Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, along with my colleagues Congresswoman Lynn Woolsey, Chairman George Miller, Congressman Mike Michaud, Congressman McDermott and almost all of the Democratic Members of the Committee on Education and Labor, I rise today to introduce the Employee Misclassification Prevention Act of 2008, EMPA.

The egregious practice of misclassifying workers as independent contractors needs to end. EMPA is pro-employee, pro-employer and pro- taxpayer. The bill will protect employee benefits, remove incentives for employers to misclassify their workers, and ensure that bad employers don't line their own pockets with unpaid payroll taxes.

In the last decade we have seen a questionable increase in the amount of individuals classified as independent contractors. In 1984, which was the last time a comprehensive misclassification study was conducted by an oversight agency on this issue, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) estimated that 15 percent of employers misclassified 3.4 million workers as independent contractors. As a result, $1.6 billion or $2.72 billion in inflation-adjusted 2006 dollars in Social Security, unemployment and income taxes was stripped from the hands of the Government and went into the pockets of tax evaders. Furthermore, the 3.4 million workers who were misclassifed were stripped of many of their basic, but essential, employee rights.

In some cases, classifying an individual as an independent contractor is quite right and quite appropriate. If someone is retained for a limited purpose, usually for a limited time, to do a specific job function for an employer, it is quite necessary and appropriate that that person not be treated as an employee for reasons of flexibility, and for reasons of fair compensation.

However, when an individual is considered an independent contractor by their employer, but is told what to do. has no discretion over how to conduct the affairs of the business, and whose compensation is fixed and set by the employer, it is our duty as Members of Congress to protect this employee's rights under Federal law.

There are millions of workers, who mow lawns, drive trucks, work in garment linen factories, and serve food in restaurants that I would consider an employee; nonetheless, these hardworking individuals are exploited and misclassified by their employers seeking to evade paying taxes. If any American worker is told what to do, when to do it, how much money they are going to make, what the work rules are, what they can and cannot do by their employer then the law should require they be classified as an employee and receive all of the benefits of the 40- hour work week, as well as worker safety protections, pension and healthcare protections and other worker protections provided to them under Federal law.

I encourage everyone to join me, my cosponsoring colleagues, as well as the AFL-CIO. Change to Win, United Brotherhood of Carpenters, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, the Laborers International, UNITE HERE, the National Employment Law Project, and others and support EMPA to protect workers across the country from employers who are only interested in making a profit for themselves at the expense of the American workers and taxpayer.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to introduce the Pension Protection Act ERISA Amendments of 2008, PPAEA. Although I voted ``no'' on final passage of the Pension Protection Act, PPA, in 2006 due to a number of provisions, which put thousands of New Jersey jobs and retirees' plans at risk, I do believe there are many beneficial aspects of the law that are helping to protect the retirement plans of working Americans and retirees across the country.

For workers retired from a single-employer plan, PPA provided a better method of ensuring that an employer may continue to offer retirement benefits to their employees by meeting their plan financing obligations. This change made it far less likely that taxpayers would have to step in and pay the bill for thousands of retirees. PPA also provided smaller businesses with a bit more flexibility, by giving some of them a new plan option. One such option is known as the ``Defined Small Employer Defined Benefit Plan'' or ``DB(k),'' which I authored. DB(k) relieves employers of the administrative burden tailored for large plans and provides them with the best of both the defined benefit and defined contribution world.

For people who work for or are retired from multi-employer plans, the 2006 law gives those employers--and the funds to which they

belong--an opportunity to receive some relief from external circumstances that caused those plans to be in jeopardy; and again, relieving taxpayers of potential liability and obligation.

In 2005, on the eve of the introduction of PPA, the economic forecast predicted an avalanche of more defined benefit plan terminations, placing the solvency of the pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation, PBGC, as well as hundreds of millions of retirees' assets at risk. With several major companies expecting to either eliminate or freeze their defined benefit plans a few years ago, PPA has been instrumental in slowing the decline in defined benefit, DB, plans. Nevertheless, DB plans are still on the decline. Today, less than one in five workers in the private sector--20 million workers--has a traditional defined benefit plan, while 401(k) plans are on the rise, dominating the retirement landscape. Today over 50 million American workers are covered by a 401(k) plan. Whether these plans are adequate to provide the average American worker with a comfortable retirement remains a question we will continue to examine in the coming years.

Solving the problem of providing retirement coverage, which is both affordable and adequate, is a priority of mine, but before we address it, we must first make sure PPA is measuring up to its fullest potential. The purpose of PPAEA is to correct a number of anomalies in PPA, which in many cases, subvert the policy goal of a particular provision. Though most of these anomalies were not intentional, if left uncorrected they have the potential to strip thousands of retirees of a lifetime of savings and force many employers to drop their retirement plan for their current employees.

As I indicated in the hearing I chaired last year in the Health, Employment, Labor, and Pensions, HELP, I am not interested in upsetting the fundamental agreements of PPA. Rather, I am most interested in vindicating those agreements and making them work better.

With the support of the Chairman of the Committee on Education and Labor and my good friend from California, George Miller. and several other colleagues, I look forward to working with Members on both sides of the aisle to help pass a bill to further protect retiree assets, provide employers with a funding method that holds them accountable but provides flexibility, reduce burdensome transaction cost to plan sponsors and pensioners, and provide employers with additional investment tools to ensure that all retirees under their plan receive their promised benefit.

Madam Speaker, I was not present on May 20, 2008. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on the following rollcall votes: rollcall No. 331, rollcall No. 332, rollcall No. 333, rollcall No. 334, rollcall No. 335, rollcall No. 336, rollcall No. 337.

Madam Speaker, I was not present on May 6, 2008. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on the following rollcall votes: rollcall 246; rollcall 248; rollcall 249; rollcall 250; rollcall 251; rollcall 252; rollcall 253; rollcall 254; rollcall 256; rollcall 257; rollcall 258; rollcall 259; rollcall 263; rollcall 264; rollcall 265; and rollcall 266.

I would have voted ``nay'' on the following rollcall votes: rollcall 245; rollcall 247; rollcall 255; rollcall 260; rollcall 261; and rollcall 262.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of Friedreich's Ataxia Awareness Day, which is recognized each year on the third Saturday in May. Friedreich's ataxia is a life-shortening neurological disorder that is usually diagnosed in childhood. It causes muscle weakness and loss of coordination in the arms and legs; impairment of vision, hearing and speech; scoliosis, diabetes; and a life-threatening heart condition. Most patients need a wheelchair full-time by their twenties. Life expectancy is reduced to early adulthood. There is currently no effective treatment or cure for Friedreich's ataxia.

Although there is no effective treatment or cure available, Friedreich's ataxia patients and families have more and more reason for real hope. In fact, that hope has been translated into increasing confidence that treatment and a cure for Friedreich's ataxia will be achieved. An extraordinary explosion of research insights has followed the identification of the Friedreich's ataxia gene in 1996. Since that discovery, research scientists have learned a great deal about the disorder. We now know what defects in the gene cause the disease, what protein the gene is supposed to produce, what that protein is supposed to accomplish, and why a shortage of the protein results in the cell death that leads to the disease symptoms. Investigators are increasingly optimistic that they are drawing closer to understanding more fully the causes of Friedreich's ataxia and to developing effective treatments. In fact, they have recently declared that, ``in Friedreich's ataxia, we have entered the treatment era.'' That treatment era is being characterized by the two clinical trials already underway and four additional trials to be initiated over the next 12 months. These investigators and our patient families believe very strongly that these clinical trials will result in the first approved treatments for Friedreich's ataxia.

At the National Institutes of Health across the country and around the world, clinical trials for Friedreich's ataxia are being conducted on drugs that hold real promise. Growing cooperation among organizations supporting the research and the multidisciplinary efforts of thousands of scientists and health care professionals provide powerful evidence of the increasing hope and determination to conquer Friedreich's ataxia. There is also a growing conviction that treatments can and will be developed for this disease and that the resulting insights will be broadly applicable across a wide range of neurological disorders such as Parkinson's, Huntington's and Alzheimer's.

On the third Saturday of May, events will be held across our country to increase public awareness of Friedreich's ataxia and to raise funds to support the research that promises treatments for this disease. I applaud the Friedreich's Ataxia Research Alliance, FARA, for its contributions to these efforts and ask my colleagues to join me in recognizing May 17, 2008, as Friedreich's Ataxia Awareness Day to show our concern for all those families affected by this disorder and to express our support and encouragement for their efforts to achieve treatments and a cure.

Madam Speaker, I was not present on May 5, 2008. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on the following rollcall votes: rollcall No. 240; rollcall No. 241; rollcall No. 242; rollcall No. 243; rollcall No. 244.

Madam Speaker, I was not present on April 30, 2008. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on the following rollcall votes: rollcall 227, rollcall 228, rollcall 229, rollcall 230, rollcall 233.

I would have voted ``nay'' on the following: rollcall 232.

Madam Speaker, I was not present on April 29, 2008. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on the following rollcall votes: rollcall 224, rollcall 225, and rollcall 226.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor Michael J. Quinn, senior news writer for CBS News Philadelphia, who retired on April 24, 2008. Mr. Quinn began working in TV news in 1961 at Channel 10, a CBS affiliate. During his tenure with Channel 10, Mr. Quinn served as a news writer, newscast producer, reporter and news anchor. In 1984, Mr. Quinn began working at CBS 3 Eyewitness News, serving as a senior news writer and as a producer for the ``Newsmakers'' program.

Mr. Quinn has covered many major events over the past decades, including numerous presidential elections. In 1988, he was the associate producer for coverage of the presidential caucuses in Iowa. Mr. Quinn was the producer of the 2000 Republican National Convention CBS coverage in Philadelphia. Mr. Quinn also was the producer of the inauguration coverage of President George W. Bush in both 2001 and 2005.

Madam Speaker, Mr. Quinn spent his long career providing the people of Philadelphia with compelling news coverage. Mr. Quinn's hard work and dedication to his chosen field has touched the lives of millions of Americans. I commend Mr. Quinn for his commitment to broadcast journalism and wish him the best for his retirement.

Madam Speaker, I'd like to thank and congratulate my dear friend from New York for a stellar achievement in her stellar work here in the Congress, and to thank Mrs. Biggert, who has fought with great vigor and enthusiasm for this bill.

Madam Speaker, here's what Ms. Slaughter and Mrs. Biggert have achieved. Somewhere this morning, a family is going to get news that a biopsy came back with bad news, that someone they love has a tumor, and that family is going to go through the agony of the next couple of months or even years of wondering if that person they love so much is going to live or die.

Now the progress we have made in this country, thank God, has let many more of those people live. But the ultimate progress is to get to the genetic puzzle that makes that person susceptible to that tumor in the first place. The way we are going to find the solution to that puzzle is by gathering data by more and more people being willing to share their genetic information with the brightest men and women in this country.

Right now there's a justifiable fear that if you share your genetic information, someone may misuse it to deny you a job, deny you an insurance policy, or hurt you in some other way. This bill lifts that burden, lifts that fear, and will stimulate millions of Americans to voluntarily, privately and safely participate so they can be part of finding this puzzle.

What Chairwoman Slaughter has accomplished today, Madam Speaker, is that some day is coming, and I hope it's soon, when people will get the right answer all the time to that question, when the cure will be here, the pain will be gone, and the hope will prevail. There's a lot of things we do in this

chamber that have transitory significance. What will happen in a few hours will benefit people around the world for years to come.

This is a singular achievement. I congratulate the chairwoman. And as a father and a husband, I thank her for what she's done.

I thank the chairman for yielding, and I rise in strong support of this legislation. I would like to thank all of those involved in bringing us to this point, Ms. Slaughter, Mrs. Biggert, and I especially want to mention Mark Zuckerman, Brian Kennedy, Michelle Varnhagen, and Carlos Fenwick from our staff who worked so hard on making this a reality. Thank you very much for your good work.

This is about as basic as it gets. It is a fundamental principle in this country that when you walk in and apply for a job, you shouldn't be judged on the color of your skin, your gender, your sexual orientation, your ethnicity, your age, or your religion. To that today we are adding the notion of your genetic background.

I think most Americans would understand as a matter of simple common sense that if your grandmother had breast cancer, it should be irrelevant as to whether you get a job or not. If your grandfather was diabetic, it should be irrelevant as to whether you get health insurance or not, and under what terms.

This simple, powerful, commonsense idea that is embodied in this legislation will become embodied in the law very shortly because of the good work that is being done here.

Beyond the basic fairness, the basic principle that we should be judged by our abilities and not by our characteristics, is the point that we discussed earlier during the rule debate. Many Americans justifiably fear that if they share their genetic information with

researchers, that information may wind up hurting them. It may wind up depriving them of a job, depriving them of health insurance, or raising their health insurance premiums.

The very significant protections that are in this bill, soon to become law, will provide a level of assurance for Americans that when we participate in genetic research, as I have by donating my DNA sample to the Coriell Institute in Camden, New Jersey, that we will be protected against misuse of that information.

This unlocks an exhilarating potential for finding the cure for all kinds of diseases and afflictions that have hurt so many people for so long. So I believe this is a singular achievement. It is an honor to be a part of it, and I know that generations of Americans will benefit not only from the simple fairness that this law will impose in the workplace, but for the great potential that this law will unlock for the investors and inventors and researchers of this country.

No American should ever be denied a job or health insurance or a promotion because of their genetic characteristics. Because of our actions today, this will become the law.

I thank the chairman for his leadership. I thank Mrs. Biggert for her leadership and Chairwoman Slaughter as well, and urge a ``yes'' vote in favor of this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate Mr. Miller and Mr. McKeon for skillfully navigating this legislation to the floor, and I strongly support it.

Our country's economy has been severely affected by a lack of liquidity crisis. In plain language, people who need to borrow money to do good things who are creditworthy are having a very difficult time borrowing that money.

The early tremors are present in the education field that young men and women who need money to go to school are beginning to have trouble borrowing that money; and we are, frankly, concerned that an earthquake may follow those tremors.

Rather than wait for that disaster to occur, Chairman Miller and Mr. McKeon are taking preventive, action along with the Secretary of Education, to try to prevent such a calamity from occurring.

This legislation is commendable on any number of grounds. First, it strengthens the lender of last resort program so that guarantee agencies around the country will be equipped to quickly move capital to students and schools who find it difficult or impossible to get that capital from the banking institutions. Second, it increases the limits that students can borrow money that is guaranteed under the Federal guaranteed loan programs.

This is especially important, because so many of our students need what are called gap loans. This is the person who has an aid package of $28,000, but who needs 31,000 to go to school. In the past, the way families and students have dealt with this problem is to find a private lender to make a loan to fill that gap. There is increasing evidence that achieving that loan is increasingly difficult. By raising the loan limits in a fiscally responsible way, this bill alleviates that problem.

And, finally, by encouraging the growth of technological progress in the education sector, this bill ramps up the infrastructure that will be necessary to move loans to more students around the country as the time has come.

There is a lot of cynicism, Mr. Speaker, in this country about government, and some of it is quite justified. But I would hope that the cynics would watch the process that has occurred here where two leaders, one Democrat, one Republican, have come together, listened to the Secretary of Education, carefully analyzed the problem, and worked together to produce a piece of legislation that I believe will solve that problem. I commend them for their leadership.

I am proud to support this legislation, and I would urge Republicans and Democrats to vote ``yes.''

Madam Speaker, I was not present on April 24, 2008. Had I been present, I would have voted yea on the following rollcall votes: Rollcall 220, rollcall 221, rollcall 223.

I would have voted ``nay'' on the following: Rollcall 222.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor Mrs. Deborah Rozanski on the occasion of her retirement. Mrs. Rozanski has served as a New Jersey public school teacher for 34 years. She has dedicated herself to the Audubon School District for the past 29 years, enriching the lives of countless students. In addition, Mrs. Rozanski deserves to be commended for her dedication over the past 28 years as an advisor to the Audubon Safety Patrol, as a student council advisor, and as a representative on the instructional council.

Beyond the classroom, Mrs. Rozanski is also an advocate for the protection of our environment. Mrs. Rozanski has organized the planting of many trees on the Mansion Avenue School campus, which add to the beauty of the school and the surrounding community.

Madam Speaker, the devotion that Mrs. Rozanski has shown to her work and to the community is truly praiseworthy. I want to thank Mrs. Rozanski for her tireless effort as a teacher and wish her the best of luck upon her retirement.

Madam Speaker, I was not present on April 23, 2008. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on the following rollcall votes: rollcall 209, rollcall 210, rollcall 211, rollcall 212, rollcall 213, rollcall 214, rollcall 215, rollcall 217, and rollcall 219.

I would have voted ``nay'' on the following: rollcall 208 and rollcall 216.