Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased that we are passing this crucial Terrorism Risk Insurance Act (TRIA) extension, which will provide necessary stability for our Nation's economy in a post 9-11 world. I have strongly supported this legislation from the outset, and I congratulate Chairman Oxley and Ranking Member Frank for their hard work and the excellent product as it passed the House. While I wish more of the House provisions we passed 10 days ago had survived conference, I am pleased that we are able to extend TRIA before the deadline, so that it does not expire in 2 weeks. I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this important conference report.

A stable, secure insurance market is vital to the health of our national economy. More than 4 years ago, the stability of the insurance industry, and all of our Nation's policyholders, were put in jeopardy when insurers and reinsurers lost more than $30 billion as a result of the 9/11 attacks. After these substantial losses, insurers were unable to make terrorism insurance available, which left many of our Nation's businesses vulnerable to unacceptable risk.

In response, Congress overwhelmingly passed TRIA to provide a temporary, limited federal backstop in the event of another catastrophic terrorist attack. While we still expect the insurance industry to eventually develop methods for making terrorism insurance available without government support, the market has not yet stabilized to the point where this is possible. Extension of TRIA, which is necessary to prevent the chill of development in our cities, has wide, bipartisan support, and should be enacted promptly.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to House Resolution 612. I honor and support our troops and request an open debate on Iraq on the House floor.

Mr. Chairman, I stand in opposition to this amendment. I think that we should move forward and make sure that we have the groundwork for a program that allows, as President Bush has stated, those who work hard, play by the rules, to come out of the darkness and come out of the shadows and come forward.

I do not think we should criminalize it at any level. We have administrative review now. We have civil penalties. We have a process. And I do not see why we should change that process, if indeed, as the chairman has said and so many people have said, that, next year, we are coming back to fix this thing.

Well, let us not cause any interruptions in fixing this thing. I said we should not criminalize this in the first place just on principle. We have civil statutes that deal with this.

So I stand, and the Hispanic Congressional Caucus has unanimously adopted a position to stand against this motion and this amendment in particular.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman very much for all of his hard work.

Mr. Chairman, I guess I come to speak before this very, very able body today to say that we are really not solving the problem. The fact is that this bill represents a retreat from true immigration reform and from true security. Evaluate the bill, and you will see that it neither demonstrates the political will nor commits the requisite resources to deport 11 million people who currently live and work in the United States of America.

So after the bill is passed, there will still be 11 million, and I do not see anything in the bill that is going to cure that problem; 11 million people who we should, as President Bush has urged, as all like- minded people have urged, should be given the opportunity to come out of the shadows of darkness, should come out of the marginalized existence of exploitation in which they live and be able to join all of us doing three things: demonstrating their good moral character; demonstrating that they pay taxes; demonstrating that they work and they contribute to this great country of ours.

The bill does not do anything. It is silent. Eleven million people. Are we going to go out and arrest and detain and deport 11 million people? Nobody would argue that that is what we are going to do, because we have never demonstrated the political will to do that, nor have we ever committed the requisite resources to do that. So in the absence of that, if you truly want security here, I suggest that we should get their fingerprints; that we should have them come out of the darkness and give us their fingerprints; give us their bank accounts; give us their addresses and become full-fledged members of our society.

I am not saying put them at the head of the line. Put them at the back of the line. Let us see what it truly is. They have committed what is a civil offense. That is what it is, according to our statute. You cannot retroactively make it a criminal offense. It is a civil offense, and let us deal with the civil offense that they have committed.

What offense have they committed to come here? I do not know. But I just think that in America no one is in fear and trepidation of the Windex-wielding cleaning lady at K-Mart. I do not think anyone in America is in fear of the woman who wakes up every morning to cherish and to nourish and to raise the children of American citizens. No one is in fear when they go to their hotel room and they see the woman that has made their bed and cleaned their carpeting and placed their towels in their appropriate places. No one in this place fears walking into a restaurant and eating from the dishes that have been cleaned. No one in this room would say, God, I cannot eat those grapes, will not touch those apples from Washington State. Yet we well know who has toiled in those vineyards and in that agricultural sector in very tough conditions with very low wages.

I do not see people in America saying, God, Luis, the Congress of the United States should do something. I want my son to be a dishwasher. I want my daughter to pick grapes out there in the State of California.

We know who is doing these jobs. As a matter of fact, according to our own Department of Labor, our economy will continue to create low- wage, low-skilled, entry-level jobs for which there will not be an American workforce to fulfill those necessities.

So given that reality, let us not cast that all of the problems and ills of our society are somehow upon the immigrants who have come to this country. I will suggest to you that they are your neighbors; that you know that when you walk into a building and you see those shiny floors, you know who was up the night before shining those floors; when you walk into that comfortable room after a long day of work, you know who cleaned that room; when you eat from those dishes, you know who washed them.

It is critical and essential to our economy for their being here in the United States of America. So let us stop it. Let us put an end to it.

I would say to all of my colleagues here today, if you are selling drugs, if you are a rapist, if you are a robber, if you are a murderer, if you are someone of ill repute, I and the colleagues I know would be the first to stand up and to say, Out with you and back to your country of origin, if that is what you have come here to do.

But let us be honest. The immense majority of them are hardworking. The immense majority of them are people we know that are hardworking, taxpaying, good moral character people who want to do nothing more than what other immigrants have done before them, to become part of this great process.

So let us keep that in mind as we continue this debate. Let us take the high road, not the low road, in this debate.

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 618.

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased that we are finally considering this crucial Terrorism Risk Insurance Act (TRIA) extension, which will provide necessary stability for our Nation's economy in a post 9/11 world. I have strongly supported this legislation from the outset, and I congratulate Chairman Oxley and Ranking Member Frank for their hard work to bring it to the floor. I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this important bill.

A stable, secure insurance market is vital to the health of our national economy. More than 4 years ago, the stability of the insurance industry, and all of our Nation's policyholders, were put in jeopardy when insurers and reinsurers lost more than $30 billion as a result of the 9/11 attacks. After these substantial losses, insurers were unable to make terrorism insurance available, which left many of our Nation's businesses vulnerable to unacceptable risk.

In response, Congress overwhelmingly passed TRIA to provide a temporary, limited Federal backstop in the event of another catastrophic terrorist attack. While we still expect the insurance industry to eventually develop methods for making terrorism insurance available without government support, the market has not yet stabilized to the point where this is possible. Extension of TRIA, which is necessary to prevent the chill of development in our cities, has wide, bipartisan support, and should be enacted promptly.

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 609, 610 and 611.

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 586, 587 and 588.

Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably absent from this Chamber November 7. I would like the record to show that, had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall votes Nos. 557 and 558.

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 No. 569.

Stated against:

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the Chicago White Sox for their historic 2005 season which culminated in their first World Series victory in 88 years.

Earlier this year, many Chicagoans realized that this team was something special. For example, their style of play was unique. The White Sox placed emphasis on aggressive base running, solid pitching, strong defense and strategic hitting. This style of play became known around the league as ``Ozzie ball,'' named after the White Sox former shortstop and now manager, Ozzie Guillen.

The White Sox front office caught on to this trend and began marketing the Sox with their ``Grinder Ball Rules'' ad campaign. One of these ``rules,'' Grinder Ball Rule #7, was demonstrated in a print ad featuring White Sox closer and Japan native, Shingo Takatsu with the line: ``To win, you need defense, speed and discipline . . . And immigration.''

That ad captured two of the important components of this historic team: the hard nosed ball playing of the Sox and the diversity of players that came together to win the championship as a team.

The White Sox dugout at times sounded as if it were a mini-United Nations. Jose Contreras and Orlando Hernandez from Cuba. Damaso Marte, Luis Vizcaino, Pablo Ozuna, Juan Uribe and Timo Perez from the Dominican Republic. Freddy Garcia and manager Ozzie Guillen from Venezuela. Tadahito Iguchi from Japan. And last, but not least, the Korean baseball hero, always smiling bullpen catcher, ``the Hulk,'' Man Soo Lee.

Their story is so familiar, so hopeful, for so many immigrants in this country--men and women who, like them, come to the United States to work hard, to provide for their families and loved ones, so that they, too, can live a better and safer life and pursue the American Dream.

And that is why this resolution is so important, deserving and justified. Throughout history people have associated baseball with the strengths of American culture and equated the game with the best of our country's character and resolve.

And in Chicago, we have found a team that embodies the character of our great city, especially the South Side of Chicago, where part of my District lies. The team, much like the South Side, is composed of close-knit friends who do their work diligently and without much fanfare. You can see it in the fan base, especially when you watch games on television. When the White Sox swept the Red Sox in the first round of the playoffs, celebrities like Ben Affleck, Jennifer Garner, Matt Damon, and Robert Redford were easily identified by the television cameras panning around Fenway Park. But when the next round came back to Chicago, the cameras weren't as active looking for Bernie Mack, James Denton (the plumber from ``Desperate Housewives'') and Dennis DeYoung of Styx.

And I think that's just fine with the South Side and our city at large. The White Sox didn't win the World Series by relying on the star power of a few individuals. Instead they had to work together and grind out every game with blood, sweat and, after the champagne popped in the clubhouse, after the last game of the year, tears of White Sox heroes who all share the spotlight equally with some of the best fans in baseball. Congratulations.

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 No. 557 and No. 558.

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 555 and 556.

Mr. Chairman, I am very proud of the committee print of H.R. 1461, legislation designed to improve the regulatory structure of the Government Sponsored Enterprises, GSEs. I am pleased that two amendments I offered at markup are part of the bill. One of my amendments preserves the minority component of the single family housing goals relating to underserved areas, with a major improvement in its implementation. My other amendment provides protection from liability for a GSE that makes reports to its regulator concerning transactions involving fraudulent loans or financial instruments. This provision was modeled after the protection from potential liability for such reports that banking institutions currently have under the Bank Secrecy Act.

H.R. 1461 also contains a much-needed expansion of Fannie and Freddie's affordable housing goals. The legislation directs each company to establish and manage an affordable housing fund to promote affordable housing and assist victims of Hurricane Katrina. The GSEs would devote 3.5 percent of after tax profits to the fund beginning in 2006, which increases to 5 percent annually beginning in 2007.

In 1989, in the FIRREA legislation, we created a similar Affordable Housing Program in the Federal Home Loan Bank System. The AHP requires the FHLBs to devote 10 percent of each year's net profits as grants for affordable housing projects sponsored by their member financial institutions. The AHP's success can be measured by the fact that today it constitutes the largest private source of funding for affordable housing and community development projects.

In my hometown of Chicago, the Federal Home Loan Bank of Chicago's AHP plays a key role in local efforts to address the housing needs of low- and moderate-income families by providing financial assistance for rental and owner-occupied housing, assisted living facilities, senior housing developments, homeless shelters and group homes.

In 2004 alone, the Chicago FHLB awarded $32.1 million of subsidies to 109 projects in Illinois and Wisconsin, and another 15 projects in other States. As a result, 5,680 housing units were created or rehabilitated, of which 58 percent were for very low-income households. Another $10.4 million was funded in downpayment assistance to help 2,278 families buy their first home in Illinois or Wisconsin.

While these figures are impressive, numbers do not quite tell the whole story. Let me describe one AHP project in the Humboldt Park/West Town area of Chicago to provide a better sense of the impact these programs can have in their local communities.

Joly Hernandez and Jose Rodriguez, with their children Imani and Albert, lived in Chicago's Humboldt Park/West Town community. Like many, they wanted a larger apartment, but could not afford the higher rent due the dramatic rise in the cost of housing in the area. In the 1990s, with increased recognition of Humboldt Park as an attractive, artist-friendly neighborhood and historic district, property values soared, and affordable rental housing was lost to speculators and developers of expensive luxury condos and single-family homes.

In 1994, Bickerdike Redevelopment Corporation, BRC, a nonprofit, community-based affordable housing developer and property manager began the arduous task of planning the Harold Washington Unity Cooperative to address the loss of affordable housing in the Humboldt Park/West Town area. Despite the increase of new construction and housing renovation in the area, a few pockets remained undeveloped. BRC knew that if the vacant land and neglected buildings were not immediately claimed for affordable housing, more long-time residents would be displaced.

A project was planned to develop 87 housing units in 18 buildings over 10 sites in a formerly blighted four-block area bordered by Kedzie Avenue, Albany Avenue, Chicago Avenue and Ohio Street. All 87 units in the Cooperative will remain affordable to households earning 50 percent or less of the area median income for at least 15 years.

The total cost of the project was almost $14 million. The Chicago FHLB, working through Bank One, which sponsored the project's application, provided an AHP grant of $500,000. In addition, the project received financing from CDBG funds through the City of Chicago, Trust Funds from the Illinois Housing and Development Agency, Federal Low Income Housing Tax Credits, Illinois State Tax Credits, an Empowerment Zone grant, a Tax Increment Financing, TIF, loan and first mortgage financing.

Ten years after its original conception, the Harold Washington Unity Cooperative stands as an enviable display of community pride, determination and opportunity.

Because of the hard work and dedication of BRC, Joly, Jose and their two children now live in a new home in their old neighborhood. They also belong to the Bickerdike Residents Council and feel a strong sense of community and camaraderie with their neighbors.

Extending this program to Fannie and Freddie is long overdue, has overwhelming bipartisan support, and I look forward to similar success stories once this legislation is implemented.

Those of us on the Committee have worked very hard to ensure that the fund can only be used for affordable housing purposes. It cannot be used for political advocacy or lobbying either by the receiving entity or a third party affiliated with them. It cannot be used for counseling services or tax preparation or travel expenses, administrative costs or anything that is outside of the GSE charter. It can only be used for affordable housing purposes. But apparently that was not enough for a small minority of radical conservative members, who insisted on inserting a provision restricting non-partisan civic activities by non- profits. This language would prohibit non-profit organizations (as well as any affiliate of the non-profit) from using their own funds to engage in non-partisan voter registration or get-out-the-vote activities. Profit earning entities are not similarly restricted.

Low-income housing groups and faith-based groups would be forced to choose between obtaining funding for low-income housing and using other funds to engage in non-partisan voter registration and get-out-the-vote activities. This provision is likely unconstitutional.

The manager's amendment also contains language that would require that a faith-based or social welfare non-profit entity applying for a grant must have as its sole ``primary purpose'' the provision of affordable housing. This restriction is particularly problematic for social welfare and faith-based groups, which have a broader mission than exclusively affordable housing.

These provisions are not only offensive substantively, but I have a real procedural problem with the way these provisions are being inserted in the bill. They are a part of the manager's amendment, which also contains important provisions that were worked out on a bipartisan basis, and provisions designed to help hurricane victims. The Rules Committee has unconscionably denied us an opportunity to vote to strike these offensive provisions on a stand alone basis. They did this because they knew we would win such a vote and they needed to bow to a tiny minority of conservatives who apparently have little regard for the Constitution.

Regretfully, I must oppose H.R. 1461 due to the inclusion of these provisions and the fact that we were not even allowed an opportunity to vote to strike it. I sincerely hope that these provisions are stripped in conference and, if that is the case, I look forward to enthusiastically supporting the conference report so that this otherwise excellent legislation can become law.

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 536, 537, and 538.