Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, due to circumstances beyond my control, I was unable to vote on the amendment offered by Mr. Session to H.R. 3093 (rollcall No. 721) on Wednesday, July 25, 2007. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''

Madam Speaker, on rollcall No. 689, had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''

Madam Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

And I acknowledge that the Illinois delegation on a bipartisan basis has supported this project. And this project, unlike the one that my colleague from Arizona mentioned, isn't a typical aquarium project. This is focusing on resources that highlight the importance and fragility of our Great Lakes aquatic ecosystem from the Dunes to Chicago's unique urbanized lakefront to the Illinois Beach State Park, where this interactive saltwater and freshwater aquatic biology lesson can take place.

This has bipartisan support. It is timely, given BP's recent announcement that it has received a permit to dump 1,500 pounds of ammonia and almost 5,000 pounds of sludge into Lake Michigan every day.

I am proud to defend this request to protect our largest source of drinking water, not just in Illinois, not just in the country, but in the world.

And my colleague from Arizona and from States like Colorado, who are experiencing severe water shortages, should want us to make sure that we're educating our community how to defend this important national resource.

I would also suggest that, while I respect the gentleman's concern for fiscal responsibility that he shows on this $150,000 request out of a $150 billion bill, he didn't show such restraint in rolling back subsidies to the oil and gas industry for $14 billion earlier in the year. I would suggest that he look elsewhere to promote fiscal responsibility.

I ask my colleagues to join me in opposition.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from North Carolina for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Res. 455, which supports the goals and ideals of National Internet Safety Month. Following the lead of the Senate, I'm proud that the House of Representatives will recognize June 2007 as National Internet Safety Month with passage of my resolution today.

I want to thank Chairman Dingell and the resolution's cosponsors, Representatives Upton, Green, Shimkus, Matheson, Donnelly and Gillibrand, for their help bringing to the floor this resolution on Internet safety.

The Internet is a wonderful resource for our children. Over 35 million students have access to the Internet and use it every day to expand their knowledge beyond what they can learn in textbooks and in the classroom. In addition, the Internet allows kids to stay connected with their friends when not at school.

The Internet has increased productivity and opened a new world of opportunities for our children; but at the same time, it has opened a world of dangers. These threats, whether it be unwanted online solicitations, Internet scams or cyberbullying, are dangerous and real. In order for our children to be protected from the dangers of the Internet, we must work together to raise awareness of Internet safety.

As noted in today's resolution, 41 percent of middle and high school students do not tell their parents about their Internet communications; 61 percent of students admit to using the Internet unsafely or inappropriately; and of most concern, 20 percent of middle school and high school students have met face-to-face with someone they first met online.

In recent studies conducted by the Department of Justice, one in seven children between the ages of 10 and 17 received a sexual solicitation online and one in 25, or essentially one per classroom, have received an aggressive sexual solicitation when a predator calls them on the phone, sends them gifts, or requests a meeting.

Fortunately, our schools, nonprofits, local, State and Federal governments, and concerned corporate citizens have been actively engaging children on Internet safety. Programs vary, but all emphasize the importance of protecting personal information, keeping parents informed of Internet actions, and being careful who you talk to online.

For the last 2\1/2\ years, I have hosted Internet safety forums for kids and adults in my own congressional district. Having teenage daughters of my own, I discovered while they enjoyed the opportunity to express themselves with popular networking sites, they had no appreciation for the dangers that lurked there. Whenever I meet with students from my district, I always emphasize tips for how to stay online.

We have a little bookmarker that we distribute to children across the district giving them safety tips. Some of those include, number one, not sharing passwords or personal identifying information, and they really don't appreciate that while this is a site that allows them to connect with friends, oftentimes predators are using these sites as online shopping catalogs for potential victims, and by sharing information, they're setting themselves up as just that potential victim.

We also talked to children about while trustworthiness is one of the pillars of character that many schools instill in their own character development programs, that that trustworthiness is not something that anyone they have met on the Internet is deserving of because oftentimes they're not who they say they are, and the 14-year-old from the school across town very well in many cases is a 38-year-old predator from out of State.

We also tell them to avoid posting pictures online. Again, they're sharing pictures of activities and themselves with their friends, but those pictures are often taken out of context and they have no control over how they're used, where they're used, who they're used by. And we also remind particularly our high schoolers that not only colleges but future employers will be looking on these networking sites to see the pictures they have posted; and while they may think these are private or they can take those pictures back, through the use of technology, in most cases they can't. Once they're out there, they can't get those back.

Besides educating children about Internet safety, it's as important to inform parents how to keep their kids safe online. The sad reality is children know far more about the Internet and they're much more comfortable with computer usage than we as parents tend to be, but we have to work at it.

Approximately 50 percent of parents admit that they do not properly monitor their children's Internet activity and they don't use filter, blocking or monitoring software on their home computers. Parents need to be engaged and ask their children what they're doing online.

We all remember, and our children remember, stranger danger. We certainly have all, as parents, encouraged them never to talk to strangers at the playground. The playground has gotten a lot bigger, and now those strangers can come right into our home, and in some cases, our children's bedrooms, which is also why we encourage parents not to put computers in their children's rooms but to put them in a public place.

Finally, install filter blocking and monitoring software to prevent children from visiting dangerous sites.

In addition to today's resolution, I have introduced legislation that will expand the FTC's resources to create public awareness with a national campaign to help kids, teachers and parents protect themselves.

In closing, I urge my colleagues to support H. Res. 455 and encourage them to use Internet National Safety Month as an opportunity to support the efforts of our local, State and Federal government, local and national nonprofit organizations, and concerned

corporate citizens in promoting Internet safety.

Mr. Speaker, I have a parliamentary inquiry.

Mr. Speaker, is the gentleman from Georgia requesting a recorded revote on the bipartisan Bean-Neugebauer amendment which passed by voice vote last week?

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I just wanted to make sure this was the bipartisan Bean-Neugebauer amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 1427. I want to thank Chairman Frank for his hard work in crafting such a strong GSE reform bill, and I am pleased that the Financial Services Committee was able to move this bill to the floor so quickly. Passage of this legislation is necessary to further strengthen the U.S. financial system and is essential in establishing a sound regulatory environment for the housing GSEs, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the Federal Home Loan Banks.

In order to ensure that the GSEs are able to perform their Congressionally chartered functions as efficiently, successfully and safely as possible, Congress must put into place a robust, world class regulator capable of overseeing the safety and soundness of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac's operations as well as their housing mission.

However, over the last several months, as Congress has considered how best to achieve this goal, much attention has been drawn to the scope of the new regulator's authority in developing criteria to oversee Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac's portfolios, which are critical in providing liquidity and stability to our Nation's housing market.

On this issue in particular, I believe Chairman Frank's intent in crafting this legislation has been clear from the beginning, to provide bank-like oversight authority, to ensure the safe and sound operations of the GSE portfolios.

However, when asked about the portfolio language Chairman Frank negotiated with Secretary Paulson, James Lockhart, the current GSE regulator, was quoted in January as saying, ``My view is that inherent in any safety and soundness activity, one has to be concerned about systemic risk, and I don't think it has to say the word to have that as a potential consideration.'' In contrast, during the committee's oversight hearing, Chairman Frank once again reiterated what has been his consistent view, that the language was envisioned to only cover mission and safety and soundness concerns.

This apparent ambiguity about the interpretation of the bill's portfolio language fueled concerns on both sides of the aisle and underscores the need to clarify its intent.

Mr. Chairman, the term ``safety and soundness'' is a well-defined term in banking law and regulation. What is less clear is the application of a so-called systemic risk standard. First, there is no systemic risk standard applicable to banks or financial services holding companies, and certainly no such standard imposed on the mortgages they hold.

Second, the question of whether or not to apply a systemic risk standard to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac has already been asked and answered definitively by this House. In the 109th Congress, Representative Royce offered an amendment to the GSE reform authorizing systemic risk as a consideration for regulating the GSE portfolios. This amendment was overwhelmingly rejected on a bipartisan vote of 346- 73.

Such a strong repudiation highlights several of the questions the proponents of systemic risk have been unable to adequately address. Number one, how to define it; two, demonstrate how there could be a systemic risk to the overall economy that would not first trigger safety and soundness concerns to the enterprises themselves; and, three, why should GSEs be held to a different standard than other holders of mortgage assets.

Furthermore, Mr. Chairman, I was extremely concerned yesterday following the administration's release of its official Statement of Administration Policy. In it, the administration suggests that the portfolio authority contained in H.R. 1427 helps to address the systemic risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to our financial system.

The SAP leaves no doubt that the administration interprets the current language of H.R. 1427 to authorize an application of systemic risk, which is why I urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan amendment I am offering today with Representatives Neugebauer, Moore and Miller. As it did in the 109th Congress, the House must once again reject the vague notion of systemic risk and be clear that it is not intended to be a criterion applied by the new GSE regulator.

This amendment is very straightforward. It would ensure if there is sufficient risk posed to each company, the regulator would have the authority to adjust the portfolio. However, the regulator would not be authorized to shrink, cap or limit the size of the GSE portfolios based simply upon a nebulous determination that the portfolios are too large or that they might pose a risk to the overall system.

Again, I want to thank Representatives Randy Neugebauer, Dennis Moore and Gary Miller for their support and hard work on this issue. I am pleased the amendment has received such strong and broad-based support. I am equally pleased to see that portrayed associations representing the leaders have endorsed this amendment.

Offered By: Ms. Bean

Amendment No. 4: Page 60, line 2, after ``posed'' insert

``to the enterprises''.

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer an amendment to the Small Business Fairness in Contracting Act. I would like to thank Ranking Member Chabot for cosponsoring and Chairman Velazquez for her support. This amendment would increase the Federal Government's small business contracting goal from 23 to 30 percent.

Small businesses are the stimulative engine to our Nation's economy and drive our domestic job growth. They make up 97 percent of all businesses, provide 50 percent of our gross domestic product and 50 percent of our non-farm employment. Clearly, small businesses have the capacity to compete for Federal contracts.

The government's small business prime contract goal has not been increased since 1997. Since that time, the Nation has added over 3 million net new small businesses. At the same

time, the Federal marketplace has doubled and now accounts for over $400 billion in goods and services. My amendment reflects that new reality that the number and capabilities of small businesses have grown to such an extent that an adjustment to our national goal is in the best interests of our country.

The increase would also address a discouraging development that, after some early successes in achieving the contracting goal, Federal agencies have become complacent in their efforts to provide opportunities to small business. Over the last 5 years, they have begun to use contract bundling and contract streamlining practices, which reduced opportunities for competition. Without competition, we cannot ensure that taxpayer dollars are being used most effectively.

In addition, Federal agencies have become careless in their reporting of contract awards, leading them to believe they have exceeded small business goals they were, in fact, failing to achieve. As a result, small businesses access to prime contracts have suffered. In 2005, the Federal marketplace rose by 7 percent, but prime small business contracts only rose by 2 percent.

Last year alone, we found that the Federal Government fell about $12 billion below their goal level, even though the SBA originally reported that they had exceeded their goal.

By raising our small business prime contracting goal and increasing competitive bids, we get a greater return on our tax dollars. At the same time, we provide economic stimulus for the small businesses in our communities. I urge your support of this amendment.

I yield to cosponsor Chabot.

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

Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, the Small Business Lending Improvements Act of 2007, which I introduced earlier this year, was recently reported out of the Committee on Small Business, without objection, and I am pleased that it is being given consideration on the House floor today.

I would like to begin by thanking Chairwoman Velazquez and Ranking Member Chabot for cosponsoring this legislation and for their leadership in moving this bill forward. The expedited consideration of this bill, as well as the bipartisan support it has received, underscores the importance of ensuring access to capital to our small business community.

I am also very appreciative of the expert assistance provided by the House Small Business Committee staff, especially Michael Day, whose work on this issue has been invaluable.

Having been a small business owner myself, I can appreciate the challenges that entrepreneurs and small business owners face in gaining access to the capital that they need to grow. That is why I have long been active in my support of measures to improve and expand the SBA loan programs, which offer low-interest, long-term loans, not subsidies, to business owners seeking affordable options.

This bill is no exception. H.R. 1332 makes much-needed changes to SBA's lending initiatives and, most importantly, helps to preserve the original intent of these programs, to help make available affordable sources of financing. This is of particular importance as the cost of capital through these programs has risen rapidly over the last few years, stifling plans for both new businesses and those ready for plant and equipment expansion. This bill helps to reverse this discouraging trend by supporting our entrepreneurs and not stifling their visions for growth.

In addition, H.R. 1332 addresses the need for lending in our rural communities by restoring the LowDoc program and by strengthening the 504 initiative, which is integral in stimulating economic growth in rural America.

Together, these initiatives will streamline and reduce the fees for SBA's lending programs, making it easier for small lenders to participate. Local economies throughout the country will benefit from new jobs and economic development that will occur in their communities as a result.

Again, I commend the work of the Small Business Committee, under the leadership of Chairwoman Velazquez, for recognizing the need for this legislation and prioritizing it relative to other committee work. Small businesses are the backbone of our Nation's economic stimulus, driving 80 percent of domestic job growth, and their success is dependent upon their ability to grow and to expand. This legislation helps provide them with the fundamental tools they need to do so.

I urge your support of this bill.

Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 1675) to suspend the requirements of the Department of Housing and Urban Development regarding electronic filing of previous participation certificates and regarding filing of such certificates with respect to certain low-income housing investors.

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

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

The Preservation Approval Process Improvement Act of 2007, introduced by myself and Representative Gillmor, was recently reported out of the Committee on Financial Services without objection, and I am pleased it is being given consideration on the House floor today. In addition to expressing my appreciation to Chairman Frank, Ranking Member Bachus, and Housing Subcommittee Chairwoman Waters, I would especially like to thank my colleague from Ohio (Mr. Gillmor) in moving this bill forward and his efforts to address the regulatory barriers impacting the investment in affordable housing.

I am also very appreciative of the expert assistance provided by the House Financial Services Committee staff, including Jeff Riley and Cindy Chetti, who have been working on this issue for more than 1\1/2\ years.

H.R. 1675 will reduce burdens caused by HUD's unnecessarily complex regulation of its previous participation reporting requirements, known as the 2530 process.

Written many years ago when small mom-and-pop companies were investing in affordable housing, HUD's regulations governing the 2530 process are no longer in sync with the type of real estate transactions being conducted today. As a result, when applied to the more typical investor of today, these regulations impose huge administrative and regulatory hurdles. The application of these cumbersome regulations was made worse last summer when HUD automated the 2530 process using an electronic system known as APPS. In addition to being difficult to navigate, the APPS system experiences technical difficulties almost daily and has led to a number of security breaches involving personal data.

As a result, H.R. 1675 will suspend the requirement that 2530 filings be done through HUD's electronic APPS system. Participants may choose to continue to use APPS, but HUD must permit other participants to submit 2530 paper filings. The suspension of HUD's requirement that all filings be done through APPS will continue until HUD revises the 2530 rules to eliminate unnecessary burdens and disincentives for all participants. The revised regulations are to be submitted to the Committee on Financial Services as well as to the Senate Banking Committee for review.

Further, the bill requires the HUD Secretary to immediately suspend all filing requirements under the previous participation process for limited liability corporate investors owning an interest in entities that receive low-income housing tax credits. Limited liability corporate investors have no operational control over properties and pose no risk to the Department. The investors are simply providing much needed capital to build affordable housing for low-income Americans, and such investment should not be inadvertently discouraged by outdated, burdensome regulations.

I submit for printing in the Record a letter addressed to Chairman Frank and Representative Bachus from nearly 30 organizations endorsing this legislation, including the National Association of Realtors, National Multi-Housing Council, the National Association of State and Local Equity Funds, and many more.

It is time for us to bring a commonsense approach to affordable housing. In passing this bill we will be taking an important step toward encouraging investment in such housing options and reducing unnecessary regulatory roadblocks.

March 27, 2007.

Hon. Barney Frank,

Chairman, House Committee on Financial Services, Washington,

I have no further requests for time, and I reserve the balance of our time.

Madam Speaker, I would just say this is a bill where we had strong bipartisan support, and while technology didn't work in the case of the APPS system, bipartisanship did.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I am proud to rise today in support of National Foster Parents Day. This celebration honors the parents who open their hearts and their homes to children who are in need of a family. As an adoptee and member of the Adoption Caucus, myself, I am proud of the efforts Congress has made to increase adoptions both nationally and internationally, and to give special thanks to the many families who have sacrificed to provide loving homes for foster children.

Currently, thousands of children are without permanent homes. Fortunately, for many of these children there are foster parents who are eager to bring a child into their home. I cannot think of a more rewarding pursuit than creating a family and bringing hope into a child's life.

As a member of the Congressional Coalition on Adoption, I am well aware of the positive impact foster parents have on our children and communities. I am proud of the contributions foster parents make across America, and I hope my colleagues will join with me in supporting a National Foster Parents Day.

I thank the gentleman from Georgia for yielding. It is always an honor to join you here on the floor as it was an honor to join you during the NATO parliamentary assembly that we attended together. And one thing that didn't come up that you mentioned earlier with Congressman Chandler was that, in addition to visiting NATO headquarters in Brussels, we also visited the Landstuhl Medical Facility in Germany where our returning wounded are coming from both Iraq and Afghanistan. And it was important to meet with them and hear from them their firsthand experiences and what brought them there, why they are fighting so hard, and their concern for those in the platoons that are still fighting. And one of the things I wanted to talk about is bringing some accountability to that process.

And I will also mention that there has been a lot in the press recently about Walter Reed and some concerns about infrastructure and investment that I know we are working to address as we look at appropriations. But it was encouraging to see the medical professionals, their commitment to facilities and just the top-notch care that our returning men and women who have been wounded are getting and hear how pleased they were with the level of medical support they are getting.

But the Iraqi War Cost Accountability Resolution which we in the Blue Dogs introduced is what I wanted to touch on, because several of my Blue Dog colleagues and yourself, Mr. Scott, have mentioned accountability, and I think it certainly what our constituents expect of us. And one of the reasons we supported this bill is it provides accountability across four different disciplines. It provides spending accountability; it enforces transparency, and requires the Department of Defense Inspector General to provide regular reports on exactly what spending has taken place, what spending hasn't taken place, what projects we are working on, what the status of those projects are, what the contracting process is. And also, not just what we in this country are providing, but also what are other countries that are allied with us are providing to what is going on there as well. It provides contracting accountability in addition to spending accountability, with a commission akin to the Truman Commission that was done in the past to oversee the contracting process, the policies, how they are being carried out, and whether those contractors are fulfilling their obligations as well. And it also puts sanctions in place for any kinds of fraud or abuse that can be happening.

It also provides budget accountability. As you and I know, and we have talked about this in our Blue Dog meetings, there have been six emergency supplementals, and those emergency supplementals have all been for war spending. Given the number of years we have all been engaged in this process in Iraq, it is no longer an emergency. This is an unaccounted for spending; this isn't something that we are surprised by. And so what we are requiring in this bill is on budget war appropriations. And it also requires Iraqi accountability. So let me go through all four of those, and then I will describe what I mean by the Iraqi accountability.

Spending accountability, contracting accountability, budgeting accountability, and Iraqi accountability.

And that means that we need to hold accountable not only the Prime Minister al-Maliki, but the Iraqi government, to be accountable first and foremost to protecting themselves on a sovereign basis. And as you alluded to earlier, it is our job to help contain the situation from insurgents outside, but they need to, for their own security, be first and foremost in assuming a higher degree of responsibility, as many of us supported the President when he said, as the Iraqi people and the Iraqi military stand up, we can stand down. And so we have to hold them accountable to doing that so we can.

I am going to lastly talk about the budget in general and why I am a Blue Dog. You have your sign up there, we all do, and it talks about the $9 trillion of debt that we are now at. And I think Congressman Cooper alluded to the fact that the foreign borrowing that we are doing is contributing to that. We are now borrowing, as a Nation, $7 billion to $8 billion per working day from foreign countries; $2 billion to $3 billion of that is just the government alone. And at that rate, we are going to continue to exacerbate this debt and the individual share that we are passing on to every American.

I think, as a parent, I often remind myself that tough love is important. It is not my job as a parent to tell my kids what they want to hear, but to tell them what they need to hear. And I think the Blue Dogs bring that same kind of tough love to our constituents and to our Nation, and hopefully to our Congress, because we need to be talking about what Americans need to hear, not what they want to hear. And so I am glad to be joining you tonight.

Absolutely.

Very much so.

Absolutely we do.

Our entire Nation.

I would agree. Our entire Nation is grateful to them, and to their families who were there supporting them through their injuries.

And on that note I will yield back, because I know we have Congresswoman Sanchez, who is also anxious to speak.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to celebrate National Day of Serbia, which observes the anniversary of the adoption of Serbia's first modern constitution in 1835. In addition, this year marks Serbia's first National Day as an independent nation-state.

February 15th is also Armed Forces Day in Serbia which commemorates the beginning of

the first Serbian uprising against the Ottoman Empire in 1804. On this day over 200 years ago, Serbians began the arduous effort to gain independence after nearly 300 years of Ottoman rule.

Finally, this year marks 125 years of diplomatic relations between the United States and Serbia. A strong democratic Serbia is crucial to the future of the former Yugoslav republics, the Balkans, and the rest of eastern Europe. Strong ties with the United States are necessary as Serbia looks to encourage international investment, expand its economy and move forward into the future.

Madam Speaker, please join me, Serbian-Americans and the citizens of Serbia in remembering such an important date in their history.

I thank the gentleman from New York for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 976, the Small Business Tax Relief Act.

America's small and medium businesses are our Nation's stimulative engine, employing roughly 80 percent of our domestic workforce. Too often, our Tax Code is weighted in support of our large lobbying interests, without consideration of those small businesses who are the backbone of our communities and have vital economic impact there.

I am proud to join Chairwoman Velazquez, Chairman Rangel and other colleagues in support of the Small Business Tax Relief Act, which provides needed tax relief to our Nation's small businesses in support of their growth and profitability. In particular, the Small Business Tax Relief Act will provide incentives to businesses in my district and around our country to continue to invest in the infrastructure important to their growth.

In addition to extending deductions in plant material investments, this bill also extends the Work Opportunity Tax Credit. This credit has been successful in helping people move from welfare to work and gain on-the-job experience by incentivizing employers to hire disadvantaged workers, including returning veterans and the disabled.

As Chair of the Small Business Tax and Finance Subcommittee, I will continue to champion initiatives that help our Nation's small businesses prosper.

I urge my colleagues to support the Small Business Tax Relief Act as part of that effort. As our small businesses grow stronger, so do the communities in which they reside and the workers they employ.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague, the gentleman from Massachusetts, for yielding.

I rise today in support of H. Con. Res. 63 and in opposition to the proposed troop surge in Iraq.

When I visited Iraq in 2005, like the soldiers I met there, I was hopeful that democratic elections would allow Iraq to move forward as a unified sovereign nation. While the elections demonstrated a commitment from the Iraqi people to do that, the situation on the ground has instead worsened, sectarian violence has increased, and the escalating death toll for American and Allied troops and the Iraqi people demand serious scrutiny of our strategy in Iraq.

When I met with the President's military and national security advisers last month to learn about their new plan, I anticipated that a new course would be proposed. Regrettably, this surge does not constitute a new course.

We have tried multiple troop surges. After the most recent surge last summer, conducted in Baghdad, the U.S. military declared that it had ``not met our overall expectations of sustaining a reduction in levels of violence.'' In fact, attacks increased by 22 percent, and already after 20 percent of the current surge has been deployed, violence has not decreased.

Instead of sending more troops, our military mission in Iraq must shift from attempting to secure Iraq to better equipping and training the Iraqi Security Forces so they can secure their own country. Like most Americans, I have supported the President's objective that we will stand down as the Iraqis stand up. We have already trained nearly 325,000 Iraqi Security Forces toward that end.

For 4 years Americans have seen the brave men and women of our Armed Forces perform their duty courageously. We have seen over 3,100 American husbands, wives, mothers, fathers, sons, and daughters make the ultimate sacrifice, including 116 servicemen and women from my State of Illinois. We have seen $400 billion in hard-earned tax dollars invested in this effort to support those fighting. What we haven't seen is real accountability for results.

That is why I have joined my colleagues in the Blue Dog Coalition to introduce the Iraq War Cost Accountability Resolution. This resolution requires accountability in four ways: spending accountability; contractual accountability; budget accountability; and, importantly, Iraqi accountability.

To ensure spending accountability, this resolution requires the Department of Defense Inspector General to provide an accounting of all military and reconstruction spending and to report to Congress every 90 days, including how and where our tax dollars are being spent, transparency in contracting and procurement methods, and levels of participation from other countries, additional funding required, and, importantly, sanctions applied for fraud, abuse, and war profiteering.

To enforce contractual accountability, a select committee akin to the Truman Committee would be created to investigate the awarding of contracts and their execution to protect our tax dollars. To provide budget accountability, this resolution requires funding requests for the war in Iraq in fiscal 2008 and beyond must come through the regular appropriations process, not continued emergency supplementals. And to demand Iraqi accountability, the administration should firmly condition further American financial and military support upon steady and measurable improvement in Iraqi progress towards principal responsibility for internal security in Iraq.

Mr. Speaker, increasing the number of troops without increasing the level of accountability perpetuates the same policy that has led to this crisis in Iraq.

I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support both of these resolutions. Instead of sending more troops, let us provide the high degree of accountability that the American people demand and that our valiant men and women serving in Iraq deserve.