Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I rise today to discuss our national debt.

Let's look at the facts of how we got here. Just 10 years ago, the National Debt clock was turned off and we were having serious conversations about what would happen after we paid down the debt. Our nation was running a budget surplus in 1998, starting a stretch of surpluses that lasted through 2001. Our nation's fiscal house was in order. How then, have we gone from surpluses to significant deficits?

Some would have us believe that the national debt suddenly appeared in the past year. If only it was that easy. The national debt level we see today is the result of 8 years of poor decisions. Earlier this decade, the Republican-controlled Congress voted to slash taxes for the wealthy and charge it to the national debt. The same party voted to create a prescription drug benefit and charge the entire cost to the national debt. I voted against both of these laws because they were fiscally irresponsible. The previous President decided to pursue two wars on borrowed money and charge it to the national debt. In contrast, the policies that we have adopted this Congress to pull our economy out of the recession are responsible for less than 16 percent of this and last years' deficit.

Because of the irresponsible decisions of the recent past, we entered this recession with our fiscal house not in order. With our economy nearing collapse, our government had a choice to make. Facing the worst economic crisis in 75 years, we could have done nothing. Yet, this was not a responsible option. During times of great hardship, our government cannot shrink away from helping our citizens and helping our economy recover. This required federal investment. Leading economists have made clear that these investments were vital and that the best way to reduce the deficit in the long-term is through a strong economy.

One major reason for the debt we see today is because President Bush and the Republican-controlled Congress allowed the ``pay-as-you-go'' law to expire. Every family understands this principle--you must pay for what buy. I am saddened that Congress forgot this simple lesson earlier this decade. This is only one tool, but it is a strong one to return our nation back to fiscal stability. It forces Congress to identify inefficient or ineffective programs whose funding can be cut to fund higher priorities, such as health care, education, and clean energy.

The bill we consider today restores this budgetary safeguard and makes the ``pay-as-you-go'' principle law. In the 1990s, the last time that ``pay-as-you-go'' was the law, we turned the massive deficits of the 1980s into record surpluses. In 2007, I was pleased that the House of Representatives restored this principle in the House rules when Democrats regained control of the House. While this rule was a good first step, today's legislation goes further by applying automatically to legislation and will cut spending if Congress does not do so.

In addition, this bill would require the Government Accountability Office, GAO, to review all programs and initiatives to find any duplicative or wasteful programs. The GAO would report what they find to Congress so that we can eliminate the wasteful programs and merge any duplicative ones.

I will continue to work to ensure taxpayer money is well spent. I helped write the Student Aid and Fiscal Responsibility Act, which will reduce our debt by $10 billion by eliminating wasteful subsidies for banks to offer student loans. I am pleased that many other major bills being considered, including health reform and climate legislation, have been paid for and would reduce the debt as well. I have fought every year to cut billions from the flawed missile defense program, which never produced a reliable technology; I have supported reducing agricultural subsidies that too often go to the wealthiest producers instead of small family farmers; and I have advocated for eliminating subsidies to private insurance companies for providing the same services that Medicare already provides to seniors. These are all common-sense steps to reduce wasteful government spending.

This legislation sends a message to the American people that the government is committed to putting the country back on stable economic footing. I will vote for this bill and

will work for our government to regain its fiscal discipline.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express the compassionate concern of Congress to those affected by the recent earthquake in Haiti, including thousands of American families of those missing and injured.

My thoughts are especially with the Gianacaci family of Hopewell, New Jersey, at this time from the appropriately named town of Hopewell. Their daughter, Christine, a student of Lynn University, was doing service work in Haiti when the quake struck. I have assured the Gianacaci family that we will not rest until Christine and so many others are accounted for and returned to their loved ones.

I pay a special tribute to the Fairfax County Search and Rescue Team which, like others, have been at the Hotel Montana site continuously for more than 2 weeks looking for Christine and other Americans believed to be at the hotel. Also, thanks must go to the Department of State and the many people in the 82nd Airborne, the Marine Expeditionary Group, the DOT, HHS, and other government personnel who reflect and carry out the compassionate concern of the American people who again demonstrate their core generosity.

Madam Speaker, I thank the chairman for bringing this resolution forward, and I rise in support of the resolution and to offer my condolences to the families, friends, and colleagues of the seven clandestine service officers who were killed by a suicide bomber in Khost, Afghanistan, a couple of weeks ago, and to offer support and appreciation and best wishes for those recovering from their injuries.

As Chair of the Select Intelligence Oversight Panel and a member of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, I am well aware, as we all are here, of the risk to forward-deployed clandestine service employees, a risk they face on a daily basis.

These seven employees gave their lives in the line of duty, and our thoughts and prayers remain with their loved ones. May they find comfort in part in the knowledge of the high service these people have given to their country.

Let me also take a moment to express my wishes for a full and speedy recovery to those wounded in the bombing and my appreciation to all Americans, civilian and military, who are serving our Nation in Afghanistan. We look forward to the day when their presence in Afghanistan will no longer be needed and that they will return home safely to their families.

I thank Chairman Reyes for offering this resolution, and I urge my colleagues to support it.

Madam Speaker, I rise to commemorate the 225th anniversary of the city of Trenton's tenure as the capital of the United States.

Students of American history are familiar with the Compromise of 1790. James Madison

and Thomas Jefferson won permanent residence for Congress on the Potomac in exchange for the Federal Government's assumption of State debts from the Revolution--a priority of Alexander Hamilton. What followed was the Residence Act, which established what we now know as the District of Columbia.

What is less understood is the capital's journey through eight other towns, the abandoned proposals and the near-misses before Congress settled here on the Potomac. During the Revolutionary War, Congress moved frequently to avoid British troops--meeting famously in Philadelphia then in Baltimore, York, and Lancaster. Upon ratification of the Articles of Confederation, Congress returned to Independence Hall only to be removed abruptly in the summer of 1783.

That June, approximately 500 mutinous Pennsylvania militiamen demanding back pay from their service during the Revolution, encircled Independence Hall and refused to let Members of Congress leave the building unless their demands were met. Uncertain of their safety and the integrity of Congress, the delegates fled across the Delaware to Princeton, New Jersey.

In Princeton, Congress redoubled its efforts to select a permanent seat of government. To settle regional animosity, Congress agreed on two permanent capitals on the Delaware and Potomac, while designating Annapolis and Trenton as interim capitals.

On November 1, 1784, Congress convened in Trenton. Travel-weary legislators reluctantly trickled into Trenton--then a town of roughly 500 people--and it began official business at the French Arms Tavern on the corner of Warren and State Streets.

When Congress finally reached a quorum on November 29 it considered matters of foreign affairs and finance, appointing ministers to Britain and France and selecting commissioners to the Board of Treasury.

The highlight of Trenton's time as the capital was a visit by the Marquis de Lafayette. During his visit he petitioned Congress to take official leave to France and addressed a joint session of the New Jersey State Legislature. In honor of Lafayette, one of George Washington's most trusted generals, Congress drafted a letter to the King of France praising Lafayette's service and passed a resolution commending Lafayette for his bravery during the siege of Yorktown.

As the session concluded before Christmas, Congress scrapped the plan for two capitals and took up a resolution to establish a permanent capital in Trenton. Unfortunately for Trenton, debate stalled, and on Christmas Eve Congress agreed to meet in New York City after the New Year.

The rest as they say is history. The bustling, city life of New York was more appealing to Members of Congress than the calm of small-town Trenton. They quickly forgot their plans and continued to meet in New York until 1790.

Still, Congress's brief visit to Trenton offers a fascinating glimpse into the early history of the United States and should remind us that the remarkable Capitol building in which we conduct the people's business should not be taken for granted.

I commend the Crossroads of the American Revolution National Heritage Area, the Trenton Historical Society, and the other organizations that make up Trenton 1784--The Nation's Capital Committee, for their excellent work, schedule event and lectures and preparing exhibits and online resources to bring to life this fascinating yet fleeting moment in American history. Trenton was then and is today a town with great appeal.

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of this important bill.

To help support our troops and their families, this bill provides a much-deserved 3.4 percent military pay increase, as well as $472.4 million for Family Advocacy programs and full funding for Family Support and Yellow Ribbon to provide support to military families, including quality child care, job training for spouses, and expanded counseling and outreach to families experiencing the separation and stress of war. Additionally, H.R. 3326 provides $29.2 billion ($3 billion above the 2009 level) for the Defense Health Program to provide quality medical care for servicemembers and their including $120 million for Traumatic Brain Injury and Psychological Health Research.

Regarding the Defense Department's operations, I'm pleased that the bill provides $5 billion to allow defense personnel, not contractors, to perform critical department functions. The Department estimates that every position that is converted from contract to federal civilian saves on average $44,000 per year. Additionally, the bill reduces contracted advisory and assistance services by $51 million, and includes general provisions to stop further conversions by the Department of Defense from government functions to contractors. The bill also contains important policy provisions I support, including a bar on the establishment of permanent bases in Iraq or Afghanistan, and the continuation of a general requirement prohibiting the torture of detainees held in U.S. custody.

I am disappointed that we were forced to include in this bill a 60 day extension of three expiring Patriot Act authorities. The very good Patriot Act reform bill reported out of the Judiciary Committee eliminates over-broad surveillance authorities, tightens requirements for the issuance of national security letters, and contains important oversight requirements that will help us protect our people from both potential terrorists and an out-of-control executive branch. That bill should be passed by the House in January 2010 and the Senate should adopt it.

Some non-defense policy items are also attached to this bill, including expanded unemployment benefits, including increased payouts and longer duration of benefits, through February 28, 2010. The bill also extends from nine to 15 months (to February 28, 2010) the 65 percent COBRA health insurance subsidy for individuals who have lost their jobs. The COBRA subsidy extension would help New Jersey families between jobs immediately, as without this subsidy the average New Jersey family would pay $1,156 a month for COBRA coverage, which would consume over two-thirds of their unemployment benefits.

Overall, this bill meets important national security and domestic policy needs, and I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this bill.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to vote against allowing the United States to default on its debt, although not otherwise in favor of increasing the debt ceiling. As my colleagues know, this is the fourth time we've done that since enactment of the Housing and Economic Recovery Act in July 2008, just as the economic crisis was exploding upon us. Although a comprehensive and expeditious response was necessary, each such increase has represented hundreds of billions of dollars in additional debt.

In July 2008 Congress increased the debt ceiling by $800 billion. A mere three months

later, in October 2008, the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act increased the debt ceiling by another $700 billion all because of President Bush's decision to pursue two wars on borrowed money Fours months after that, in February 2009, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act increased the debt ceiling yet again by $789 billion because of the continued decline of the economy and efforts to deal with it. And today, we increase it by $290 billion more, to bring the ceiling to a staggering $12,394,000,000,000. The fact that the current increase is much smaller than the previous increases is no consolation, since the Treasury Department has indicated that it will only cover obligations due until February 11, 2010--a mere two months from now. Not to mention the fact that the entire debt ceiling was only about that much--$300 billion--during World War II.

These increases don't come for free--we're mortgaging our future on them. We have voted to accelerate inflation and increase our long-term fiscal challenges. Before next February arrives, we must all give intensive thought to how to return this country to the surplus conditions in enjoyed in the late 1990s. Between fiscal years 1998 and 2001, the federal government ran at a surplus and the debt ceiling only increased by $450 billion. The surplus vanished after fiscal year 2001, and the debt ceiling has increased by more than ten times that amount ($44.66 trillion) since then.

This deficit spending has provided much-needed economic stimulus in a time of crippling economic recession, and there is no dispute that we urgently needed to implement such stimulus measures over the course of the past year. But we are now in recovery, and it is time to get this economic train back on the right track. I support this increase with no pleasure, and I look forward to working with all my colleagues to bring down the debt ceiling as soon as possible.

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2847, the Jobs for Main Street Act. This legislation would provide jobs for tens of thousands of Americans, preserve thousands more jobs, and continue essential benefits to aid the unemployed without increasing the national debt.

We have taken important steps to bring our economy back from the worst economic crisis in three-quarters of a century. We've made important investments in our infrastructure, clean energy jobs, science research, and the next generation of workers.

There are clear signs that the economy is improving. Instead of shrinking by 6.4 percent a quarter, the economy has grown by 2.8 percent. Instead of losing 741,000 jobs a month, as the economy did a year ago, last month the economy shed 11,000 jobs. These are encouraging signs.

Yet, I'm not going to sit on my hands and wait for job creation. Families in New Jersey, who have lost a job or had their hours or paychecks cut, are still hurting. And we know employers have cut jobs more sharply and are more hesitant to replace them than in previous downturns.

The government can and should work together to increase employment opportunities in the short-term, mid-term, and long-term. Economists, business leaders, financial experts, among others, have argued that the Federal Government, and only the Federal Government, can inject into the economy a stimulus of sufficient size to make up for the frozen, collapsing economy. The package we are considering today will build on our previous investment, creating needed jobs and helping those who continue to be unemployed.

The Jobs for Main Street Act would redirect $48.3 billion to put Americans to work rebuilding our Nation's crumbling roads and bridges, modernizing public buildings, and improving air and water quality. Specifically it would invest $27.5 billion in highway infrastructure improvements, $8.4 billion for transit improvements, and $800 million to improve Amtrak. It

is estimated that this investment will create over 750,000 new jobs. Additionally, H.R. 2847 would invest $2.8 billion in clean water infrastructure, aquatic ecosystem restoration, and flood mitigation; creating another 50,000 jobs. It also will put contractors back to work by providing states with $4.1 billion for school construction, rehabilitation, and renovations. The $270 million that this legislation would invest in improving and protecting Federal, State, and local public lands would support approximately 14,000 short-term jobs, improving service to visitors, reducing the large backlog in facilities and habitat restoration needs, and reducing hazardous fuels that lead to damaging and expensive wildfires. These investments will do more than create jobs in the short term, they will provide long term benefits to all Americans.

Over the past year, I have held a number of events focused on jobs. Two months ago, I brought 50 central Jersey small business owners to Washington to hear their concerns and help them access helpful programs. Two weeks ago, I hosted a jobs forum in central New Jersey. At both events, I heard from small business owners struggling to get the credit and loans they need. The Jobs for Main Street Act would help those small businesses by eliminating fees on Small Business Administration loans and by providing a strong guarantee for Small Business Administration loans to encourage more banks to lend to small businesses. Small businesses are the engine that drives our economy, and during rough economic times they are also the engine that drives job creation. This is one step that Congress is taking to help our small businesses, who generate jobs and develop the innovative products of the future.

I especially am pleased this bill provides funding to ensure that states can keep police officers, firefighters, teachers, and other State and local employees on the job. Without this funding, States would be forced to make the difficult decision between cutting jobs and services or increasing taxes. That is a choice that no state should have to make, especially in difficult economic times.

The Jobs for Main Street Act includes $1.18 billion to help put more than 5,500 law enforcement officers on the beat throughout the United States, and $500 million to retain, rehire, and hire firefighters across the United States. According to the International Association of Firefighters, nearly 6,000 firefighters have been laid off or are subject to layoffs. An additional 6,000 positions have been lost through attrition. The bill would provide $18.9 billion to school districts and public institutions of higher education to retain or create 250,000 teaching jobs.

The recession has hit those between the ages of 16 and 25 particularly hard, and the unemployment rate is especially high for this group. The Jobs for Main Street Act would provide much needed job training and temporary public service positions to get these individuals back to work. The bill would provide $200 million to hire an additional 25,000 AmeriCorps Members, this funding would enable those individuals to serve their communities while earning an education award to further their education or pay off student loans. With the teenage unemployment rate at its highest rate in history, 27.8 percent, this legislation would invest $500 million to create 250,000 summer jobs for disadvantaged youth. H.R. 2847 would help up to 250,000 students stay in school by investing $300 million in the College Work Study program, which supports low- and moderate-income undergraduate and graduate students who work while attending college. Additionally, this legislation would provide $750 million for competitive grants to support job training for approximately 150,000 individuals in high growth and emerging industry sectors, particularly in the health care and green industries that are adding jobs despite difficult economic conditions.

For those workers struggling to maintain their health insurance while in between jobs, this bill would extend the COBRA subsidy established in the Recovery Act, which has already benefited approximately 7 million Americans. This expanded COBRA subsidy would help workers for 15 months with their COBRA health insurance premiums and help more Americans access this benefit. Job losses also have caused State Medicaid rolls to swell. This bill temporarily would increase the Federal Government's contribution to Medicaid to ensure States are able to provide health coverage to these workers. This two-prong approach will help ensure millions of unemployed workers are able to maintain health coverage for their families.

When we talk about jobs, we are not just talking about the economy. We are talking about the dignity that comes from holding a steady job that supports your family. The Jobs for Main Street Act recognizes this, and would help our families in real ways. I urge my colleagues to support it.

Madam Speaker, today Members received another classified briefing on our policy in Afghanistan, a briefing that raised a number of questions that need answers before our country commits further troops and resources to that conflict. These are not loaded questions or simply rhetorical, they are real questions--and just some of the real questions--that people in central New Jersey are asking.

Would this proposed troop increase bring us closer to capturing or killing those responsible for the 9/11 attacks? If the al Qaeda remnant Americans are seeking to capture or kill is on the Pakistani side of the border, or in Yemen or East Africa, how will sending more troops to, say, southern Helmand Province in Afghanistan help us to get those terrorists who attacked us on September 11 or might attack us in the future? Should we send troops to where al Qaeda isn't? Should we expand our aerial strikes? Would an escalation in air attacks do more harm than good? Is our intelligence apparatus structured and capable of giving our military and political leaders the intelligence they need to wage this war? Given our lack of foreign language capabilities, can we really know what's going on in the towns and farms and villages? Does the deterioration in the military and political situation in recent years in Afghanistan result from actions Americans have taken or failed to take? If so, how do we avoid those problems in a surged military action? What constitutes victory or success in this conflict? What is it that we hope to leave behind once we exit Afghanistan? What can we reasonably hope to leave behind?

Is the Afghan Government a viable partner? Is it viewed as legitimate by the Afghan people? Does the government and do the people have the same dedication to human rights, education and public welfare that we do? If so, how will our military troops bring improvements in those areas? Do the Afghan people have the same revulsion to official corruption that Americans do? Can the Afghan security forces be expanded as quickly as claimed? Is President Karzai correct that he needs extensive military U.S. security assistance for 15 or 20 more years? Will such assistance require the use of many private security contractors? If so, what will such a reliance on contractors cost the American taxpayer? If contractors are employed extensively in Afghanistan, do the State and Defense Departments have sufficient oversight mechanisms to ensure those contractors operate more legally and ethically than they have in, for example, Iraq? What lessons from Afghanistan's history can

we learn about the population's reaction to the long-term presence of foreign troops on their soil? Could Afghanistan degenerate into a civil war along ethnic and religious lines, as happened in Iraq?

Is the Government of Pakistan a viable partner? Are they serious about helping us? Are elements of their military and security services still supporting the Afghan Taliban who are attacking our troops? What if President Zadari is overthrown, as has happened with previous leaders?

Will our allies actually provide the troops the President is requesting? And if they commit 10,000 troops and we have 90,000 troops, will it be seen as an international effort or an American war? If European countries' troop casualties rise sharply next year, will those nations pull out of Afghanistan and leave our troops to bear the future burden?

Should we pay for the war openly and up front? Or should we commit troops and consider how to pay later? How would we pay for such an escalation, including the long-term costs of caring for our wounded veterans? Is the Department of Veterans Affairs hiring enough psychological counselors to treat the number of veterans who need counseling and treatment for posttraumatic stress disorder? Do we even know how to treat PTSD of veterans who have endured two, three or more combat tours? What should we make of the fact that the estimated $100 billion we'll spend on the war each year is equal to the cost of the health reform bill each year that we are debating now?

Are there alternatives to the President's approach that Congress and the Nation should explore? What is truly the best way to secure our country against future terrorist attacks? Are we putting the right emphasis on a military approach to counterterrorism policy? When extremists can transmit their ideology and recruit terrorists over the Internet and via extremist madrassas and youth groups, are we fighting on the right battlefield in Afghanistan? Are we doing enough at home to prevent future tragedies like the one that occurred at Fort Hood?

Fulfilling our constitutional obligations regarding matters of war and peace requires that Congress get answers to these questions and many more, and help the American people get these answers.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this bill.

Too many of our fellow citizens are suffering as a result of the biggest economic downturn in 75 years. In light of the number of Americans who continue to be unemployed or under-employed, it is essential that we focus our efforts on helping Americans find jobs. H.R. 3288 is responsible legislation which will help employ Americans, assist communities suffering from decreases in tax payments, and provide more stability to our economy.

H.R. 3288 would put an estimated 1.5 million Americans back to work by investing $41.8 billion in improving our transportation infrastructure. The bill also provides 4.5 billion for commuter and passenger rail projects to help reduce congestion and provide more environmentally-friendly ways for Americans to get to work and travel. I am pleased that my colleague from Pennsylvania Patrick Murphy and I were able to get language removed from this bill preventing Amtrak from being able to offer discounted fares to commuters on the Northeast Corridor. Since it was first included in the 2006 Fiscal Year, this language prevented Amtrak from being able to offer a more than 50 percent discount off peak fares to commuters on any of its lines. This resulted in a 20 percent fare increase to my constituents. The removal of this provision recognizes the need to make public transportation more affordable and more accessible, and I expect it will result in discounted Amtrak ticket rates.

Our economy nearly collapsed last year because of the combination of reckless and abusive financial services and mortgage-industry practices, and astounding regulatory failures. To help re-establish real oversight and control over our financial markets, the bill provides $1.111 billion to strengthen and enforce rules that govern investments and financial markets and to detect and prosecute fraudulent schemes, and allow the hiring of another 420 investigators, lawyers and analysts to support the mission of the Securities and Exchange Commission. The bill also provides $292 million to strengthen the Federal Trade Commission's capacity to protect consumers and combat anti-competitive behavior. Additionally, the bill allocates $118 million for the Consumer Product Safety Commission to continue implementing bipartisan consumer protection legislation enacted in 2008 in response to massive toxic product scandals, including children's toys from China.

The bill also provides $1.4 billion for training and support services to workers affected by mass layoffs and plant closures, and $125 million for competitive grants to community colleges and partnership with local adult education providers to prepare workers for careers in high-demand and emerging industries. To assist affected parents in ensuring that their children get good meals and quality health care, the bill provides $7.2 billion for Head Start, an investment that will help nearly 1 million children from low-income families.

To help America's students pay for a college education, this bill maintains the discretionary portion of the maximum Pell Grant at $4,860, which, combined with a mandatory supplement of $690, will support a $5,550 maximum Pell Grant in FY 2010. Since January 2007, the maximum Pell Grant has been increased by $1,500 or 37 percent--from $4,050 to $5,550. In FY 2010, more than 8 million college students will receive Pell Grants.

This bill maintains investments in math and science education by providing $180 million toward the Department of Education's Mathematics and Science Partnerships. The program is the only national teacher development program available to teachers across the U.S.

It is widely understood that early language education is the key to language proficiency later on. In order to start addressing the pressing needs for skilled linguists and other language professionals that currently exist, this bill maintains investments in the Foreign Language Assistance Program at $27 million, which is currently the only federal program that supports foreign language education at the elementary and secondary school level.

This bill also contains provision and funding for programs to protect Americans' access to health care coverage until national health care reform is enacted. To that end, the bill provides $2.2 billion to provide primary health care to 17 million patients, of whom 40 percent are uninsured, in 7,500 service delivery sites. These centers provide high quality care in both urban and rural underserved areas across the country. The bill also seeks to increase the number of health care professionals by providing $498 million to support the training of health professionals in fields where there are shortages, such as nursing. And to help find cures for the diseases afflicting Americans, the bill provides $31 billion for NIH-funded biomedical research to improve health and reduce health care expenditures.

At a time when the recession has created a fiscal crisis for state and local governments, requiring them to let go of key law enforcement and related personnel, federal support for state and local law enforcement programs has never been more important. To help keep police on the beat, the bill provides $792 million to support local law enforcement agencies with hiring, technology, training, body armor, and sex-offender enforcement management grants. This includes $298 million specifically for COPS Hiring Grants to hire or retain approximately 1,400 police officers. The bill also provides $519 million for the Byrne Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) program, which helps local law enforcement agencies engage in a broad range of activities to better fight and prevent crime. I'm pleased that this year several municipalities in my district will receive funding for projects under this program, including the Borough of Jamesburg (to modernize communications), the city of Trenton (for an anti-gang program), and the township of North Brunswick (for a video surveillance system).

Meeting our obligations to America's veterans is a national trust. The bill provides over $109 billion for the operation of the Department of Veterans Affairs, with $45.1 billion allocated for medical care. In a breakthrough long sought by veterans, the bill also provides advance appropriations for the VA to ensure a stable and uninterrupted source of funding for medical care for veterans, providing $48.2 billion for

Madam Chair, I rise in support of H.R. 4173, the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2009, and to commend Chairman Frank, Chairman Peterson, and the broad coalition of Members who have worked to craft this financial services reform legislation.

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act was an important first step, but we are still in the throes of recovery from the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression, which was caused m large part by more than a decade of regulatory failures. Reckless, abusive and irresponsible practices on the part of some in the mortgage issuance and financial services industries combined to create a perfect storm, resulting in a catastrophic economic collapse. The country had fallen into recession by the end of 2007, which exploded into an economic crisis as the subprime mortgage crisis unwound, Lehman Brothers filed for bankruptcy and AIG collapsed.

The impact on the American people has been profound. Household net worth dropped by more than $14 trillion from 2007 to mid-2009, the value of retirement assets dropped by 22 percent between 2006 and in mid-2008, total home equity dropped from $13 trillion in 2006 to $8.8 trillion by mid-2008, and as of today, almost one in four homeowners owes more on their mortgage than their home is worth. In addition, Americans in every income strata have simply not been protected from even the most egregious behavior. The Securities and Exchange Commission utterly failed to discover and prevent the collapse of a $65 billion Ponzi scheme, as well as several others which also resulted in billions in losses to investors. Meanwhile, millions of Americans who live paycheck to paycheck and rely on payday loans are being charged annual interest rates of 400 percent or more, totaling nearly $5 billion per year.

The Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act is an aggressive and comprehensive response to the broad spectrum of problems the recent economic crisis brought to light. It creates a new Consumer Financial Protection Agency to ensure that bank loans, mortgages, payday loans, overdraft fees and credit card policies are fair, affordable, understandable, and transparent. It establishes a new Financial Services Oversight Council to monitor and respond to systemic risk, to prevent the sort of tidal wave of catastrophic interconnected developments that brought down the economy in 2008. It puts measures in place to ensure that there will never again be a company deemed ``too big to fail,'' and it establishes an industry-funded dissolution fund to ensure that taxpayers will not be asked to bail out any such company if it goes into collapse. The bill also includes legislation passed in the House earlier in the year, to regulate the type of incentive-based executive compensation that provoked some of the riskiest and most reckless behavior in the financial services markets, and to prohibit the sorts of fraudulent and abusive mortgage issuance practices that caused the subprime mortgage crisis.

I am also pleased that the bill includes several strengthening amendments I offered, and I thank Chairman Frank again for his support of those amendments and for including them in the Manager's Amendment. My amendments would clarify that the newly-created Financial Services Oversight Council, rather than one dominant member thereof (the Federal Reserve Board), is the systemic risk regulator empowered under the Act. The amendments would also ensure that the Council is a broad-minded think tank staffed equitably by all of its Voting Members, rather than predominantly by one (the Department of the Treasury). The staff would remain on the payrolls of the detailing agency, pre-empting a budgetary problem for the Council.

In addition, the bill includes two good government amendments I offered, which clarify that financial companies cannot be compelled by the systemic risk regulator to waive any privilege (such as attorney- client privilege) when providing data at the request of the systemic risk regulator, and that the same protection against compelled waiver of privilege applies to private funds, investment advisors and others. In times of crisis and crisis response, we must exercise heightened diligence in protecting and preserving our foundational rights and principles.

The Committee has taken bold steps to confront the failures of our financial services regulatory system, and I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of legislation that will extend tax relief to millions of Americans, the Tax Extenders Act of 2009. This bill will extend 40 tax cuts which are due to expire at the end of this year, many of which are important to businesses and families in Central New Jersey.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Medicare Physician Payment Reform Act, H.R. 3961, legislation that would ensure that physicians are reimbursed fairly for treating Medicare patients. Improving this payment system is vital to improving our nation's health insurance system.

There is broad consensus that the current Medicare formula for reimbursing physicians, the Sustainable Growth Rate (SGR), is fundamentally flawed. This formula would be eliminated by this bill and replaced with a better structure for Medicare physician payments. Without this necessary action, doctors' payments would be cut 21 percent in 2010, forcing many doctors to stop accepting Medicare patients and undermining the ability of millions of Medicare beneficiaries to get the care they need to stay healthy. I am pleased that this new formula would compensate physicians fairly for their services to seniors.

As a U.S. Representative and the spouse of a physician, I have heard from many physicians, nurses, and other health care providers frustrated with the annual ritual of preventing major Medicare physician payment cuts. I am pleased that this legislation, a crucial part of health care reform, would stop this cycle and reset the Medicare physician payment baseline to ensure seniors continue to have access to their doctors. In addition, this bill recognizes the importance of primary care, a key component of health reform, and would provide seniors with greater access to primary care practitioners. This would help seniors with greater coordination of their medical care and promote medical care that keeps seniors healthy.

In addition to stopping the Medicare physician payment cuts, the legislation also would implement the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act. This Act would require all new spending to be paid for and not increase the debt by instituting pay-as-you-go budgeting as law. I support pay-as- you-go rules because fiscal discipline must always be a hallmark of our government. In the 1990s with pay-as-you-go as the law, we turned the massive deficits of the 1980s into a record surplus under President Clinton. Pay-as-you-go is only one tool, but it is a strong one to return our nation back to fiscal stability.

I voted in favor of this bill to help physicians and health care providers continue to provide excellent service to our nation's seniors.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 4152, the Permanent Estate Tax Relief for Families, Farmers, and Small Businesses Act of 2009. This is responsible legislation that would provide permanent tax relief to middle-class families and family-owned businesses, while maintaining the estate tax for only the 7,600 wealthiest individuals nationwide, according to the Committee on Ways and Means.

H.R. 4152, the Permanent Estate Tax Relief for Families, Farmers, and Small Businesses Act of 2009 permanently would set the estate tax at the 2009 level. This would allow families and small businesses to have certainty about the rate of taxation on their estates and plan accordingly.

Currently the estate tax exemption is set at $3.5 million for individuals and $7 million for couples and with a maximum tax rate of 45 percent. Unless the House and the Senate take action, the estate tax is scheduled to enter 1 year of full repeal in 2010 followed by a return of the estate tax in 2011 with a drastically reduced exemption level and a much higher maximum rate of taxation. If we allow the estate tax to return to a $1 million exemption at a tax rate of 55 percent, 30,000 more American small businesses, farms, and families will be subject to the estate tax in 2011. Given the high property values in New Jersey, allowing the estate tax to revert to a million dollar exemption would hit my constituents especially hard.

Additionally, the legislation we are considering today would require all new spending to be paid for and not increase the debt by instituting pay-as-you-go budgeting as law. I support pay-as-you-go rules because fiscal discipline must always be a hallmark of our government. In the 1990s with pay-as-you-go as the law, we turned the massive deficits of the 1980s into a record surplus under President Clinton. Pay-as-you-go is only one tool, but it is a strong one to return our Nation back to fiscal stability.

I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Medicare Physician Payment Reform Act, H.R. 3961, legislation that would ensure that physicians are reimbursed fairly for treating Medicare patients. Improving this payment system is vital to improving our Nation's health insurance system.

Madam Speaker, I support our Nation's small business and the passage of the ``Small Business Financing and Investment Act,''