Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I rise today to celebrate the accomplishments of Junipero Serra High School which is located in Gardena, California in my district. Serra High has become the first in California state history to win a state football championship and a state basketball championship in the same school year. Even more remarkable and more important is the fact that for three years running, 100% of Serra High School's graduating seniors were accepted to college.

Junipero Serra High School is operated by the Department of Catholic Schools of the Archdiocese of Los Angeles. Serra High School was founded in 1950 and graduated its first class in 1953. Over the years, the school has played a very important role in the life of the community, graduating over six thousand students in the South Bay area.

Serra's recent achievements add immensely to its already strong legacy. In December, the Cavaliers became the California Interscholastic Federation's Division III state champions in football with a victory that was ``as much a triumph of athletic skill as one of perseverance from year to year and play to play,'' as local newspaper the Daily Breeze stated. Against Marin Catholic High School, the Cavaliers won 24-20, establishing themselves as a dominant force in the very competitive California high school football climate.

In March, Serra High School captured the Division III basketball championship with a 63-59 overtime victory over Oakland's Bishop O'Dowd completing the historic double victory. Not Santa Ana's Mater Dei, not Concord's De La Salle, not Los Angeles' Crenshaw High, not Long Beach Poly--no athletic powerhouse, private or public in California, had completed such a feat until Serra High did it. At the end of the 2009- 10 school year, Serra's athletic program was rated by ESPN as the fourth best all-around high school athletic program in the USA and the number one program in California. I also understand the Cavalier Track team came within two points of being state champions and that the Girls Basketball and Track teams have also excelled.

I congratulate President Erick Rubalcava, Principal Michael Wagner, Athletic Director Ted Dunlap, Head Football Coach Scott Altenberg, Head Basketball Coach Dwan Hurt, their assistant coaches, the entire school staff and all of the amazing faculty and students at Serra for their excellence both in academics and athletics.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H. Res. 1401, expressing gratitude for the contributions that the air traffic controllers of the United States make to keep the traveling public safe and the airspace of the United States running efficiently. I thank my colleague from New York, Mrs. McCarthy, for offering this resolution.

Air traffic controllers dedicate themselves to the protection of the flying public. Their job is important, and it is stressful and demanding. Air traffic controllers must make split second decisions at times when the lives of hundreds of passengers are in danger. They perform this work professionally and in doing so provide a great service.

My district in Southern California is home to Los Angeles International Airport (LAX), one of the busiest airports in the world. LAX is an economic hub for my district and for the region--it brings people and business to Los Angeles and Southern California from all over the country and the world. LAX is also a job creator for many of my constituents, and this includes the men and women who serve as air traffic controllers, working to keep passengers, aircraft, and area residents safe.

A little more than a year ago, on June 28, 2009, an air traffic controller at the Southern California TRACON facility--Ron Chappell-- issued a traffic advisory to a jet aircraft landing at LAX after he saw another target on his radar screen at an unknown altitude and approaching the jet. This response by Mr. Chappell likely averted a deadly crash. I salute him and his fellow air traffic controllers who work in Southern California and throughout the United States to keep us safe.

I offered an amendment to prohibit consolidation of the Federal Aviation Administration's regional offices and air traffic control facilities without congressional oversight and public comment which was included when the House reauthorized the FAA earlier this year.

I am concerned that consolidation of air traffic control offices and facilities could have an effect on the safety of flying. In addition, consolidation would result in the loss of many jobs, including jobs of some of my constituents as the Western-Pacific Regional Office which serves all of Southern California is located in Hawthorne--a city in my district.

The National Air Traffic Controllers Association recently presented me the Champion for Aviation Safety Award for my work to protect local jobs in Southern California and to keep passengers and the communities surrounding LAX safe. I truly appreciate this honor and will continue to be a strong advocate for air traffic controllers and passenger safety.

Members of Congress are perhaps some of the most frequent flyers, especially those of us who represent constituencies far away from Washington. We owe air traffic controllers--as well as flight attendants, pilots, ground crew, ticket agents, and others--a debt of gratitude for keeping us and our fellow passengers safe, and for keeping us moving safely and

quickly so that we can get back to our constituents and our families in a timely manner.

So I am proud to rise in support of this resolution, Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlelady from New York for offering it.

Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained and unable to vote on H.R. 5604, rollcall No. 452. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.''

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on H.R. 5114 and to insert extraneous material thereon.

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

Mr. Chairman, I am proud to bring my bill, H.R. 5114, the Flood Insurance Reform Priorities Act of 2010, to the floor today; and I stand in strong support of its passage. Moreover, I'm proud that this bill has the support of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, having passed out of the Financial Services Committee in April on voice vote.

Mr. Chairman, this bill is essential. The Flood Insurance Program provides valuable protection for approximately 5.5 million homeowners; but, unfortunately, the lack of a long-term authorization has placed the program at risk. The program has lapsed three times now since the beginning of this year: for 2 days in March, for 18 days in April, and again from June 1 to July 2, when President Obama signed my bill to provide for a short-term extension of the program through the end of September of this year.

These lapses meant that FEMA was not able to write new policies, renew expiring policies, or increase coverage limits. These delays also meant that each day 1,200 home buyers who wanted to purchase homes located in flood plains were unable to close on their homes. Given the current crisis in the housing market, this instability in the Flood Insurance Program is hampering that market's recovery and must be addressed.

Mr. Chairman, in drafting this bill, I also wanted to address the challenges posed to communities by the imposition of new flood maps. I saw these challenges firsthand in my home city of Los Angeles. Earlier this year I was able to assist homeowners in the Park Mesa Heights area of Los Angeles who had been mistakenly placed in a flood plain. In this case, FEMA acted quickly to respond to new data and correct the mistake. However, there are thousands of homeowners nationwide who now find themselves in flood zones and subject to mandatory purchase requirements.

H.R. 5114, the Flood Insurance Reform Priorities Act of 2010, would restore stability to the Flood Insurance Program by reauthorizing the program for 5 years. It would also address the impact of new flood maps by delaying the mandatory purchase requirement for 5 years and then phasing in actuarial rates for another 5 years.

The bill also makes other improvements to the program by phasing in actuarial rates from pre-firm properties, raising maximum coverage limits, providing notice to renters about contents insurance, and establishing a flood insurance advocate similar to the taxpayer advocate at the Internal Revenue Service.

Mr. Chairman, we must reauthorize the National Flood Insurance Program and pass the reforms included in H.R. 5114. This country is reeling from major floods in Tennessee, Arkansas, and Oklahoma; and we are now officially in hurricane season, with south Texas still recovering from Hurricane Alex. I urge my colleagues to stand with me in support of this important extension.

In closing, I would like to recognize the many Members on both sides of the aisle who have approached me with their concerns about flood insurance programs. I'm further gratified that, through this bill, we're able to address many of those concerns. I remain committed to working with Members on ensuring that this program works for their communities and their constituents.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois, Representative Costello, who has been the leader on this issue of the maps, the remapping. And because of him we have a strong bill. He worked very hard, and I am very grateful.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Arkansas, who has fought so hard for his constituents and making sure that they have a strong advocacy program in this bill, Marion Berry.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 30 seconds to make sure that the gentlelady understands that we are moderating the subsidy in several ways on second homes, on nonresidential property, and when the homes are sold, and that's an important point that we will have some discussion on later.

At this time I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Scott), who's been responsible for making sure that we give homeowners an opportunity to pay installments instead of up front all of these premiums that they will be responsible for.

Thank you so very much for your work.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlelady from New York (Mrs. McCarthy), who has worked very hard on these issues, and we have, in the manager's amendment, some of the work that she did.

I yield 1 minute to my colleague from California, Linda Sanchez, who has given a lot of her time to this effort.

I yield 1 minute to the gentlelady from D.C., Ms. Eleanor Holmes Norton.

I yield 1 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Al Green). His State has experienced a lot of hardship with Katrina and Alex, and I thank him for his hard work.

I have no other speakers, Mr. Chairman; and I would reserve the right to close.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank the ranking member from West Virginia (Mrs. Capito) for her cooperation and the work that she has put into the formulation of this very, very important bill.

I would like to thank Members on both sides of the aisle for the cooperation that we have seen exhibited on this bill, and I think that the Members on both sides of the aisle have done a fabulous job representing their constituencies on this issue.

It is time for us to have a reauthorization for 5 years, given the lapses that we have had and the risks that we have placed homeowners at when we

don't have flood insurance coverage. And so Members have come one by one on this issue explaining what is going on in their districts, and of course, we have had a lot of criticism about FEMA. We have had Members explain that neighbors are getting together to fight some of the mapping that is being done. All of that has been brought to our attention, and we've been able to deal with most of those complaints, not only in this bill but, of course, in the manager's amendment.

We have some people who are going to bring amendments to the floor from both sides of the aisle, and I'm confident that with the work that has gone into this bill, the amendments that we will have on the floor--many of them will be adopted--that we will see a good, solid piece of legislation move from this floor that will address the concerns of so many of our constituents across this country.

I'm proud of this legislation. I thank not only the Members on both sides of the aisle but the staffs from both sides of the aisle who have worked so hard to ensure that we address these concerns.

So, now, with this authorization for 5 years, with the delayed time so that people have the opportunity to prepare, with the installment, with the way that we have done all of this, including putting an advocate in, our constituents are going to get some justice, some real attention; and I think they will be proud of the work that we have done.

American Insurance Association,

Washington, DC, July 15, 2010.

Hon. Barney Frank,

Chairman, Committee on Financial Services, House of

Representatives, Washington, DC.

Hon. Spencer Bachus,

Ranking Member, Committee on Financial Services, House of

Representatives, Washington, DC.

Dear Mr. Chairman and Representative Bachus: The American

Insurance Association (AIA) would like to express its strong

support for the House Financial Services Committee reported

bill reauthorizing and reforming the National Flood Insurance

Program (NFIP), H.R. 5114. The recent lapses in the NFIP

followed by the use of short-term extensions have caused

disruptions to homeowners, businesses and hindered real

estate closings nationwide. A long-term NFIP reauthorization

will bring much-needed stability to the market and fiscal

soundness to the program.

However, we strongly oppose the amendment to be offered by

Rep. Gene Taylor (D-MS). The Taylor amendment would

negatively impact ``Write Your Own'' (WYO) companies and

significantly alter the way in which claims are processed by

the NFIP. Consumers want reasonably priced insurance for the

risks they confront. To help meet that objective, insurers

must be able to contractually define the parameters of their

exposure. Adopting the Taylor amendment will cause WYO

companies to take a hard look at their continued

participation in the program and jeopardize our support for

the underlying bill.

We look forward to continuing to work with you to enact a

long-term NFIP reauthorization.

Sincerely,

Leigh Ann Pusey,

President and CEO,

American Insurance Association.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk that was made in order under the rule.

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

Mr. Chairman, the manager's amendment I have submitted to the committee would make further improvements on the bill. The amendment would contribute to the stability of the flood insurance program by prospectively phasing in actuarial rates for severe repetitive loss properties and properties sustaining substantial damage.

The financial solvency of the program would also be protected by a provision that would make sure that homeowners receiving preferred rates who deliberately drop out of the program are charged actuarial rates if they rejoin the program.

The amendment also strengthens protections for homeowners by allowing all homeowners to pay flood insurance premiums in installments, providing grants to homeowners experiencing repeated flooding with funds to mitigate their flood risk, requiring FEMA to take a second look at areas that may be incorrectly mapped, and requiring FEMA to study the impacts of the flood insurance program on working waterfronts.

I am pleased that this amendment also incorporates amendments offered by many Members, including Mr. Hinchey, Mr. Clyburn, Ms. Herseth Sandlin, Mr. Hare, Ms. Markey, Mrs. McCarthy, Mr. Melancon, and Mr. Pascrell. I thank these Members and others who have made suggestions to me for their constructive additions to this amendment.

This amendment makes significant improvements to the underlying legislation, and I urge an ``aye'' vote on the amendment.

Mr. Chairman I reserve the balance of my time.

I think everything has been said that needs to be said.

I simply again want to thank all of the Members that have been involved. I am very pleased that we finally are responding to the concerns of all of our constituents, particularly about new mapping. There are a lot of concerns about that. But the way that we delay implementation will give our constituents an opportunity to prepare the installment plans, the way we deal with the actuarial rates. I think this is some of the best work that could have been done to honor the concerns of our constituents.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim time in opposition, although I am not opposed.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank the gentleman from Florida for offering this amendment.

The underlying bill authorizes grants to local communities to reach out to homeowners and communities about the flood insurance program and flood risk. As we know, the process by which homeowners receive notification of new flood maps is severely lacking.

Too often, homeowners learn that they are in a floodplain when they receive a letter from their mortgage company informing them that they have 45 days to buy flood insurance or it will be purchased on their behalf. Local communities are supposed to inform residents about new maps. However, communities often receive little notification from FEMA themselves. Also, some communities simply lack the resources to do the type of notification that is necessary to ensure that homeowners are aware of changes to the flood maps.

By providing a grant program to assist communities, the underlying bill would address this problem. The gentleman's amendment would require the director of the flood insurance program to submit annual reports to the Congress on the effectiveness of these grants. I think that is important. And I think that Congress should know how these grants are working and how these funds are being spent.

So I support the gentleman's amendment, and I would urge an ``aye'' vote.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim time in opposition, although I am not opposed to the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, quite simply, I support the gentleman's amendment. While I believe that the bill is clear that the grants provided under the bill would be competitive and, therefore, not subject to earmarking, I can understand the gentleman's need for wanting to clarify that these funds cannot be used for earmarks. Therefore, I support the amendment, and I would urge an ``aye'' vote.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Chairman, I stand in support of this gentleman's amendment.

In April, my subcommittee held a hearing on flood and wind insurance legislative proposals. And at that hearing, the gentleman from Mississippi testified about the way the insurance industry abused the flood insurance program following Hurricane Katrina by claiming that if so much as a drop of water touched a home, that all the resulting damage was the result of flood and not wind, even if there was damage to the contrary. Insurers were able to maintain their bottom line at the expense of the financial solvency of the National Flood Insurance Program.

Nobody has worked harder on these issues than he has. He deserves support for this amendment, and we will continue to support his instructions about what we should be doing in the future.

Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim time in opposition, although I'm not opposed to the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I support the gentlewoman's amendment. I understand that the gentlewoman has some concerns with the flood insurance program. I understand that she does believe that homeowners in her district are subsidizing the cost of flood insurance for homeowners along the coast.

While I disagree with her premise, I see no harm in having the GAO perform the study described in her amendment to look into the role of the private insurance market in providing flood insurance, the impact on the program if communities drop out, and the feasibility of regionalizing the program.

However, I would like to note that flood insurance is just that, insurance. It insures against an event that may or may not happen in the future. We have taken several steps in this bill to address the ``sticker shock'' that homeowners are encountering as a result of the mandatory purchase requirement resulting from the new maps.

However, if the maps are accurate, and if there is a flood risk, public policy should dictate that homeowners have coverage for that risk because if they don't, the Federal Government will have to pick up the tab.

Therefore, I disagree with the problem the gentlewoman has with the program. But I see no harm in her amendment, and so I would support that amendment.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak in opposition to the motion.

Mr. Speaker and Members, we patiently waited over here to hear what this motion to recommit was going to be all about. We thought about all of the Members who have been calling us, writing us, working with us from both sides of the aisle to please help them address the concerns of their constituents about flood insurance. We have worked very hard with Members from both sides of the aisle to include their concerns in this bill.

You saw Members come to the floor with those amendments. You saw in the manager's amendment that we had worked with so many Members not only to include their concerns, but to answer questions and prepare them for going back to their communities explaining how this whole thing works.

Many of those questions that have been raised by our constituents have been raised over a long period of time. Our offices are bombarded with questions about the mapping. How does it work? How are they going to get timely notification? What are the premiums all about? These questions go on and on and on, to the point where our offices are oftentimes overwhelmed, not able to give sufficient information, or to assist those communities where they have banded together, despite the fact oftentimes they have few resources to deal with these issues.

And now, in this comprehensive authorization that we are doing we address those constituents' concerns with this outreach. I am very surprised that the Members on the opposite side of the aisle would try and deny to their constituents the basic kind of information and services that we should all be responsible for. We should be able to say to our constituents not only do you have a right to this information, but we are going to give you some help. You don't have to try and band together with resources that you don't have to find out how it all works to oppose FEMA, to find out from your mortgage servicers why you didn't get a timely notice, to find out from your city, who was notified perhaps by FEMA, why they didn't notify the community.

Mr. Speaker and Members, these are simply outreach activities that must be dealt with. These are outreach activities that our constituents deserve. To oppose assisting our constituents when they may be forced into new mapping that's going to cost them money that they had not anticipated, on and on and on, is just unbelievable.

So I would simply say it speaks for itself. Assistance to our constituents asking those basic questions. I would ask for a ``no'' vote on this motion to recommit. It works against the best interests of all of our constituents. They deserve better than this.

Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Clerk be authorized to make technical corrections in the engrossment of H.R. 5114, to include corrections in spelling, punctuation, section numbering and cross-referencing, the insertion of appropriate headings, and clerical errors in amendatory instructions.

Thank you very much.

Madam Speaker, I would first like to thank our chairman, John Conyers. He is always on the case in a timely fashion, providing leadership that is so desperately needed on issues such as this one.

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 5503, the Securing Protections for the Injured from Limitations on Liability Act, that is, the SPILL Act. H.R. 5503 is a good first step and must be passed to immediately assist the victims who would otherwise be denied adequate compensation under our current laws. I am very disappointed at some of the arguments that are being made against this bill by my friends on the opposite side of the aisle.

One of the arguments that they make is the DOHSA provisions of the SPILL Act will allow surviving families to receive undue compensation. Well, let me set the record straight. DOHSA currently provides outdated and uneven compensations for victims on the high seas because it fails to award damages for pain and suffering, loss of care, comfort, and companionship in many cases, including an accident like the Deepwater Horizon explosion.

The changes to DOHSA are not intended to single out any particular industry. The SPILL Act will make Federal law consistent so that the families of all victims on the high seas can receive the compensation they truly deserve. These gross inequities exist because DOHSA, enacted back in 1920, has undergone only one significant update, in 2000, 4 years after the TWA Flight 800 crash.

I would simply ask for support and a vote on H.R. 5503, recognizing the families who have been harmed.

However, we cannot discount the critical needs of entire communities and other individuals whose way of life has been severely impacted by the oil spill. The outlook for little-known communities of black oyster farmers is especially bleak. These small villages of black fishermen have been self-sufficient for generations, relying on the region's wetlands for their economic independence. The challenges these oyster farmers will face must not be excluded in our efforts to help the Gulf Coast. We must ensure that BP and other responsible parties are held liable and accountable to the hundreds of thousands of lives they have destroyed at the expense of cutting costs.

Therefore, while I fully support H.R. 5503, I am very disappointed that critical amendments to the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA) as well as my amendment that would have legally nullified BP's original attempts to make their $5,000 payouts legal settlements were taken out of the bill. All we have now is BP's word that they will not enforce these waivers or honor the $75 million liability cap current law provides. However, this is unacceptable.

In the same manner that the federal government responded to the 9/11 attacks and the economic collapse, we must be equally as vigilant in responding to the crisis in the Gulf Coast.

DOHSA currently provides outdated and uneven compensation for victims on the high seas because it fails to award damages for pain and suffering, and loss of care, comfort, and companionship in many cases-- including in accidents like the Deepwater Horizon explosion.

The SPILL Act will make federal law consistent so that the families of all victims on the high seas can receive the compensation they deserve.

These gross inequities exist because DOHSA, enacted in 1920, has undergone only one significant update--in 2000, four years after the TWA Flight 800 crash. Because many of the TWA victims were children who earned no income, Congress narrowly amended DOHSA to grant non- pecuniary damages to family members of commercial airline victims on the high seas, but not for any other deaths on the high seas.

Mr. Speaker and Members, I rise in support of the rule. A lot of people have put in a lot of work to organize this supplemental in ways that many of us would have the opportunity to support.

I am focused on several aspects, but I am particularly focused on the amendment that will be brought before us by Barbara Lee. Barbara Lee has an amendment that basically would strip the funding that is dedicated to the war in Afghanistan and redirect those funds so that we can safely withdraw from an Army that has less and less support of the American people.

And while I will not get into details about my support for that amendment at this time--I will be speaking on it later--I wish to congratulate the leadership and our Rules Committee members for the hard work that they have put in in organizing the rule on the supplemental. It has not been easy. There are a lot of concerns. There are a lot of demands. We have a lot of needs that need to be addressed.

So while we are wrestling with addressing the needs of our domestic community and our domestic concerns, we still have to be concerned about the direction that the war is taking and what that means for the future of this country. While we are bogged down in a serious deficit, the moneys that we are spending on this war must be reconsidered in ways that will eventually wind this war down and give us an opportunity to focus on our domestic needs.

So I would ask my colleagues to support the rule on this supplemental.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support, strong support, of Congresswoman Barbara Lee's amendment to the 2010 Supplemental Appropriations Act. This amendment would limit the funds appropriated within the supplemental to the continued protection of our military and civilian personnel in Afghanistan, while a plan is implemented to begin their safe and orderly withdrawal from the region.

Despite nearly $300 billion spent on a predominantly military operation, by the way, resulting in the loss of over 1,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan, we have not been able to successfully address Afghanistan's economic depravity, political corruption, or social divisions that have significantly impeded our military efforts within the country.

The American public is tired of this long, drawn-out war. Moreover, many of us in Congress do not see the logic in investing further funds toward training the Afghan Army, when all methods utilized to this point have failed to achieve tangible gains.

Furthermore, charges of corruption within the Karzai government have negatively impacted our credibility among Afghans, forcing them to choose between two different groups of terrorists.

The counterinsurgency (COIN) strategy is failing in Afghanistan and the Afghan government remains corrupt and illegitimate in the eyes of many of the Afghan citizens. The critical appropriations being offered in other Amendments (disaster relief, education funding, black farmer settlements) today underscores why we can no longer afford to continue our expensive military strategy in Afghanistan.

Deploying more combat troops to Afghanistan and continuing Bush wartime engagement strategies will fail to help Afghanistan build long- term sustainable institutions and a credible democratic government. Despite nearly $300 billion spent on a predominantly military operation (resulting in the loss of over 1,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan), we have not been able to successfully address Afghanistan's economic depravity, political corruption, or social divisions that have significantly impeded our military efforts within the country. The American public is beginning to tire of this long drawn-out war. Moreover, many of us in Congress do not see the logic in investing further funds towards training the Afghan army when all methods utilized to this point have failed to achieve tangible gains. Furthermore, charges of corruption within the Karzai government have negatively impacted our credibility among Afghans, forcing them to choose between two different groups of terrorists--the Taliban or the corrupt Karzai government comprised of former warlords, responsible for some of the same atrocities the Taliban currently inflicts upon civilians.

A strengthened Taliban has resurfaced and is engaged in violent attacks throughout the country so that now is the deadliest time for American soldiers since the war began. Booming opium production helps fund the Taliban, which also receives aid from al Qaeda networks in Pakistan. The fledgling Afghan army and police are not ready to defend the country from insurgent attacks and operate independently from U.S. military involvement, training, and support. The highly organized and determined insurgency has continued to exploit the weak central government. Although the main insurgent groups may not have the same operational structure or long-term goals, they are inherently united in their efforts to drive the U.S. out of Afghanistan and unravel the central Afghan ``democratic'' government.

Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I strongly urge my colleagues to vote yes on Representative Lee's Amendment so that we can begin the process of bringing our troops home!

Mr. Speaker, Members, I would like to begin by thanking the chair of the Financial Services Committee, my colleague, Mr. Barney Frank, for the leadership that he has provided in bringing us to this point in doing regulatory reform. There were times I thought it would never happen, but because of his brilliance, and because of his leadership, and because of his ability to listen to all of the Members who serve not only on that committee but on the conference committee, we finds ourselves here.

But I would like at this point in time to engage my chairman to make sure that I understand one particular word that was used in this conference committee report.

So if I may make an inquiry of the gentleman from Massachusetts. I'm trying to understand the meaning of the world ``initiated'' in paragraph 5 of the conference report. Would ``initiated'' include any program or initiative that has been announced by Treasury prior to June 25, 2010? And if so, I assume that that means that programs such as the FHA refinance program, which would address the problem of negative equity and which I understand Treasury and the FHA are working on but is not yet publicly available, would be included as would the Hardest Hit Fund program, which is not fully implemented yet.

And this would not prevent, for example, within the $50 billion already allocated for HAMP, perhaps adjusting resources between already-initiated programs based on their effectiveness.

Thank you. I appreciate that.

Mr. Speaker and Members, I am pleased and proud to stand here today in support of this most significant piece of legislation that is before this House.

Again, I thank Chairman Frank for his leadership, and I'm especially proud that this work of the conference committee was done by such a diverse group on this side of the aisle. I'm especially proud that members of the conference committee included not only women, but African Americans and Latinos and Anglos. It was truly diverse, and you can see that work reflected in what came out of the conference report.

For example, the CBC members of the Financial Services Committee worked on a number of these issues over the past several years, and we came up with those things that had been brought to our attention year in and year out that are finally paid attention to in the conference report.

The Federal Insurance Office, we will be asking them to gather information about the ability of minorities and low-income persons to access affordable insurance products. To give consideration and mitigation of the impact of winding down a systemically risky institution on minorities and low-income communities. The expansion of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's advisory board to include experts in civil rights, community development, communities impacted by high-priced loans, and others. And perhaps most importantly, the establishment of the Offices of Minority and Women Inclusion at each of the Federal financial services agencies.

These offices would provide for diversity in the employment, management, and business activities of these agencies. The data for the need for these offices speaks for itself. Diversity is lacking in the financial services industry, with the GAO reporting from 1993 to 2004 the level of minority participation in the financial services professions only increased marginally, from 11 percent to 15.5 percent. We took care of that in this bill. And now we have the opportunity to not only give oversight to diversity, but to help these agencies understand how to do outreach, how to appeal to different communities so that we can get the kind of employees that will create the diversity to pay attention to all of the needs of the people of this country.

In addition, Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to note that this conference report includes a provision that I championed to allow the SEC to issue rules on proxy access, giving the Nation's pension funds and other long-term institutional investors a say in the governing of the companies in which they own stock.

Additionally, I am pleased that this bill addresses foreclosures, which have single-handedly inflicted tremendous damage on neighborhoods in my district in California and across the country. It has long been my position that this bill would be incomplete without directly addressing the needs of America's homeowners and neighborhoods. That is why I have fought for an additional $1 billion in funds for the Neighborhood Stabilization Program, a program whose authorizing legislation I wrote in 2008. And it is helping neighborhoods all across this country that have foreclosed properties and rundown properties that are driving down the price of other homes in that community. Now we can rehabilitate those properties and keep the values up of the homes in the neighborhood.

I am also pleased that an additional $1 billion in emergency assistance for unemployed homeowners was included in this bill. Reports indicate that 60 percent of individuals seeking help in avoiding foreclosures are doing so because they are unemployed.

I thank the chairman.

This funding will provide a critical bridge for homeowners during periods of joblessness, and allow them to maintain stable housing for their children. This $2 billion, combined with an additional $6 billion I have secured for NSP through two rounds of funding, is another step toward addressing the foreclosure crisis. But more needs to be done. That is why I am pleased that the Treasury has committed to providing another $2 billion for unemployed homeowners in addition to the amounts provided under this bill. And that is why I will continue to fight for both additional funding and for loss mitigation legislation, which would make it mandatory for banks to offer real sustainable loan modification offers.

Chairman Frank, thank you for your assistance, thank you for your support, thank you for your leadership. I am proud to be a part of this Congress, so proud to have been a part of the conference committee. And I think we are doing all Americans justice in this bill as we pay attention to needs that have been so long overlooked.

Madam Speaker, I submit the following: To Penny, Raymond, Steve and the family of Caffie Greene, please accept my heartfelt condolences for the loss of your beloved mother, grandmother, and my friend, Caffie Greene.

Caffie was a brilliant community activist, one of a handful of strong African American women who used their God-given talents to speak up for the least of these. She fought alongside the women of South Los Angeles who led the struggle for justice and equality for so many years. Women such as Lillian Mobley, Mary Henry, Johnnie Mae Tillman, Catherine Germany, and Nola Carter.

Caffie was outspoken, confrontational, and fearless. She had the ability to influence politicians and elected officials with her strong organizing skills. She had the capability to articulate the pain and concerns of poor people; and she never hesitated to show up to meetings at the school board, city hall, press conferences or anywhere else she needed to be.

I know we will all miss Caffie, her strength and unique brilliance. But we must continue her work and honor her legacy which I hope will inspire and motivate a new generation of leaders to dedicate their lives in the service of others as she did. May she rest in peace.

Madam Speaker, I submit the following:

To family of Paul H. DeVan,

It is with great pain and sorrow that I express my

condolences to you, all of Paul's friends and the entire Head

Start family.

Paul and I were very good friends--we met and worked

together starting in the early 1970's in the Head Start

Program. Paul was an activist, organizer, and a promoter of

fairness, justice, and equality for poor people, people of

color and people who simply needed to have friends to assist

them in locating resources to pursue a decent quality of

life.

I loved Paul's kindness, his love of people and his

willingness to work hard for the betterment of our community.

Paul was the kind of man that understood his strength and

power. He had the confidence that is so necessary to make

things happen and get the job done.

Unfortunately there are not many Paul DeVan's left in our

communities that are willing to meet the challenge of

discrimination, poverty and hopelessness. Paul had health

challenges for quite some time but never gave up. He loved

the Head Start Program and was the Founder of Training and

Research Foundation, which provides resources to parents to

help children fulfill their educational destinies.

Paul and Elaine were a wonderful team that accomplished so

much. This home going for Paul must also be a thank you for

all he has done for so many. Paul, I love you and will miss

you very much.

Madam Speaker, I submit the following:

To Juanita and the Family,

Like most of his fans, I had always admired Ollie Woodson

the performer, from afar, as one of the mainstays of ``the

temptin' Temptations.'' When I finally got to meet the

person--your husband, father, and grandfather--at a birthday

celebration in the home of my dear friend Glodean White, I

was really impressed with how friendly, warm and down-to-

earth he was. Since that time, whenever I had the good

fortune to see him, Ollie would always go out of his way to

say hello and make that personal connection. His close

friends tell me that was the generous spirit of the man,

forever responding to those he loved.

We all know about the incredible voices and intricate dance

moves that made a Temptations concert a must-see. But I

specifically remember a wonderful solo performance Ollie did

for the National Newspaper Publishers' Association at the

Democratic National Convention in Denver. I was not only

knocked out by his sheer ability to entertain but I thought

about how Ollie and the rest of the Motown family have really

been cultural ambassadors for America, all over the world.

As successful as he undoubtedly was both as a performer and

producer, I will also cherish some of those special times

right here at City of Refuge, when Ollie would grace the

church and Bishop Noel Jones with a wonderful gospel song. He

certainly never forgot his roots.

So today, let us celebrate both the performer and the man,

who with his God-given talent has earned a place in history

and in our hearts--Ali Ollie Woodson. May he rest in peace.

Madam Speaker, I submit the following:

To Eleanor and Family,

I am sorry that I cannot be with you at the home-going services of your dear husband, father, grandfather, and my good friend, Bill.

I join with the many other elected officials and community leaders who mourn his loss. Bill Elkins was well known, respected, and loved by the many who knew, worked with and understood his undying commitment to African Americans in this city.

Bill spent the best part of his years in service to the late great Mayor Tom Bradley. He served as a liaison for Civil Rights Organizations, Ministers, Fraternities and Sororities and elected officials representing Mayor Bradley. Bill was all about equal opportunity and participation by all people. He truly was responsible for keeping the community informed and working closely with ministers helping them to their congregation engaged and helping to solve community problems.

I could share many stories on how we spent countless hours planning, strategizing, organizing and encouraging people to ``Get Out the Vote''. We don't see that kind of dedication anymore. But for those of us who were fortunate enough to work with him we learned what it meant to be truly committed to the community, he inspired us all.

Eleanor, your sisters in BWF, the organization that you helped to found, stand with at this difficult moment for you and your family. You and the family can rest assured that Bill did more than his share of service in this community. His work is recorded in the history of this city and now it is time for him to rest in peace. He will be sorely missed by so many.

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk made in order under the rule.

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

Mr. Chairman, the manager's amendment would make technical corrections to the underlying FHA Reform Act of 2010 and would respond to a GAO request for more time to complete the mandated study on FHA.

This amendment would also facilitate HUD's implementation of a recently finalized rule whereby FHA will no longer directly approve loan correspondents or mortgage brokers but will require lenders to approve brokers.

Under the language proposed in this amendment, loan correspondents would be permitted to continue closing loans in their own name, a critical business function, and continue to utilize table funding arrangements.

This amendment also addresses eligibility for FHA loans by requiring FHA borrowers to have a valid Social Security number and limiting FHA loans to only U.S. citizens and legal immigrants. This language ensures that undocumented immigrants or other individuals who are in the country unlawfully cannot get FHA mortgages, while still providing that lawful immigrants can continue to stimulate demand in the U.S. housing market through the purchase of homes.

Finally, this amendment provides that the Secretary may increase loan limits for micropolitan counties surrounded by higher-cost areas that are experiencing significant growth.

Again, this amendment strengthens an already strong bill, and I urge my colleagues to support it.

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

Mr. Chairman, I have no further requests for time on this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

I would like to thank my colleague from California. I certainly support this amendment.

The gentleman from California has been one of the most active Members of this Congress in bringing attention to the economic fallout of the foreclosure crisis. I am well aware that his district located in my home State of California has one of the highest foreclosure rates in the country. California has the Nation's fourth highest foreclosure rate with one in every 192 housing units receiving a foreclosure filing last April.

Unfortunately, due to the economic impacts of foreclosures on communities, high foreclosure rates are sometimes accompanied by high unemployment rates. At 13 percent, California's unemployment rate is higher than the national unemployment rate of 9.5 percent. By prioritizing foreclosure counseling services to the hardest hit areas, this amendment would ensure that the homeowners most in need of these services would receive them, helping to stabilize communities that are already facing economic troubles.

I support this amendment, and I certainly thank the gentleman for offering it. I hope my colleagues will vote ``yes.''

I rise to claim the time in opposition, although I am not opposed to the amendment.

I thank the gentleman for this amendment which would ensure that FHA borrowers who are having difficulty paying their loans would receive counseling about credit risk and financial management in addition to information about loan modification assistance and the availability of housing counseling.

Financial literacy is an important tool for empowering consumers, especially those consumers who are having difficulty making mortgage payments. The gentleman's amendment would enhance the housing counseling resources provided by the bill. By allowing borrowers to learn about how to manage their non-mortgage debt, they could be helpful in ensuring that they are able to remain current in their mortgages after modification.

I support this amendment, and I urge an ``aye'' vote.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, this amendment reiterates the existing authority of the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development to raise down payment standards if he deems it necessary to ensure the financial health of FHA, and that is exactly what Secretary Donovan, with the help of Commissioner Stevens is doing because data indicates it is the best thing to do for the current economic environment. In addition, the Secretary has the authority to reduce this down payment

should economic conditions change and data indicates that it can be done while preserving the health of the capital reserves.

This amendment also calls for the Secretary to provide an annual report on the implementation of the minimum down payment requirement, the impact on FHA's capital reserves, the housing market generally, all the number of FHA borrowers, and the impact of any proposed changes on borrowers on the fund.

I believe this is a sensible amendment that increases transparency and accountability and should receive strong, bipartisan support, and I thank Congresswoman Bean for all of the work that she's done on this committee and for this amendment.

I object.