Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I rise with sadness today to honor Tony Pini, a popular leader and a family man, who served as Fire Chief in Santa Rosa, California, for 18 years. Tony passed away December 8, 2009, at the age of 62.

Born in San Francisco and raised in that city and in South San Francisco, Tony joined the Navy after high school. He served aboard the destroyer USS Radford off Vietnam, and while still in the service, met his future wife Elaine in Honolulu where she was vacationing.

He returned to the Bay Area and, in 1970, became a firefighter in South San Francisco. He was soon promoted to captain, moved on to a division chief position in Campbell, CA, and became fire chief in Santa Cruz in 1981 at the age of 34.

During this time, Tony married Elaine; they had 2 daughters; and Tony earned degrees at the College of San Mateo, the University of San Francisco, and San Jose State University (Masters of Public Administration). Despite his hectic schedule, he made sure he had time for traveling and camping with his family.

In 1985, Tony was hired as Santa Rosa Fire Chief, a job he loved. He worked hard to develop solid relationships with union firefighters, upgrade the engines and equipment, and promote diversity in the department. His friendly, outgoing style suited the city, and he stayed till he retired at the age of 55.

After retirement, Tony continued to enjoy time with family, which grew to include 5 grandchildren. He was a man of wide ranging interests and active disposition who learned languages, played guitar, and studied art through both books and visits to museums.

He is survived by his mother Florene and his brother Rick, as well as his wife, 2 daughters and 5 grandchildren.

Madam Speaker, Tony Pini's passing has left an empty space in the Santa Rosa community, and for his wide circle of friends and his family. We thank Tony for his years of inspirational leadership and appreciate all he has given.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor Maurice A. Schwartz of Stinson Beach, California, who will be retiring next month as Executive Director of the Audubon Canyon Ranch (ACR). Skip Schwartz-- everyone calls him Skip--a man known for his rare combination of a strong work ethic, empathy, kindness and humor, has been at the helm of ACR for thirty-four years, a time of great growth and accomplishments for the ranch.

Audubon Canyon Ranch was founded in 1962 to preserve a thickly wooded nesting place for great blue herons and great egrets on the shores of Bolinas Lagoon. Skip first saw the ranch as a visitor in the early 70s and later he and his wife became docents. In 1975 he so impressed the ACR's trustees that they hired him as Executive Director. With his commitment, boundless enthusiasm and practical know-how, Skip tackled the tough problems of a young non-profit and succeeded far beyond anyone's expectations.

Today ACR is a financially solid organization with 24 employees and 800 volunteers with exciting environmental education and research programs and preserve holdings in two counties totaling over 2,000 acres, and will be a beneficiary of a gift of another 1,700 acres in the future. ACR now includes the 1,000 acre Bolinas Lagoon Preserve near Stinson Beach; the 535-acre Bouverie Preserve near Glen Ellen in Sonoma County, the Cypress Grove Research Center on Tomales Bay and several other properties in West Marin. Recently an access agreement was signed with Jim and Shirley Modini, whose 1,725-acre Modoni Ranch in Sonoma County has been willed to ACR.

Due largely to Skip's democratic leadership skills, ACR was named this year by the North Bay Business Journal as one of the five best places to work in the North Bay. Employees--whose average length of employment is 11 years--gave Audubon Canyon Ranch the highest marks of the five firms honored. Employees cited ACR's family focus and its commitment to ``walking the talk'' by making every effort to make the workplace green, including establishing mileage reimbursement for bicycle use during work hours.

Under Skip's leadership, ACR scientific contributions also literally helped put Bolinas Lagoon on the map as a United Nations RAMSAR site of international significance. ACR's conservation science programs have grown to include a Research and Habitat Preservation and Restoration component.

Skip has overseen the creation of a nationally recognized elementary school environmental education program that serves schools throughout the Bay Area at no charge to them or their students. Each year, between 6,000 and 7,000 students from ethnically and economically diverse neighborhoods in four counties participate in ACR's ``hands on'' environmental education program.

Skip Schwartz, who has been the public face of Audubon Canyon Ranch for over three decades, will step down as Executive Director in January, but he will continue to work part time as a consultant with the organization. It appears that the Directors of Audubon Canyon Ranch know just how big Skip's shoes will be to fill. He leaves a legacy of accomplishment, but at least for some time ACR's Directors, staff and many friends will continue to benefit from his knowledge, enjoy his humor and kindness, and be inspired by his practical idealism.

Madam Speaker, on December 9, 2009, I was unavoidably detained and was unable to record my vote for rollcall No. 945 and rollcall No. 946. Had I been present I would have voted:

Rollcall No. 945: ``yes''--Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 4173) to provide for financial regulatory reform, to protect consumers and investors, to enhance Federal understanding of insurance issues, to regulate the over-the-counter derivatives, markets, and for other purposes

Rollcall No. 946: ``yes''--To eliminate an unused lighthouse reservation, provide management consistency by bringing the rocks and small islands along the coast of Orange County, California, and meet the original congressional intent of preserving Orange County's rocks and small islands, and for other purposes

Mr. Speaker, I join my colleagues today to show opposition to the Stupak-Pitts amendment and its new limitation on women's reproductive rights. The House bill already had language that reflects current law prohibiting funds from being used for abortion while allowing women to use their own money to buy the coverage that they need.

The Stupak-Pitts amendment goes beyond the Hyde amendment. It sets new precedent for restricting women's rights and eliminating coverage for an important and legal health service that millions of women currently have. That's why I will join with my colleagues to vote against any final health reform bill if it contains the Stupak-Pitts amendment.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to ask: What happened to the civilian surge in President Obama's new strategy for Afghanistan? In his address to the Nation on Tuesday night, the President said that there are three parts to his Afghanistan strategy: a military effort, a civilian surge, and partnership with Pakistan. But while the President spoke at great length about the military effort and about Pakistan, he gave virtually no details about the civilian surge. In fact, he devoted only one sentence of his speech to it--a brief sentence about agricultural assistance.

Earlier this year, with great fanfare, the President unveiled his plans for a civilian engagement. He said it would help the Afghan people to rebuild their economy, infrastructure, education system, justice system, government, and civil society. I supported this policy because I believe that helping the Afghan people to improve their lives is the best way to defeat violent extremists. But it's now painfully obvious that the White House has all but forgotten about the civilian surge. It appears to have been lost in his plan to escalate the war with 30,000 more troops, which is deeply disappointing to me. But it's not the only reason why I oppose the escalation. I oppose it because the American people don't support it and can't afford it. In fact, America's military spending in Afghanistan alone next year will now exceed the entire official military budget of every other country in the world.

The escalation will also lead the Afghan people to see our troops as an occupying army, and the history of Afghanistan shows that the Afghan people will never accept a foreign occupation. As a result, the plan will boomerang because it will help the Taliban when they are recruiting for new members.

The escalation will also lead to more casualties of our troops and it will continue to stretch our military forces, which are already stretched much too thin. It will reduce the dwell time for our troops back home between deployments, placing even greater burdens on them and on their families.

The President's new strategy, Mr. Speaker, also doesn't include a realistic exit plan. The President talks about transferring responsibility for the war to Afghanistan within 18 months, but since there is very little chance that the Afghans will be ready by then, our troops are likely to be stuck for many, many years to come.

Finally, I'm disappointed in the President's plan because it continues to rely on the military option that has failed. At the same time, it ignores the far more effective alternative that is available to us. That alternative is smart security. Smart security calls for a strong emphasis on diplomacy, humanitarian aid, and economic development for the Afghan people. That is what will stabilize Afghanistan. That is what will win the hearts and minds of the Afghan people.

More broadly, smart security includes a comprehensive plan that would eliminate the root causes of extremism in Afghanistan and elsewhere. It dismantles existing networks of extremists, and it would stop the spread of nuclear and conventional arms around the world. I have proposed a smart security platform for the 21st century, Mr. Speaker, and it's in my bill, House Resolution 363. I invite every Member of the House to read it and to work with me to implement it.

Mr. Speaker, I'm as committed to defeating extremism in Afghanistan as anyone, and I do not believe that simply pulling our troops out of Afghanistan overnight is the right way to go. But I do believe that the Afghan people need political, economic, and social solutions for their problems. They do not need a military solution. That's why I will join with others throughout our Nation in the days ahead to oppose the escalation of this war and to urge the President to shift to smart security to make our Nation and the world a safer place.

Madam Speaker, I rise with sadness today to honor a true American icon, landscape architect Lawrence Halprin, who passed away on October 25, 2009, at the age of 93. Mr. Halprin's legendary work profoundly influenced concepts of landscape design in this country and around the world.

A long-time resident of Kentfield in Marin County, California, Mr. Halprin's mark on the Bay Area is particularly evident. From the groundbreaking Sea Ranch development on our Sonoma Coast to Ghirardelli Square and George Lucas' Letterman Digital Arts Center, he designed memorable spaces that create harmony between people and environment.

Nationally, his best known work is the Franklin D. Roosevelt Memorial in Washington, DC, which artfully invokes Roosevelt's life and work as visitors stroll through a sculptured plaza in a natural setting. Throughout his career, Larry Halprin was adept at revitalizing perceptions of urban areas and involving the community in his public projects.

Mr. Halprin often worked in partnership with his wife, the well-known dancer Anna Halprin. The two met while attending the University of Wisconsin and were married in 1940. While in Wisconsin, they met Frank Lloyd Wright at Taliesin, and his ideas inspired Mr. Halprin to study landscape architecture at Harvard.

Their collaboration was based on a shared vision of crafting interactive, creative experiences that connect with people on a deep level. Halprin also joined Anna's dance work, most famously in their 1979 ``planetary dance'' on Mount Tamalpais. The goal was to take back the mountain for people frightened away by the notorious Trailside Killer. The dance is now performed annually in 36 countries.

While serving in the Navy in World War II, Halprin recuperated in San Francisco from a Japanese attack which had destroyed his ship. After the war, the couple relocated to the Bay Area.

Widely recognized as a man whose genius revolutionized landscape architecture, Mr. Halprin also won a number of awards. These included a Presidential Design Award for the FDR Memorial, the University of Virginia Thomas Jefferson Medal in Architecture, and the prestigious National Medal of the Arts. A man of many talents, he was also recognized for his documentary on Salvador Dali, ``Le Pink Grapefruit.''

In addition to his wife, Mr. Halprin is survived by his daughters Dana and Rana and four grandchildren.

Madam Speaker, it is not easy to summarize the scope of Lawrence Halprin's influence and accomplishments. As we enjoy his urban environments or the spaciousness of Sea Ranch, we can understand how much his vision and creativity have enriched our lives.

Madam Speaker, I rise with sadness today to honor my friend Jeanne-Claude, who passed away November 18 at the age of 74. In partnership with her husband Christo, she created some of the most exciting art projects of our time. The couple is known for large-scale temporary environmental works of stunning beauty that transform our perceptions of building and landscapes, while creating community dialogue.

I was fortunate to meet the couple in connection with The Running Fence, one of their most spectacular projects that snaked through 24 miles of my district in California's Sonoma and Marin Counties. Installed in 1976, The Running Fence featured over two million square feet of billowing nylon across the golden brown hills of 59 ranches to the Pacific Ocean. The sheer logistics of the endeavor became part of the artistic process as Jeanne-Claude and Christo brought disparate members of the local community together over four-and-a-half years of planning and prodding to bring it to fruition.

The pair returned to Sonoma County in September for a reunion event where I saw that Jeanne-Claude exhibited the same flamboyant, warm style that won her friends and

supporters for the project 33 years ago. The reunion laid the groundwork for an upcoming Smithsonian exhibition on The Running Fence that will serve as a tribute to her partnership with Christo on this remarkable collaboration.

Born in Morocco, Jeanne-Claude met Christo, a Bulgarian refugee who shared her birth date, in Paris in 1958. At that time, Christo was wrapping small objects, and they soon began collaborating on wrapping larger outdoor installations which led to the most famous--Paris's Pont Neuf (1975-1985) and Berlin's Reichstag (1971-1995). Many other projects included natural settings such as a Surrounded Islands in Biscayne Bay, Florida; Valley Curtain in Rifle, Colorado; The Umbrellas on hillsides in both California and Japan; and The Gates in Central Park, New York.

Sponsorships were never accepted for these and other installations which were financed through sales of plans, models, drawings, photos, and other documents. The works were always a team effort, with the resulting objects signed with the joint name, ``Christo and Jeanne- Claude.''

In addition to her husband, Jeanne-Claude is survived by their son, poet Cyril Christo, and a grandson.

Madam Speaker, Christo will be carrying on the couple's work, and I am sure that memories of Jeanne-Claude's vibrancy and love will be a comfort to him during this time. Marin and Sonoma residents will remember her glitzy red hair and her wit and charm, but it is her friendship that we will cherish the most.

Mr. Speaker, President Obama will talk to the American people about Afghanistan tonight. He is expected to announce a major new escalation of the conflict. I believe President Obama's apparent decision to send tens of thousands more troops to Afghanistan is a mistake, and I believe that because the past years have taught us that there is no military solution to Afghanistan. That's why I've urged the President to change our mission and to emphasize diplomacy, economic development and humanitarian aid as the best way to stop violent extremism in Afghanistan.

As a Californian, I'm proud to say that the California Democratic Party has passed a resolution that also urges President Obama to change course in Afghanistan. I want to recognize, and I want to thank my friends at the Progressive Democrats of America and the

State Party's Progressive Caucus for leading the effort to pass the resolution. The resolution states that ``far from eradicating the Taliban and other insurgencies, the presence of foreign troops has instead strengthened them, creating greater insecurity, death and impoverishment of the Afghan people.''

The California Democratic Party's resolution expresses deep concern for the ``honorable American young men and women who have been killed and wounded'' and the terrible toll of the war on their families. It notes that our involvement in Afghanistan ``continues to cost billions of dollars each month while the United States and particularly the State of California are in an economic crisis without money to fund domestic needs.''

The resolution also calls attention to the plight of the Afghan women who have suffered greatly during the war, and it calls for an end to military action that causes civilian casualties. It urges President Obama to redirect America's ``funding and resources to include an increase in humanitarian and developmental aid.'' It also asks the President to encourage ``multiparty talks aimed at ensuring a Democratic and legitimate representation of the people of Afghanistan, as well as a multiparty regional diplomacy for the safety and stability of neighboring countries.''

Mr. Speaker, the resolution was adopted after the members of the California Democratic Party heard the powerful testimony of Marine veteran Rick Reyes. He has served in both Iraq and Afghanistan, and he said, There is no military solution to Afghanistan. The problems in Afghanistan are social problems, problems that cannot be fixed militarily.

Mr. Speaker, instead of escalating the war and bringing more destruction to Afghanistan, we must devote our resources to improving the lives of the Afghan people. This change in strategy will achieve a number of very important goals. It will give the Afghan people hope for their future. It will give them a reason to reject violent extremism. It will save the lives of our troops, and it will save the lives of Afghan civilians. And it will save money, money that we need to invest in what will truly make our Nation stronger and safer, which includes energy independence, jobs, and reforming health care so that health care doesn't actually strangle our economy.

Mr. Speaker, there is a lot that we should be doing, and this is what the American people want the Obama administration to focus on. That's why I will join with millions of Americans in the days ahead to oppose the escalation of the war in Afghanistan, and to continue to urge our President to change course.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor George Ellman of Sonoma, California, who died on September 27, 2009, after a lifetime of community activism, leadership, and dedication to protecting the environment which included promoting public transit in Marin and Sonoma Counties.

Born in Chicago in 1923, Mr. Ellman received a degree in biochemistry at the University of Illinois and completed a master's degree at the University of Washington where he met his future wife, Phyllis. The Ellmans moved to Pasadena where George earned a Ph.D. at Cal Tech. In 1957, as a young scientist at Dow Chemical Co. in Michigan, he developed the Ellman Reagent, which became the standard clinical lab procedure for measuring enzymes and proteins. Moving to Tiburon in 1958, George was the chief research biochemist at the Langley Porter Neuropsychiatric Institute and professor in the Department of Biochemistry at UC Medical Center.

With a passion for public service, George served on the Tiburon Parks and Recreation Committee and was elected to the Tiburon City Council, serving as Mayor, and representing the city of Tiburon on the Bay Conservation and Development Commission and the influential Bay Area- wide Metropolitan Transportation Commission, where he developed a lifelong interest in transportation issues. While living in Tiburon, George and Phyllis were active in the effort to keep Richardson Bay from being filled and developed. They helped preserve and protect Blackie's Pasture and Lyford House, which kept them from becoming part of a proposed 4-lane expansion of Tiburon Boulevard.

After moving to Sonoma County in 1980, George devoted himself to helping the environment. He served for 28 years on the board of ``People for Open Space'' which became Greenbelt Alliance, and used this experience to help forge the Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation and Open Space District in 1990. George also served as a board member of the National Audubon Society and went on to help establish the Sonoma Ecology Center.

Mild mannered and good humored, George was a respected activist with an unremitting persistence to do the right thing. With a passion for public transit, George worked tirelessly to bring back passenger rail service linking Sonoma and Marin Counties. The biggest booster for the Sonoma Marin Area Rail Transit, SMART, George lived to see voters pass the quarter-cent SMART sales tax measure last November, which will help fund the 70-mile rail service through the two counties. Scheduled to roll down the tracks in 2014, the SMART board has agreed to honor his request that his ashes ride on the first SMART train out of the station.

Dr. Ellman was also a classically-trained pianist and co-founded the Sonoma Classical Music Society. Dedicated to the environment, environmental education and bringing music to the community, to sustain this, the Ellmans established the Ellman Fund at the Community Foundation of Sonoma County.

George was a devoted husband and father. His wife of 60 years, Phyllis, died last June. He is survived by his daughter, Judy Ellman of San Francisco; brother, Charles of Georgetown, Kentucky, and many nieces and nephews.

Madam Speaker, George Ellman will be missed by so many who shared in his work and dreams. He believed that creating a better world was both necessary and possible. It is fitting to recognize his dedicated efforts to preserve open space in Marin and Sonoma Counties as well as his tireless leadership to help reduce carbon emissions, promote smart growth, and bring back commuter rail service. I join the many people who will miss George Ellman's inspiration, friendship and bright spirit.

Mr. Speaker, last week on Veterans Day the American people paid tribute to the heroic men and women who have and are serving in our military. Fortunately, most veterans return home safe and sound. They devote themselves to their families. They become leaders in their communities. I know many veterans in my district. They are among the most respected and beloved neighbors. But too many veterans, Mr. Speaker, never get the chance to resume their lives. They die in battle or they return home with terrible wounds that will never heal. Their loving families feel scars of war, too--especially the children.

Today, American soldiers continue to face danger in Afghanistan and in Iraq. Nearly 5,300 have already died in those two conflicts. About 35,000 have been wounded. And when the wounded return home, they often face many challenges.

According to a study by the Harvard Medical School, over 130,000 veterans are homeless. Over 2,200 veterans died last year because they didn't have health insurance. And, Mr. Speaker, many veterans are out of work in this recession.

This Congress and President Obama and his administration recognize these problems and we made some good progress in addressing them. This House has passed new legislation that helps veterans. We have passed a strong health insurance reform bill that will help veterans. In addition, General Shinseki, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, has promised an all-out effort to end veterans' homelessness. He has also launched a new effort to strengthen housing, education, employment, and medical care opportunities for our veterans.

We need to do all of this, Mr. Speaker, and we need to do more. But I have always believed that the best way to serve our veterans is to do everything we can to keep them out of harm's way in the first place. That means sending our troops to war only as a last resort, when we have explored every other alternative.

In Afghanistan, we haven't met that test. We have relied almost exclusively on the military solution for over 8 long years. And we see where that's gotten us--absolutely nowhere.

Mr. Speaker, we have learned that there is no military solution to Afghanistan, and we've learned that lesson the hard way. We have learned it through the number of dead and wounded. That's why I urge President Obama to say ``no'' to sending more troops to Afghanistan. Our troops have already been stretched to the limit by repeated deployments. Their families have already suffered enough on the homefront. Escalating the war will only help the violent extremists in Afghanistan to recruit more violent extremists to attack our troops.

Instead of pursuing the same failed strategy of the past, I have called for a new strategy that relies on all the effective tools of smart security. These tools include diplomacy, humanitarian aid, economic development, education, civil affairs, and better intelligence and police work to search out and capture extremists. At least 80 percent of all further funding for Afghanistan should be devoted to these smart power efforts.

Mr. Speaker, the casualty figures are growing in Afghanistan. We owe it to our courageous troops to protect their lives before we have another Iraq on our hands. Smart security must be used because it can get us a lot farther in Afghanistan, much further than military power alone.

Mr. Speaker, let's change our strategy before it's too late. Let's bring our troops home. Let's bring them home safe, sound, and successful.

Madam Speaker, Matthew Hoh, a former Marine captain, recently resigned his job as U.S. Government reconstruction official in Afghanistan. In his letter of resignation, he criticized the American strategy in Afghanistan. He said the presence of large numbers of U.S. troops is making the insurgency stronger because it makes the Afghan people see America as an occupying power, a power that must be opposed.

Now, before anybody accuses Captain Hoh of being a long-haired hippie peacenik, keep in mind that he fought with distinction in Iraq before serving in Afghanistan. He believes in the American military. He supports it with all his heart.

In fact, he says that ``no nation has ever known a more dedicated military as the U.S. Armed Forces. The performance of our troops,'' he says, ``is unmatched.''

But he also, Madam Speaker, believes that no military force has ever been given such a complex mission as the U.S. military has received in Afghanistan.

Captain Hoh is right. Our troops have been given an impossible job, and now we are seeing the tragic results. Over 1,000 American troops have been wounded in battle in just the past 3 months. That accounts for one-fourth of all the casualties we've taken since the war began in October 2001.

Think about it. The war has been going on for 97 months in Afghanistan, and one-fourth of all the casualties have been suffered in just the last 3 months.

Things have gotten so bad, Madam Speaker, in fact, that the casualty rate in Afghanistan is now actually higher than the casualty rate for American troops at the height of the violence in Iraq. And the spike in the casualty rate occurred after the administration sent 21,000 more troops to Afghanistan in the hope that there is a military solution to the problem.

But relying on military power alone has not done the job, and escalating the war now by sending in tens of thousands more troops won't solve the problem either.

That's why I am calling on President Obama to change our mission in Afghanistan. I have urged him to devote most of our efforts on humanitarian aid, diplomacy, and economic development. These are the elements of ``SMART Security.'' They'll do a much better job of stabilizing Afghanistan than a heavy military footprint.

Without this change in strategy, our troops are likely to face worse, not better, situations. The enemy is learning how to use IEDs more efficiently. Lieutenant Thomas Metz, the director of the Pentagon's effort to reduce IED casualties, has acknowledged that sending more troops to Afghanistan will likely mean more IED deaths and injuries, which include spinal cord damage, traumatic brain injuries, and amputations.

So I urge the administration to move in a new and a different direction for the sake of our country and for the sake of America's troops and their families. And I urge every Member of the House to listen to the words of Matthew Hoh, who wrote the following to a State Department official:

``I trust you understand the sacrifices made by so many thousands of military families whose homes bear the fractures, upheavals, and scars of multiple deployments. Thousands of our men and women have returned home with wounds, some that will never heal. The dead return only in bodily form to be received by families who must be assured that their dead have sacrificed for a purpose worthy of futures lost.''

Madam Speaker, the casualty rate in Afghanistan is unacceptable. Continuing the same policies that put our brave troops at risk is unthinkable. That's why it's time to put SMART Security to work in a place where military power alone just isn't the answer.

Madam Speaker, on November 6, 2009, I was unavoidably detained

and was unable to record my vote for rollcall No. 868. Had I been present I would have voted: rollcall No. 868: ``yes''--Jack F. Kemp Post Office Building.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks in support of this bill because it will make health care affordable for women who still earn 77 percent less than men.

Thank you to Congressman Rob Andrews, who kept this clear and made it understandable for every single person in this country. Thank you, Congressman.

Well, let's put aside all the numbers and fuzzy terminology and let's talk about what this bill really means to average Americans.

Madam Speaker, I will never forget 40 years ago waking up in the middle of the night with a start night after night after night because I did not have health insurance for my three small children, and it was not anything that had to do with anything that we had caused. I would wonder what would happen, what if my children got ill or one of them was injured because of no health insurance? Well, this bill that we're talking about today, with it, our family would have been secure. We would have been much healthier because we would have known that we had health insurance.

So, Madam Speaker, let's take a family of two, two working parents, two children. With this bill, if one of the children gets sick, the parents won't have to worry about arguing with the health insurance company for treatment. If the mother gets breast cancer, the family won't have to worry that their health insurance company will cancel their coverage because it doesn't want to pay for her treatment. If one of the parents loses his or her job, and along with it the family's health insurance, they will be able to go into the health exchange and choose between private and public plans. If the family can't afford to pay the premiums, there will be affordability credits to help them.

That security would have meant a better life for me. It would have meant a better life for my children that year. We want to make sure that every child has that security.

Mr. Speaker, at least 46 million Americans are uninsured right now. More than 85% of the uninsured are in working families. Even if you have health insurance now, without reform, the cost of health care for the average family of four is projected to increase by almost $2,000 a year. The need for health reform is urgent and that's why I rise in strong support of this historic bill.

Many Members of Congress, myself included, continue to believe that the best way to provide high quality, affordable healthcare to everyone is to create a single payer health insurance system. However, while we would prefer single payer, we united behind a health reform bill with a robust public option.

We believed, and still believe, that the robust public option, a public option based on medicare plus 5% rates is the best way to increase competition, bring down the costs of premiums, and provide everyone with a real choice between a private and public health insurance plan.

In August, many thought the public option was dead. But the Progressive Caucus, Tri Caucus, and many in our leadership, made sure that the robust public option was very much a part of the debate in September and October.

Because of the work of so many Members, we have a public option in the bill we are considering today. While it's not the plan I would have preferred, this public option will increase competition with private plans and provide a real choice in health insurance plans.

In addition, there is language in the manager's amendment that will ensure that any increase in health insurance premiums must be justified, which will help make premiums more affordable for our Nation's working families.

As we move into conference with the Senate, I look forward to continuing to work with my colleagues to ensure that we have the best possible bill. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, to increase competition and provide choice, any bill reported out of conference must retain a strong national public option that goes into effect when the health exchange begins, and, is not based on any triggers. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Madam Speaker, on November 5, 2009, I was unavoidably detained and was unable to record my vote for rollcall No. 864. Had I been present I would have voted:

Rollcall No. 864: ``aye''--Expressing support for the goals and ideals of National Family Literacy Day.