Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I rise to offer legislation to extend the New Markets Tax Credit program for an additional five years. I am pleased to be joined by Rep. Ron Lewis in offering this bill, along with several other cosponsors.

The New Markets Tax Credit program has proved to be a remarkably successful way to revitalize communities. Current authority for the program, however, is due to expire at the end of next year. It is important that we extend this credit soon and that we provide for a long-term extension.

The credit was first enacted in 2000 as part of the Community Renewal Tax Relief Act. From enactment through fiscal year 2005, the New Markets Tax Credit has generated financing for the construction or rehabilitation of over 43 million square feet of real estate, and has helped to create or retain 72,000 construction jobs and 20,000 full time equivalent jobs in low-income community businesses.

The credit stimulates investment and economic growth in low-income urban neighborhoods and rural communities. Investors receive over seven years a 39 percent Federal tax credit for Qualified Equity Investments, with a 5 percent credit during the first three years and 6 percent during the next four years. These investments are made through vehicles known as Community Development Entities (CDEs), which raises capital from the tax credits and then makes loans to or investments in worthy businesses and projects in low-income areas. These CDEs must be domestic corporations or partnerships with a primary mission of providing investment capital to low-income persons or communities, must provide accountability to the communities or residents, and must be certified by the Treasury Secretary as an eligible entity.

Eligible communities, which include both metropolitan and rural areas, are low-income communities with a high poverty rate or low median family income. In the 2006 extension of this credit, the Treasury Secretary was directed to prescribe regulations ensuring that there was a balance in allocations between metropolitan and nonmetropolitan counties. Further, the Treasury Secretary may also designate targeted populations as low-income communities if certain individuals or an identifiable group of individuals, including an Indian tribe, are low-income persons or lack adequate access to loans or equity investments. Some have recently argued that service-connected disabled veterans are such a group and I encourage the Treasury Secretary to look into this reasonable suggestion.

Finally, the law requires that businesses, in order to be eligible for such investments, show that at least half of the total gross income of the business is derived from active operations in a low-income community, and that a substantial portion of the business property and the services performed by the employees are located in a low-income community.

I believe that all of these rules ensure that the credit is appropriately targeted. A recent GAO report found that the program is very effective at increasing investment in low-income communities. To date, New Markets Tax Credit investments in low-income communities total over $7.7 billion. The tax credit has been used to support a wide variety of community and economic development initiatives including, among others, the financing of charter schools, health care facilities, manufacturing businesses, grocery-anchored retail centers, and numerous other commercial and mixed-use real estate projects.

Now, despite this explanation, some of my colleagues may be wondering how these credits really work. Let me detail one local success story from my Congressional district, and encourage my colleagues to look into projects in their districts as well. Hot Mama's Foods is a Massachusetts-based food company, specializing in salsas, pestos, and other spreads. Recently, the company was able to secure a loan from the Massachusetts Development Finance Agency, a CDE, along with other financing in order to relocate to a USDA-certified food production facility in Springfield, which is in my district. That relocation and expansion meant the company could add an additional 10 jobs to its 50- person workforce and revitalize a neighborhood.

These tax credits work. They help businesses expand and add valuable jobs. The credits need to be extended. I urge my colleagues to join us in sponsoring the New Markets Tax Credit Extension Act of 2007.

Madam Speaker, it is my great honor today to acknowledge Patrick Turley from Palmer, Massachusetts upon being named the recipient of the Small Business Administration's Phoenix Award for Small Business Disaster Recovery.

Patrick Turley, President of Turley Publications, received the Phoenix Award in Washington, DC today for his tremendous commitment to his community. SBA Administrator Steven Preston describes recipients of these awards as ``individuals [who have] displayed tremendous courage and selflessness in the midst of the most devastating disasters ever experienced by our Agency.'' The SBA also describes the Phoenix Award as an acknowledgement of an individual's heroic efforts, and as ``a token of appreciation for their support of the physical and economic recovery efforts in the Gulf Coast and New England States.''

Turley Publications is one of New England's largest printers of community and university newspapers. Located in Palmer, Massachusetts, the company was founded in 1962 when Patrick H. and Thomas A. Turley purchased the Palmer Journal & Monson Register. From these humble beginnings, this locally owned family business has grown from 1 weekly newspaper into a chain of 15 weekly newspapers ringing the Springfield market and 3 monthly specialty publications with national circulations.

In addition, Turley Publications prints student newspapers and magazines for the 5 sister colleges in the Springfield/Holyoke region-- as well as for Harvard University, Yale

University, Boston University, Boston College, Tufts University, and UMass-Amherst. Turley Publications has been printing the Daily Collegian, the UMass Amherst student newspaper, since that publication went daily in 1967. It also prints other newspapers, including the Worcester Business Journal and its sister publications Hartford Business Journal, and Mainebiz, as well as the Holden Landmark.

Today, Turley Publications remains locally owned and operated by Patrick Turley and his sons Keith and Doug. They are responsible for nearly 250 employees working in various locations. The two main production facilities are located in West Springfield and Palmer, Massachusetts.

Turley Publications was forced to stop the presses in October 2005 when floodwater caused property losses over 900 thousand dollars. I visited Turley Publications immediately after the flooding occurred and can personally attest to the severity of the damage at the Water Street facility in Palmer.

But high water didn't stop Patrick Turley from tackling the job that needed to be done. He decided he wasn't going to miss a deadline. Dedicated employees helped with the cleanup, electricity was restored, and 2 university newspapers were printed on time. Turley received an SBA disaster loan and within 5 months the plant was running once more at full capacity.

I had the honor of meeting with Patrick Turley and his wife Ann today when they visited my Washington office. I would like to echo the accolades of the Small Business Administration in recognizing Patrick Turley as an extraordinary businessman and citizen. Congratulations.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of the Colon Cancer Screen for Life Act, which I am introducing along with Congressman Phil English (R-PA) and Congressman Ed Towns (D-NY). According to the American Cancer Society, this year alone, 52,180 Americans will die from colon cancer. In my own state of Massachusetts, 1,180 people will lose their life to this deadly disease. What makes statistics such as these all the more tragic is that unlike other forms of cancer, colorectal cancer is highly detectable and even treatable if it is caught early through a colonoscopy screening examination.

Recognizing the importance of early intervention, Congress acted to provide Medicare coverage for colorectal cancer screening (CRC) through colonoscopy in the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 and further expanded in 2000 when the colonoscopy benefit was added for high risk beneficiaries. Under this benefit, a low risk beneficiary is entitled to receive a colonoscopy once every ten years and a high risk beneficiary is entitled to a colonoscopy every two years. Despite this, recent studies have shown that patients are not utilizing coverage of CRC preventive screenings. According to the Government Accountability Office (GAO), since the implementation of the benefit in 1998, the percentage of Medicare beneficiaries receiving either a screening or a diagnostic colonoscopy has increased by only one percent.

A key reason for the low rate of colonoscopy screening in the Medicare population is rapidly declining rates of reimbursement for the procedure. Medicare reimbursement for colonoscopies performed in the outpatient setting has dropped by 33 percent from the initial 1998 levels. In many states today, Medicaid payment rates actually exceed Medicare reimbursement for colonoscopy. Unless we reverse this trend toward declining reimbursement, physicians will no longer be able to offer colonoscopies to Medicare beneficiaries. This bill increases Medicare reimbursement rates by 30 percent for colonoscopies performed in an outpatient setting, and by 10 percent for procedures performed in the physician's office, to ensure that Medicare beneficiaries have access to these lifesaving procedures. Moreover, increasing colonoscopy screening rates will generate significant long-term savings for the Medicare program, in the form of foregone costs for costly colorectal cancer treatment.

Medicare also does not currently pay for a physician office visit prior to a screening colonoscopy. Colonoscopy procedures involve sedation, so physicians generally do not perform them without an office visit prior to the procedure to obtain the patient's medical history and to educate the patient about the steps he or she needs to take in order to prepare for the colonoscopy. A number of states actually require this pre-operative consultation. Medicare pays for this pre- operative visit when a colonoscopy is being performed in order to diagnose a patient--but it does not pay for such a visit prior to screening colonoscopies, even though the procedure is the same and presents the same risks to the patient. This bill fixes this discrepancy by providing Medicare reimbursement for the office visit that takes place prior to the screening colonoscopy.

Finally, reducing financial requirements on beneficiaries will encourage more people to take advantage of this preventive benefit. It was with this intent that Congress agreed to waive the Part B deductible as part of the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005. Unfortunately, since that time, CMS has misinterpreted this provision of law, claiming that the deductible is only waived if the beneficiary has a ``clean'' screening, but maintaining that the deductible still applies if the screening results in taking a biopsy or if a cancerous or pre-cancerous polyp. Under this nonsensical policy, a beneficiary is left not knowing whether or not the deductible is waived until after the screening. Those whose ability to pay is limited are therefore simply choosing not to take the risk. This bill would require that the deductible be waived for all screenings, regardless of the outcome.

Madam Speaker, as the old saying goes, ``an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.'' This bill embodies this wisdom. In passing the Colon Cancer Screen for Life Act, we will not only be able to save lives but we will also be able to save money. According to the American Cancer Society, 153,760 new cases were diagnosed this year. Each of these cases will cost Medicare between $35,000 and $80,000 per patient to treat. For the bargain price of a little over $200 dollars, we can stop this cancer before it starts. Seems to me that is not only the right thing to do, it is the smart thing to do.

I hope my Colleagues agree and will join me and Representatives English and Towns in support of this important piece of legislation.

Madam Speaker, today I wish to recognize and honor a dedicated and innovative educator, Mr. Dennis Gjerdingen, upon his retirement after 26 years as principal of the Clarke School for the Deaf in Northampton, Massachusetts.

Dennis became interested in childhood deafness when, in 1964, he learned that his newborn son was deaf. He trained as a teacher of social studies and English at Minnesota State University, received his masters in Speech and Hearing at Washington University in St. Louis and did post-masters work there in Educational Administration. He spent 14 years at Central Institute for the Deaf in St. Louis, as a classroom teacher, researcher, associate professor, assistant to the director and as headmaster, before coming to Clarke School for the Deaf in 1981. He is the 6th president in Clarke's 140-year history.

Clarke School is an international leader in teaching listening, speech, language and academic skills to deaf children and assisting families and training professionals to work with them. During his tenure, Mr. Gjerdingen has reorganized the Clarke School and its structure to position Clarke for a rapidly changing future. He designed and administered new Clarke programs, including the creation of the Center for Oral Education on the Northampton campus that helps people of all ages with hearing loss. In the last 10 years, Mr. Gjerdingen spearheaded a strategic plan to expand Clarke to 5 campuses with 4 new schools for young children in Boston, MA, Jacksonville, FL, New York City, and Philadelphia, PA. Clarke School for the Deaf now impacts the lives of more than 10,000 children and adults annually through its educational programs, research, curriculum development and professional training.

The author of more than 30 articles in professional journals, Mr. Gjerdingen is widely recognized as an expert in the field. In 1987 he was appointed by Congress to the Commission on the Education of the Deaf that reported directly to Congress and the President. During this appointment, he helped author a report from which major legislation was adopted. He has also served as president of the International Alexander Graham Bell Association.

It is my great privilege to honor Mr. Gjerdingen for his commitment to providing greater educational opportunities for deaf children and their families and professionals around the country.

Madam Speaker, since 2003, certain qualified dividends from corporations have been eligible for a lower rate of tax. This lower rate of tax is 15 percent for higher income taxpayers and 5 percent for lower income taxpayers, specifically those in the 10 and 15 percent brackets. The rate of tax for lower income taxpayers becomes zero in 2008 and beyond. At the end of 2010, these special rates expire and dividends will be once again taxed as ordinary income.

Madam Speaker, today I am pleased to join my friend and Committee colleague Representative Dave Camp in introducing legislation to make permanent the Subpart F provision for active financial services income. It is time to end the temporary extensions of this important incentive and finally make this a permanent part of the tax code. In the Senate today, Chairman Baucus and Senator Hatch will also be filing identical legislation.

The U.S. financial services industry employs workers all across the U.S. The continued health and vitality of this industry depends on the level of success of these U.S. companies in the global market. However, one important incentive expires at the end of next year, which allows these companies to defer U.S. tax on the active business financial services income earned by foreign subsidiaries of U.S. financial services companies. Other active U.S. businesses enjoy this deferral for active business operations, so it just makes sense that financial services companies should as well. The deferred tax would be triggered when that income is sent back as a dividend to the U.S. parent.

While the U.S. financial services industry is a global leader, the market is fiercely competitive with every company searching for some advantage over another. If U.S. financial services companies are unable to compete in global markets, foreign firms will fill the void. In that case, the thousands of jobs necessary to support a global financial services operation will be lost to foreign companies.

Current law includes stringent safeguards to ensure that the income eligible for deferral of U.S. tax is real business income and is earned by local operations serving local markets. Importantly, a qualifying business cannot be one that is based in a tax haven to serve other markets. To qualify, a company must be actively engaged in a financial services trade or business and must predominantly serve customers in the country in which it is located. These common-sense requirements ensure that this exception works as intended.

Deferral for active financial services income has been the law for most of the history of the corporate income tax. However, since 1997, it has only been a temporary provision in the code and extended many times. It is time for Congress to once again make this exception a permanent part of the code providing the stability our U.S. financial services indistry needs to remain the global leader. I urge you to join us in this effort.

Mr. Speaker, I think we've done a good job of balancing small business tax incentives with an increase in the minimum wage.

Both workers and employers come out winners. And because the bill is revenue neutral, the taxpayer also wins.

The bill provides a few billion dollars of tax relief in the first few years while businesses are absorbing the minimum wage increase.

These tax benefits include a 1-year extension of the WOTC, Work Opportunity Tax Credit, which is a credit for employers who hire the hard-to-employ.

Eligible workers include those from low-income communities, or those on public assistance, or veterans who simply need a boost in getting back into the workforce.

Our bipartisan bill also doubles the WOTC credit for hiring veterans with service-connected disabilities.

The bill also increases and extends the small business expensing allowance so that small business owners can write-off capital expenditures.

A small business owner buying equipment or new computers can immediately recoup the cost, rather than depreciating the asset over several years.

And the bill allows businesses to continue to take a full ``tip credit'' for their tipped workers. Otherwise, with the increase in the minimum wage, these business owners would lose a significant amount of the tip credit right away.

I applaud the work of Chairman Rangel and Mr. McCrery who drafted this bipartisan bill. I urge my colleagues to support the bill.

Madam Speaker, I thank Mr. Engel for yielding.

Last Saturday in my hometown of Springfield, Massachusetts, I spent the day welcoming back 150 brave American soldiers from the 181st Engineer Battalion of the National Guard who just completed a year-long deployment in Iraq. Their mission was to provide security for their fellow servicemembers and to protect military facilities. This group included members who possessed the Bronze Star, the Combat Action Badge, and the Purple Heart. Every Member of this House and Senate has participated in ceremonies similar to this across the country. We might have our differences about the war, but we find common ground in our steadfast support for these soldiers both in Iraq, on their way to Iraq, and around the world. And that is one of the reasons I intend to vote in favor of this bipartisan resolution today.

There is a reason that the framers of our constitutional system chose in Article I to establish that Congress is the first branch of the government, to oversee the Executive. One of the reasons that we are here today is because the majority at the time never asked a question of the Administration. Everything the Administration said, the Republican majority at that time in Congress went along with.

I am mindful of the thousands of soldiers who have died, more than 3,200. I am mindful of the 21,000 today who have been wounded. I am mindful of those who continue to serve our country bravely and honorably, and that the burden of this war has fallen on these troops and their families. There has been very little sacrifice asked of the American people.

But those who have sacrificed deserve a frank and honest debate about President Bush's policy. This is the debate we should have had 4 years ago.

You cannot edit history. We know today there were no weapons of mass destruction. There was no enriched uranium from Niger. There was no connection to al Qaeda. We were not welcomed as liberators in war. And 3\1/2\ years later, the mission has not been accomplished.

Madam Speaker, like the vast majority of the American people, I agree that the war in Iraq is going badly and getting worse. I attach great significance to the National Intelligence Estimate. The overall security situation in Iraq has deteriorated, as they have said, with 2006 being one of the deadliest years to date. The war has increased Islamic radicalism around the world and has helped to destabilize the entire Middle East. By any objective standard, Iraq has descended into something worse than a civil war, as noted by the Iraq Study Group, and our American troops are caught in the middle. And let us call it for what it is: a civil war.

Yet President Bush, nearly 3 years after declaring an end to major combat operations in Iraq, is sending another 20,000 American troops into battle. And Vice President Cheney, in the face of insurmountable evidence, continues to declare that Iraq is a success.

As we debate this resolution today, it is clear that support for the war is at a tipping point. Our intelligence community, speaking collectively in the recent NIE, they believe that the future of Iraq is grim. And, most significantly, our distinguished military commanders believe it is time for a new direction. General Powell, General Zinni, General Batiste, General Gregory Newbold, and others have all expressed concern about the future of Iraq. These are individuals who were involved in the planning and execution of the war; and, obviously, they do not like what they see.

Even former director of the National Security Agency under President Reagan, retired Lieutenant General William Odom, acknowledged on Sunday that ``the President's policy in Iraq is based on illusions, not realities.''

I do not believe that public opinion alone should shape public policy, but no one should underestimate the intelligence of the American people. They are convinced that ``stay the course,'' as President Bush has suggested, has not succeeded.

Every Member of Congress wants our soldiers to succeed in Iraq. No elected representative in this institution would ever seek to undermine our servicemen and women. But the facts are clear. The war in Iraq is the most important issue facing America today, and our constituents are entitled to know where their representatives stand on the way forward. That is why this debate, finally, is so important. Just as the debate in 2002 led us into the war with Iraq, perhaps this conversation with the American people that we are having today will begin the process of bringing our troops back home.

More than 4 years ago, I came to the floor of the House with deep reservations about granting President Bush unlimited powers to authorize this invasion of a sovereign country. It is the best vote of opposition that I have offered in my 19 years in this House of Representatives

Madam Speaker, on Wednesday night, January 24, 2007, the University of Massachusetts presented Henry M. Thomas III of Springfield, MA, with its Distinguished Service Award. This award recognizes the ``demonstrated leadership'' and ``exemplary accomplishments'' of an individual, and I can think of no one more worthy than my friend Henry Thomas.

Henry Thomas is a life-long friend of mine and I would like to extend at this time my heartfelt congratulations to him upon receiving this prestigious honor. I would like to include in the Congressional Record today a history of Henry Thomas's accomplishments and dedication to the city of Springfield, social activism and education. Congratulations Henry on an award that is well-deserved.

Distinguished Achievement Award Presented to henry m. thomas iii,

January 24, 2007.

No one in our time has made greater civic contributions to

western Massachusetts than Henry M. Thomas III, or shown

greater courage and resolve in doing so. His record of

achievement during the past three and a half decades has been

dazzling in its depth and diversity.

Thomas is president and chief executive officer of the

Urban League of Springfield Inc., which he joined in 1971 as

youth and education director. The Urban League serves the

African American community by promoting through advocacy and

services the academic and social development and the economic

self-sufficiency of young people and families. It also

fosters racial inclusion and social justice.

Thomas showed an early aptitude for leadership. Within 4

years he was promoted to director of voter registration and

education at the Springfield Urban League, and then to deputy

director. In 1975, when only 25 years old, he was named

president and CEO, the youngest person ever so appointed in

an Urban League affiliate. He is a past president of the

National Urban League Executives and served for 2 years as

vice president for youth development at the New York office

of the National Urban League, developing infrastructure to

support inner-city youth.

Many other institutions and organizations have been touched

by Thomas's energetic idealism and executive skill. As the

first African American chairman of the Springfield Fire

Commission from 1985 to 1998, he demonstrated a courageous

willingness to challenge a rule that forbade fire department

applicants from having an arrest record, as opposed to a

conviction--this at a time when blacks and Latinos were

frequently arrested on spurious grounds. Ten years later, as

the first black chairman of the Springfield Police

Commission, Thomas received death threats after granting

three African Americans promotions to sergeant.

In January 2006, Governor Mitt Romney appointed Thomas vice

chairman of the Massachusetts Board of Education, on which he

had served since 2001. Thomas was also recently appointed to

the transition team of Governor Deval Patrick.

Camp Atwater in North Brookfield, MA, the Nation's oldest

African American summer youth residential camp, has long

benefited from Thomas's support: he reopened it in 1980

following a 6-year hiatus and serves

as its CEO. He also serves on a number of local and national

boards and commissions. Thomas founded and is the presiding

chairman of the board of Springfield's New Leadership Charter

School, is a member of the board of the American Camping

Association, and chairs the board of trustees of the

Springfield Cable Endowment. He founded and is a co-chairman

of Step Up Springfield and is on the executive committee of

the Hamden County Regional Employment Board.

An earnest and inspired educator, Thomas has been a

visiting professor in the Master's of Regional Planning

Program at the University of Massachusetts Amherst and at

Curry College in Milton, Massachusetts. He hosts a weekly

community talk show, ``Urban League Community Focus,'' now in

its 15th year on Springfield radio station WTCC.

Thomas grew up in Springfield, where at Technical High

School he was his class's only black gymnast. Equally adept

on the gridiron, he was offered dozens of college football

scholarships and accepted one at American International

College in Springfield. There he founded the black student

organization and earned a bachelor's degree in psychology in

1971 and a master's degree in human resource development 2

years later. In 1983 he received a jurisprudence doctorate

from Western New England College School of Law. Thomas has

called his law degree ``an invaluable tool for dealing with

government officials, community leaders, and the business

aspects of running a multimillion-dollar nonprofit agency. .

. . Virtually every area of my work involves law in some

degree.''

He has also received honorary doctorates from Westfield

State College and Bay Path College. In 1999, he received an

Executive Leadership Program Certificate from the Kennedy

School of Government at Harvard University.

Thomas gives enormous credit to his wife, Devonia J.

Thomas, for the support and encouragement she has provided

throughout his career. The Thomases have been married for 35

years and live in Springfield's historic Forest Park

neighborhood in a home well stocked with books and artifacts

reflecting their love of African American history and African

art, especially Shona art from what is now Zimbabwe. Their

son, Perren, is an investment banker on Wall Street. Their

daughter, Shadae, is a fourth-grade teacher in Cambridge, MA.

Thomas relaxes by playing racquetball and the saxophone and

by reading and watching a good deal of football.

Madam Speaker, I want to thank Chairman Lantos and certainly Chairman Smith for bringing this resolution to the floor today.

One of the reasons that American foreign policy has triumphed in Ireland has been because this was done in a bipartisanship way, a bipartisanship way, the way American foreign policy formally was conducted. And the success that we have enjoyed in the North of Ireland has largely been indispensable due to the involvement of America, and revisiting these cases, as Mr. Smith has requested and Mr. Lantos has sanctioned, is terribly important.

Think of these murders, cold-blooded murders, shooting down attorneys who were providing a common defense for suspected, suspected, members of the IRA. Never was there ever indication that they were members of the IRA; they were suspected members of the IRA, and they were not entitled to a common defense under the former justice system in the North of Ireland. So, the attorneys are murdered as well as the suspected members of the IRA.

What is notable about this is what occurred last week. Many of us in this Chamber, Members of this House, have been involved in cases dating back to Gibraltar, to Birmingham, and to a series of other cases which we in this House brought forward. It is Members of this body that demanded that the British Government bring these cases to light and be put under the magnifying glass of critical analysis. And now we find that not only was there collusion on the ground, there was collusion at the highest levels of the British Government where the military gave information to paramilitaries on the loyalist side, who then cleared the area so that attorneys could be targeted for assassination. That is how far reaching these murders were.

What is also significant is this: It is because of this Chamber that the IRA and its political ally Sinn Fein had the courage to proceed with not only disarmament but, just as importantly, they decided to join policing. And let me just say this about policing today in the North of Ireland. One section of the community used policing to keep the other section of the community in line. That is what this was about.

And now the faith that has been offered by the Good Friday Agreement, again in a bipartisan sense, has allowed us to proceed and to move forward. And it could not have been done without people like Mr. Smith. And I could go on and on with Members of this Chamber, and Mr. Lantos again offers support to this initiative today.

So it is terribly important. And I want to thank all of you, and Mr. McCord, the chief constable from the North of Ireland will be in my office tomorrow to answer questions from the Members of Congress

Madam Speaker, I rise today to introduce the Social Security and Medicare Improved Burn Injury Treatment Access Act of 2007. This legislation provides a waiver of the 24-month waiting period now required before an uninsured individual becomes eligible for Medicare coverage for disabling burn injuries, as well as the five- month waiting period for Social Security disability benefits.

Each year an estimated 500,000 people are treated for burn injuries. Of these 500,000 injuries, about 40,000 require hospitalization. Fire and burn deaths average about 4,000 per year.

Burn care is highly specialized. While there are thousands of trauma centers in the United States, there are only 125 burn centers with a total burn-bed capacity of just over 1,800. These specialized burn centers treat about 25,000 or 200 admissions per year, out of the total 40,000 admissions, while the other 5,000 U.S. hospitals without burn centers average less than three burn admissions per year.

Medical care for serious burn injuries is very expensive, which places a great financial strain on burn centers, about 40 percent of whose patients are uninsured. Because of these financial challenges, burn centers in Pennsylvania, Mississippi, Iowa and South Carolina have closed in just the past two years.

This is occurring at a time when the federal govemment is asking burn centers to expand their capacity to deal with mass casualty scenarios. The Departments of Health and Human Services and Homeland Security have included burn centers in the Critical Benchmark Surge Capacity Criteria in the funding continuation requirements for state plans administered through the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA). HSS, in conjunction with the American Burn Association,

has created a real-time, web-based burn-bed capacity system in the national emergency preparedness center and funded Advanced Burn Life Support (ABLS) and clinical, on-site burn nurse training for 200 public health service nurses as a reserve capacity for potential mass burn casualty incidents, as well as supporting more than 20 ABLS courses with over 600 first-responders in ten key areas of the country.

The 9/11 terrorist attacks on New York City and Washington, D.C., and major accidents like the Rhode Island nightclub fire and North Carolina chemical plant explosions demonstrate the substantial number of burn injuries that can result from such events. Over one-third of those hospitalized in New York on 9/11 had severe burn injuries. The Department of Homeland Security has recognized that there would be mass burn casualties in terrorist acts, and there is a need for appropriate preparedness activities. For example, if the United States should suffer further terrorist attacks using explosions, incendiary devices or chemical weapons, most victims would suffer severe burn injuries.

Even a relatively modest number of burn injuries can consume large segments of the nation's burn bed capacity. For example, the victims of the Rhode Island nightclub fire absorbed the burn bed capacity of most of the northern East Coast of the United States. Mass burn casualties that reach into the hundreds or thousands would strain the system to the breaking point.

It is clear that burn centers are a national resource and a critical link to public health emergency preparedness. Medicare coverage for serious, disabling burn injuries would enable these burn centers to remain financially viable and preserve an essential component of our public health emergency infrastructure.

This legislation follows an approach already taken with respect to End Stage Renal Disease (ESRD) and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS or Lou Gehrig's disease), both of which result in waivers of the 24- month waiting period for Medicare eligibility. While these two diseases tend to be progressive in nature, the very initial phase of a serious burn injury is when things are most acute.

Providing immediate Medicare coverage for uninsured patients suffering serious, disabling burn injuries is a fully justified and necessary step. Although not all hospitalized burn injuries would qualify as ``disabling'' and thus result in immediate Medicare coverage, this legislation is about providing coverage for the many uninsured patients suffering from serious burn injuries and ensuring the survival of a vital national resource that already is in jeopardy, a situation we cannot accept as we seek to prepare the nation to deal with potential mass casualty terrorist events.

Mr. Speaker, last Saturday in Dublin, the national executive of Sinn Fein voted in favor of holding a special Ard Fheis on January 28 to vote on a motion supporting police and the rule of law.

For those who remain committed to lasting peace and reconciliation on the island of Ireland, bringing this peace process to a successful conclusion, it was a development that would have been unimaginable just 10 years ago.

On both sides of the Irish Sea, the decision by Sinn Fein was welcomed as historic and important. The Taoiseach of Ireland, Bertie Ahern, called it a landmark and timely decision. The British Secretary of State for the North, Peter Hain, called it a hugely significant move of seismic proportions.

Mr. Speaker, as someone who has been involved in this process for three decades, I would describe the action by Sinn Fein as remarkable. It is a reflection of the leadership of Sinn Fein's Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness. At a critical moment, they honored their commitments and once again kept their word. A vote taken by the executive last week is just the latest example.

No one should minimize the difficulties this decision is causing Sinn Fein leadership on the ground, but for nationalists and republicans the issue of policing has been a long and troubled history. I am confident that the special Ard Fheis will see it as a defining moment in Irish history and vote to support policing and the rule of law.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank Mr. McDermott for yielding me this time.

After I got done hearing my friend from Pennsylvania speak, I was reminded once again of a recurring theme in this town from Republicans: have they ever met a special interest they didn't love.

The struggles of Big Oil: profits last year of 117 percent. Remember as we heard these arguments just a couple of minutes ago from those champions of the average guy, as they would have you believe today, these are the people who in a craven moment in the closing days of the 109th Congress tied an increase in the minimum wage to repeal of the estate tax, conveniently forgetting about that individual who had to work one day a week at minimum wage just to fill their gasoline tanks.

This is good policy. It is sensible, and it speaks to the idea of returning $14 billion to the Treasury that will be redirected to renewable and energy-efficient programs resulting in a cleaner and more efficient America where both consumer and business reap the benefits.

Advancing progressive energy will wean us off of foreign oil, which all Americans agree is needed. It has been said that American needs another Manhattan Project, not to create weapons of mass destruction, but to create masses of jobs by harnessing America's technological innovation.

We all know how many jobs have been lost due to foreign competition, and we are going to continue to lose them if we fail to make the necessary investments in energy technology and the people who are behind the research and its development.

Put the American people and their interests first here. The idea that we would drill on public land and not seek some sort of compensation for the Federal Government, relief for the taxpayer, is ridiculous.

Madam Speaker, it is my privilege to pay my respects to the First Greek Orthodox Church in Springfield, Massachusetts upon the occasion of its 100th anniversary

In 1907 an old house was acquired on Auburn Street, converted into a place of worship and it was here that the rapidly growing Greek community held their first church services.

By 1920 the Greek population had grown so large that the Auburn Street building no longer could accommodate the members of St. George's Greek Orthodox Church. A building fund campaign was soon inaugurated to raise the funds to buy a new church. A building was purchased on Patton Street which provided adequate facilities for church services, a Greek School and administrative offices.

By 1940 the Greek population had again increased greatly. It was at this time that the Congregational Memorial Church at Main and Plainfield Streets became available. The Greek Community took advantage of this opportunity and purchased the Memorial Church and its spacious parish house on October 7, 1940. This magnificent Gothic Church, built in 1866, was designed by the noted architect, Richard Upjohn, with a high vaulted ceiling and priceless stained glass windows.

By 1975 the Church began looking at new sites for a community center and by June 1977 it was decided that St. George would expand and stay in Springfield. A General Assembly approved plans for a parish center by purchasing the old Memorial Square Library Building. The St. George Greek Orthodox Church Cultural Center was opened in 1978 and to the present time it houses administrative offices, classrooms for Sunday and Greek Schools, a gymnasium and facilities for social functions. A Chapel was added to the building in 1986.

The first Greek immigrants in Springfield brought with them their history, their philosophies, their democratic ideals, their courage, their culture and traditions, their Greek language and customs, their festive celebrations, their foods, music and dance and most of all their Greek Orthodox faith which they have handed down from one generation to the next all of which we celebrate this Centennial Year.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman.

When you hear this argument and this debate, remember, a year ago, these are the people that were going to abandon the Social Security system. These are the people that were going to throw the Social Security system overboard.

I heard the gentleman from Arizona say, well, there is good things in the legislation and there is bad things in the legislation. Does anybody remember the S&L issue around here or did we have amnesia? There were good things about deregulating the S&Ls, and it cost the American taxpayer $500 billion, but a decade later.

The Wall Street Journal published a poll yesterday. I hear my Republican friends talking about how great everything is. How good everything is on Wall Street.

The American people are asked, in what direction is the country headed, right or wrong? And by almost two-thirds they say the wrong direction. They are paying $3.15 a gallon for gasoline, their health care plan is being taken away, and their retirement plan is being compromised, if not jeopardized. 401(k) plans are replacing the defined benefit that we had all come to know.

That is where the anxiety is coming from. That is why the American people think the country's headed in the wrong direction.

You are about to hasten the demise of the defined benefit plan by embracing this legislation tonight, and I want to say something as well to those who are witnessing the debate.

It has not been vetted through the committee system. It has not been presented back and forth between two parties. It is being put up on a Friday night, once again because they think you are not watching. That is the way the Ways and Means Committee has operated during the last few years. That is the way legislation's brought to the floor, no opportunity for the minority to ever be heard. We simply put it in front of this body, late at night so people cannot witness it, and then we move on from there. Whether it is good or bad, we will not have our fingerprints on it.