, that should not even be a debate.

It should not even be, well, I agree with it or I don't agree with it. You should agree with it, because we need it more now than ever.

One of the big issues now, Mr. Ryan, when it all boils down to redeployment of our troops in Iraq, all of this is a vicious circle of irresponsibility in the past, or a lack of responsibility, and making sure that we are able to carry out not only diplomatic responsibility, but legislative responsibility and oversight.

I think the reason we have had the escalation in troops, Mr. Ryan, is prior to the lights being illuminated or the committee rooms being illuminated to have hearings on what we should do in Iraq, how we should work in a diplomatic way in Iraq, what kind of leadership should we have in Iraq, now that is happening with the confirmation of a new general to take over the command in Iraq.

I think it is important, Mr. Ryan, that we move in the direction that we have been moving in, and that is in a bipartisan direction, that is in a direction that the supermajority of American people agree with. Let's get those things off the table. Let's start fine-tuning these issues of six in '06. I think some of the Republican leadership just has issues with the fact it is part of six in '06 and ``we have to be against it, because we didn't do it when we had the opportunity to do it.''

I can care less about what happened in the last Congress. I do care about what is happening in this Congress, Mr. Ryan, and what is happening in the future Congresses. Because when folks woke up at 7 o'clock in the morning on a Tuesday morning and voted for representation, they voted for leadership, they voted for bipartisanship, they voted for a Washington, D.C., especially under the Capitol dome, Americans coming together, because we are all Americans, coming together on behalf of the greater good.

That is what they are counting on. That is what we should give them. The majority of the Members of the House should give that to them. When I am speaking of the majority members of the House, I am talking about Republicans too. I am talking about all of us coming together on their behalf.

So, to hear these issues tonight, it is going to be very, very important. The President has a choice. If he wants to come to the floor, Mr. Speaker, and continue to give the same speech that he has been giving in the past, it will be very, very unfortunate. But if he comes to the floor tonight talking about how he would like to work with the Democratic Congress and work with the Democratic leadership and the Republican leadership, and the same

thing over in the House and the Senate, work in a bipartisan way, if he used the words ``bipartisan Congress,'' I think he will be more successful in passing legislation that we can all come together on and that we do have an input in it, because we will have input in it, and we should not dig in and deny the American people of this great opportunity, Members, to see advancement in health care, to see some advancement in the issue of Iraq and Afghanistan at the same time, and to see some level of advancement in having clean air for our children and renewable fuel here in America, investing in the Midwest versus the Middle East.

I yield to my friend from Ohio.

I think it is very important, Mr. Ryan, to really talk about many of the issues that are facing the right here, right now Congress, right here, right now. Not, well, what we would like to do pie-in-the-sky. Something realistic.

Mr. Murphy, I can tell you that it is very important that when we look at the issue of Iraq, that we have a real discussion. The President is going in the opposite direction of the American people at this point. I mean, in November, that is what happened. The President is moving in this direction, the American people are going in the opposite direction. He could be going this way, they are going that way. I mean, it is just that simple.

I don't know who the advisers are in the White House or what have you, but when you have generals that have been in the field at the double digit numbers saying that we are headed in the wrong direction as it relates to the strategy that the administration has, you have Colin Powell. Goodness gracious, the Secretary of State, the former I guess two Joint Chiefs of Staff, the head of the military, to say an escalation in troops in a civil war is a wrong thing to do.

We have been saying in November and even now saying that the principal mission of our forces should be training of the Iraqi troops. Now, that is ``we are going to start training.''

Well, we have been saying that from the beginning. That is a strategy to redeploy hopefully one day. Not ``we will work it out sometime in the near future.'' The issue of the logistics and force protection and counterterrorism activities, those are the things that we should be involved in versus patrolling the streets of Baghdad. Patrolling the streets of Mosul. That should be the Iraqi force's responsibility right now.

The beginning of phase, to be able to redeploy our troops, that has to happen. We have military bases, Mr. Ryan, we have been there. We have military bases that are the size of some U.S. cities in Iraq where troops can be trained, Iraqi troops can be trained, along with getting some of our allies to take part in that.

So for us to have what we talk about so much here on this floor, a bipartisan approach towards some of these major, major issues, we are going to have to move in that direction.

To try to make tax cuts permanent for the super wealthy, that is the opposite direction as it relates to being able to provide some sort of relief for the middle-class and small businesses in this country. We have already said, Mr. Murphy, that we are going to operate in a pay- as-you-go atmosphere. What does that mean? Mr. Ryan, you know how over the years we have said we want to break this down, Mr. Murphy, so that everyone can understand what we are talking about.

That means if you are going to pay for something, if you are going to spend money, then you have to show how you are going to pay for it. Not just saying a chicken in the pot for everyone. Well, how much does it cost? That is not important, because we will just ask our country, we will just ask Japan, China, the U.K., the Caribbean, Taiwan, Korea, Canada and Germany and OPEC nations to pay that for us and we will just owe them. We don't have to pay it any time soon, but we will owe them. We will be indebted to countries even to countries that we have been with war with in the past.

I am going to yield to my friend from Connecticut here in one second. Great point. I am glad that you put a period at the end of that dot.

Thank you, Mr. Ryan.

The real issue here is, gentlemen, even before I have an opportunity to get a copy of the President's speech, Mr. Speaker, and even before our great Sergeant at Arms stands there and says, Madam Speaker, for the first time in the history of the country, the President of the United States, even before that happens, I guarantee you, gentlemen, that this health care proposal that the President has is going to end up being to the American middle-class taxpayer, a person that wants health care, money out of this pocket, taking money out of this pocket and putting it hopefully in the other, with some coming out to pay for it.

There will be no real program that will benefit the middle class in achieving health care. It would have to almost be, Mr. Speaker, an atmosphere to where for a person to get a true benefit, they would probably have to go out and get a tax attorney to understand their opportunities, their lucky-ducky opportunities that we hear so much about here on Capitol Hill.

I think it is important, Members, that we break this thing down before we leave Washington this week to make sure the American people know exactly the direction that the administration wants this Congress to move in, because there has to be a discussion. And it has to be open-ended, Mr. Murphy. He needs to say, Listen, I have this health care initiative; I would love to have a discussion with the Congress on how we can make this possible for the American people.

Now, I can tell you right now, the superwealthy have an advocate in the administration in making their tax cuts permanent; I am talking about the superwealthy. I am talking about the folks who are not worried about if they are going to be able to get health care. They already have it.

We are talking about those 47 million Americans that are stuck right now, and the thousands of small businesses that once provided a level of health care; but let's not make it so technical so that only a few can benefit. Some of the earned income tax credits are not taken advantage of, Members, because when you are punching in and punching out every day and you have to go pick up your kids, and if you have got to take them to the doctor, you are making a career decision, that is the reason why the emergency room is so convenient because the boss person doesn't want to let that working parent or parents off to be able to take care of his health care needs.

So this is a huge issue. But at the same time, I think it is important, Members, that we keep in the frame here this issue of Iraq. It has to continue to surface; we have to deal with it; and the American people are counting on us to provide leadership.

I yield to the gentleman from Connecticut.

Mr. Speaker, I think in light of bipartisanship, I know we split the hour, and I see my colleague on the Republican side is already here, in the light of bipartisanship, we will yield back our 10 minutes that we have left on our time to get off on a good note here.

Madam Speaker, today I rise in sadness over the passing of William ``Bill'' Ferguson, who suffered a fatal car accident in Miami-Dade County last week. He was a wonderful person, highly educated, and highly motivated and his passing is a great loss for our community.

His family and friends will memorialize him at a ``going home'' celebration to be held this Friday, January 19, 2007 at the historic Mt. Zion Missionary Baptist Church in Overtown. Mr. Ferguson was a brilliant attorney and counselor, and he was a consummate community activist.

Bill Ferguson's work with Ms. Georgia Ayers's Alternative Program has helped hundreds of men and women become responsible citizens of our community. His work gave hope and courage to countless folks who had been marginalized by their experiences with crime and prison. Some may have given up on them, but Mr. Ferguson's knowledge of the law and his commitment to working with all individuals irrespective of past transgressions made all the difference in countless lives. At work, he was a real marvel to witness.

He was born in November 6, 1946, to James Ferguson and Pauline Holland Ferguson. Having served his country with integrity in the U.S. Navy, he obtained his bachelor's degree in political science at Indiana State University in 1978. He went on to get his law degree from Texas Southern University's Thurgood Marshall School of Law in 1982 in Houston, TX. Not satisfied with his master's degree in law, he pursued another master's degree in counseling from Indiana State University, his alma mater.

He moved to Miami in 1985 where he met Ms. Georgia Ayers, who introduced him to her innovative and award-winning Alternative Program. In his role as ``house attorney'' and psychologist-counselor, he went above and beyond the call of duty to reach out to needy clients. The collective testimony of praise and gratitude from people in our community is testimony to the utmost respect that people had for Bill Ferguson.

His character and his dedication to helping the less fortunate members of our community defined his leadership. His word was his bond to those who dealt with him--not only in moments of triumphal exuberance in helping many a wayward youth, but also in his quest to transform their lives by the simple rules of good conduct and responsible citizenship.

As we honor William ``Bill'' Ferguson, I will fondly remember this good man. Our pride in sharing his friendship is only exceeded by our deep gratitude for all that he has given to our community.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to the late Gifford Carl Ramsey, a fellow trooper and colleague in the Florida Highway Patrol. He died on January 10, 2007--a victim of cancer--and will be buried this Saturday, January 20, 2007, at Glendale Baptist Church in Miami-Dade County's Richmond Heights community.

Born on January 16, 1959, to Gifford and Agatha Ramsey, he was affectionately called ``Spanky'' by those of his closest friends and teammates, who played on the football team at Florida A&M University. Awarded a full athletic scholarship, he led the Rattlers on the gridiron by winning two consecutive national football titles in 1977 and 1978, and was honored as Division I-AA and Black College All- American.

Ever since I have known Trooper Ramsey as a member of the Florida Highway Patrol's 66th Recruit Class of 1982, he eminently served above and beyond the call of duty until his promotion to Sergeant in July 2006. He also volunteered as chaplain of the National Black State Trooper's Coalition and became the vice president of the Florida Coalition of Black State Troopers.

Responding to an inner calling of consecrating his life to the service of God, he affirmed his vocation by accepting Jesus Christ as his personal Savior in 1988 and joined the congregation of Glendale Missionary Baptist Church under the tutelage of the late Reverend Joseph Coats, Sr. On January 20, 1993, he met his future wife, Lisa Smith of Philadelphia, PA, and married her a year later on July 9, 1994. Two children, Jarrett and Jayla, were born out of this happy union. Thereupon, he and his wife became partners in God's Vineyard, and in 2001, Trooper Gifford ``Spanky'' Ramsey was ordained a Deacon of Glendale Baptist Church.

Blessed with an unenviable commonsense approach to life, he was also imbued with the rare wisdom of recognizing the strengths and limitations of the members of his congregation and those he served. Trooper Ramsey went about the duties of his profession, and he also became a missionary at home and abroad, serving a short-term tenure in Cape Town, South Africa.

Trooper and Deacon Ramsey was my good friend, and I am deeply saddened by his passing. He was my mentor ever since I became a trooper in the Florida Highway Patrol in 1989. Indeed, he will be an indelible reminder of the noble commitment of public service, and the awesome power of his religious vocation to minister to the youth under the aegis of programs such as the Juvenile Justice Center Read Aloud Program, the Governor's Mentoring Initiative, Special Olympics Fundraising Events, Child Passenger Safety Details in both Miami-Dade and Monroe Counties. His faith was deep and genuine, and his love for Glendale Baptist Church defined his dynamic friendship and understanding. No one who knew Trooper ``Spanky''--and being struck by his sunny disposition and optimism--went away not acknowledging the presence of a caring community leader.

Like the God he faithfully served during the remaining years of his life, this trooper and gentleman came and lived among us that we may have life and have hope more abundantly. True to his faith, Reverend Ramsey would urge us to believe that his death does not represent an irrevocable finality, and he would assure us that he will live on in the good deeds he left behind. Indeed, no life could be more revered for having fulfilled his vocation as God's faithful steward. I will cherish the wonderful memories I have of his magnificent friendship.

Mr. Speaker, it is very important that we listen to the debate that is taking place here on this floor. Some of it is true; some of it is fiction. I think it is very important to understand that $14 billion is going to go into a place that is going to help us to be able to have the kind of energy we need in the future, to be able to invest in the Midwest versus the Middle East.

But I was just on the floor last night talking about something that the American people want even more than what we are doing here in this debate here on the floor, because a lot things are being said here, but they want bipartisanship, and they have had it over the last 2 weeks. And I think the Republican leadership is a little afraid of the fact that their Members are voting on behalf of the American people. So they want to stand in front of the door of the House and say how bad it is.

But when the board lights up here, Members have a choice: do they want to vote on behalf of their constituents and making sure that we have the kind of future here in the United States, or do they want to vote on behalf of the special interests and the status quo for breaks to big oil companies that they didn't even ask for.

I think we are moving in the right direction with this legislation. This is just the beginning of us working together in a bipartisan way, and I look forward to moving in that spirit, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, it is an honor to come before the House once again.

As you know, the 30-Something Working Group, we come to the floor to share not only with the Members but also the American people the great things that are happening here under the Capitol dome and some things that Members should be informed of that could happen under the Capitol dome if we were able to work in a bipartisan way.

But I am so happy, Mr. Speaker, today because we are on the floor today, and we have a number of issues that we want to share with not only Members but also the American people. I am excited about all these bipartisan votes that have been taking place over the last 90- something-odd hours that have taken place.

I am glad to have good friends from all over the country. We are going to have the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Altmire) that is going to join us, and also the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Murphy) is going to join us tonight.

I think it is important for us to really reflect on some of the things that have been happening.

Mr. Speaker, if I may make an inquiry, how much time do we have, sir?

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I just wanted to verify that time check there.

In the 58 minutes we have left, I just want to talk about a few of the bipartisan votes, and then we will talk about this whole 100-hours agenda.

I was having a conversation before I came to the floor, and I was stopped by one of the outstanding staffers that are here. They said, Congressman, it is just interesting to see Democrats and Republicans voting together on major issues for a change.

Today, Mr. Speaker, we had a vote on the College Student Relief Act, and I am proud to say that not only did we have every Democratic Member that was in attendance today voting for it, but we also had 124 Republicans that voted for it. This was to take the interest rates down from 6.8 to now 3.4, and it is going to help 5.5 million students be able to afford college.

But I definitely love for my colleagues to chime in, because this is a good day of accomplishment whenever you can come to the floor and vote and be successful on something that you talk about when you are running for office; and now to see this legislative accomplishment in such a very short time is something that you should be excited about. I know that all our constituents are, too.

I yield to the gentleman from Connecticut.

I am glad just to echo what everyone else is saying about this outstanding day on the floor of the House of Representatives.

The thing that I have been dwelling on in the last segment of the 30 Something Working Group is the fact that we have these bipartisan votes, but we still have the Republican leadership that is voting against, voting the opposite way of many of their colleagues in their caucus.

I wouldn't say that the Republican Caucus are joining us, I would say that they are representing their constituents. And we talk about bipartisanship, my constituents talk about it. I know that all of our constituents would like to see it, because this vote, Mr. Speaker, today was for America, for America's future. It was for kids like these and others that were here on the opening day of the House. We are fighting on their behalf. And when we fight on their behalf, we fight on their parents' behalf, their grandparents' behalf. Because no matter what religion that one may practice, they want their children and grandchildren to have a better opportunity than what they have had. And with the whole devolution of taxation, Mr. Speaker, that was passing here with out-of-control spending here in Washington, D.C., sending a lack of funding to the States that they have to balance, many of us come from State legislatures, we know we have to balance. It is not like the Federal Government, they can put it on a credit card.

One of our first actions that we took here on this House floor was to pass the pay-as-you-go rules, of saying that if you are going to spend money, then you have to show how you are going the pay for it, not just saying that we are going to borrow from foreign nations and allow them to own a part of the American apple pie.

But today I want to talk about this vote again: 71 Republicans on that side voted against it. Amongst the Republican leadership, every last member of the Republican leadership voted against it.

Mr. Speaker and Members, what is important here is the fact that this bipartisanship is what America has been waiting on. They have been waiting on it. Let's not do it as some sort of slogan. Living proof is the vote that took place here today on this floor. 124 Republicans voted on behalf of their constituents, not just the Republican leadership saying, well, we want you to vote this way, you know, don't worry about it. It is some mighty tall ladder to climb to say that, well, go back home and say I voted against interest rate cuts for your kid to go to school. I don't know, I wouldn't be back if I was to go home and tell my constituents I voted against it because it didn't happen fast enough in my opinion.

Well, the Republican leadership and the Republican Congress on the other side last session took this money away from students and families, and raised the interest rate to give special interest tax breaks to the super, super, super plugged in here in Washington, D.C. the way it used to be. Now, today, we were like Robin Hood. Those Members that voted on behalf of their constituents and voted on behalf of America's future put their special interests love aside and said that we are going to vote on behalf of America's future.

So I am excited about it. This is a day that educators and parents and grandparents who want to see their children educated will see this day as a momentous day. And I am speaking from proof, Mr. Speaker. My wife couldn't have gone to law school. She came from a family that they just didn't have the money to do it. If it wasn't for her being able to get student loans, this bill isn't going to be able to help her but it will help kids like her, and she is a judge today. She wouldn't be a judge if she obviously didn't get a law degree. So I think it is important that we give face and voice to this day because this is about the future of our country.

Mr. Ryan, I will yield to you at this time.

I just want to let you know how much I appreciate you yielding to me. And you and Mr. Murphy, this must be an outstanding moment for you, because it is better than what Mr. Ryan and I experienced when we came in the 108th Congress. We didn't have the opportunity to do even a quarter of the things that we told our constituents we would do if they gave us an opportunity to serve them in this great body.

And what you just talked about is exactly--you can run for five elections on what you just mentioned that we did in the last 2 weeks. Unfortunately, it has been so backed up to the fact that now it is like excitement, it is electric here in Washington, D.C. And these bipartisan votes, anyone who wants to say anything about partisanship, they have to look at what has happened over the last 2 weeks and say, this is what we are talking about. They want it.

They need it.

They asked for it.

And I just, again, as we go along, because, Mr. Speaker, I am just going to keep saying the same thing because the last 109th Congress, the gentleman from Connecticut and the gentleman from Pennsylvania and Ohio, we pulled this chart out. I know the Clerk's office here has seen it, they probably could close their eyes and tell you what is on it because they have seen it so many times, and I know that the Members on the Republican side and the Democratic side. But this is what has been happening, $1.05 trillion. We are going to have another chart because I am pretty sure that number has gone up of out- of-control borrowing from foreign nations, higher than 42 Presidents, 224 years prior to, $1.01 trillion. That is a real fact. And we kept saying and kept saying it.

And what I am going to say again is the fact that we have the 9/11 Commission recommendations implementation making America safer, Mr. Speaker, bipartisan 9/11 Commission. Anyone can go on Yahoo and get a copy of this, the 9/11 Report: 299 yeas. Every Democrat on the floor that was in attendance that day voted for it and 68 Republicans voted in the affirmative. That is bipartisan.

Minimum wage, we talked about it. On that day, there were 315 yeas. Here is the record here with everyone that voted for it and against it. Every Democratic Member in attendance, 233, 82 Republicans voted for it. That is the bipartisan spirit.

Stem cell research, that was mentioned earlier. We have 253 votes; we have 216 Democrats voted for it and we have 37 Republicans voting for it. That is a good number.

Also, you have the Medicare Prescription Drug Price Negotiation Act, which is 231 Democrats voted for it, 24 Republicans voted for it. And I think it is important that you take a look at that and pay well note to the fact that we were able to vote in a bipartisan way.

And I gave the vote out earlier and I want to direct the Members and all the Members to the vote counts. You can go to www.house.gov to get those vote counts so that you can share them not only back home in your district with your constituents, but the American people, Mr. Speaker, can go on www.house.gov and get this information and share it with the people that have been asking and polling and saying that they want bipartisanship in this House. We know there will be a point where there won't be bipartisanship on some votes, but we are going to try to encourage as much as possible. And I want to continue to say that. And I say that in Democratic circles and I say it in Republican circles with my Republican colleagues.

But we are so glad to be joined by another Member that has joined us in the 110th Congress, the distinguished lady from New York.

What we are doing here is kind of going around, and everyone is pretty much sharing what their experience has been over the last 100 or so hours or 90-something hours. We are going to hit 100 tomorrow. But talking about this governing in the way that we should be governing. And the American people are excited about it. So how is it for you?

Just if you would yield, please.

Let me just say the fact that in the 30- Something Working Group we are so glad that not only have the gentlewoman from New York, but also the gentleman from Connecticut and also from Pennsylvania joining us, and of course Mr. Ryan from Ohio.

The fact is that we come to the floor to share with the Members what is actually happening here, because I think some Members may say they don't understand, but I think we were pretty clear last Congress about the facts.

Mr. Speaker, I want to make sure, I was actually corrected on the 90- something hours; it is 68 hours. Because we like to give out good information here. Even when we may sometimes by mistake give the wrong information out as it relates to the 100 hours, we correct ourselves here on the floor. So we give good information to the people so everybody knows exactly what is going on and how it is going on.

Congresswoman, you are going to add not only your experience, but also a good representation on behalf of your constituents and the people of America. By the fact of us being elected, our constituents have federalized us to deal with these issues that are facing the country right now.

Mr. Ryan, I yield to you.

I yield to Mr. Altmire.

It is nothing like, and I just keep breaking this down to what my cousin would understand, who has nothing to do with government. There is nothing like being a Member of Congress and telling people what you would do if you had the opportunity to get elected, and then coming and actually doing it.

Mr. Speaker, that is a paradigm shift. That is a paradigm shift here in

Washington, D.C. We said we would do what we are doing now, and it is actually happening. This is not something that somebody wrote in an article or an op-ed to your local newspaper, saying it would be wonderful if Congress could come together in a bipartisan way and raise the minimum wage.

It would be wonderful if we could start really diving into stem cell research in a way that would be responsible and along the lines of being able to cure many of the ailments that so many Americans have.

It would be wonderful for us to be able to take those super giveaways and loopholes and take $13 billion of those dollars and put them into energy innovation, making sure that we look at an efficient way to conserving not only energy but investing in the Midwest versus the Middle East. It would be wonderful, Mr. Speaker.

These are all of the things that people have been talking about, and I am glad to be a Member of the 110th Congress.

I was so happy, this last King holiday I had an opportunity to give a couple of speeches. I shared with folks; I told them what I had done over the last week and a half. They were, Wow, Congressman, we weren't ready for all that. We have been reading about it and we are so excited about it. It passed the House; and yes, it is on its way to the Senate and hopefully the President of the United States will sign it.

Our work is not done here. The Members' work is not done. America's public work is not done at this time. The American public has to continue to voice their opinion on these issues that we are passing off this floor.

I want to also let Members know that I will be down here tomorrow as a member of the Committee on Ways and Means, talking about the importance of the passage of this legislation. Being able to pass this legislation and turn these loopholes and great giveaways to special interests and turn them into something that the American people can wrap their arms around; and we can be innovative here, in the American homeland, to be able to hopefully save America.

I look at this as a national security issue. I was on Armed Services for the last two Congresses. I can tell you, I am not a Member of Congress with a conspiracy theory, but I know that if we start to invest in what we have here, our natural resources here, our alternative fuels that we can look at, be it E-85 or what have you, we will be able to do better.

I can tell you what is going to stop, Mr. Speaker, and we are going to make sure that the gentleman from Connecticut and the gentlewoman from New York and also the gentleman from Philadelphia, you will get your set of charts as you move along, to be able to show these great illustrations that I usually do. Mr. Ryan and I have a plethora of these charts.

I just want to say that it is important----

I am sorry, did I say Philadelphia?

I am sorry, Mr. Altmire, from Pittsburgh. I got a little excited.

Thank you so very much. You can say I am from Georgia at least once.

Let me just say this: It is the same media market that you are in with Mr. Ryan. I was listening.

Like, for instance, here is an actual pump of ExxonMobil. Here is E- 85 that is here, and these are the other fuels that are there, need it be unleaded, regular, what have you. You see here ``cannot use your Mobil credit card'' to buy this ethanol which is something that is produced here in the United States. This is a part of innovation. This is a part of trying to roll back the clock on global warming. All of these things that have taken place, they have been allowed to do it.

What we are doing tomorrow is taking away some of those super giveaways that they didn't even ask for and the Republican Congress was so happy to give to them. And I don't blame the oil companies. Don't get me wrong. They can only do what we allow them to do.

And while they are making record profits and still have the taxpayer dollars to do what they wish to do, we are going to turn that around and we are going to invest. That is just the beginning. That is what I am excited about.

I yield to the gentlewoman from New York.

I thank the gentlewoman. Again, being a new Member of Congress and to be able to go home and say that you actually have done what you said you would do should make your constituents feel good and should make even your family feel good and you feel good as a public policy maker.

Mr. Ryan, I yield to you at this time, the gentleman from Niles, Ohio.

It is making a difference.

Well, you are 110 percent right. I am so glad you mentioned this faith in government and the opinion prior to the election. We would watch the news, and they would talk about the American public and what they thought about the Congress, what they thought about elected officials.

I can tell you, and this is going into my 13th year of public service in the Florida House and the Florida Senate, now here in the Congress, I have never had a 2-week period like I have had.

And let us not take it lightly. This is something that should be well noted, and it is something that I am excited about as an individual. But I know the American people are excited about it as well, because my constituents are very excited about it. They have never seen this. So let us not take this lightly.

I know we have about 5 more minutes left, and we want to go around and make sure we all get an opportunity to make closing comments, but look at the vision of this Congress from this point forward. Just think about it. Think about the committee work that is going to take place. Think about the oversight that is going to finally take place. Think about the way we are going to look at the President's budget when it is presented later on, when the President comes here and gives his State of the Union speech. Think about the response to that and how we work with the President on some of those issues and move it forward, not jammed up here in Congress.

Because the American people want action. They want it right here, right now.

We are going to give it to them, Mr. Speaker. And I am glad we have the leadership in place, with Speaker Pelosi and our entire Democratic leadership that is here. We also have some leadership, I believe, on the Republican side of the aisle, the Republicans who want to vote on behalf of their constituents. We are going to give them that opportunity.

Folks talk about bipartisan. There have been Republicans on the other side of the aisle who have been wanting to vote for this stuff, for these things. I am going to say this stuff, using Mr. Ryan's analogy, which is good. Because we don't want to speak over the heads of anyone. We want to make sure that we communicate with everyone, and that is what it is all about. That is what it is all about, communicating. And that is what we want to continue to do. Whether it is good or bad, we are going to come to this floor and be committed to it, and I am glad you are all here tonight.

Those are my closing comments, so we will roll all around to the Member from Pennsylvania.

Well, I can tell the gentleman from Pennsylvania, you just had a great honor, because that is usually, for the last 4 years, that has been Mr. Ryan's honor, and he has now passed that on to you, so that means when you are here on the floor, the 30- something Working Group, it is your responsibility to give the website out and the e-mail address out. So consider yourself a friend, I guess, because since you all share the same media market, he thought he would be nice to you.

Let me just say in closing, it is an honor being joined here by my colleagues here in the House. And I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, even when I first came here to this House of Representatives, the good thing about being a Member of this House, when we take our voting card out, that is one vote. We all equal the same one vote. And that is very significant here in this Chamber.

We are going to take some tough votes, Mr. Speaker, and we are going to need Members to step up to the bat and be Members and be leaders on behalf of their district and on behalf of America.

And with that, we would like to thank the Speaker for the time to be here on the floor. Also, our Democratic majority leader and our Democratic whip and chairman and vice chairman for everything that they have done.

And with that, Mr. Speaker, we would like to yield back the balance of our time. And it was an honor addressing the House.

Madam Speaker, Dr. King brought the civil rights movement to every living room in this country. He marched for freedom in the face of unspeakable racial prejudice, yet preached a message of nonviolence, civility, and tolerance. It took Dr. King's forceful movement and powerful words to bring about real and lasting change to this country.

This will be the first Martin Luther King, Jr. Day since the passing of Dr. King's wife, Mrs. Coretta Scott King, a legendary civil rights advocate whose memory we honored at a community-wide march last year in Miami. During a time of national grief and unrest following Dr. King's assassination, she became a symbol of her husband's struggle for peace and unity. On this day, we also honor this wonderful matriarchal figure, a role model who helped lead the struggle for equality.

Minority communities face obstacles every day--poverty, unemployment, lack of healthcare, and access to housing. It is a tragic waste that 1 in 5 children live in poverty, including more than one-third of African American children.

Dr. King paved the way for so many people, including me, to assume roles of influence in this country. And for all this work, he created a more just society and made this country an even better place to live. On this day of remembrance, let us work even harder toward fulfilling Dr. King's legacy of public service.