Floor Statements

I am going to forego the niceties of congressional conversation this afternoon because I have only got a minute to tell you what I really think. There are times when the timidity of the Congress of the United States absolutely overwhelms me into anger.

We have sat by in this country since the Second World War was over, watching American jobs go to rebuild the economies of Germany, Japan and Korea, one after the other. We have gone way too far. We have jeopardized our own well-being.

If we believe that we can be a superpower, the superpower, and not manufacture anything, I think we are sorely mistaken. When we are dependent on other countries for all the goods that we need, not only domestically but

militarily, I think we are in a sorry shape.

Now, our trade policies that we have had have been awful, and it is bipartisanly awful. But I will tell you right now that as far as I am concerned, and I hope a lot of my colleagues agree with me, until we get reciprocity, until every trade agreement that we pass says that that country has to open its borders completely to trade from the United States of America, we don't have anything.

We are way late on this. We are 20 years too late to be doing this. We are right at the brink right now of financial disaster in this country. Those jobs that we have lost are not coming back. We have got to be rebuilding a new economy. We can't do it if China is going to do it all first and get there and dump on us and undercut.

So not only pass this bill today, but demand stronger policies in this country to save us for our next generation.

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 1682 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier). All time yielded during consideration of the rule is for debate only.

General Leave

I ask unanimous consent that all Members be given 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on House Resolution 1682.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, H. Res. 1682 provides for consideration of the Senate amendments to H.R. 3081, the Continuing Appropriations Act of 2011. The rule makes in order a motion offered by the chair of the Committee on Appropriations, or his designee, that the House concur in the Senate amendments to H.R. 3081. The rule provides 1 hour of debate on the motion, equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations. The rule waives all points of order against consideration of the motion, except those arising under clause 10 of rule XXI. And finally, the rule provides the Senate amendments and the motion shall be considered as read.

Mr. Speaker, we are here tonight to approve the continuing resolution to maintain a level and consistent funding stream for the government. It is an easy issue to demagogue, and it is my hope that everybody will work together now and quickly move this bill to passage and to the President's desk. The Senate voted earlier this evening on the same straightforward bill that keeps funding even for the fiscal year that begins on Friday. As you know, the CR before us will fund government agencies until December 3, and Congress will revisit the issue in November.

There are some on the other side who question why we are considering a CR. They want us to stay here in Washington instead of getting this done and heading back to our districts. If you ask me, we've been here long enough. It has been an historic, groundbreaking session of Congress that will improve the quality of life for millions of Americans and has exceeded all of our expectations.

Generations from now, history will show that Speaker Pelosi and our majority helped usher in far-reaching health care reform that had been tried for 100 years and put curbs on insurance companies, restructured Wall Street rules, reformed student aid, increased small business assistance, added new regulations on tobacco, curbed credit card abuses, and protected Social Security. It has been one of the most productive sessions of Congress that I have ever been associated with, and I am proud of all the work that we have behind us. But now it's time to approve the CR and go home.

No one should be surprised with the CR. With the exception of fiscal years 1989, 1995 and 1997, one continuing resolution at least has been enacted for each fiscal year since 1955. In the 12 years that Republicans controlled the House, CRs were enacted 84 separate times. As in previous years, we are extending funding with a CR but are making no changes in policy. And I hope all of my colleagues would join me in voting ``yes'' on this rule.

Mr. Speaker, before we spend more time on conversations about budgets and currency, I want to pause to pay tribute to a very special person who is retiring from Congress in November. Katharine Hayford, known to the world as Sophie, is more than just a dedicated member of the Rules Committee staff. She is an icon in the House, a symbol of the best attributes of the dedicated staff that keeps this place humming. She is a deep and irreplaceable reservoir of institutional knowledge, and to say she will be missed is a critical understatement.

Sophie is one of those rare people in Congress who has always been content to work quietly and professionally in the background. She never sought or wanted attention. Her pride was in being prepared for any scenario that could unfold in the hearing room or on the House floor. And as someone with more than a little experience on the Rules Committee, I can vouch for that. Almost anything can and does happen

here every day, and that is one of the things that makes the place so wonderful to work in.

It's common knowledge to those of us on Rules that the tiny cubby holes and shelves behind her desk have more yellowed and dog-eared records than the National Archives and more paper and reports than a Presidential library. Sophie saved everything. Whenever the members were on the floor to manage a rule, Sophie was ready and waiting with a massive, double-phonebook-sized binder filled with House precedents, statistics, talking points, and even items that she had culled from the many blogs and Web sites she devoured.

My first email from her every morning came between 5:35 and 6 a.m. But she is much more than a mini research factory. Sophie has a smile for everyone and went out of her way to provide cookies, raisins, almonds, crackers, chips, and even doughnuts on a regular basis to our hardworking staff. She did that on her own because she knew it was needed and appreciated. She bakes cakes, even vegan ones, out of deference to our staff that don't eat dairy. Her birthday celebrations are a familiar and comforting routine.

Before we had the privilege of working with Sophie, she worked in the personal office of Congressman Joe Moakley, who was a friend to all of us. Sophie spent 10 years on Congressman Moakley's staff before coming to the Rules Committee in 1986, the year that I was elected to Congress, and some of my staff had not yet been born. More recently, she has discovered the pleasures of France and is a frequent visitor to Paris, where she is learning the language and discovering sites.

And now, as she prepares to leave the Hill and spend more time with Brad, her quiet and extremely talented musician husband, it is time for us to say goodbye to Sophie and thank her for all this work over these many years.

I yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier).

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds.

I just want to say to my friend, the eternal optimist, that I have served here for 22 years. I served in the State legislature in Albany, and I served in the county legislature. I have been a student of legislatures, Mr. Speaker, believe it or not, and I have never heard of, seen, or even contemplated any legislature anywhere where one party simply opted out and voted ``no'' on every single thing for political gain.

They did have plenty of opportunity at the hearings and all the committee meetings to make their input there and had a lot of effect, I think, with quite a bit of legislation that we passed. But we had to pass it, Mr. Speaker, the hard way.

I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), from the Rules Committee.

I yield the gentleman an additional 1 minute.

I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Sutton), a former member of the Rules Committee.

I yield 30 seconds more to Ms. Sutton.

I am.

Mr. Speaker, let me talk about some of the consequences if we were to, and I pray we do not, vote ``no'' on the previous question.

My colleagues say they are going to extend the Bush tax cuts permanently, with a price tag of $4 trillion over the next 10 years, more than doubling the deficit, while cutting the domestic discretionary Federal budget back to 2008 levels, which they say will save $340 billion over the next decade.

Choosing once again to disinvest in America would save less than 10 percent of the increased deficits their policy would cause, but it would result in significant reductions to existing State and local law enforcement and crime-fighting programs.

It would slash and burn JAG grants, which help communities to fight crime, by $260 million. It would gut the STOP grant funding that helps States prevent and respond to violent crimes against women. Overall, the Department of Justice would be cut by $2.4 billion. That would result in thousands of law enforcement personnel being laid off.

The plan would slash $700 million from new law enforcement initiatives, including $210 million from DOJ and the FBI's cybersecurity, WMD, and counterterrorism programs, and 137 members from DEA, ATF and other agencies, all trying to fight the Mexican drug cartels that are threatening the communities along our borders.

The price is really much too great, Mr. Speaker. I urge a ``yes'' vote on the previous question.

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

Madam Speaker, it is a great pleasure to be here with a member of the Rules Committee and my cochair of the Arts Caucus. It is wonderful to work with Mr. Platts, and I appreciate the kind words that he said about the work that we do.

I rise today to honor the 50th anniversary of Americans for the Arts. As the leading nonprofit organization for advancing the arts and arts education in the United States, Americans for the Arts continues to be dedicated to representing and serving local communities and creating opportunities for participation and enjoyment in all forms of the arts.

Founded in 1960 in Winston-Salem, North Carolina, the original mission was and continues to be to enhance support for the nonprofit arts. In 1965, Americans for the Arts played a key role in the establishment of the National Endowment for the Arts. A half century later, Americans for the Arts continues to foster the arts at the local, State, and national level.

Under the remarkable stewardship of Robert Lynch for the last 25 years, Americans for the Arts has provided leadership and training to local public and nonprofit agencies through a national network of arts and business councils, business committees for the arts, and local and State agencies.

Research by Americans for the Arts measured the economic impact of the arts, which was a wonderful piece of work and gave us a lot of ammunition on the Arts Caucus. It showed that approximately 100,000 nonprofit cultural organizations generate $166.2 billion in economic activity every year--now that is a great return on not much money-- supporting 5.7 million jobs. In my congressional district alone, there are over 1,200 arts-related businesses employing almost 16,000 people.

In addition to fostering art jobs in our local communities, Americans for the Arts has worked to promote the importance of arts education in the public schools. Young people who regularly participate in arts programs are more likely to have better attendance records, to be involved in their school government, excel in their academics, and develop the creative and innovative skills necessary for us to compete in the 21st century global workforce.

Through national events like Arts Advocacy Day, Americans for the Arts brings national attention to the importance of arts throughout our Nation. The arts define our culture and instill unique character in the communities across our Nation. Art transcends barriers of language, time, and generation, translating cultural differences, breathing life into history, and bridging experience across cultures. They accomplish the seemingly impossible task of both revealing our differences across the globe while managing to illuminate all that connects us.

I thank Americans for the Arts and the wonderful staff and all of the people who have devoted so much of their working careers to this noble effort. And of their wonderful, fine accomplishments that they have achieved over 50 years, I am sure that the next 50 will produce even more great work, and we will all continue to enjoy the richness that the arts provide to each of our lives.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to speak in recognition of the 90th anniversary of the passage of the 19th amendment of the U.S. Constitution on August 26th, granting voting rights for women. This day, also known as Women's Equality Day, marks a significant milestone in American history. I know that my colleagues join me in acknowledging the contributions that women have made to America and the importance of this landmark in history.

The 72-year struggle of suffragists, from the First Women's Rights Convention in July 1848 to the passage of the 19th amendment on August 26, 1920, bears witness to the sacrifice and dedication of the leaders of the early Women's Rights Movement.

We must thank Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Lucretia Mott, and the other courageous women who organized the First Women's Rights Convention in 1848. Their early advocacy for voting rights, protection from domestic violence, the right to own property, and other social reforms that promote equality are the same goals that we seek for women today. The ``Declaration of Sentiments'' speech that Mrs. Stanton delivered at the July convention called for ``all men and women'' to be recognized as created equal under the law. This is a sacred trust that we must continue to support.

On August 26, 1970--the 50th anniversary--the National Organization of Women (NOW) called upon women nationwide to strike for equality in protest of the fact that women still did not have equal rights. In New York City, 50,000 women marched down Fifth Avenue to demonstrate in support of the women's movement, as did women in 40 other cities across America that day. U.S. Representative Bella Abzug addressed the New York City crowd and was instrumental in getting Congress in 1971 to officially recognize August 26th as Women's Equality Day.

In 1776, Abigail Adams, wife of John Adams, sent an urgent message to her husband who was a delegate to the second Continental Congress. She stated, ``In the new

Code of Laws, I desire you would remember the ladies.'' It took 144 years for women's equality rights to be sanctioned by Congress and I ask, Madam Speaker, that we take this opportunity to honor this 90th anniversary and the remarkable contributions that women have made to this country. The American people owe a debt of gratitude to the early suffragists for remaining steadfast in the face of overwhelming opposition to equal rights for all American citizens that our Constitution supports today.

Madam Speaker, many of my colleagues here today interrupted important activities back in their home districts in order to be here today for this unusual August session.

Some canceled important community events, put off important meetings with constituents or postponed time with their children to be here.

For me, today was the day that I was scheduled to present 11 military medals to Thomas Hetherington, a wonderful Niagara Falls man and decorated Naval officer.

Hetherington fought in both the Korean and Vietnam wars but struggled for years to convince the Pentagon to give him replacement medals; his originals were buried some years ago in the casket of his brother, who himself was a decorated Marine and Vietnam veteran.

This year, my staff was able to assist Mr. Hetherington with getting replacement medals to compensate for the ones he bequeathed to his brother. It was very important to his family and I was glad I could play some small role in navigating the bureaucracy for this constituent.

But last week we called Mr. Hetherington and said we had to postpone the service. Why? Because like my colleagues, I was summoned to Washington to vote on an absolutely critical package of legislation that the Senate approved late last week.

We're here today debating emergency assistance for states and school districts across the country, I can't think of a better reason for members to rush back to the Capitol.

We're here today to extend a lifeline to teachers and classrooms to ensure that students across this country are not hurt by a weak economy that has forced some states into drastic cutbacks.

Despite the failure of the Senate to move this bill during many months of debate until it finally passed this week, the urgency is real. And the appeal is broad.

This legislation saves or creates 310,000 American jobs, specifically for teachers, police officers, firefighters and nurses.

The funds will go immediately to states to prevent layoffs and in some cases to rehire teachers as summer comes to an end and students to go back to school.

Students here in Washington DC will be at school the week after next.

In my home state of New York, this package is worth roughly $2 billion in Medicaid savings.

Since New York faced a budget shortfall, this bill directs more than $600 million to the state to retain and create teacher jobs over the coming school year. The U.S. Department of Education says the bill will fund 8,200 positions.

This legislation is completely paid for, primarily by closing tax loopholes that encourage corporations to ship American jobs overseas. In fact, this bill will help us cut the deficit by $1.4 billion over the next 10 years.

Amazingly, some on the other side have argued that this legislation is nothing more than a deal for ``special interests,'' as they say.

These funds will assist states so that they can keep qualified teachers in classrooms and pay firefighters and police officers to keep our neighborhoods safe. Shouldn't we do everything in our power to protect those jobs?

Widespread layoffs in those sectors would hurt not only schools and children but would further depress the economy. Knocking Americans into the unemployment line does nothing for families--they deserve better. These people form the backbone of our economy.

Sadly, one of the reasons it took until the early part of August to pass this legislation is that Senate Republicans filibustered efforts to bring it forward for a vote.

Now that this measure is before us, I hope all of my colleagues will join me in supporting this legislation and quickly moving to a final vote this afternoon.

If protecting public safety and education means that I am helping ``special interests,'' then count me in.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in order to express my sincere congratulations to Harris RF Communications on celebrating its 50th anniversary.

The division is a shining example of how a sense of entrepreneurship and perseverance can leave a lasting impression on an industry and a community.

Started by Bill Stolze, Elmer Schwittek, Roger Bettin and Herbert VandenBrul in 1960, the outfit has transformed itself from a basement operation in Rochester, NY to a $2 billion dollar business in international company producing cutting edge technology.

It is especially fitting that we celebrate this achievement as this radio is used and sought after by every branch of the U.S. Department of Defense as well as several of our ally nations. Today, their radios are seen not only as meeting industry standards, but surpassing them with their tbrward looking technology. Their products contain next- generation communications capabilities that are designed to be compatible with existing communications systems. Moreover, they can be upgraded in the future to grow as new software and encryption technology advances.

It is this superior design and production, which was recognized by the U.S. Army as one of 2007's greatest inventions that leaves me confident that our troops and those of our allies are in good hands while using Harris RF Communications products.

The company, which has given so much to the industry, should also be commended on their dedication to the community. Their mark has not only been felt through their donations to local educational institutions, but by participating in mentoring youth in engineering such as the newly established Harris Scholars Program for economically disadvantaged young girls.

However, no achievement is won alone, so I would also like to recognize all of Harris' local employees for the critical work they perform every day in support of our soldiers. Their care and dedication assure me that there are many more years of innovative products to come.

Mr. Chairman, on rollcall No. 505, had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the 50th anniversary of Americans for the Arts. As the leading nonprofit organization for advancing the arts and arts education in the United States, Americans for the Arts continues to be dedicated to representing and serving local communities and creating opportunities for participation and enjoyment of all forms of the arts.

Founded in 1960 in Winston-Salem, North Carolina, the original mission of Americans for the Arts was and continues to be to enhance support for the nonprofit arts. In 1965 Americans for the Arts played a key role in the establishment of the National Endowment for the Arts. A half century later Americans for the Arts continues to foster the arts at the local, state, and national level.

Under the remarkable stewardship of Robert Lynch for the last 25 years, Americans for the Arts has provided leadership and training to local public and nonprofit agencies through a national network of Arts and Business Councils, Business Committees for the Arts, local and state arts agencies, state arts advocacy organizations, and community- based cultural organizations across the country serving 5,000 local arts agencies and their communities.

Research by Americans for the Arts measured the economic impact of the arts, which showed that approximately 100,000 nonprofit cultural organizations generate $166.2 billion in economic activity every year supporting 5.7 million jobs. In my congressional district alone, there are over 1,200 arts-related businesses employing nearly 16,000 people.

In addition to fostering arts jobs in our local communities, Americans for the Arts has worked to promote the importance of Arts Education in our public schools. Young people who regularly participate in arts programming are more likely to have better attendance records, be involved in their school government, excel in their academics, and develop the creative and innovative skills necessary to compete in the 21st century global workforce.

Through national events like Arts Advocacy Day, Americans for the Arts brings national attention to the importance of arts throughout our nation. The arts define our culture and instill unique character in the communities across our nation. Art transcends barriers of language, time, and generation, translating cultural differences, breathing life into history, and bridging experiences across cultures. They accomplish the seemingly impossible task of both revealing our differences across the globe, while managing to illuminate all that connects us.

I thank Americans for the Arts for their fine achievements over the past 50 years. I know that the next 50 will be filled with even more accomplishments, and that we will continue to enjoy the richness that the arts provide to each of our lives.

I appreciate the gentleman's yielding.

Mr. Chairman, Buffalo, New York, is the third poorest city in the United States. No one in their right mind would ever accuse Buffalo of getting spoils. This complex is a very important economic development tool for us. This amendment would strike an important lifeline to a place of cultural and economic significance in a struggling region that has been hit hard by the recession.

This house was completed in 1905. I won't go into all that. I simply want to say that Mr. Martin was the patron of Frank Lloyd Wright. He kept him going in good times and bad. Mr. Wright did his best work on this complex. It has been allowed to degenerate over the years because of a lack of money. The community has raised almost all the money to restore this by themselves.

Now, let me tell you, Mr. Flake, we estimate that when this is finished, consultants tell us that 42,000 to 83,000 visitors a year would come to see that house. It would generate $17 million in economic impact annually. For this million dollars, Mr. Flake, you probably would not get a better return on your money, and additionally the tax return would be significant.

Of this $17 million, $8.34 million will be the earnings and wages of 198 workers who would otherwise be jobless. This is not the time to be striking those jobs from these persons.

One of the reasons that we are anxious to get it finished is that in October 2011, there will be a national conference convening in Buffalo with Martin House at its center bringing in more than 2,000 people. It is our aim to try to make this magnificent structure and we invite you to come up. I know you would love it. We want to have it finished.

We believe that this will be a significant destination for everybody in America who loves the finest architect that America ever produced-- Frank Lloyd Wright.

And, Mr. Flake, I do appreciate you. As you remember, it was my committee that put this in order. Thank you very much.

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong opposition to the Flake Amendment eliminating funding for restoration of the historic Darwin Martin House and complex in Buffalo, New York.

This amendment would strike an important lifeline to a place of cultural and economic significance in an already struggling region hit hard by the recession.

The Darwin Martin House and complex was completed in 1905 in the historic Parkside neighborhood of Buffalo and is a testament to the genius of famed American architect Frank Lloyd Wright.

The Buffalo community has rallied behind this historic landmark, spearheading an ambitious effort to complete its full restoration after years of neglect and disrepair, turning into source of jobs and tourism revenue.

Consultants predict visitation levels at 42,000 to 83,000 visitors per year, which would generate $17 million in economic impact for the region annually.

Of this $17 million, $8.34 million will be the earnings and wages of 198 workers who would otherwise be jobless.

I hardly think now is the time to be striking jobs from hard working folks, during a period of economic hardship we have not seen since the Great Depression.

Additionally, The National Trust for Historic Preservation will be convening its October 2011 national conference in Buffalo, a city of architectural masterpieces, including Frank Lloyd Wright's Martin House Complex, a lynchpin of the region's architectural and cultural tourism sectors.

Over 2,000 practitioners and opinion makers from the fields of historic preservation, architecture and design will be coming to see the Martin House.

Richard Moe, former president of the National Trust, called the Martin House, ``the most ambitious and well executed restoration effort in his 15 years at the helm of the Trust.''

He went further to say he believed the Martin House holds the promise of becoming ``the signature Frank Lloyd Wright site in America.''

This is a national success story that will bring millions of visitors to the Buffalo Niagara region and will be an anchor for the burgeoning cultural tourism industry.

New York State will have ``book-end'' Wright sites with the Guggenheim Museum in NYC and the Martin House to the west, in the shadow of Niagara Falls and all its international tourism appeal.

Please join us in opposition to this amendment.

Announcement by the Chair

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the men and women who risked their lives for the victims of 9/11.

In the aftermath of the collapse of the World Trade Center towers, thousands of courageous men and women from around the country devoted themselves tirelessly to the rescue efforts. In the course of their work, they were exposed to numerous toxins.

After giving so much of themselves, many of these firefighters, police officers, rescue workers, and innocent bystanders are currently suffering from serious respiratory, gastrointestinal, and mental health conditions. More than 70,000 individuals have enrolled in the World Trade Center Health Registry, signifying that they were exposed to the toxins. Over 13,000 responders and 4,500 survivors are sick and receiving treatment. Moreover, approximately 53,000 responders have entered into medical monitoring.

For this reason, I support H.R. 847, the 9/11 Health and Compensation Fund.

H.R. 847 would build on existing programs to provide long-term, comprehensive health care and compensation for those in need. By establishing the World Trade Center Health Program, this legislation would ensure that World Trade Center victims and survivors receive proper medical monitoring and treatment. It will also reopen the 9/11 Victims Compensation Fund, which would help cover economic losses.

The World Trade Center victims and responders have waited long enough. Thousands of Americans were exposed to toxins at Ground Zero, and they are sick and need treatment. It is time for action.

Mr. Costello, I thank you so much for your kindness in yielding. I thank you even more for your kindness and your persistence, yours and Mr. Oberstar's, in bringing us to this moment this evening.

I want to thank Mr. Mica and my neighbor, Mr. Petri, for their caring and work that they have done as well.

My heart is pretty full tonight because I have watched the families over these 1\1/2\ years, watched them with pain etched on their faces that will never go away. We talked a little while ago in my office about the ceremonies of life, who would give you away at the wedding, you miss your father at Christmas time, your mother, your child.

One of the saddest things in the world that happened here today, and I want to call attention to it, was the Eckert family, Karen and Susan, sisters of Beverly, who died in that plane crash. Beverly's husband had died at the World Trade Center. She was somebody we knew very well. She was here a lot, and we got to know her. And then her sisters took up this banner to make sure that this would not happen to other people.

They have learned to live with their tragedy, but what they have been doing all this time is working for us. They have made sure that none of the rest of us will endure this kind of tragedy. I know how grateful I am for them, but everybody in America owes them a debt of gratitude.

On that awful evening in February, with the runway in sight of that airplane, we lost 50 people and we learned that the skies are not as safe as we once thought. Since then, we have learned that regional airline pilots don't require the same training as major carriers with whom they share the skies.

No airline should have ever sent into Buffalo, New York in February two pilots that didn't have the foggiest idea how to fly through ice. We also found out that they were extraordinarily exhausted. They were paid so little that they had to fly to Newark to get their plane and they couldn't even afford a hotel room. One of them slept on the floor of a FedEx plane that night to get to Newark. Others were sleeping in chairs at the post.

How terrible is this that these are the people who are exhausted, underpaid, undertrained, and many of them with great failures on their records that nobody ever knows about? How tragic for these families that those were the people in charge of the plane that night.

Now, every person on that plane was extraordinarily precious. We love and we miss every one of them. Also, the family who lived in the house where the plane fell, they lost their father. I will tell you that on that plane was one of the world's greatest anthropologists. On that plane was one of the world's greatest musicians. Everybody on that plane had particular talents and gifts and families that they loved. It should never have happened to them. That's why getting to this night is so important to all of us and to all of them--but we know now that crash could have been prevented.

So there are the people I thanked before. In addition is our Transportation Secretary, Mr. LaHood, to whom I want to say we really can't thank you enough.

We all know that progress has been slower than we would have liked, but Mr. Costello is absolutely right. We seem to pass bills over here in a great flurry, working as hard as we can, and then they fall into that black recess on the other side of the Capitol. Today, though, we know we are at the finish line, and with the lessons that we have learned from Flight 3407, we have another opportunity to try to get this right. We must not rest until we get this right.

All of us want to say again to the families who are here, who have been with us, who have exhibited extraordinary patience, who have come at their own expense, who have suffered, that to get to know them and their children has been astonishing. What they have learned from their loss was to turn that into a gain for all of us. Thank you very much for all of the work that you have done. We appreciate it.

I join them to say that I hope no family will ever be confronted with the disaster that this was that could have been avoided.

Mr. Speaker, on this most important day in the history of the House of Representatives, I send to the desk H. Res. 1555, and ask unanimous consent for its immediate consideration in the House.

Madam Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 1549 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Madam Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I am pleased to yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sessions). And all time yielded during consideration of the rule is for debate only.

General Leave

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members be given 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on House Resolution 1549.

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

Madam Speaker, H. Res. 1549 provides for consideration of H.R. 1264, the Multiple Peril Insurance Act. The rule provides 1 hour of general debate controlled by the Committee on Financial Services. The rule provides one motion to recommit with or without instructions.

Madam Speaker, there is not a person in the Chamber today who can forget the terrible destruction left in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina 5 short years ago. Lives were lost, homes were destroyed, businesses closed. Schools and hospitals were underwater. Our Nation has never been the same.

The damage that Katrina inflicted on New Orleans and across the Gulf States left thousands of people homeless. There were refugees spread across more than a dozen States. I think I speak for all of us when I say the storm left an indelible mark on our collective psyche.

Although the storm and accompanying flood exposed many troubling failings, one of the most alarming was the fact that so many people who believed that they had adequate insurance, in fact, were not covered for Katrina's destruction.

Why? Because insurance companies engaged in a maddening shell game with homeowners about their coverage. Damage that seemed obviously caused by water would be attributed to wind, while wind damage was chalked up to flooding. The stalemate left far too many people with no claim.

The apparent loophole in coverage made it very difficult for many families to rebuild in the months and years after the storm. The same problem has cropped up after other hurricanes or large storms have struck over the years.

In the aftermath of Katrina, Congress worked collaboratively on legislation to address the coverage gap; and 3 years ago, legislation to do just that was approved by the House. However, the plan was unable to win passage in the Senate, so we are here again to try.

Despite the challenges, it is our contention that taxpayers will actually end up saving significant amounts of money if this type of coverage is made available to Americans.

In the aftermath of Katrina, the Federal Government spent more than $34 billion on rental assistance, on vouchers, trailers, grants to homeowners and Small Business Administration disaster loans to homeowners.

Had there been a public option available to allow property owners to purchase insurance that provided seamless coverage of hurricane losses, some of that cost might have been avoided. With this bill we accomplish that goal.

The bill creates a new program within the National Flood Insurance Program to purchase both flood and wind storm insurance under one multi-peril policy, or to purchase wind storm coverage to supplement their already existing flood insurance.

It is a bipartisan bill and has been endorsed by the National Association of Home Builders, and the National Association of Realtors. The bill is also PAYGO compliant, since the program is required to pay for itself.

The most important thing to remember about this legislation is it simply gives Americans the option of buying coverage of getting some peace of mind.

The issue is far too important for us to wait around for the next round of storms like Katrina or Ike or Gustav to roar ashore and leave far too many families with nothing. This bill is a simple and effective way to permit people to purchase insurance so the next storm does not leave them high and dry.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself 1 minute.

We don't have hurricanes in Rochester, New York--for which we are extremely grateful. But all of us were affected by Katrina. All of us saw what happened to the city that we all loved. New Orleans belongs to every American. All of us have friends here in the House and some in the Senate who lost everything they had. These were people who had insurance on their homes. They thought they were covered. But because the fact the insurance companies said no, they would come to your house, which may have been completely overwhelmed with water, and say that was wind damage; we don't cover that. With the whipsawing back and forth, so many people lost everything they had.

As I said in my opening statement, the government paid $34 billion to try to house and maintain people until we could find a permanent solution. If by passing this bill we can avoid that kind of expenditure again, I would call that money well spent. This program is self- sufficient, it is paid for by the premiums.

I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).

I reserve the balance of my time.

At this moment, I do not.

May I inquire of the gentleman if he's ready to close?

May I inquire if the gentleman is ready to close?

Thirty-five or 50?

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Mississippi, the sponsor of the legislation, Mr. Taylor.

I yield the gentleman an additional 4 minutes.

Madam Speaker, I yield the gentleman 3 additional minutes.

I reserve the balance of my time until the gentleman from Texas closes.

Madam Speaker, I want to remind those persons listening, particularly Members of Congress who are going to come to the floor to vote, that we are not voting on Amtrak cars. We are talking about legislation to try to protect those Americans who are victims of hurricanes and other related natural disasters from losing everything the way the gulf coast victims of Katrina have. The bill will help ensure that the insurance loopholes will be closed and that hardworking Americans won't be denied legitimate claims when they desperately need them.

I call for a ``yes'' vote on the previous question and on the rule.

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

Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of Social Security as its 75th birthday nears.

Social Security is among the most important programs ever created by our Government. Older Americans have worked hard and made sacrifices to ensure a better, stronger country for future generations. They deserve a secure, healthy retirement.

Without Social Security, one out of every two seniors would fall into poverty, and the disabled and survivors--including millions of children--would find themselves without this critical safety net in their time of need.

In my district alone, over 120,000 people received Social Security benefits in 2009, including over 77,000 seniors and nearly 13,000 children who receive benefits because a family member has retired, become disabled, or died. Today, as we approach its 75th anniversary, Social Security is once again under assault by Congressional Republicans.

The ranking Republican member on the House Committee on the Budget introduced H.R. 4529, the Roadmap for America's Future, which purports to rescue and strengthen Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security, allowing them to fulfill their missions and making them permanently solvent--all while putting the federal budget on a sustainable path. If this were true, I would be the first in line to cosponsor the legislation.

However, independent analysis of the bill revealed the plan would raise taxes for most middle-income families, privatize a substantial portion of Social Security, and replace Medicare with a voucher system that would cover fewer and fewer health care services as the years went by.

What I find most disturbing about this proposal is the failure to acknowledge a connection between the recent volatility of the stock market and the effect that would have on privatized Social Security accounts.

When a trillion dollars of wealth can disappear in 30 minutes, as it did on May 6, 2010, we know that the stock market is not the place for seniors' life savings. Privatization, or partial privatization, of the Social Security system would have been disastrous for millions of senior citizens that depend on their Social Security checks every month.

Too many seniors in this country saw their retirement savings decimated by President Bush's economic crisis. I rise today to assure seniors that I and the Democrats in Congress will continue to stand firmly opposed to any and all efforts to privatize Social Security. Seniors can count on us to preserve Social Security for both current beneficiaries and generations to come.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to commemorate the one- year anniversary of the murder of Dr. George Tiller who was killed in his church in Wichita, Kansas on May 31, 2009. Dr. Tiller was a dedicated physician, and his murder was a deplorable act of violence that violated the sanctity of his place of worship. Dr. Tiller's shooting shattered the peace of his church, and added to an all too long list of past tragedies in places of worship. In the past ten years, there have been numerous instances of gun related violence in our places of worship which resulted in 32 deaths and 26 injuries. These sanctuaries are meant to be peaceful refuges for those who seek serenity in times of turmoil and safety in times of hostility. On this anniversary of Dr. Tiller's murder, we must remember and commit to our country's tradition of cooperation and understanding. We must reaffirm the American principle that tolerance must always be superior to intolerance, and that violence is never an appropriate response to a difference in beliefs.