Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, on rollcall 1161, I was in the Chamber and trying to cast my vote as the rollcall was closed. Had I been permitted to enter my vote, I would have been recorded as ``nay.''

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from Ohio, the Honorable Robert E. Latta, be permitted to take the oath of office today.

His certificate of election has not arrived, but there is no contest and no question has been raised with regard to his election.

Madam Speaker, it is my privilege to introduce the newest Member of our body from Ohio, Mr. Robert Latta.

There is a lot that I can say. He has an outstanding record in the Ohio legislature. He has a lot of community activities. One that I especially like is he was very active in the 4-H program, and that's something close to my heart.

But let me say, Bob, you have a wonderful legacy to uphold here. Your father served here for 30 years, an outstanding Member, Del Latta, for a few of us that still remember him well, a great Member. And then you succeed Paul Gillmor, who had 20 years of outstanding service. So the 5th District of Ohio has had 50 years as a legacy of great service. And looking at your record in the Ohio legislature, I know that you will carry on the same record of great service to the people of that district and to the State of Ohio. And I'm happy, as the senior Member, to welcome you as a new Member of this great body.

Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Ohio.

Madam Speaker, one of the most significant factors of a student's academic achievement and success in life is a teacher who inspires. It is my privilege to rise today to recognize two outstanding teachers from my district who have been honored for their exceptional service and dedication.

Just last month, Terra Mann was recognized among 4,000 nominations by the U.S. Department of Education as Ohio's recipient of ``American Stars of Teaching.'' With 19 years of teaching at Worley School in Canton and hundreds of inspired students behind her, Terra's talent and commitment has propelled students forward. In 5 years, she has risen to the challenge and helped move a struggling school to one of the highest designations of success we measure as a Nation, particularly in the critical area of reading proficiency.

Julie Herman teaches at Compton Elementary in Canton, Ohio, and is the most recent recipient of the Milken Family Foundation National Educator Award, an award also known as the ``Oscars of Teaching.'' She is an intervention specialist and engages young at-risk and disabled students to achieve remarkable success academically. In 2005-2006, she helped all of her third graders pass the Ohio Achievement Test.

Before our future entrepreneurs, innovators and leaders stands a teacher, and these women are examples of the truly best. I'm pleased to recognize and congratulate them here today.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to this. When I was chairman of the committee, we eliminated the Bureau of Mines in 1995. Nobody missed it. The functions are carried on by the USGS very effectively. It is just one of those things that is not needed. I think it would be a big mistake to put it back in place.

The amendment provides for 200 employees out of USGS. Why take them away from where they are doing a good job? The mining programs have worked very effectively since 1995, the time at which we eliminated this. It saves about $100 million. I think it would be a big mistake to put another, put it back in place.

I hope that the Members will join me in opposing this amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the Pearce amendment. This amendment would simply re-create an agency that was dismantled in 1995. As Chairman of the House Interior Appropriations Subcommittee at that time, I worked to close the Bureau of Mines which the proposed amendment's agency resembles, in an effort to balance the budget through smaller, more effective government. With its closure, almost $100 million, or 66%, of the Bureau of Mines' 1995 programs ceased. However, certain critical minerals information activities moved to the US Geological Survey. This meant we receive the needed information on our mineral resources using far less money than in the past.

Since taking over the minerals information functions, the USGS has done an excellent job of producing critical minerals information and in fact has broadened the role of the minerals information group by providing vital statistics and insight to help commerce, industry, and security.

The USGS is the sole provider of mineral resource assessments and information in the federal government. To fragment this program once again by creating a new bureaucracy in government would not improve its functionality or serve American taxpayers' interests.

Mr. Chairman, this amendment does not create anything new that is substantive. The only thing the amendment will create is a title of new agency, move some people around, and employ 100 new bureaucrats in administrative positions. Why do we need 100 administrative positions to oversee 200 scientists who were already working effectively at the

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlemen for yielding time. I could spend all day on this. I've had 10 years of experience with this, with the heritage corridor, and it's been such a tremendous asset.

As a matter of fact, our chamber of commerce brought in an expert on economic development as to what we could do to keep young families in our community, and she said your number one asset is the corridor, the trail, because young families want to use it, and they do use it. And putting a human face on it, not only do I see young families all the time out on the towpath with their bicycles, with their family groups, but I see handicapped people who are wheeling their wheelchairs down the trail. So they, too, can benefit from the value of open space, a touch of environment and touch of nature.

It's a terrific asset in our community. Over 3 million people use it. In terms of costs, this is not an appropriation. This is an authorization. So let's not be confused here by what it costs. That will be a decision for the Appropriations Committee to make as to how much they want to commit. All this bill does is authorize this expenditure.

But what we found is that we get a huge outpouring of community support, foundations, village councils, private individuals who support this. For every dollar of Federal support, there's probably been $10 of local community involvement because they appreciate the recreational value. They appreciate the family values that come from using these facilities. They appreciate what it means to have this kind of thing in our community.

The Ohio and Erie Canal Towpath, which was originally there as part of the canal system, had brought prosperity to Ohio many years ago. In fact, we had had a system of canals that were the original expressways of yesteryear, and it started with George Washington and John Quincy Adams who pushed this for people.

Of course, we all know about the granddaddy of all canals, the C&O Canal. That was saved. It was originally designated to be a highway. The highway folks said, yeah, this is wonderful; we've got 160 miles here of corridor where the canal and the towpath run so we'll put a highway on it. And Justice William O. Douglas got the Washington press corps together and said, ``Come with me; we'll hike this piece of history.'' I suppose that was a little strenuous at the time, but they managed it, and they wrote such glowing editorials about it that it was preserved.

And to date, it's the C&O Canal National Parkway, and all you need to do is go out there on a Sunday afternoon or any weekday and you see people, thousands of people, from the City of Washington and the area using the C&O Canal for recreation, for an understanding of environment, for an understanding of history. It's a terrific asset.

And I think what we're saying here is that other communities want to preserve their heritage corridors to tell the story of how their communities were built originally, and this is the case in Ohio. But you get all the additional benefits of health, of walking and bicycling on a towpath, the benefits of being together as a family, the benefits of having a community asset.

It was mentioned about the cost, but I don't think we are ready to charge for Yellowstone or Gettysburg. We preserve these things, and it's part of the national responsibility to preserve these historic artifacts and places that are very much a part of our Nation's history.

So I would urge my colleagues to support this bill. Let the communities raise their money. Let them go to the Appropriations Committee and get whatever they can by way of support.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I want to commend Chairman Rahall and the staff for their effective working on this.

This is a people's bill because what it does is allows the local communities to develop their heritage legacy. As Mr. Wolf pointed out, the historic corridors, as was pointed out also by Mr. LaHood, would bring these things to life. It would bring these battlefields to life to understand what happened there and how important that is to our Nation's heritage as a people, how important it is in the case of Lincoln, as to what his life has meant to all of us.

And it's no encroachment on local control. In fact, it's the epitome of local control, because the decision to make heritage corridors work is up to the people. In our own experience, as I say, we've raised over 250 million private dollars to match something like 8 or 9 million of Federal dollars.

But putting the Federal imprimatur on this gives it a certain status that allows foundations, that allows private individuals to contribute to making these corridors a success.

And as I said earlier, it enhances family values. It enhances property values. It enhances understanding.

I'll never forget going out, to our corridor, where we had a group of students from the inner city as part of a summer work program, cleaning up the right-of-way where we now have the towpath. And these two young students who for the first time in their life, saw a turtle. It was a whole new experience for them. I said to them, Keep your finger out of that turtle's mouth.

But it illustrates how historic corridors are so much a part of everyone's heritage, to understand environmental values, to understand historical values, to understand what has made this Nation great.

And I would urge all of my colleagues to support this legislation. This is a gift to the people of all local communities that have a corridor.

I thank the gentlelady for yielding, and I also would like to mention the loss of Charlie Vanik. I think for the people of Ohio, his greatest legacy is he joined John Seiberling and myself in creating the Cuyahoga Valley National Park, and it was his leadership that was vital in getting that legislation passed. Millions of Ohioans and others enjoy the great outdoors in this 33,000-acre park that serves our State so well, and that was a wonderful legacy that Charlie Vanik left as part of his service in this Congress.

Madam Speaker, I know that Leader Boehner has already informed the House of the untimely death of our colleague, Paul Gillmor, but I want to just add to that. I will be offering a resolution of bereavement after we have finished the suspensions for the day, which will be very shortly, for those who might want to comment.

It is a tremendous loss for Ohio. Paul was a leader in the Ohio senate over a number of years, 22 years to be exact. He was a leader here on the Financial Services Committee. But most importantly, he was a person who cared about the people of Ohio. He made a tremendous effort to represent them well. It is evident by a number of awards that he received and so on. I won't take the time to go into that now, but all of you knew Paul.

I think something that many were not aware of, he was chosen as the vice president of the International NATO Group, the parliamentary group that is made up of something like 22 nations, and they elected him as the number two person in their leadership responsibilities. It is a tribute to him and to Ohio and to this body that he was chosen for that assignment.

Madam Speaker, I would like if we would all rise and recognize his loss, too, in a moment of silence.

Mr. Speaker, I offer a privileged resolution (H. Res. 632) and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur), my colleague, who is the senior member of the Democrat delegation, pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to my friend and colleague Paul Gillmor of Tiffin, Ohio. Paul Gillmor was a leader in Ohio. He was elected five times by his colleagues in the Ohio Senate as a leader and was President of the Ohio Senate three times.

He was a leader here in this House on financial issues, focusing effectively on legislation to protect the general public. Additionally, Paul's leadership extended beyond Ohio and Congress to his position as Vice President of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly.

His awards from grateful constituents and community groups he represented were powerful evidence of Paul's diligent efforts on behalf of those who depended on his caring representation on their behalf. Five Ohio colleges and universities honored his outstanding leadership with honorary degrees.

In addition, he served his country as a captain in the Air Force with active duty during the Vietnam conflict from 1965 to 1966. Ohio Wesleyan University and the University of Michigan Law School are proud to claim him as an alumnus.

Our sympathy goes out to Paul's wife, Karen, and his five children.

To those of us who cherished him not only as a colleague, but as a friend, we will long remember Paul and will always be grateful that he was part of our life.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. LaTourette).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Barton), chairman of the committee on which Paul served.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Pryce).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Tiberi).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the leader, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Bachus).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Burgess).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to our colleague from Ohio (Mr. Jordan).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Aderholt).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Ohio, Mrs. Schmidt.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Turner).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Chabot).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Stearns).

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

Mr. Speaker, how much time is remaining?

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that both sides have 5 additional minutes.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Price).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Blunt), the minority whip.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that both sides have an additional 5 minutes each.

Mr. Speaker, I yield so much time as he may consume to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Hobson), a good friend of Paul, a good friend of our Ohio delegation.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 1 minute. I just want to say, too, that Paul cared a lot about his staff. He was always a person that cared for others, and particularly his staff, and I want the members of his staff to know that we understand the great loss that they feel.

And I guess particularly when I left the Ohio senate, my staff person was inherited by Paul, and we used to often talk about Celia Foraker, about Celia did this and Celia did that, because we both shared a great fondness for her. I know that Paul felt that way about his staff here. It's a great loss to his staff to have a Member that had the caring concern that he did.

Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of our time.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H. Res. 632.

Madam Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

First of all, Madam Chairman, I want to express my appreciation to the chairman of the committee for including funding for the teacher incentive fund. It is so vitally important to the inner cities to be able to attract the best teachers and this fund can be used by school districts to do just that.

Too often in the school systems, the best teachers tend to flee to the suburbs and they also flee to the good schools. Where we really need the top notch teachers are in the inner cities because our cities are really facing a crisis in the sense that their percentage of those who do not finish high school is growing and is a terrible waste of human capital. We can't afford that.

And one of the important things is to get these students in the early years, first grade, kindergarten, second grade, third grade, to like school and to like to learn, and that takes a quality teacher. And this program, and thanks to the chairman we have the 99 million dollars and this proposal for some additional, allows schools to give some financial incentives to the really top notch teachers to take on that responsibility.

I have an instance in my district where a handicapped teacher has inspired a class in a low-income neighborhood and it has made a world of difference in the lives of these young people.

So I just want to express, again, my appreciation to the chairman and for the interest of the gentleman from Georgia in the Teacher Incentive program because I think it is one of the vital challenges in addressing the dropout rate in the big cities to ensure that these students get a taste for education and they enjoy the experience and they stay with it. I am hopeful that the States will use these funds in that way, to give incentives to the very best teachers to go into the toughest areas and inspire young people.

I will add that the Teach for America program does a great job in that respect because they send their Teach for America candidates into very difficult situations.

I hope that we can address the dropout rate prospectively when we have a nation where 31 percent statistically do not finish high school and we know it is much larger in the cities. So there is the challenge, and this program, which the chairman was gracious enough to include in the original bill, is one of the keys to addressing that problem. So I, again, commend the chairman and also the gentleman from Georgia for their concern to inspire and make it attractive for the quality teachers to teach in difficult situations.

The teacher is where it is. If you ask any group, as I do when I give a speech, how many of you had a teacher, maybe two that made a difference in your life? And every hand will go up, and that says so eloquently that we want to have teachers in the toughest situations where their students will at some time in the future say, yes, I had a teacher that made a difference in my life.

That's why I'm here. That's why I finished high school. That's why I press on.

I went into a charter school where there was a Teach for America Teachers and it was in one of the toughest parts of the city. And the teacher there said, as we walked through the door, these were fifth graders, ``What do we do in 2010 or 2011?'' Without missing a beat, every student said, ``We go to college.'' Now, if I had done that 5 years ago or 3, they would have said, ``What? What do we do? I don't know. Drop out, probably.''

So I want to again commend the chairman for many parts of this bill that are important to giving teachers inspiration and making schools better so that whomever is here 25 years from now will not be saying that 31 percent of the students in the United States drop out. We can ill afford that in the competitive world in which we live.

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

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Madam Chairman, I rise in support of the fiscal year 2008 appropriations bill for the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and related agencies.

As you know, I chaired the subcommittee responsible for providing the funding in this bill for the previous 6 years, and I am pleased to provide my support today. The bill provides Federal funds that touch every American. And it's important in serving as the backbone for our medical research, job training, and key education programs at all levels of learning.

I do want to compliment Chairman Obey and Ranking Member Walsh on the excellent job they did in crafting this legislation. Within the bill's allocation, they have targeted increased dollars in key areas that I strongly support.

First, as we continue to ask for more in the performance of our teachers and students under the No Child Left Behind Act, we continue to maintain the vital role the classroom teacher plays in student achievement. I am extremely pleased that the bill funds the Teacher Incentive Fund, a program that awards teachers for student achievement at $99 million.

Next, our Nation's future economic success depends on an educated population. An education that ends at high school no longer suffices in our globally competitive world. Therefore, I strongly support the increase in the Pell Grant for students, which reaches a new high of $4,700 in this bill.

Our Nation's biomedical research effort has made great strides since we doubled the funding for the National Institutes of Health during my tenure and led by our previous speaker in years past.

I am pleased that the bill will build on NIH funding in our continued attempts as a Nation to seek treatments and cures for the debilitating diseases that strike us, our family and friends.

Next, I talked about our competitive global economy, and I support funding to assist our current workers in improving their skills through the Department of Labor's employment and job training programs that are passed through to our local communities for use directly in these communities and for Jobs Corps, which gives our young people a second chance to participate in the workforce in society.

I could go on highlighting the numerous programs in the bill that impact Americans. But let me close by expressing my support for the increase in funding for the administrative costs for the Social Security Administration.

While the benefits Americans receive for Social Security or disability support are provided through mandatory spending, without good people and a sufficient staff to process these claims, the program would not run. Therefore, I support the $400 million increase in funding for the SSA administrative cost. Americans deserve effective and efficient responses to their claim requests. And with that funding, I'm hopeful the SSA will continue to improve and shorten its response times.

Again, this is a very good bill. I congratulate my colleagues on the subcommittee for their work in bringing it before us today. I urge my colleagues in the House to support this bill.

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words.

Mr. Chairman, just as the chairman said, this is consistent with our goal in this committee to enhance this city and make it a capital that we can be proud of, and I congratulate the Member from California for putting in something that, while not affecting his area, will add great value to the city and to the people who live here.

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

Would the gentleman yield for a question?

How much private investment in your judgment will this generate locally, knowing they're getting some assistance?

Thank you.

Mr. Chairman, we are also prepared to accept the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words.

Mr. Chairman and Members of this body, I am sure that the sponsor thinks he is going to improve the operations of the government, but I think this is probably offered for political purposes.

We cannot deal with the constitutional responsibilities in this bill, and the Vice President does have constitutional responsibilities as President of the Senate. The Senate Legislative Branch appropriations bill provides funding for his salary and legislative operating expenses. In fiscal year 2008, his requests equal $2.3 million.

I think it's important that I take time to oppose this amendment because it is setting a bad precedent. I think the sponsor must be making an assumption that they will never have a Vice President, because you are setting a precedent here that might come back to haunt you at some time in the future.

The Vice President's office also receives $4.8 million to fund the executive branch duties of the Vice President and pay for his residence. We decided that, for security reasons, the Vice President needs to have a residence. There was a time that that was not the case. And I don't think that because some Members may not like the current Vice President, or any future Vice President, doesn't mean Congress should use its power of the purse to eliminate funding for the office. That is not how the Founding Fathers envisioned the separation of powers operating.

Eliminating funding to maintain the Vice President's residence and the 25 Federal employees funded by this object is irresponsible. I think it is disrespectful of the Constitution and the Office of the Vice President. Whether we agree or not, the Vice President's office serves an important executive and legislative function.

And let me just say again to my colleagues, this sets a very bad precedent. Where do we stop if we determine that we're going to, by using the power of the purse, pass judgment on the policies of people that serve in government?

It's a political activity. It's a political attempt to embarrass the Vice President. I would hope my colleagues reject this.

Just remember, you may have a Vice President, too. And once you set a precedent, I'm not sure that you would want that to be part of your legacy.

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

I do claim the time in opposition to this amendment.

And I reserve my time. Just let me say again, this is a bad, bad precedent. And it's an example, you better be careful what you wish for, because you may decide that it's not something you want to happen.

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

Number one, of course, you are going to abolish the residence. I assume you are going to get a Katrina trailer to provide for the Vice President, since we historically have provided housing and you don't offer any substitute for the existing residence. So I would think you would want to give that some thought.

Secondly, we have elections. This is not the place to establish an amendment to the Constitution or to define what you may or may not like about the operation of the Vice President's office.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Blunt), the distinguished whip.

I yield to the gentleman from Illinois to ask a short question of the whip.

Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. Issa).

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to this amendment. Points I want to make; First of all, we have reduced the level of earmarks.

Number two, our title is Representative to the Congress. As such, we have a responsibility to represent the needs of our districts. Earmarks provide a vehicle to do that.

Third, earmarks if you follow them through, are great generators of private investment. It certainly happened in my district. A lot of good things get done because we have the stimulus of an earmark.

Fourth, we have a right to decide the priorities of our district. We are better equipped to do that than somebody in the bureaucracy and in the executive branch. Constitutionally, we have the responsibility to make policy. Their job is to execute policy downtown.

Fifth, Congress has a transparent and open process. This is the result of the efforts of the chairman of the Appropriations Committee. That was the discussion we had. We have accomplished that. This is why the gentleman from California can question this earmark, earmarks generally, because we have a transparent process. People know what the earmark is, what it does, and who sponsored it. We have had Member after Member come in and defend their earmarks today, and that is the way it should be. If you eliminate the earmarking process, you move it solely to the administration, and where is the transparency in the administration; or, we revert to the old days where a few people in conference were adding projects with very little opportunity for the Members of the body to look at them or challenge them.

I would think that the gentleman from California would be pleased that we have the transparency that is part of this and allows him or others to question earmarks. I think those who put in the earmarks have to be prepared to defend the validity of what they have offered. So this is a good process, and this is a result of our discussion.

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

Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Westmoreland).

Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey).

Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gohmert).

Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Pence).

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

I yield to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Stearns).

Yes, I would be glad to yield to the gentleman.

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

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

Mr. Chairman, I am going to include my statement in the Record. I will paraphrase it in the interests of time.

First, I want to congratulate Chairman Serrano in being the pioneer chairman of the newly created Financial Services and General Government Subcommittee. He has given us great leadership in a bipartisan, inclusive spirit while shepherding this bill through the subcommittee. Additionally, my colleagues on the subcommittee on both sides have provided valuable input and guidance. The chairman has mentioned the hard work of the staff on both the majority and minority. I won't reiterate that, but I will say we have had great staff help for both majority and the minority.

I am pleased to present this Financial Services bill. We have taken into consideration the priorities of the President and the Members of the House, and I think we have produced a bill that meets the needs of Americans and our operations of government while staying below the President's budget request, which is somewhat unusual for most of the Appropriations Committee bills. I appreciate the leaders of the Appropriations Committee, Chairman Obey and Ranking Member Lewis, in providing a manageable allocation for the bill.

We allocate, as the chairman has said, $21.4 billion in discretionary budget authority. This is $243 million below the administration's request, but it is $2 billion above fiscal year 2007. This is in recognition of some additional responsibilities that we have.

It provides funding for a diverse number of agencies that affect the lives of all Americans. Twenty-seven different agencies are funded in this bill: Telecommunications; IRS Taxpayer Assistance; Small Business Administration, an interesting group; the General Services Administration; and also the Office of Personnel Management.

I want to mention here that in testimony, I was struck by the fact that the director of the Office of Personnel Management said that in the next 10 years, 60 percent of the workforce will retire. I would say to any young people that are listening tonight there will be a lot of opportunity in the Federal Government.

Another point that was made in the hearing was that only 15 percent of the Federal employment is in Washington, D.C., which means that there will be job opportunities all across the country. I would urge young people that are in political science or have an interest in government to think about getting the skills that might be useful in working in Federal employment. This would, of course, be some budget experience, some tax policy and some general policy of government. There will be opportunities and exciting challenges.

We have the Small Business Development Centers. Sometimes I think we only think about the big ones in terms of businesses, but it is the thousands and thousands of small businesses that really fuel this Nation's economy. I know in my own district, if you add up the 50, the 75 and the 100-employee businesses, that is a very significant total. Those businesses don't tend to go overseas. They don't sell out and move their operations somewhere offshore. They stay. Therefore, I think it is extremely important that we help small business in every possible way.

We do that in this bill. We have $100 million for Small Business Development Centers. This is an increase. It is a method, a way of providing management assistance. Just in Ohio alone, we have over almost 900,000 small businesses. Every dollar we invest in this leverages a couple of dollars in economic activity.

Another interesting thing in the bill is financial literacy. We hear a lot of comment about the fact that our young people don't know how to handle credit cards, they don't know how to handle their loans, and they get themselves in financial trouble. We have allocated in this bill $900,000 for the Treasury's Office of Financial Education. This is some $200,000 over the President's request.

What I would like to do is urge that Treasury work with the Department of Education and move some of this responsibility to them to work with the schools, the elementary and high schools, in improving financial literacy in this country. Credit is extremely important, and too often young people do not understand the impact of building credit card debt and other types of debt which gets them in substantial financial trouble. So we hope that we can encourage a greater amount of financial education among the students of this Nation.

We also hear a lot about the fact that $300 billion of taxes are left uncollected. As Mr. Dreier pointed out on the statement on the rule, most people pay their taxes. The United States is unique, probably in some respects in that we have a voluntary system of paying taxes, but people want to know that if they pay their taxes, they want their neighbor and their fellow citizens to also pay theirs.

If there is this $300 billion tax gap, we need to do something to address it, so we have set aside the money for taxpayer support services. And I might say, for those that are listening out in the audience across the country, that many people are not aware of the fact that there is a Taxpayer Assistance Service. It is available in most of the major cities of the country, and they can be very helpful to people who have some type of problem with IRS. We said some years ago that we want to make the IRS more taxpayer friendly, and we have tried to do that in this bill.

The chairman mentioned the District of Columbia. I often think about President Reagan, who talked about the city of Washington being the ``shining city on the hill.'' What we try to do in this bill is to move this city a little bit further along in that direction.

The District of Columbia, and we recently changed their voting status, is the Capital of this Nation and a city we should all take pride in. So what we have tried to do in this bill, since we fund D.C., their Federal money, is to make it a better city.

I want to say I think the Mayor is recognizing the challenge that is before him. They have made a dramatic change in their school system. Now the Mayor is responsible and accountable, and I am hopeful that this will make a vast improvement over a period of time in education.

The key to a successful city is a successful education system. One of the things that plagues the cities of America is the fact that they do have problems with their system, and they have a high rate of dropouts. We hope we can change that not only in the District of Columbia, but in every city in America.

If our Nation is to remain competitive in the years to come, we have to start with the education system. I am pleased that the Mayor and the city leadership here recognize that fact. We put $35 million for college tuition assistance, $41 million for school improvement, and $10 million to improve libraries. I know the Mayor has selected a new superintendent. We wish her well. We want to do everything we can to make her administration and that of the Mayor a success in dealing with education problems.

The chairman mentioned the Election Assistance Commission. This is, of course, designed to make sure that everybody has an opportunity to vote. That is, again, fundamental to our democracy, that people have not only the right to vote, but that we make it as uncomplicated as possible so they do make the effort to exercise their franchise. I think, perhaps, the $300 million is not necessarily required at this time because the Presidential primaries will start in January, and the States are already sitting on $1.3 billion, but we can perhaps address that issue in conference.

The loan program, I am a little concerned. We are giving $80 million to help subsidize loans where there is a default. Historically this is funded by a premium on both the borrowers and lenders, and I am hoping that we can work out a program that will encourage people to use the loan program.

Private debt collectors, we don't know. We have kept that in place with a very limited amount of money because we are not sure how effective that program is, but I think the Treasury would argue that it has been a successful program.

We have maintained the policies on abortion. We have maintained the policies on Cuba. Any change of these would bring about a Presidential veto.

I hope that we can work out any differences we might have in conference, and that the bill would be one that the President of the United States can sign. Certainly in terms of meeting his fiscal requirements. We have more than met that challenge by being under his numbers.

I urge Members to look at this bill and weigh the importance of it when it comes time for final passage. I know we will have a number of amendments, and we will address those as we move along.

Introduction

First, I would like to congratulate Chairman Serrano on being the pioneer Chairman of the newly created Financial Services and General Government Subcommittee. Chairman Serrano has provided great leadership and a bipartisan, inclusive spirit while shepherding this bill through subcommittee and full committee. Additionally, my colleagues on the subcommittee have provided valuable input and guidance throughout the process.

Also, I would like to acknowledge the hard work, dedication and expertise of the subcommittee staff. On the majority side, Dale Oak, Bob Bonner, Karyn Kendall, Frank Carillo, Deb Bilek, Jim Curry and Nadine Berg on Chairman Serrano's personal staff. On the minority side I would like to thank John Martens and Alice Hogans for their counsel in putting together this bill.

Overview

Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to present before the House today the fiscal year 2008 Financial Services and General Government Appropriations Bill. By taking into consideration the priorities of the President and the Members of the House, we have produced a bill that meets the needs of Americans, and the operations of our government while staying below the President's budget request. I appreciate the efforts of the leaders of the House, Chairman Obey and Ranking Member Lewis to provide a manageable allocation for this bill.

The Financial Services and General Government Appropriations Bill allocates $21.4 billion in discretionary budget authority. This number is $243 million below the Administration's request and $2 billion above fiscal year 2007. I would like to repeat this to my colleagues who have voiced concerns over extraneous spending in appropriations bills; this bill is $243 million below the Administration's request, while still providing sufficient funds for various agencies to continue their missions and service.

The bill provides funding for a diverse number of agencies that affect the lives of all Americans. The agencies funded in this bill regulate the financial and telecommunications industries, collect taxes and provide taxpayer assistance, lend a helping hand to small businesses and disadvantaged communities by providing them with capital, support the operations of the White House and Federal Judiciary, provide Federal payments to the District of Columbia, operate and maintain Federal buildings, manage our federal workforce which is expected to experience tremendous attrition rates over the next ten years, assists in the administration of federal elections and protect consumers and investors from fraudulent practices.

SBA-Small Business Development Centers

The Chairman has done a good job of highlighting the bill so I will not repeat him, but I would like to mention several items of importance to me. I am particularly pleased at the $100 million for Small Business Development Centers, an increase of nearly $13 million. The Small Business Development Centers account is the Small Business Administration's primary method of providing management assistance to small businesses. In my state of Ohio we have over 889,000 small businesses and every dollar invested in the OHIO SBDC network leverages at least $2.00. This program is vital to the life of small business, and I urge my colleagues to maintain this funding on the House floor today.

Financial Literacy

I am also encouraged to see $900,000 for Treasury's Office of Financial Education, an increase of approximately $200,000 over the President's request. The increase is targeted toward improving the National Strategy for Financial Literacy and expanding efforts at financial literacy in elementary schools and high schools. Financial literacy is a very important life skill and I look forward to working with the Chairman to further develop this initiative and ensure maximum programmatic impact.

Additionally, the bill increases essential funding for the Internal Revenue Service to close the nearly $300 billion tax gap, which is the difference between the amount of taxes owed and the amount actually paid. Closing the tax gap is critical as most Americans do not mind paying their fair share of taxes as long as they know others are doing the same. Furthermore, $3.6 billion is set aside for taxpayer support services activities aimed at tax return preparation, the IRS National Taxpayer Advocate and IRS outreach and education efforts to serve taxpayers by helping them understand their tax obligations before they file. These activities have been steadily reduced in recent years and are in need of a boost.

D.C. Education

I am supportive of the funding appropriated in the bill to improve education in the District of Columbia, including $35 million for college tuition assistance, $41 million for school improvement, and $10 million to improve libraries. The children in Washington D.C. have been at a disadvantage for many years, and I look forward to working with the Mayor to enhance the school system to give the children of D.C. a chance to succeed.

Concerns

As I mentioned previously, this bill is $243 million below the Administration's request, and Chairman Serrano has done a fair job in allocating these funds to the various agencies within the bill. However, I do have a couple spending and policy concerns, which I would like to outline.

Election Assistance Commission

Primarily, I am concerned about $300 million added to this bill in unrequested funding for election assistance grants. The Help America Vote Act of 2002 authorized $3.9 billion for grants to the states to improve their voting systems through 2007. This program has not been authorized to receive funding in 2008 and there still remains $1.3 billion in appropriated dollars from the Help America Vote Act that have yet to be spent by the States. Therefore, I believe that an additional $300 million is unnecessary at this time especially with Presidential primaries beginning in January. This is a short turnaround to spend $300 million while the states are sitting on $1.3 billion. Although I am supportive of the Election Assistance Commission, I remain concerned over these unrequested and unauthorized funds.

SBA 7(a) Loan Program

Another funding item of concern that I bring up with trepidation is subsidization of 7(a) business loans. An amendment in committee was adopted which ignores the fact that the 7(a) loan program has been operating at record levels without a subsidy appropriation since fiscal year 2005. Past practice has proven that subsidies limit access to SBA loans if demand for loans exceeds the availability of appropriations. In past years, SBA has been forced to temporarily shut the program down or impose loan limits to manage within available appropriations. Zero subsidy has proven to be effective and allowed SBA flexibility to manage the program in a user friendly way. I hope to work with the Chairman in Conference to find an agreeable solution regarding 7(a) subsidization.

Policy Riders

Regarding policy, I have reservations with language attempting to limit the use of private debt collectors. Private debt collectors simply pursue the low hanging fruit that the IRS does not currently devote resources to.

Otherwise longstanding policies on abortion and Cuba are maintained in this bill. Any altering of these may bring about a Presidential veto.

Lastly, while I have a few qualms with the bill, I believe it is a bill that should be passed by the House and signed by the President, as long as controversial policy riders or substantial funding changes are not made to the bill. I thank the Chairman and ask my colleagues to vote yes with me on House passage of the first Financial Services and General Government Appropriations bill.

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