Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably absent from this chamber today. I would like the Record to show that, had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall votes 891, 892, 893, and 894.

Madam Speaker, along with my distinguished colleague from Massachusetts, Mr. Frank, I am proud to introduce the Coinage Materials Modernization Act of 2007.

This legislation, which is supported by the Treasury Department, would update the law governing the materials used to mint U.S. coins by authorizing the Treasury Secretary to change the composition of coins to less expensive materials.

The immediate purpose of this legislation is to address the rising cost to taxpayers of minting pennies and nickels. Currently pennies are made mostly of zinc and have a copper-plated surface. Nickels are made up of an alloy of 75 percent copper and 25 percent nickel. Since March of 2003, world demand for core metals has driven up the price of copper and nickel by 300 percent and of zinc by 450 percent. At the current specifications for these coins, it costs the Government 1.7 cents to make a penny and 10 cents to make a nickel.

Other coin denominations continue to be made at costs well below their face values, but metal cost is increasing for them as well. This legislation will allow Treasury to change the composition of all U.S. coins to less expensive alternatives and dramatically reduce the costs of producing these coins.

The Treasury Department estimates that by changing the composition of pennies and nickels, we will save the Government over $100 million a year; and by making similar changes to the half dollar, quarter and dime, the Government can save as much as $400 million annually.

Under current law, the Treasury Secretary cannot change the base metals used to make our Nation's coinage without congressional action. The Secretary has the authority to vary the alloy of copper and zinc comprising the penny, but there is little room for further adjustment. This legislation would grant the Secretary the authority to change the base metals used to mint coins, potentially saving taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars, without changing the visual features of our coinage.

After this bill is enacted, the United States Mint, which is a bureau within the Treasury Department, will seek public and industry comment on possible alternative composition for the penny and the nickel. Following the comment period, there will be a competitive public bidding process for new coinage materials. Congress, particularly the Committee on Financial Services, chaired by my cosponsor, Mr. Frank, and the Subcommittee on Domestic and International Monetary Policy, Trade and Technology, which I chair, will exercise strong oversight over this process.

I encourage my colleagues to join me in supporting this legislation, which has the potential to save the Federal Government hundreds of millions of dollars annually. The financial resources of the Federal Government are limited, and it is rare when we have the opportunity to make a simple legislative fix with the potential to save the taxpayers so much. We should take full advantage of this opportunity and pass this legislation in an expeditious manner.

Madam Speaker, I was unavoidably absent from this Chamber yesterday. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall votes 758, 759, 760, 761, and 762.

Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably absent from this Chamber today. I would like the Record to show that, had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall vote 757.

Stated against:

Madam Speaker, I was unavoidably absent from this chamber yesterday. I would like the record to show that, had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall votes 687, 688, 689 and 690.

Madam Speaker, I was on official leave of absence due to a health matter in my family. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall votes 483, 491, 497, and 498 and ``no'' on rollcall votes 466, 467, 468, 469, 470, 471, 472, 473, 474, 475, 476, 477, 478, 479, 480, 481, 482, 484, 485, 486, 487, 488, 489, 490, 492, 493, 494, 495, and 496.

Madam Speaker, I was on official leave of absence June 12 and 13, 2007, due to a health matter in my family. I would like the record to show that, had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall votes 451, 452, 453, 456 and 457 and ``no'' on rollcall votes 454, 455, 458, 459, 460, 461, 462, 463, 464, and 465.

Madam Speaker, I was absent from this chamber today, due to a health matter in my family. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall votes 448, 449 and 450.

Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably absent from this Chamber today. I would like the Record to show that, had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall votes 384 and 385.

Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably absent from the Chamber today. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall votes 345, 346 and 347, 348, and 349.

Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably absent from this Chamber today. I would like the Record to show that, had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall votes 342, 343, and 344.

Madam Speaker, I was unavoidably absent from this chamber yesterday, April 23, 2007. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall votes 245, 246 and 247.

Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably absent from this Chamber today. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall votes 157, 158, and 159.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to announce the introduction of my bill, the Citizenship Promotion Act of 2007. The goal of the legislation is to minimize the obstacles that legal immigrants face on the road to becoming U.S. citizens.

During my 15 years in Congress, I have made citizenship and immigration issues the cornerstone of my work here. In my district, we have created innovative naturalization workshops that have become a national model for legislators around the nation. I am proud to say that these workshops have helped more than 40,000 Chicago-area immigrants to become U.S. citizens.

But there is much more to these workshops than numbers. There is something special, something amazing, about seeing the pride, the promise, and the confidence on a person's face after they have completed the citizenship application process. Men and women who take the oath of citizenship are committed to the responsibilities of being American citizens and are equally dedicated to making the most of America's opportunities.

They have done everything right. They work hard and play by the rules. Yet, this Administration continues to put citizenship out of reach for many hard working individuals by proposing unrealistic and punitive fees to complete the citizenship process.

And the proposed fee hikes, which were announced a few weeks ago, are a glaring example of the government imposing a higher price on its customers, while continuing to offer inadequate, inefficient and ineffective service.

That would never fly in the business world, and it shouldn't when it comes to providing government services.

Prospective citizens are not asking for a free ride--they never have. They are simply asking for fairness, and for a broken bureaucracy, with an unacceptable backlog, to stop trying to fix its failures, and its inefficiencies, on the backs of low-income working families.

In recent years, USCIS has increasingly burdened prospective citizens with indirect costs not related to the application process. The legislation I am introducing today would help reverse that trend in a way that makes sense for prospective citizens and for the agency.

It would freeze fees at their current rates until we can conduct proper oversight and thoroughly review the proposed fee structure.

It would also ensure that indirect costs, those not associated with the application process, can be funded through the appropriations process and not through increased filing fees. The legislation would also help ensure that the citizenship test is administered fairly--and justly--and that people aren't deterred from pursuing the process because of electronic filing barriers.

In addition, the legislation would set up the New Americans Initiative. This would establish a grant program to fund the work of community-based organizations to promote and increase citizenship opportunities through application assistance, outreach and community education, and English and citizenship classes. We have seen a version of this project thrive in Illinois under the leadership of Governor Blagojevich and the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights.

Madam Speaker, let me close with this point. President Theodore Roosevelt once said: ``Americanism is a question of principle, of purpose, of idealism, of character. It is not a matter of birthplace or creed or line of descent.''

Let's work to ensure that those who possess the principle, the purpose, the idealism and the character of America can earn the chance to achieve the American Dream. And let's ensure that they are not priced out of the process.

Let's work to ensure that they can continue to build and better our great nation, as immigrants have done for generations. Let's work to ensure that hard working men and women can fully share in the rights that citizens enjoy and can also help shoulder the enormous responsibilities that come with this incredible opportunity.

Madam Chairman, I rise today to affirm my strong support for H.R. 800, the Employee Free Choice Act. I would like to thank my colleague, Chairman George Miller, for introducing this important legislation to ensure that workers have the light to organize a union if they choose, without being subjected to workplace abuses, economic coercion or threats by their employers.

Union busting has become a lucrative industry at the cost of the American worker. When surveyed in 2006, a substantial majority, 58 percent, of eligible workers said that they would join a union if they could; however, union membership dropped below 10 percent in the private sector, bringing union membership to a record low. This discrepancy is directly related to the flawed National Labor Relation Board system as it applies to a fair and democratic election process.

Under the current NLRB system, employers are allowed to pressure employees into voting against the union during an organizing drive by using economic coercion and continual threats. It is common practice for union-busting employers to use direct supervisors to meet one-on- one with employees to compel them to vote against the union. Also, employees are often forced to attend mandatory anti-union lectures, while union representatives, under threat of termination, are not allowed to present their views to other workers at their employment site.

And the list of abuses goes on and on:

Twenty-five percent of employers illegally fire at least one worker for union activity during an organizing campaign;

Fifty-two percent of employers threaten deportation or other forms of retaliation during organizing drives that include undocumented employees;

And 51 percent of employers threaten to close their plants if the union wins the election, although only 1 percent actually will.

Worksite intimidation and economic threats create a hostile environment and eradicate the ability for a worker to make a fair and free decision. Workers are pushed out of an impartial election process because they fear for their livelihood and the economic stability of their families. The current system is far from democratic. It's unfair and it's wrong.

We need to fix this broken system to allow for workers to freely make their own choices at the workplace without fear of employer reprisal.

As a Representative from the great city of Chicago, a stronghold of working families and union struggles, I can speak to the benefits afforded to workers who choose to wield their collective bargaining power. The median weekly earnings of union workers are 30 percent higher in comparison to nonunion workers. This increase can pull a working class family out of poverty and strongly into the middle class.

Union workers also receive more benefits than nonunion workers. Only 2.5 percent of union workers go without health insurance coverage, whereas 15 percent of nonunion workers are uninsured. From health to disability benefits to pensions, joining a union provides a higher standard of living and secure benefits that may otherwise not be within reach of some employees.

Unions are essential to the fight for worker rights, and we must work to ensure that they can be formed without pitting employers against employees.

Workers must be allowed to choose freely whether or not they want to form a union--absent employer intimidation and economic coercion--and this is exactly what the Employee Free Choice Act will provide. This timely legislation will enhance working conditions and ensure a more equitable system in the workplace. The welfare of our working families and the future of our middle class depend on it.

I urge a yes vote on this historic and important legislation.