Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished Chair of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, Mr. Berman, for bringing this resolution to the floor. The resolution calls on the Government of Brazil to live up to its obligations under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction by releasing Sean Goldman to the custody of his father, David Goldman of Tinton Falls, New Jersey, my constituent. This bill shines a bright light on the problem of international parental kidnapping, and it is an issue that deserves congressional attention.

Let me recount some of the recent background on this issue and why this resolution is before the House today. It is heartrending, as you have heard from my colleague from New Jersey.

Nearly 5 years ago in June, 2004, Mr. David Goldman began a long and painful odyssey to rescue his son from an international parental kidnapping. He had driven his wife, Bruna, and their 4-year-old son, Sean, to the Newark airport for a scheduled trip to visit her parents in Brazil. Mr. Goldman was to join them a few days later. Shortly after arriving in Brazil, Mrs. Goldman called her husband to say two things: their marriage was over, and if he ever wanted to see Sean again, he would have to sign over custody of the boy to her. To his credit, Mr. Goldman refused to be blackmailed. Instead, he began a campaign, a relentless campaign, to secure his son's release.

There is no question that Mr. Goldman has the law both here in the United States and internationally on his side. It is sad and unfortunate that this father and this little boy must have their personal lives dragged through the public forum.

For any of us who have children or grandchildren, we can imagine but not fully comprehend the pain that Mr. Goldman and similar parents have gone through when a spouse kidnaps a child and whisks them away somewhere around the world. Tragically, Sean Goldman's case is just one of over 50 reported cases involving Brazil. Many countries, including key U.S. allies such as Japan, are not even signatories to this Hague Convention. For parents of children kidnapped by a spouse and taken to one of these non-Hague signatory nations, their battle to recover kidnapped children is even more difficult. The resolution before us highlights also the plight of these parents and their children. And it should be viewed as one step toward increasing the tools available to parents to help them recover children.

In October, 1980, the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction entered into force. The United States and Brazil are both signatories. Under article 3 of the Convention, the removal of a child shall be considered wrongful if ``it is in breach of rights of custody attributed to a person, an institution or any other body, either jointly or alone, under the law of the State in which the child was habitually resident immediately before the removal or retention; and at the time of removal or retention those rights were actually exercised, either jointly or alone, or would have been exercised.'' Well, Sean Goldman had been habitually resident in New Jersey until his mother kidnapped him and took him to Brazil.

Shortly after that, Mr. Goldman filed a Hague Convention application in Brazil's federal courts seeking the return of his son under the Convention.

Despite the clear legitimacy of Mr. Goldman's claim, the case has crawled along in Brazil's courts, bouncing back and forth and back and forth. Mr. Goldman's wife secured a divorce in Brazil and began a new relationship with a prominent lawyer. In August of last year, his former wife died during childbirth, a fact that Mr. Goldman learned only some time later and a fact that was concealed from the Brazilian courts by Mr. Lins e Silva, her then husband, and Mr. Goldman's late wife's parents.

After our individual intercession and with the help of the State Department and my colleague from New Jersey, and I particularly want to note his actions, Brazilian authorities moved to have the case once again sent to Brazil's federal courts to secure visitation rights for Mr. Goldman. Finally just last month, Mr. Goldman was able to see his son for the first time in more than 4 years. It is clear that Sean still loves his father and wants to be with him. It appears that the only thing standing in the way of that is the illegal conduct of Mr. Lins e Silva.

I applaud Secretary of State Clinton for raising this issue with Brazil's foreign minister and through other channels. If Sean is not released by the end of this week, I hope that President Obama will continue to bring the issue to the attention of Brazilian President Lula Da Silva and that Sean and his father will be united as they should be.

I thank the gentleman.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished chairman for yielding.

Yesterday marked the passage of 50 years since the Tibetan people in Lhasa first rose in protest against the harsh actions of the People's Republic of China to undermine the Tibetan self-government. I am honored to introduce this resolution recognizing the long hardship borne by the Tibetan people, a great people, who continue to labor peacefully for freedom in Tibet and maintain a Tibetan cultural identity and democratic community, even in exile. Importantly, this resolution also recognizes the government and the people of India, who generously have hosted the exiled government and people of Tibet in the city of Dharamsala since 1960. The perseverance and charity exhibited by these peoples should be a model for all.

For 50 years the situation in Tibet has deteriorated with too little attention from the outside world. Tibetan culture has been eradicated systematically and relentlessly. Basic freedoms,

like freedoms of speech and religion and association and movement, have been repressed. Human rights abuses have been all too common and continue to occur. At this time last year, the Chinese Government was engaged in a fierce crackdown on nonviolent Tibetan protesters that resulted in serious injuries to civilians and an undetermined but significant number of deaths. Even today reports indicate that the Chinese Government has imposed a virtual state of martial law in the Tibetan plateau.

Over the same 50 years and in the face of such adversity, the Dalai Lama has sought to bring wisdom to human affairs and has used his position and leadership to promote compassion and nonviolence in the search for a lasting solution to this issue.

Last year I had the opportunity to travel to India with a congressional delegation led by Speaker Pelosi. We witnessed firsthand the dedicated Tibetans who crossed the rugged Himalayas to escape oppression, including young children. We also had lengthy meetings with the Dalai Lama, whose commitment to peaceful, steady progress is a powerful beacon of hope to all people seeking freedom and equality. It is long past time for this commitment to be reciprocated by the Chinese Government.

The so-called ``Seventeen Point Agreement'' that was signed by Chinese authorities in 1951 provided that ``the central authorities will not alter the existing political system in Tibet. The central authorities also will not alter the established status, functions, and powers of the Dalai Lama. Officials of various ranks shall hold office as usual.'' A few years later, in March of 1959, just days after the Dalai Lama's flight from Lhasa, the Chinese Government abolished the local Tibetan governing structure. The agreement also explicitly stated that ``when the people raise demands for reform, they must be settled through consultation with the leading personnel of Tibet.'' Clearly the terms of this agreement have not been upheld. Tibetans and the international community are asking that the Chinese Government implement autonomy as promised but never granted genuinely.

In this spirit the resolution before us calls for an immediate cessation of the repression and abuses being imposed upon the people of Tibet. We urge the Chinese Government to engage in a constructive dialogue with the Dalai Lama in a sustained effort to craft a permanent and just solution that protects the rights and dignity of all Tibetans. The distinctive culture of Tibet must be preserved, and we throughout the world should want it preserved, and a vibrant future must be guaranteed. I'm hopeful that the new administration will answer the call of this resolution to use all of the diplomatic, programmatic, and multilateral tools at its disposal to encourage China to adopt such a course.

Last year this body agreed to a resolution introduced by Speaker Pelosi that addressed the rights of the Tibetan people. Today we reiterate that message and recommit ourselves to a sustained effort. Today is a day when this body once again brings a national spotlight to the plight of the Tibetan people, honors those who struggle nonviolently against brutal suppression, and reaffirms our commitment to freedom around the world. It is a day when we recognize, in the words of the Dalai Lama, ``the importance of universal responsibility, nonviolence, and interreligious understanding.''

I would like to thank Chairman Berman and the House Foreign Affairs Committee for their leadership and action on this issue. I appreciate the support of Ranking Member Ros-Lehtinen and the hard work of Mr. Halpin of the minority staff as well as Mr. Hans Hogrefe of the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission. The immense contributions of Todd Stein and the International Campaign for Tibet should also be acknowledged. And I would like to pay special tribute to Speaker Pelosi, who has long been a strong champion of human rights in Tibet and around the world, and to thank her for her help with this resolution.

We call on the leaders of China for justice and freedom.

Mr. Speaker, as the people today are talking about restoring science and government to its rightful place, President Obama's nominees for Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy and Administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration await confirmation. John Holdren and Jane Lubchenco are among the Nation's finest scientists, and we urgently need them at the forefront of our Nation's efforts to rebuild our economy with new discoveries and innovations, to transform our energy use with new technologies, and to manage our natural resources with enhanced understanding.

Today, I stood in the White House as the President talked about the new science policy; and later I stood in our Capitol dome, gazing up at the fresco of George Washington surrounded by the tools of our founders. My eyes were drawn to two scenes in particular, one named Oceans--or Marine--and the other Science. Our Nation's future prosperity is no less dependent upon a mastery of these fields today. I look forward to confirmation of my good friends, Dr. Lubchenco and Dr. Holdren, soon.

Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of the Helping Families Save Their Homes Act of 2009 (H.R. 1106), and to commend Chairman Frank, Chairman Conyers, and the Financial Services and Judiciary Committees for their leadership and hard work on this measure. I urge my colleagues to support it.

No doubt, the experience of my colleagues is the same at when the economy spiraled out of control last year, my constituents did not call me and write me and come to my Town Hall meetings saying ``please give my hard-earned taxpayer dollars to Wall Street. Wall Street is really hurting, and I want to do my part to help.'' No, they came to me saying ``I am in trouble. I played by the rules. I did everything right, but my life is falling apart, and my home is about to be taken away. Please help me.'' We responded a few weeks ago by enacting the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act to help stimulate the economy and get people back to work while providing for the essential services people need to get by. Today, we are taking another very important step by responding to the foreclosure crisis that is at the root of the recession.

The foreclosure crisis is a vicious cycle. Due to plummeting home values in recent years, an estimated 14 million homeowners owe more on their homes than their homes are worth; their mortgages are ``under water''. For a variety of reasons, including predatory lending abuses, exploding adjustable rate mortgage payments, and increasing job losses, homeowners all over the country have tried to refinance their mortgages into lower rates just to make ends meet. But the decreased values of their homes made that impossible. Unable to afford their current mortgage payments, unable to refinance them, and unable to sell the homes due to the depressed housing market, many face foreclosure. According to the trade research organization RealtyTrac, lenders made foreclosure filings on 2.3 million properties last year alone. Each foreclosed home reduces nearby property values by as much as 9 percent, sending those surrounding homes down the path towards being under water. And the cycle continues. Congress must act, must act now, and must act with force and determination.

The Helping Families Save Their Homes Act attacks the foreclosure crisis aggressively, and approaches the problem from many angles at once, but is measured in its application. The bill would help millions of homeowners stay in their homes, by including incentives to encourage lenders to negotiate affordable mortgages for homeowners whose mortgages are under water, who are at risk of foreclosure, and who are facing bankruptcy. For example, it would modify the Hope for Homeowners program by reducing the fees that discouraged lenders from voluntarily participating in that program last year, and by providing for a $1,000 incentive payment to servicers for each successful refinancing of an existing loan.

The bill also provides special protections for veterans, by allowing the Department of Veterans Affairs, the Federal Housing Administration (FHA), and U.S. Department of Agriculture to guarantee and/or insure mortgage loans that have been administratively or judicially modified. Therefore the bill would provide additional financial incentives for lenders to voluntarily modify mortgage loans instead of foreclosing. The bill also would expand the FHA's mortgage loan modification abilities by allowing a reduction of interest payments of up to 30 percent of the outstanding loan balance.

Most importantly, the bill would pay for adjustments to existing programs by tapping into $2.316 billion in already-authorized funding under the Troubled Assets Relief Program enacted last year. Therefore, to be clear--this is not a ``new bailout.'' This bill gives back to taxpayers more than 2 billion taxpayer dollars that previously had been allocated to Wall Street by previously-enacted legislation.

In addition to incentivizing lenders to modify mortgages to keep families in their homes, the bill would give homeowners an important new tool to fend for themselves: judicial modification of primary home loans. By allowing bankruptcy judges to modify the terms of the home mortgages at the core of the economic crisis--the mortgages already issued prior to enactment of this bill under terms, conditions and circumstances that forced so many of them into foreclosure or the brink of failure--we help our constituents remain in their homes under revised payment plans they can afford. This important protection also does not cost taxpayers anything, but it could reduce foreclosures by 20 percent.

The mere fact that homeowners have judicial modification of primary home mortgages available as an option, which is already available for vacation home loans and other consumer loans, will further encourage lenders to modify mortgages before borrowers file for bankruptcy. In addition, as it would be further fine-tuned by the Conyers amendment, the bill would apply a ``good faith'' test to deny bankruptcy modification relief to individuals who can afford to repay their mortgages without it, and extend the negotiation period requiring the debtor to certify that he or she contacted the lender and sought to reach agreement on a qualified loan modification. As perfected, the amendment would also allow a court to consider, in lieu of reducing principal in a modification, reducing the interest rate to lower the borrower's monthly payment; enhance the ``good faith'' test restricting the use of judicial modification to reduce principal by requiring courts to determine whether a lender offered to modify the loan and whether the debtor could afford the offered modification; and increase the proportion of appreciation on a home that a lender could recoup in a sale

within five years after the modification. The bill already includes a provision protecting mortgage servicers from lawsuits by investors who may be unhappy with the mortgage modifications.

Some have expressed the concern that this bankruptcy option will increase the cost of borrowing for other homeowners. Compared to the alternative of foreclosure, however, judicial modification should maximize, rather than decrease, the value of troubled mortgages for the lender. According to economist Mark Zandi, ``[g]iven that the total cost of foreclosure to lenders is much greater than that associated with a Chapter 13 bankruptcy, there is no reason to believe that the cost of mortgage credit across all mortgage loan products should rise.'' In addition, because the bankruptcy modification right only applies to mortgages issued before enactment of the bill, home mortgages issued in the future will be viewed as more stable, reliable and predictable than loans that can be modified in bankruptcy, and capital should again in the future readily flow to the home mortgage industry as it did in the past.

The bill also recognizes that unchecked predatory lending activity was one of the root causes of the crisis we face today and attacks that problem directly in several ways. For example, it requires the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to approve all parties participating in the FHA single family mortgage origination process, allows HUD to impose a civil money penalty against loan originators which are not HUD-approved but participate in FHA mortgage originations, and establishes other rigorous conditions on eligibility for would-be participants in the program.

Finally, it makes permanent an increase, from $100,000 to $250,000, in the amount of bank or credit union deposits insured by Federal banks and credit union regulators, and increases these regulators' authority to obtain additional liquidity from the US Treasury. It is an aggressive and comprehensive, but thoughtful and measured bill. It puts taxpayers first, and most of it costs nothing or is already paid for by taking taxpayer funds that had been allocated to Wall Street and returning them to Main Street. I urge my colleagues to support it.

Mr. Speaker, this week, I reintroduced the Anthrax Attacks Investigation Act, H.R. 1248. Since the attacks occurred, I have pressed for a full investigation into this insidious biowarfare attack on our country.

My bill's purpose is simple: to examine and to report on how the attacks occurred and on how we can prevent similar episodes in the future. Numerous experts and advisory committees say that biological attacks or emerging epidemics are our greatest public risks.

As you may know, the anthrax attacks in 2001 originated from a postal box, evidently, in the Twelfth Congressional District in New Jersey. They disrupted the lives of people throughout the region and the country. For months, Americans lived in fear of a future attack and of the possibility of receiving cross-contaminated mail. Mail service was delayed, and people wondered whether there was a murderer at large in their midst. Further, my own congressional office and others here in Washington were shut down after it was found to be contaminated with anthrax. These attacks raised the fear of terrorism to a fevered pitch.

Since the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation announced in early August of last year that Dr. Bruce Ivins was their prime suspect before his suicide a month earlier, I've spoken with FBI Director Mueller about the case. He readily has admitted that the case against Dr. Ivins is and was circumstantial and that the FBI has no direct physical evidence tying him to the attack. No anthrax spores were found in his car or his home, and the FBI has no evidence that Ivins actually mailed the letters in New Jersey. Nevertheless, the FBI and the DOJ are closing the case because they believe the available circumstantial evidence against Dr. Ivins is overwhelming and because no evidence has surfaced to suggest that he had any accomplices.

A number of important questions about this case remain unanswered: How did the perpetrator or perpetrators manage to pull off these attacks that were somewhat complicated in the first place? Why did the FBI pursue the wrong suspect for so long? Is the science behind the case sound? Should the case be closed? Have we learned the right lessons, and have we implemented the right changes in our defenses to make another such attack less likely? Why are investigators so certain that Ivins acted alone?

Indeed, last month in Baltimore, at the conference of the American Society for Microbiology, FBI scientist Jason Bannan told the press something I had not previously heard from the FBI officials, something that only raises more questions about the FBI investigation.

Dr. Bannan noted during the investigation that the FBI collected at least 60 water samples from communities where government laboratories work with anthrax. The purpose of collecting the samples was to see if there was any unique chemical signature in one of the water samples that would match with the water that was used to grow the anthrax spores that were mailed. According to the New York Times, Bannan said, ``The water research ultimately was inconclusive about where the anthrax was grown.''

Despite this, the FBI remains adamant that the anthrax could only have come from that site in Maryland that Dr. Ivins used even though the Bureau has never been able to replicate the chemical signature of the material in the attacks.

This is just one question.

As has so often been the case, each new revelation by the FBI seems only to raise more questions about the conduct and conclusions of the investigation underscoring why an independent review of the investigation is needed badly. In addition, there are important policy and public safety questions that our government has yet to answer satisfactorily.

In December 2008, the Commission on the Prevention of Weapons of Mass Destruction, Proliferation and Terrorism--itself an outgrowth of the 9/ 11 Commission and its recommendations--issued a report. It used alarming language to prod our government to act. It affirmed something that was demonstrated with the deadly anthrax attacks: Terrorists will likely use weapons of mass destruction attacks on America which feature biological weapons.

However, examining the 2001 anthrax attacks was not an explicit mandate of that Commission. This was in contrast to the 9/11 Commission which was specifically charged with looking at how the September 2001 attacks happened, why the Federal Government failed to prevent the attacks and what remedial measures were necessary to prevent a similar catastrophe in the future. The question is, have we implemented the lessons learned from those attacks in the fall of 2001?

The Commission that I am proposing here is similar to this 9/11 Commission that should look at the incident, why it was not prevented, and what we can do to prevent such things in the future. Just as the 9/ 11 Commission looked not only at the attacks that morning but also recommended changes in the structure of government agencies, screening methods and government oversight, so should an anthrax commission look not only at the specific crime but also at measures for prevention, detention, and investigation of future bioterrorism.

Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 326) to direct the Secretary of the Interior to take lands in Yuma County, Arizona, into trust as part of the reservation of the Cocopah Tribe of Arizona, and for other purposes.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, the pending measure sponsored by our colleague, Representative Raul Grijalva, would place land into trust for the Cocopah Indian Tribe of Arizona. This land will be used for housing, water and non-gaming economic development opportunities.

These lands, which are currently owned by the Cocopah, will be considered part of the tribe's initial reservation. Further, this legislation prohibits these lands from being used for gaming purposes under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. A similar measure was introduced in the 107th Congress and in the 109th Congress. In the last Congress, the House passed an identical version of this measure by unanimous consent.

The resolution of this matter is well-overdue. I urge my colleagues to support the passage of H.R. 326.

I reserve the balance of my time.

May I ask if the gentleman has any further speakers.

With that, Madam Speaker, I again urge my colleagues to support the passage of H.R. 326.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 81) to amend the High Seas Driftnet Fishing Moratorium Protection Act and the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act to improve the conservation of sharks.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 81, the Shark Conservation Act of 2009. Sharks are vital to the health of marine ecosystems, but the practice of shark finning is driving the decline of their populations worldwide.

Nine years ago, Congress passed the Shark Finning Prohibition Act to protect these important species. The pending measure reconfirms the original intent of Congress to prevent shark finning by prohibiting the removal of fins at sea and the possession, transfer or landing of fins, which are not naturally attached to the corresponding carcass.

Reducing shark finning is imperative to conserving sharks, a critical species within marine ecosystems. This bill passed the House during the last Congress but was not acted upon by the other body. Today, we are repeating our effort for this important conservation.

I especially want to acknowledge the efforts of Madeleine Bordallo, the Chair of the Insular Affairs Oceans and Wildlife subcommittee. She has worked hard on this. And for the sake of the ecosystem of our world's oceans, I urge my colleagues to support the passage of this bill.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, as the gentleman said, this bill will correct an oversight in the existing law, and I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 146) to amend the American Battlefield Protection Act of 1996 to establish a battlefield acquisition grant program for the acquisition and protection of nationally significant battlefields and associated sites of the Revolutionary War and the War of 1812, and for other purposes, as amended.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.

Madam Speaker, I rise as the sponsor of H.R. 146, the Revolutionary War and War of 1812 Battlefield Protection Act, which I introduced for myself and a number of other Members. I would like to thank Chairman Rahall and Chairman Grijalva for their help in bringing this legislation to the floor.

Madam Speaker, from the shot heard around the world in Lexington to the beginning of the winning, when Washington and his soldiers crossed the Delaware, on to the surrender of Lord Cornwallis at Yorktown, the stories of the American Revolution bring to life the ideals of liberty and democracy fostered by our Nation's founders.

As noted historian, David Hackett Fischer, testified before the Natural Resources Committee last year, ``from long experience I can testify that one of the best ways to learn about history is to go to sites, and get on the ground.'' I could not agree more.

While one can read about the American Revolution and the values that were fought for and established at that time, or read about the War of 1812 when the fledgling country fought to maintain its independence, history is best experienced, however, not by reading but by feeling, touching and living what was experienced in those trying times. There is no better way to experience the history of the founding of our great Nation than on the hallowed ground where the epic struggle for our Nation's independence took place.

Preserving these American historic treasures is essential to remembering the sacrifices that our forefathers made to secure our freedom and our independence, and it is vital for educating the current generations and future generations and about our rich cultural heritage. Unfortunately, urbanization, suburban sprawl and unplanned development continually encroach on many of the significant battlefields of that period. This encroachment poses a severe and growing risk to the preservation of these historic significant sites.

Last spring, the National Park Service published its report to Congress on the status of the Revolutionary War and the War of 1812 sites in the United States. This report demonstrates that there is a great need to act and to act quickly to preserve many of these sites. Out of the 677 naturally significant battlefields and associated sites of the Revolutionary War and the War of 1812, 99, according to the National Park Service, are lost forever already; 234 are fragmented or in poor condition; an additional 170 are in danger of being destroyed within the next decade.

H.R. 146 would help State and local governments and non-profits protect and preserve these battlefields and historic sites by authorizing the use of money from the Land and Water Conservation Fund to provide up to 50 percent of the costs of purchasing battlefield land threatened by sprawl and commercial development. This legislation is patterned after the successful Civil War Battlefield Protection Program that has been in effect for quite some time now.

I might add, it was an oversight, I would say, that decades ago, these battlefields and sites of the War of 1812 and the Revolutionary War were not included under the same umbrella. Now is the time to do it. Now is past the time to do it.

My home State of New Jersey played a unique role in the American Revolution. I was pleased when, a couple of years ago, Congress took action to protect the battlefields in historic sites where this conflict took place. We passed legislation that created the Crossroads of the American Revolution National Heritage Area linking hundreds of sites across 14 counties in New Jersey where more military engagements took place than in any other States. New Jersey was truly the crossroads of the American Revolution for a number of reasons, and I'm pleased we're taking steps to preserve the record of those engagements.

There's a fundamental misconception that the American Revolution and War of 1812 took place only in the Northeast. In truth, the story of the American Revolution and the War of 1812 crisscrosses 33 States, from New York to Louisiana, from Georgia to Oregon. Enacting this legislation would allow each of these States to preserve better their history and their role in the War of 1812 and the American Revolution.

Soon, I will be introducing legislation that will provide additional funding for the program created in this legislation, H.R. 149. That legislation, the American Revolution and War of 1812 Commemorative Coin Act, is modeled after the Civil War Battlefield Commemorative Coin Act of 1992, which has raised over $6 million for battlefield preservation.

Enacting that bill will allow many more historic battlefields to be preserved. Enacting this bill will make it possible for our children and their children and other generations to enjoy and learn. We want to give Americans the opportunity to learn history, to feel history, to experience history so that they understand the principles on which this country was founded. People who know history can be better citizens, more engaged in current civic affairs and more cognizant of their place in history.

I urge my colleagues to support and vote for this important legislation.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, with the urging to my colleagues to support this legislation, I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 548) to assist citizens, public and private institutions, and governments at all levels in planning, interpreting, and protecting sites where historic battles were fought on American soil during the armed conflicts that shaped the growth and development of the United States, and for other purposes, as amended.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.

Madam Speaker, since its inception in 1996, the American Battlefield Protection Program has provided grants for preserving endangered battlefields of the Civil War, which are specifically not part of the National Park system.

The program contains two components. The Battlefield Preservation Grants Program is designed to help State and local governments, private organizations and citizens protect battlefield sites.

The Battlefield Acquisition Grant Program provides matching funds to help State and local governments acquire and preserve battlefield sites. Together, these two programs have helped protect more than 15,000 acres at 72 Civil War battlefields. They have leveraged more than $50 million in non-Federal funding for battlefield protection.

Madam Speaker, as we all know, several time-sensitive pieces of legislation were caught up in the lengthy debate about public lands issues in the other body. Because of that delay, the original law for this program lapsed last September. H.R. 548 would restore this important program and authorize it through 2019.

As I said in connection with the previous bill on battlefields of the War of 1812 and the Revolution, preserving these historic sites is important not for looking back, but for looking forward, for knowing where we came from and where we are going, for knowing that we are a Nation conceived in liberty and dedicated on the proposition that all are equal. The lesson of the Civil War battlefields is a lesson for today's children, for tomorrow's children, for all citizens.

I commend our colleague, Representative Gary Miller of California, for his leadership on this issue and his commitment to historic preservation.

I urge my colleagues to support passage of H.R. 548.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I thank the distinguished gentleman, my friend and colleague from Texas, for those eloquent remarks reminding us that this is not just for land preservation, it is for values preservation that we are supporting Mr. Miller's bill. And I thank my colleagues also for recognizing the work that Mr. Miller has put into this.

With that, I urge my colleagues to pass this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 844) to amend the provisions of law relating to the John H. Prescott Marine Mammal Rescue Assistance Grant Program, and for other purposes.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.

Madam Speaker, the pending measure, the Marine Mammal Rescue Assistance Amendments of 2009, was introduced by our esteemed colleague from Alaska, Representative Don Young. The bill would extend through fiscal year 2013 the authorization of appropriations for the John H. Prescott Marine Mammal Rescue Assistance Grant Fund and the Marine Mammal Unusual Mortality Event Fund.

H.R. 844 would direct the relevant Secretary to collect and update procedures for rescuing and rehabilitating marine mammals entangled in fishing gear, rope, line, or entangled in any way other. The bill also authorizes the Secretary to enter into agreements for marine mammal stranding events requiring emergency assistance.

The 110th Congress passed a similar bill by voice vote, but the legislation did not pass the other body. We support this bill and commend Representative Young for his leadership on this issue.

I ask Members on both sides to support passage of this legislation.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Madam Speaker, on Monday February 23, 2009 I did not return to Washington in time and missed three votes.

Had I been present I would have voted ``yes'' on H.R. 911--Stop Child Abuse in Residential Programs for Teens Act of 2009 (rollcall 72), ``yes'' on H.R. 44--Guam World War II Loyalty Recognition Act (rollcall 73), and ``yes'' on H.R. 601--Box Elder Utah Land Conveyance Act (rollcall 74).

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Mike Sheehy, the National Security Adviser for the Speaker. Mike Sheehy has given three decades of service to his country, much of it here in the House of Representatives.

When the Speaker first appointed me to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence 6 years ago, Mike was one of the first people I turned to. His deep experience on intelligence matters, as well as his knowledge of the House and its Members, have served the Speaker and all of us well over the years.

Especially after the Speaker asked me to chair the Select Intelligence Oversight Panel, I have frequently sought his advice on a wide range of issues, and I've found him to be always thoughtful and well-informed, and I might add, always calm. He is a consummate professional.

As he leaves his position here on Capitol Hill, I and others want to recognize him, thank him and wish him well.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (H.R. 1). We are told that America is in the midst of the worst economic storm since the Great Depression. Millions of people are hurting across the United States and in my home state of New Jersey, New Jersey's unemployment rate has risen to 7.1 percent from 4.2 percent just a year ago. Our nation's economy is in recession, and we must respond with every tool in our toolbox to put Americans back to work and rebuild our struggling economy. Economists have predicted that the unemployment rate may exceed 12 percent this year.

What to do? We could let the free market continue to spiral downward or we could pass a bill with a smaller price tag, ignoring the lessons learned from Congress's previous attempt at stimulating the economy through rebate sent out in spring of 2008, last year's so-called check in the mail. The time has come for a bold, national response. Economists, business leaders, financial experts, almost everyone says 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 has the potential to create 3.5 million much needed new jobs in the short term.

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, is designed to help the United States climb out of the current recession through targeted, job- creating spending, responsible investments in the nation's social safety net to help Americans weather the difficult months ahead, and tax cuts for 95 percent of Americans. Importantly, this bill includes critical investments in research and development, which lay the ground work for innovation and sustainable, long-term economic growth. The political process to this point has been torturous. However, the President, the Speaker, and the Committee chairs have produced promptly what the President has called for and what the country needs. Agreed, not all parts of the bill are going to be equally stimulative. But we want a broad approach; we want our stimulative eggs in various baskets, This Act is huge and hugely important.

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act would help to put our economy on the right track by quickly creating up to 3.5 million new jobs for Americans suffering during this depression. Some of these jobs, more than 1.2 million, would be created in the construction industry through a strong investment in improving our nation's transportation and water infrastructure. The Act will inject $29 billion to repair our nation's crumbling roads and bridges, including funding for ready-to-go road and bridge modernization projects in my home state of New Jersey. This investment would create 835,000 jobs in the next two years. Additionally, this bill would invest $16.4 billion in public transportation, helping transit agencies such as NJ Transit that are struggling to meet increased demand and $18 billion for clean water, environmental restoration, and flood control projects creating another 375,000 jobs.

H.R. 1 would invest in additional projects that my Central New Jersey constituents refer to as ``green stimulus.'' These investments would create good American jobs that cannot be outsourced, while reducing our reliance on fossil fuels and protecting our environment. These jobs will be the kind of jobs that will be in demand for many years, once the economy gets going again and as we make the transition to a sustainable energy system; as we must and as we surely will. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act would provide $30 billion to transform the nation's energy transmission, distribution, and production system so they can handle decentralized renewable energy sources. This legislation includes more than $23.2 billion in incentives to promote renewable energy, help low and middle income Americans weatherize their homes, and decrease energy consumption by the federal government. It will also provide $20 billion in tax incentives such as the renewable energy production tax credit, the advanced energy manufacturing tax credit, and the consumer energy- efficiency tax credits.

Responding to the nation's rising unemployment rate, this bill would devote $4 billion to job training programs and would extend unemployment benefits through December 31, 2009, increasing benefits by $25 per week for individuals looking for work.

The current economic downturn has forced painful cuts in services. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan would make sound investments in public education. This legislation would provide $13 billion to help disadvantaged students reach high academic standards and $12 billion for special education. While the bill includes a $54 billion state stabilization fund to prevent teacher layoffs and cutbacks in education, I regret that it no longer contains the $20 billion provided in the House version to help states rebuild our nation's crumbling schools. Still, there is much here to cheer for our local school boards and the taxpayers who support the schools through our property taxes. These school bonds can be used for construction.

Additionally, to ensure that families can send their children to college, this bill would increase the maximum Pell Grant by $500, to $5,350 and would help 4 million more students attend college with a new $2,500 college tuition tax credit for families.

What pleases me most is the commitment in this legislation to science. I am deeply gratified that this bill reflects a profound commitment to renewing our nation's innovation infrastructure. Research not merely luxury to be undertaken only in times of economic prosperity. The truth is that scientific research is perhaps the most powerful economic engine, creating jobs in the short-term and building our economy for the long-term.

All together, the recovery package includes nearly $23 billion to support scientific research and facilities, including $3 billion for the National Science Foundation, $2 billion for the Department of Energy's Office of Science, and $10 billion for the National Institutes of Health. There is no doubt that these funds will create jobs. Lab technicians will be hired to carry out projects that previously went unfunded. Electricians will be put to work wiring new laboratory work. And construction workers will begin refurbishing our neglected laboratories and building the facilities that will transform science for the twenty-first century.

Of course, the ideal project is one that keeps on giving, and that is exactly what scientific research does. The innovation and discoveries that come from research form the roots from which our economy grows and prospers. For too long, we have underinvested in science, and we will never know the resulting costs to our prosperity. But we know that science will be the foundation of our nation's future economic vitality. In his inaugural address, President Obama said, ``We will restore science to its rightful place.'' That place is at the very heart of our nation's progress. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act acknowledges this fact and provides an important first step toward the sustained investment that will prevent the need for future recovery packages.

As American workers lose their jobs, more and more face losing their health insurance coverage as well. Job losses have caused Medicaid and SCHIP rolls rise by 1.0 million, further straining state budgets already stretched thin due to lower tax revenues. This bill would increase temporarily the federal government's contribution to Medicaid, giving New Jersey an additional $2 billion. For workers able to continue their health coverage through COBRA, the bill would subsidize COBRA premiums by 65 percent for nine months. This two-prong approach will provide health care for millions of newly unemployed workers and their families.

In addition to helping families maintain their health insurance coverage, this bill seeks to improve health care quality and its value. This bill would promote Health Information Technology systems, which could help reduce medical errors while lowering administrative costs by accelerating their adoption and usage among doctors and hospitals. This bill provides additional funding for prevention, which improves health at a good value by treating problems at the earliest stage before they become costly health care crises. Finally, this bill includes $1.1 billion for medical research to improve the value of health care spending by identifying the most effective treatments for given health conditions,

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act would address the struggling economy by putting money back in the pockets of American families, workers, students and businesses through $276.5 billion worth of tax cuts. Ninety-five percent of working Americans would receive a tax cut through a refundable tax credit of up to $400 per worker that will be quickly distributed by reducing tax withholding from workers' paychecks. It would prevent 26 million Americans from getting hit by the Alternative Minimum Tax and lower the taxes of more than 16 million families by increasing the child tax credit and expanding the earned income tax credit.

This bill includes a number of provisions that would help businesses create new jobs in this difficult economy. It would allow businesses to improve cash flow by allowing businesses to write off 90 percent of losses incurred in 2008 and 2009 against taxes assessed over the previous five years. In addition, it would help businesses expand by extending the increased bonus depreciation for businesses making investments in new plants and equipment in 2009. Finally, this legislation would double the amount of money businesses can deduct on their taxes for capital investments and new equipment.

Through this comprehensive approach, we can begin to put the American economy back on the right track. We must approve the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, and I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, what pleases me most about the economic recovery bill that we just passed is the commitment in this legislation to science. I'm deeply gratified that the bill reflects a profound commitment to renewing our Nation's innovation infrastructure. Research is not merely a luxury to be undertaken only in times of prosperity. The truth is that scientific research is perhaps the most powerful economic engine, creating jobs in the short-term and building our economy for the long-term.

Altogether, the recovery package includes nearly $23 billion to support scientific research and facilities, the National Science Foundation, the Department of Energy's Office of Science, the National Institutes of Health. There is no doubt that these funds will create jobs. Lab technicians will be hired to carry out projects previously that went unfunded. Electricians will be put to work wiring new laboratory experiments, and construction workers will begin refurbishing our neglected laboratories and building the facilities that will transform science for the 21st century.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today as a co-sponsor and strong supporter of H. Con. Res. 35, a resolution to recognize the 100th anniversary of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and acknowledge the numerous contributions of the NAACP in helping create a more just and equitable society.

The NAACP is the oldest and largest civil rights organization in the United States. For the past 100 years, the association has fought actively and fervently for equal justice for all Americans under the idea that all men and women are created equal.

In February 1909, a handful of courageous and fearless citizens-- including Ida Wells Barnett, Mary White Ovington, Oswald Garrison Villiard, William English Walling, Henry Moscowitz and W.E.B. Du Bois-- formed the National Negro Committee with the intent of addressing the social, economic and political rights of African-Americans. This organization would later become the NAACP, and for the next century would dedicate itself to eliminating racial hatred and ending racial discrimination.

The NAACP has accomplished and will continue to accomplish great things for our nation. In 1954, the NAACP achieved one of its greatest victories in the Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka case when the Supreme Court overturned segregation in the nation's public schools. This decision rendered ``separate but unequal'' unconstitutional. More importantly it helped to break down the barriers that divided the nation.

Through nonviolent methods such as protests, marches and media outreach the NAACP was instrumental in moving President Truman's Executive Order banning discrimination in the armed forces. The NAACP also played an active role in the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

The NAACP continues to fight for the rights of Americans confined to the corners of our society. The NAACP maintains active branches nationwide, including one in the 12th District of New Jersey, located in Trenton. I am grateful to the NAACP members who live in my Congressional District including Edith Savage-Jennings, a pioneer of the civil rights movement. The work they do to continue to advance the struggle for civil rights in our country is an inspiration to us all.

The NAACP gracefully and tirelessly has fought for the political, social, economic, and educational rights of all Americans, and has sought to ensure that our nation recognized the inalienable rights of all citizens, regardless of race, class, or ethnicity. They have paved the way for some of our most celebrated leaders like my good friend John Lewis and President Barack Obama to accomplish what they have. Moving forward the NAACP will shift its focus to ensure the attainment of human rights for all; a noble, honorable and needed effort. The enormity of the NAACP's contributions these past 100 years is immeasurable, and I am certain that the next 100 years will produce more accomplishments and milestones for this historic and vital organization. I am proud to join with my colleagues in supporting this resolution.