Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize and honor the dedication, unwavering service and steadfast commitment of Rosemarie Lane to the veterans of Maine.

Rosemarie was born in Brooklyn, New York. She joined the Army at age 19. She served in France and Germany, and volunteered to serve in Vietnam. She retired in 1986 as a Master Sergeant.

Her service to our country is not limited to the military. She recently retired from the Internal Revenue Service after many years of dedicated public service.

As a Life Member of the Veterans of Foreign Wars, Rosemarie has served as Post Commander and District 9 Commander. She was elected the 2003-2004 State Commander for the VFW Department of Maine, giving her the distinction as the first female VFW State Commander in New England. Since completing her term as State Commander, she has continued to serve the VFW on its National Legislative Committee.

Rosemarie is a staunch advocate for veterans, working tireless hours defending the rights and benefits she and her fellow veterans have earned. She embodies the spirit, commitment, and passion that all veterans' advocates should possess.

I can always trust that Rosemarie will tell me exactly what she believes. I value her guidance, her candor, and her friendship. Through her work, she has brought honor and credit to herself, her family, her community, the VFW and her Nation. I extend my sincere thank you to her for her many years of service on behalf of our veterans.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I rise today in support of H.R. 5554, the Justin Bailey Veterans Substance Use Disorders Prevention and Treatment Act of 2008. This legislation does amend title 38, United States Code, to expand and improve health care services available to veterans for substance use disorders.

It requires that all VA medical centers provide ready access to a full continuum of care for substance use disorders. And it explicitly defines that ``full continuum of care'' as ranging from initial screening through outpatient care and family therapy. We have an obligation to take care of the men and women who chose to fight for our freedom and the freedom of all oppressed people.

This legislation had strong bipartisan support during its development. I want to thank members of the Health Care Subcommittee, especially Mr. Miller, for their support and contributions to this legislation, as well as the committee staff on both sides of the aisle.

I also would like to thank Congresswoman Berkley, who has been a true advocate for our veterans, and who has been strongly involved in the development of this legislation as well.

I also want to thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your leadership, as well as Ranking Member Buyer for your leadership in this legislation. I encourage my colleagues to support it.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

I rise today in strong support of H.R. 5856, the Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Facilities Authorization and Lease Act of 2008. This legislation authorizes the Department of Veterans Affairs to build or lease major medical facilities across this country. I believe we must do everything possible to take care of the men and women who defend our Nation and fight for freedom around the world.

The facilities authorized in this legislation will provide the much- needed physical facilities around the country where we can take care of veterans for different health care reasons. This legislation has strong bipartisan support. We did take a lot of time working with the minority members and had hearings on this bill and actually went around the country to look at the facilities that the VA currently has. This bill is desperately needed to make sure that we keep upgrading and building the facilities that are needed around this great Nation of ours.

I do want to thank the staff on both the majority side and minority side for all their efforts in really moving this legislation forward. Especially I want to thank Mr. Miller, who has been a strong supporter of this legislation. We spent hundreds of hours going through this proposal with committee staff and within the VA staff as well. I especially want to thank you, Mr. Chairman, and Ranking Member Buyer, for your interest in this legislation as well.

This legislation did receive a lot of interest from a variety of Members of Congress on both sides of the aisle, and we wish we could accommodate all the interest and concerns that we heard, but we were unable to do that at this time. We will be able to move forward with report language in this legislation that actually requires the VA to report back to the Veterans' Affairs Committee on how we deal with some of the lower cost items, CBOCs around the country, and look forward to that report. Hopefully, we will be able to move forward in a more aggressive way

and get the facilities that we need around the country.

With that, I would urge my colleagues to strongly support H.R. 5856.

Madam Speaker, it is my privilege to speak in honor of the life and times of Philip Ingegneri, who was a dedicated public servant, a true friend of Maine, and a loving husband and father.

For over 30 years, Phil Ingegneri served his country as a special investigator for the Internal Revenue Service. His work in special investigations took him to cities across the eastern seaboard and even to postwar Europe, where he was stationed in Paris, France.

When the opportunity arose in the 1950s, Phil jumped at the chance to move his beloved wife, Roslyn, and two young children, Philip and Lois, to Bangor, Maine, where they quickly integrated into that vibrant community.

After a long and distinguished career serving his country, Phil Ingegneri was elected to the Maine House of Representatives, where he dedicated his efforts to improving public education for all of Maine's citizens.

I am sad to announce Philip Ingegneri passed away this Saturday evening at the age of 97. However, it is a privilege to recognize on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives his service and contributions to our Nation and the great State of Maine. His dedication and love for his family, community, and country is a fine example for all of us.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Con. Res. 322 recognizing the 60th anniversary of the founding of the modern State of Israel and reaffirming the bonds of close friendship and cooperation between the United States and Israel.

Today marks the 60th anniversary of the founding of the modern State of Israel. For the past six decades the United States and Israel have forged a special relationship based on our shared history of overcoming oppression, tyranny and hatred. This bond has strengthened over time through our common interest in peace, prosperity, and democracy.

As we commemorate this anniversary, we must also recognize the challenges that face Israel. Security and prosperity will only be reached when a resolution to the conflict between the Palestinian and Israeli peoples is achieved.

It is critical that we engage both Israel and the Palestinian leadership to find a way forward. It is also critical that we support initiatives that create greater dialogue, cooperation and economic development between Israelis and Palestinians. I have been a strong supporter of Seeds of Peace, which has a camp located in my district, which brings Arab and Israeli youth together to dispel stereotypes and build lasting trust within the regional leaders of tomorrow. I have also been a strong supporter of the Middle East Regional Cooperation program and other programs that create people-to-people reconciliation and coexistence in the Middle East.

Israel is friend and ally of the United States and it is my honor to recognize the 60th anniversary of its founding. True support for Israel lies in standing with our friend as its civilians face down indiscriminate rocket attacks and in pushing for a permanent peace that provides security and dignity to both Israelis and Palestinians.

On this special occasion it is important to commemorate the past, but also to look toward the future. As our two Nations enter our seventh decade as allies, we must continue to actively pursue our common dream of peace, freedom and security--a dream that I believe is shared by all peoples of the world.

Mr. Speaker, I reiterate my firm support of H. Con. Res. 322.

Mr. Speaker, it is my privilege to speak in honor of the life of Philip Ingegneri, who was a dedicated public servant, a true friend of Maine, and a loving husband and father.

For over 30 years, Phil served his country as a special investigator for the IRS. When the opportunity arose in the 1950s, Phil moved his beloved wife, Rosslyn, and their two young children, Philip and Lois, to Bangor, Maine.

After a long and dedicated career serving his country, Phil was elected to the Maine House of Representatives where he dedicated his efforts to improving public education for all of Maine's citizens.

I am sad to announce that Phil passed away this past Saturday at the age of 97. It is a privilege to recognize on the floor of the House of Representatives his service and contribution to our Nation and the great State of Maine. His dedication and love for his family, community, and country is a fine example for all of us.

Madam Speaker, I rise to urge my colleagues to support H. Res. 1077 and to speak about the alarming human rights situation in Tibet and the People's Republic of China.

In recent weeks, we have seen citizens of the world rising up against the Chinese Government's crackdown in Tibet and requesting that the communist regime end human rights abuses. The crackdown by the Chinese Government resulted in more than 100 deaths of Tibetans and the detention of thousands more. The Chinese government has also impeded the access of international journalists to Tibetan areas of China. It is time for this body to stand with these protests and act to protect Tibetans and Chinese citizens from further violence.

Despite the upcoming 2008 Olympic Games in Beijing, the Government's human rights record remains poor. Tibetans are not the only victims of China's human rights abuses. We must not forget the persecution of Christians, Uyghur Muslims, Falun Gong, democracy advocates, AIDS victims, journalists, and lawyers in China. There have been numerous abuses in China tied to the upcoming Olympic Games, including media and Internet censorship, sentences on charges of state subversion of government critics and forced evictions. Human rights advocates are being imprisoned for criticizing the Government's human rights record.

The Chinese Government wants to use the 2008 Summer Olympic Games to showcase the progress their country has made. It is my hope that the Chinese Government will take immediate and substantial strides to resolve the situation in Tibet and to address domestic human rights issues in China. Until that time, the voices of this Congress and the world should continue to apply pressure on the Chinese Government. The Summer Olympic Games offer the international community the opportunity to speak up against ongoing abuses in China.

Human rights should be our first priority and our first requirement when we engage with countries. It is our duty to use our economic and diplomatic leverage to make sure that fundamental rights are protected in the world.

I urge my colleagues in Congress to support H. Res. 1077, which calls on the Government of the People's Republic of China to end its crackdown in Tibet and to engage in dialogue with the Dalai Lama. The Dalai Lama's movement is not radical, and it is not violent. It is time for the Chinese to end their brutal treatment of the Tibetan people. It is time for the Tibetan people to experience the inalienable freedoms and human rights that all free peoples should enjoy. Again, I urge my colleagues to support H. Res. 1077.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to welcome and recognize Ms. Jeri Brooks Greenwell as today's guest chaplain. Ms. Greenwell is from Bethel, Maine, and is a member of the West Paris Congregational Church. She's also the National Chaplain of the American Legion Auxiliary.

Ms. Greenwell has dedicated much of her adult life in community service. She has been an active member of the Legion Auxiliary since 1974, holding numerous positions. Her service extends deep into her community. Ms. Greenwell is a life member of the Bethel Historical Society, a former Literacy Volunteer, a member of the Maine's Children Alliance, a member of the Maine Handicapped Skiing Veterans Program, and a National spokesperson for the National Meningitis Association.

Ms. Greenwell is joined by other members of the American Legion. I would like to welcome them as well. I am proud that Ms. Greenwell is my constituent, and it is an honor to have her deliver today's prayer.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the families who 150 years ago came to the banks of the Aroostook River following the Aroostook War and the Webster-Ashburton Treaty which paved their way. Working together in the midst of wilderness, the community supported a school and increasing amounts of small businesses. Finally, in March, 1858, the Secretary of State certified that an act to incorporate the Town of Fort Fairfield had been signed by Governor Lot M. Morrill.

Today, equipped with the same community spirit and sense of common purpose, the people of Fort Fairfield continue to embrace the challenges and opportunities of living and working on the border in northern Maine. Their commitment and the commitment of their ancestors are to be commended. It is these individuals and families along with the many other hardworking people of Maine that I remember every time I cast a vote here on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives.

It is an honor and a privilege to represent the people of Fort Fairfield and I am pleased to have this opportunity to help this community celebrate its 150th Anniversary.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Acadia National Park Improvement Act.

I would like to thank Chairman Rahall and Ranking Member Young, as well as subcommittee Chairman Grijalva and Ranking Member Bishop, for their work on this measure.

This is a very important bill for the State of Maine as well as the future of Acadia National Park. Acadia National Park is a spectacular and unique landscape of mountains, hills, ponds, marshes and shorelines.

Earlier visitors to Mount Desert Island and its surroundings helped to establish Acadia as the first national park east of the Mississippi. The park is a major engine of the regional economy, bringing in almost $130 million in visitor spending to the region, and supporting over 2,600 jobs.

The Acadia National Park Improvement Act will help the park continue to attract visitors to the area and maintain and preserve their important natural resources. It allows the park to continue to complete the vision laid out in the 1986 law setting the park's boundaries and to enhance the emission-reducing Island Explorer bus system.

Most importantly, this legislation will reauthorize the Acadia National Park Advisory Commission. The commission brings representatives of surrounding towns, the State of Maine, and the Department of the Interior together to make sure all community members are involved in park planning.

I want to thank everyone involved for their hard work on this, and I encourage my colleagues to vote in favor of this important bill for the State of Maine.

Madam Speaker, I rise today on behalf of the workers at NewPage Corporation in Rumford, Maine, and Fraser Timber Limited in Ashland, Maine. These workers received some devastating news this week about job losses and layoffs. Fraser Timber Limited will lay off 70 workers on February 8, 2008 to June 1, 2008. NewPage Corporation announced a shutdown of a paper machine in Rumford as of February 25, 2008. This decision could impact approximately 60 to 70 jobs in Maine.

In Maine, we are all too familiar with an economic and trade policy that has devastated our manufacturing sector. As a mill worker for nearly 30 years at Great Northern Paper Company, I know how devastating this news is for these workers and their families. When this happens in small rural communities in Maine, it ripples through the economy and throughout the region.

When the House considers a potential economic stimulus package in the next few weeks, I'll keep the workers of NewPage and Fraser at the forefront of my mind. Any economic stimulus package the House considers must consider what's good for our workers and their industry. We must get back to fiscal discipline, yet provide the relief so many people in Maine need.

But if we are truly trying to reform our economy, we must also address the serious trade imbalance that's creating this job loss. It's no secret that trade has gotten the better of Maine's manufacturing industry. Since passage of NAFTA, Maine has lost 23 percent of our manufacturing base.

Today the USTR Trade Representative Susan Schwab said that moving forward on these trade agreements will actually help our economy. Well, I can tell you this, she obviously hasn't talked to the men and women of NewPage and Fraser. She hasn't talked to other workers in Maine and across this country that have been devastated by these NAFTA-style trade deals. These workers don't want more TAA. They want their jobs back.

I've been in touch with the Maine Department of Labor Rapid Response Team, the workers at the mills, to discuss the implication of this, the paper machine shutting down on these workers. In the days and weeks ahead, my office will be working to provide whatever assistance is necessary to help these workers get back to work. But they want their jobs.

Mainers have rallied for each other during difficult times in the past and will do so again. I'll continue to be involved in meeting the needs of our workers affected by this announcement, and I'll stay in close contact with plant officials and workers in the days ahead.

But this Congress has to look at the fundamental problem with our flawed trade models and trade deals that we've been passing in this Congress. And this Congress is no different than the previous Congress. We continue to use the same flawed trade model, and that's going to continue to hurt workers and manufacturing businesses here in this country.

This Congress has to wake up to what's actually happening out there. We will not need any economic stimulus package if we make sure that we pass fair trade deals that are good for our workers here, that are good for our businesses here in this country.

Madam Speaker, I mistakenly voted ``yea'' on rollcall vote 11. While I support many provisions in H.R. 4986, I do not support this legislation because of the authorization for war funding in Iraq. I intended to vote ``nay'' on rollcall 11.

Madam Speaker, I am asking Members who are committed to a fair trade deal to vote against the Peru FTA. While I have been a Member of Congress for only 5 years, I have been a mill worker all my life. The mill I worked at in Maine shut down 3 days after I was sworn in as a Member of Congress. The culprit? Badly flawed trade deals.

This lunch bucket sits proudly in my office. It symbolizes who I am, what I stand for. It also symbolizes what has been lost.

Since the passage of NAFTA, our country has lost over 3 million jobs. When the vote on NAFTA happened, Members of Congress were promised NAFTA would raise the standard of living for all. They were sold a dream, but the dream is now a nightmare of millions of workers all across this country.

The American people get it. Polling indicates that an overwhelming number of Americans, Republicans and Democrats, are concerned about exporting our jobs. They worry whether or not they will have a paycheck in the years to come. We have all seen the ugly face of trade agreements that don't live up to the promises. The debate here today is not whether Peru is a small country and the trade impact is small compared to China. The debate is when will we truly change the course of trade policy.

If this was truly a good trade policy, I would be the first to support it. The bill's supporters claim that enhanced environmental standards in the FTA will preserve our natural resources.

Where is the strong support from Sierra Club, Greenpeace or Friends of the Earth?

The new labor provisions supposedly will improve conditions for workers in Peru and create jobs here at home. So why is no single labor union actively supporting this trade agreement? That's right, not one, not one labor union.

If this so-called new model is so great, then why aren't we hearing from all sides of the trade debate asking us to support it? If you stand with the multinational corporations that seek to offshore jobs, then vote for it. If you stand with the Chamber of Commerce who says that these labor standards are unenforceable, then vote for this trade deal. If you stand by President Bush, who has a track record of listening to corporations instead of the men and women of this country, by all means vote for this trade deal.

But if you stand by the working men and women of this country, I would encourage you, you must vote ``no.'' A ``no'' vote calls for a new model and a new direction on trade. A ``no'' vote means you stand up with the workers of northern Maine; Lorain, Ohio; Flint, Michigan; Galesburg, Illinois, and men and women all across this country who are asking, no, who are begging this Congress for a new direction on trade. These workers don't want more trade adjustment assistance; they want their job back.

It's time to send a message that we embrace globalization so long as it lifts us all up. I will never forget who I am or why I am here. I hope my colleagues will do the same.

I ask my colleagues today to vote ``no'' on this bad trade deal.

Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.

I am asking Members who are committed to fair trade to vote against the Peru Free Trade Agreement. I can think of a million reasons to oppose this agreement. Let's start with over 3 million jobs lost because of NAFTA.

Workers in my State have lost their jobs due to trade. They don't want trade adjustment assistance. They want their jobs.

The bill's supporters claim that enhanced environmental standards in this FTA will preserve our natural resources. So where is the strong support from the Sierra Club, Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth? Supposedly the new labor provisions will improve conditions for workers in Peru and create jobs for workers here at home. So where is the support from labor? The two largest Peruvian labor unions are asking us to oppose this trade deal because it will hurt their workers.

If this is, in fact, a new direction on trade, don't you think we'd hear from the support from these groups? It is time for a trade policy that benefits workers and creates jobs, not policy that encourages companies to take their investment elsewhere. Yet we are not listening. By passing this bill, we are continuing the same disastrous results that came under NAFTA and CAFTA.

I didn't come to Washington so that I could ignore the needs of my constituents back home. I came to Washington to give a voice to those who need it. So let's start listening to the voices of the people back in our districts and take a new direction on trade, to start creating a new trade regime that will benefit all of us.

I ask Members to oppose the Peru Free Trade Agreement. Speaking about trade adjustment assistance that passed this body last week, before it left this body the President came out and said he was going to veto trade adjustment assistance. Is that working in a bipartisan manner? No, it is not.

I encourage Members to oppose the Peru Free Trade Agreement.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield 1 minute to a gentleman who has been a strong advocate for fair trade deals, Mr. Wu of Oregon.

Mr. Speaker, I now would yield to a gentleman who has been in this body for a number of years, who has seen firsthand the devastation of bad trade deals such as Peru, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee) for 3 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, I now would yield 3 minutes to a gentleman who is very outspoken about fair trade deals, the gentleman from Ohio, Congressman Kucinich.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts, Representative Lynch.

(Mr. LYNCH asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

I am pleased to recognize the gentleman from California, Congressman Sherman, for 3 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 6 minutes to the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur).

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

Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, before I yield to the gentlelady from California 5 minutes, I'll take 20 seconds to make very clear, there's not one labor organization that has sent a letter out saying that they support this trade deal. They don't support this trade deal, and to cherry-pick some of the language in the letter that they've sent I think is not correct.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlelady from California (Ms. Linda T. Sanchez).

Mr. Speaker, I reserve.

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

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

I would like to recognize for 5 minutes a very outspoken, hardworking, freshman Member, Congressman Hare from Illinois.

I reserve.

So if I understand you correctly, for debate purposes this evening, the gentleman from New York has 2\1/4\ minutes.

The gentleman, how much time does he have this evening?

24\1/2\ minutes.

Do you have any additional speakers?

Okay. Well, I would now recognize an outstanding freshman Member in the 110th Congress, the gentlelady from Ohio (Ms. Sutton), who's done a great job on trade issues. I yield her 6 minutes.

I thank the Speaker.

I urge my colleagues to listen to their conscience and constituents by voting against this bill.

I worked at Great Northern Paper Company for over 28 years. My father worked there for 43. My grandfather before him for 40. Three days after I got sworn in as a Member of Congress, the very mill I worked at decided to close its doors because of trade.

Trade is not just a policy. It's a face, a name, a job, a family. The debate is, when will we change the course of trade policy so it can benefit the American economy, the American workers, the American families? When will we finally change our direction on trade and adopt a policy that makes sense for America?

A ``no'' vote on Peru means we want a new direction in trade. A ``no'' vote means we are sick of watching our jobs go overseas. A ``no'' vote means we reject imports made by child and slave labor.

Supporters of this trade agreement claim that strong labor and environmental protections are included. Then why does labor not support this bill? Why do the environmental groups not support this bill? And why does the President of the United States Chamber of Commerce support this bill? He made it very clear that the labor provisions are unenforceable. Those are his words.

This agreement is still based upon the same flawed NAFTA-CAFTA model. The proponents like to say it's not. But if you look at the investment chapter, the core investment chapter language, there are very little changes in that chapter in the core investment.

Now is the time for Congress to take a step back and consider what policies on trade is the best option, not the quickest one or the easiest one or the most politically expedient one.

In 2006, the American electorate voted overwhelmingly for Congress to move in a new direction. This is a golden opportunity to create a new policy, one that will help our workers achieve their highest potential, one that will protect our environment, one that will increase the standards of living for all countries involved.

Earlier this year, the Peruvian labor leaders had sent a letter to the Democratic leadership, and it gets to the point that Congressman Kucinich made earlier, urging Congress to reject this bad trade deal. They said if we have to accept it, make one change for us, and that has to do with privatization of Social Security. I would like to quote from that letter:

``By rejecting the Peru FTA, the United States Congress and the Democratic Party in particular can show the world that they can advocate in not only words but deeds.''

We have failed when it deals with the issue of globalization that was talked about earlier. We have failed to put on the President's desk the currency manipulation legislation. We have failed to put on the President's desk the value-added tax that we heard earlier this evening. We have failed to put on the President's desk legislation that will eliminate the tax haven. We have not made the USTR enforce these labor agreements.

The American people were not fooled about NAFTA. We heard a lot of the discussions during the NAFTA debate this evening about Peru. Over 3 million jobs have been lost because of NAFTA. Illegal immigration has increased partly because of NAFTA.

The American people will not be fooled about this trade deal. They will understand over time what this trade deal will mean to America.

It's important for this Democratic Congress to start looking at trade in a different light, to make sure that we have a trade policy that is fair, not only in words but in actions.

And that's why labor does not support this. That's why a lot of the environmental groups do not support this. But that is why the U.S. Chamber of Commerce supports this trade deal, because it's good for the large multinational corporations.

Right now, with this Democratic Congress, we have a chance to embrace globalization and make it work, to make it work for America, not against America.

As you heard earlier this evening from several of my colleagues who are opposed to this trade deal, it's about human faces. These individuals are just not numbers; they're human beings. And we, as a Congress, particularly a Democratic Congress, have to stand up for the individuals who cannot stand up for themselves.

This is a bad trade deal for America, and it is a bad trade deal for this Congress.

So, I implore my colleagues to vote against this trade deal tomorrow. I encourage you to continue to try to work with the Ways and Means Committee so we can come up with a new trade model that will actually work for America.

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