Floor Statements

I thank the gentlelady from the Virgin Islands for her leadership, and I'm delighted to join her in what I think is an enormously important discussion. Oftentimes, Congresswoman, we don't get a chance to have this kind of discussion when we are debating bills on the floor of the House. So let me, first of all, add again to your statistics. The more we can recite for people what the problem is, the better off we are.

So you will see us standing over the next couple of days and weeks, and isn't it interesting as we approach Thanksgiving and then the Christmas holiday for many of us, and holidays in different names, Chanukah for many, and many other kinds of celebratory holidays that call upon fellowship and food to realize how many are impoverished in this Nation. So I'm delighted to stand with the Congressional Black Caucus, our friend, Congresswoman Barbara Lee, our chairperson, Chairman Cleaver, and yourself to firmly stand committed to combating poverty, eliminating hunger, and providing health insurance for all citizens.

Let me just say in light of that, the Supreme Court indicated that they will take up the health care bill. But I'm going to join some pundits and take a risk and say it's going to be upheld. I know there is a lot of rubbing of the hands and excitement because they see in the eyesight the death knell for the Affordable Care Act.

But the good news is that one of the judges that upheld the Affordable Care Act was a conservative judge who analyzed our right to require individuals to have insurance for the greater good--that's not the legal interpretation. And I believe there is sufficient numbers on the court that will look beyond politics and realize that the heavy burden of health care is a heavy burden on the economy. And if you are a conservative, you will look more closely at individual responsibility. That's what the Affordable Care Act is, along with preventive care and protecting children. So I'm going to be an optimist, and I'm looking forward to the Supreme Court's decision.

But our numbers show one of every six Americans is living in poverty, a total of 46.2 million people. This is the highest number in 17 years in a country with so many resources. And you've heard me say this before, our country is not broke. It can belt tighten. It can move dollars around. I'm glad that the Congressional Black Caucus that is talking about create, protect, and rebuild has the answers.

Let me just say that children represent a disproportionate amount of the United States' poor population. I chair the Congressional Children's Caucus. In 2008, there were 15.45 million impoverished children in the Nation, 20.7 percent of America's youth. The Kaiser Family Foundation estimates that there are currently 5.6 million Texans living in poverty; 2.2 million of them are children; and 17.4 percent of households in the State struggle with food insecurity.

In my district alone, the 18th Congressional District, a very historic district, there are 190,000 people living below the poverty line, the highest number of people living in poverty in 17 years; and then we are thinking about cutting vital social services such as the supplemental excess, SNAP program, that fed 3.9 million residents of Texas in April 2011; the WIC program; and the Census Bureau also reported that there are 49.9 million people in the country without health insurance. We've already discussed that. And Texas happens to be the State with the highest number count.

All of that, and you're literally taking the front door, if there is one, opening the door and kicking people to the street.

I just want to deviate for a moment as I go over some very important aspects that I think, joining with the Congressional Black Caucus, that if they would only listen, if you would only listen, I believe would move us on a pathway of creating jobs, just as we spoke about in the jobs tour that we participated in this summer.

But I want to be very clear, the Second Mile in Pennsylvania was labeled as an organization that dealt with at-risk children. Those are poor children. Some might ask: Where is she going here? They are the most vulnerable. They are the most needy. And because those children were vulnerable, because those parents were vulnerable, because they were looking for relief, looking for a child to have some sort of, if you will, activity and comfort, maybe even food--I'm sure those programs and trips out of town might have also had resources that children do not have--when a child is vulnerable, they become a target for the most heinous of acts.

If I might deviate and indicate that I intend to introduce legislation on two

counts, one to suspend any Federal funding to any entity, academic, nonprofit, State and local government, prosecutors' office that has covered up and not prosecuted or not reported the sexual abuse of a child, excluding if it is an academic institution, funding for scholarships and Pell Grants; and to also indicate funding, ramping up funding, for the Department of Justice for anyone who carries a child over State lines for the intent of sexually abusing a child.

What an untoward national image and international image we have just gotten. I don't worry about football. I'm not interested in the State. I'm not interested in the particular academic institution. I'm not pointing fingers, and I don't know the coach's name. I just know that in the course of the activity of this alleged perpetrator, there may be many more vulnerable, poor children which we're talking about tonight, the most impoverished; and that one person, among others, saw a physical sexual act and did nothing about it.

And so poverty is not only a family not having enough to eat, maybe not having clothing, maybe not having a place to live, but it also means it puts a child in the most horrible, horrific of conditions; almost to the extent, even though you would say that the predator is sick, but it puts that vulnerable child--because that parent may be vulnerable, that parent may not be home. They may be a loving parent. They may be struggling with three jobs, and they need a place for their child. The child may need the comfort and nurturing of an adult, and that child then becomes a victim. So don't think that we're standing here and arguing against poverty just to be arguing. It is a systemic atmosphere and condition that will allow you to be victimized.

Let me go to the supercommittee as I talk about what the CBC, Congressional Black Caucus, is looking at. I will follow the quotes of some I have heard who testified before the committee. I had the privilege of sitting in on one meeting, not very long, and I think they are dedicated Members of Congress. But we must know that this is not in the regular order. This was out of the order, and it came about through the forced need to lift the debt ceiling. In essence, we were taken hostage. So, frankly, I'm going to suggest that the supercommittee yield. They can go through the 23rd, but, in essence, accept the inevitable that there will be no agreement and that this Congress come back in 2012, because we have until 2013 for the sequestration, come back in 2012 and do our business and respond to the suggestions of the Congressional Black Caucus and legislation that many of us have introduced to create jobs, to balance the revenue, and do our work.

And so I want to suggest that there are many programs. The Neighborhood Stabilization Program has been touted all over America. What it does is it brings dollars into depressed areas where these vulnerable children live, and it provides stabilization dollars, making good on 100,000 properties with $7 billion, and it allows these properties to be restored for families. In the course of doing that, you create jobs and you don't have these big signs that say, ``Foreclosure.''

And then, of course, the National Housing Trust, if Congress can provide at least a billion dollars to fund the National Housing Trust, which is a mechanism for affordable housing. When a child has a room, a light, a desk, and a bed and that family feels comfortable, they are less vulnerable to sexual predators, to not having resources, to being thrown to the wolves, if you will. And it will create 15,000 jobs.

Unemployment insurance that many of us have worked on and joined Congresswoman Lee and Congressman Scott to extend to the 99ers and to make sure that they can put bread on their table, pay their light bill and get gas to go look for a job, it will save 500,000 jobs--500,000 jobs.

Why is no one listening? It's a simple process. And has anyone heard of a country moving forward without investment in its people? And that's what we are arguing. Very quickly, we have supported this for so long. No one will listen. Everybody that is outsourcing is taxed, and that will generate resources that will allow us to invest back into the Treasury. Then we can invest in the National Housing Trust. We can invest in the Neighborhood Stabilization Program. We can invest in the 99ers, and we can provide money to those who are in need.

Give a tax holiday for the first $20,000 on payroll tax, which will provide the opportunity for small businesses and put income in, if you will, the pockets of many who are in need, who week to week make ends meet and are very much in need of that. As well, to help those who have been chronically unemployed, to not discriminate against them but to give a payroll tax holiday in order to hire the chronically unemployed; so when they see ``Help wanted,'' they will be excited about hiring someone because they have that benefit.

By the way, can we make an announcement here? We are not broke. Companies have trillions of dollars in their bank accounts, and so do the banks, but they keep saying to us they're afraid to invest and let the money go because it's not a stable economy. How much louder do I have to say it's a chicken and egg? Hire people. That's a stable economy. They invest back into the economy, they begin to buy things, and then you begin to manufacture. It's a chicken and egg. It's the cart and the horse.

Reestablish manufacturing. If manufacturing makes things, we've got to buy things. How do you buy things? You have money to buy it. And I've been supporting this for a very long time. I'm part of the Manufacturing Caucus.

In addition, it's very important that we do as the WPA did during the time of the horrible aftermath of the Depression, and the Workforce Investment Act would be assisting 8 million people and give all of these people a chance to fix the infrastructure all across America. Cars will stop going into potholes, bridges will stop having cracks in them, and we will be able to put people to work.

TANF, if it were fully funded and if it had an emergency contingency fund that many of us have been speaking about, this would make available--create temporary jobs for adults and summer jobs, but, more importantly, it would create 240,000 jobs.

And the same thing with the infrastructure. Again, how many people have traveled with a limited amount of gas but traveled over bridges and freeways and found them in disrepair? This is a simple process.

And I would argue vigorously that it is disappointing that we have not been listened to and members of the Congressional Black Caucus and the Democratic Caucus, and even today the supercommittee is speaking about not fulfilling the promise of putting the revenue on the table necessary to counter the cuts. I, frankly, don't want sequestration. The vulnerable will be hit the hardest with all of the cuts that are pointed toward Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, food stamps, and others that they allege that are protected, but I would argue that aspects of it are not. I made a public commitment to my veterans last Friday that I would not allow for my vote and my support one iota of veterans' benefits to be cut.

I'm so tired of people talking about that we're not willing to look at Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security. No, I am not willing to look at it as it has been proposed by my Republican friends. They know full well how they can cut this. They can follow the Affordable Care Act and close the doughnut hole on Medicare part D, the most expensive, heinous, insulting affront to spending money in the United States of America that was voted on in the Republican majority, Medicare part D that all seniors hate.

Our Affordable Care Act, if allowed to be implemented, would close the doughnut hole--that's one way of doing it--and seniors would jump for joy. In addition, if you start talking about provider benefits, I'm going to publicly say I oppose it. Why? Because I cannot trust the knife. What does the knife do? It goes in and slashes hospitals and home care and others possibly. And when you slash it, you do jeopardize seniors who are in hospitals.

We have to find a way to cut the waste, fraud and abuse; and we've determined that waste, fraud and abuse can save us billions of dollars. So out of my lips, I will not support cutting Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security, or discretionary funding. I will support the creation of 8 million jobs. I will support investing in America's people. I will support getting rid of at-risk children, meaning not getting rid of them but their condition, so that we don't have to find at-risk children. What a disgrace that we take that in such a way that we categorize. These are at-risk children, these are poor children, and we just accept it. They're numbers. Well, at-risk children are impoverished, malnourished, don't have good health care, and are victims. And they can be victims of the most heinous sexual predator story, act, of our recent times. Even we've heard of the faith institution that has been under such siege that has made changes--the Catholic Church spoke out today--because it is a disease, it is an epidemic, and it comes out of poverty and vulnerability. And if we don't cut out the vulnerability of our children and families--and in this great country, even the Bible says the poor will always be with us, but they also say be busy until He comes. And that means we should be busy until the Lord comes, for those of us who believe, should be busy until He comes, making the corrections that we have to make.

So I want to thank the gentlelady for allowing me to join her and to express, as the chairwoman of the Congressional Children's Caucus, the work that should be done, the work that we've done on the issues of bullying and obesity and on nutrition. And areas like that are added to this work that has been done by the Congressional Black Caucus.

And I just simply say: Is anybody listening? Because we have the solution. And if they would only listen, 8 million jobs, children who are protected, and families who can get back on their feet and begin to invest back in this country.

With that, I thank the gentlelady for yielding.

Madam Speaker, I stand today with my colleagues from the Congressional Black Caucus to discuss the recent on poverty and healthcare. Together, we stand, firmly committed to combating poverty, eliminating hunger, and providing health insurance for all our citizens.

I am, as we all are, deeply troubled by the report issued by the U.S. Census Bureau. 1 of every 6 Americans are living in poverty, totaling 46.2 million people, this highest number in 17 years. In a country with so many resources, there is no excuse for this staggering level of poverty.

Children represent a disproportionate amount of the United States poor population. In 2008, there were 15.45 million impoverished children in the nation, 20.7% of America's youth. The Kaiser Family Foundation estimates that there are currently 5.6 million Texans living in poverty, 2.2 million of them children, and that 17.4% of households in the state struggle with food insecurity.

In my district, the Texas 18th, more than 190,000 people live below the poverty line. We must not, we cannot, at a time when the Census Bureau places the number of American living in poverty at the highest rate in over 17 years, cut vital social services. Not in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis and persistent unemployment, when so many rely on federal benefits to survive, like the Supplemental Nutrition Access Program (SNAP) that fed 3.9 million residents of Texas in April 2011, or the Women, Infant, and Children (WIC) Program that provides nutritious food to more than 990,000 mothers and children in my home state.

The Census Bureau also reported there are 49.9 million people in this country without health insurance. This is an absolute injustice that must be addressed. We can no longer ignore the fact that nearly 50 million Americans, many of them children, have no health insurance.

Texas has the largest uninsured population in the country; 24.6% of Texans do not have health care coverage. This includes 1.3 million children in the state of Texas alone who do not have health insurance, or access to the healthcare they need.

It is unconscionable that, despite egregiously high poverty rates, Republicans seek to reduce spending by cutting social programs that provide food and healthcare instead of raising taxes on the wealthiest in the nation, or closing corporate tax loopholes.

Perhaps my friends on the other side of the aisle are content to conclude that life simply is not fair, equality is not accessible to everyone, and the less advantaged among us are condemned to remain as they are, but I do not accept that. That kind of complacency is not fitting for America.

I firmly believe that all Americans can come together to protect the most vulnerable citizens in the nation, to provide relief for the poor and the hungry, because 46 million of our fellow countrymen living in poverty, 15 million of them children, is simply unacceptable.

I urge my colleagues in Congress, and people across the nation, to look at what unites us rather than what divides us. We are linked by our compassion, and bound by the fundamental edict of the American dream that says we will strive to provide our children with a better life than we had. We can, and we must reach a compromise that will not cut valuable services from those who need government the most.

Will the gentlelady yield?

If I might, as I close, I did mention education. Many of us know that we are facing huge cuts in education. Again, who does it hit? The vulnerable children in public schools. And I just have to, before I leave the microphone, mention the North Forest Independent School District, the only majority minority school district left in the State of Texas, targeted for closing, not because it's not welcomed by parents, teachers, and others, but because the State simply wants to be on a budget-cutting trip, if you will. And I leave the podium by saying to my Governor, Governor Perry, as I've talked about impoverished children, don't close, and don't condemn our children who are trying to learn in North Forest Independent School District. And to my colleagues: Education creates jobs--and I mentioned the teachers-- but also, it invests in our children.

I thank the gentlelady for yielding to me.

Mr. Chair, I rise today to support H.R. 2838, ``Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Act of 2011.'' This legislation authorizes funding for the Coast Guard through fiscal year 2014, and authorizes service strength of 47,000 active duty personnel.

In 1787, Alexander Hamilton, in Federalist Paper Number 12 laid the foundation for the modern Coast Guard when he noted that ``[a] few armed vessels, judiciously stationed at the entrances of our ports, might at a small expense, be made useful sentinels of our laws.''

As a senior Member on the Committee on Homeland Security, and the Border and Maritime Security Subcommittee, I understand the importance of protecting our maritime borders. In our post-9/11 climate, homeland security continues to be a top priority for our nation.

I believe protecting our country by air, land, and sea to be critical to our national security interests. The security mission of the Coast Guard is beneficial to our maritime interests, and consequently, our national security.

In the aftermath of September 11, 2001, the role of many agencies, including the Coast Guard, began to focus on Homeland Security. The Homeland Security Act of 2002 allocated a number of security missions to the Coast Guard, the first being the protection of ports, waterways and coastal security. There are more than 350 major ports in the United States, including 23 in Texas, where I represent the 18th Congressional District. The Port of Houston is one of the busiest in the nation. More than 220 million tons of cargo moved through the Port of Houston in 2010, and the port ranked first in foreign waterborne tonnage for the 15th consecutive year. The port links Houston with over 1,000 ports in 203 countries, and provides 785,000 jobs throughout the state of Texas. Maritime ports are centers of trade, commerce, and travel along our nation's coastline, protected by the Coast Guard.

As a Representative from Texas, a border state, I am extremely concerned with curtailing

the flow of illegal drugs into the United States. The Coast Guard is the lead federal agency for maritime drug interdiction. Houston is classified by the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) as a High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area, and in a 2009 report, the ONDCP expressed concern that ``the sheer volume of maritime traffic and foreign cargo that passes through the port offers another avenue for drug smuggling.'' The Coast Guard coordinates closely with other federal, state, and local agencies and countries within the region to disrupt and deter the flow of illegal drugs into Houston and other ports, decreasing the supply of illicit substances being transported all over the country.

The Coast Guard protects the interests of American citizens and American commerce abroad. Last year, 73.2 million tons of exports left the Port of Houston to be sold to countries around the world. These exports represented $70.8 billion dollars, and countless American jobs. The international counter-piracy efforts of the Coast Guard focus on preventing attacks of piracy that threaten American commercial vessels and cargo. The Coast Guard also performs vital counter-terrorism measures in ports abroad to ensure the safety of Americans across the globe.

In Houston, the Coast Guard routinely conducts integrated operations with the city, county, state and Federal Law Enforcement partners. The joint agency Houston Area Maritime Operations Center is a prime example of the type of coordination directed in the Maritime Operations Coordination Plan recently signed by the U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

The Port of Houston is one of the world's busiest ports and the Coast Guard bears the ultimate responsibility for its smooth operation. In terms of maritime traffic and cargo, the Port of Houston ranks first in the United States for number of ship arrivals and second in total cargo tonnage. Houston handles over 50 percent of all containerized cargo arriving at Gulf of Mexico ports.

Additionally, more than 50 percent of the gasoline used in the United States is refined in this area. With more than 100 petrochemical waterfront facilities, Houston is the second largest such complex in the world. Major corporations such as ExxonMobil, Shell, Saudi ARAMCO, Stolt Nielson, Odfjell USA Inc., Sea River and Kirby Marine have national or international headquarters in Houston.

These operations typically involve the Harris County Sheriffs Office and local city Police Department marine divisions as well as CBP, ICE, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives and other Federal partners. Efforts are underway with The Coast Guards processes with neighboring sectors to align and streamline their operations across all jurisdictional boundaries. They need funding to continue to serve our country.

The Coast Guard relies on their port partners to act as both their eyes and ears on the water. With an average of 350 daily tow movements in the Houston Ship Channel and more than 100 waterfront facilities with a vigilant security presence, marine industry stakeholders are well positioned to recognize when things are out of the ordinary and serve as a valuable resource by diligently reporting breaches of security and suspicious activity. We also receive reports on fraudulent use of the Transportation Worker Identification Card, and work closely with our local enforcement and legal agencies such as the Harris County District Attorney to ensure these cases are prosecuted.

In recognition of the significance of Houston's shipping activity, the State of Texas formally established the Houston Ship Channel Security District (HSCSD) in 2010. The HSCSD represents a unique public-private partnership formed to improve security and safety for facilities, employees and communities surrounding the Houston Ship Channel. The Coast Guard played an instrumental role in the formation of the HSCSD, and continues to work closely with the HSCSD to ensure alignment of priorities and unity of effort. As Sector Commander, I am a member of the HSCSD Advisory Council and Sector Port Security specialists attend HSCSD board meetings. The district provides oversight of comprehensive and cost-effective security solutions, leveraging more than $30 million in Federal Port Security grants along with $4 million in annual member assessments to install technology and security infrastructure and provide funds for specific security projects, maintenance and operational services.

The Port of Houston accommodates a large number of tankers carrying crude oil, refined products and chemical cargoes. With approximately 9,600 deep draft ship arrivals each year, the Coast Guard maintains a very extensive Port State Control program in the Houston-Galveston area. The Port State Control program ensures the safe carriage of hazardous materials in bulk. Because over 90 percent of cargo bound for the United States is carried by foreign-flagged ships, this national program prevents operation of substandard foreign ships in U.S. waters.

The Sector also makes excellent use of its robust Vessel Traffic Service (VTS). The VTS's primary role is facilitating safe vessel transits in the waterways and ports along the Houston Ship Channel. The VTS cameras, Automatic Identification System (AIS) feeds, remote radar observation capability, and radio communications also provide an additional layer of security. In addition to the VTS resources in the Houston Ship Channel, Sector Houston-Galveston has access to feeds from three AIS receivers mounted on offshore oil platforms, which provide heightened awareness of activities in the maritime domain.

With a homeland security mission of this magnitude, it is essential that the Coast Guard be fully funded. This bill will authorize $8.49 billion in 2012, $8.6 billion in 2013, and $8.7 billion in 2014. It is certainly the duty of this Congress and the Administration to ensure the brave men and women who serve in the Coast Guard have the resources necessary to perform the wide range of duties assigned to them.

This measure contains a private-sector mandate as defined in Unfunded Mandate Reform Act (UMRA). The bill would require operators to locate a standby vessel within 3 nautical miles of offshore oil and gas facilities when certain activities are being performed and within 12 nautical miles of facilities at all other times. The cost of that mandate would depend on several factors. The bill would allow operators to share one standby vessel among multiple facilities and to use standby vessels for other purposes. For operators that can use those measures, the cost of the mandate would tend to be lower. At the same time, the bill would authorize the Coast Guard to require standby vessels to be located closer than 3 or 12 nautical miles to offshore facilities if necessary to address delays caused by weather or other conditions. Reducing the minimum distance from facilities would increase the number of vessels necessary for compliance and increase the cost of the mandate for some operators. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that the aggregate cost of the mandate would probably exceed the annual threshold established in UMRA for private-sector mandates ($142 million in 2011, adjusted annually for inflation).

However, I do have some reservations about some of the provisions in this legislation. At the request of President Obama's Administration, Congress has appropriated funding to reactivate the USGC Polar Star, a heavy icebreaking vessel. The ship is to be reactivated by December 2012 for 7 to 10 years of service. The Polar Star is deployed to assist researchers throughout the Polar Regions, and is essential to United States icebreaking capabilities. Ice breaking vessels create pathways through which supply ships can travel, facilitating important research. In its current form, the bill decommissions the Polar Star within 3 years, creating a gap in the nation's icebreaking abilities.

As a senior Member on the Homeland Security Committee, I have a deep commitment to creating a stronger and more secure America. I have worked with my colleagues, on both sides of the aisle, to pass legislation that ensures that our nation is receiving the security that our citizens deserve. As the potential threats and vulnerabilities along our coast line may always exist, we rely upon Coast Guard and their active involvement with hundreds of partners who are directly involved with or impacted by the maritime industry in the Houston- Galveston area of responsibility. This sector is committed to deterring incidents before they happen and is well-prepared to respond to them should they occur. The Coast Guard is vital to the protection of our national security.

Both sides of the aisle have a strong respect for the Coast Guard as well as for the men and women who work on manned stations off of our shores. I understand that Representative Mica has agreed to honor the purpose of an amendment offered by Representative Olson that would have required the Commandant of the Coast Guard, in consultation with appropriate representatives of industry, to conduct a feasibility study to determine the capability, cost, and benefits of requiring the owner or operator of a manned facility, installation, unit, or vessel to locate a standby vessel nearby. I would have supported this amendment because although a properly designed and equipped standby vessel in the immediate vicinity of manned outer continental shelf facilities may, in some cases, improve safety on the outer continental shelf.

In the event of a major casualty to an offshore installation, the immediate presence of a properly designed and equipped standby vessel, manned by a specially trained crew, might in some cases increase the chances of survival of the installation's crew members. We must not, however, forget the fact that historically the main cause of rig and platform abandonment has been due to severe weather. Unless these standby vessels are designed to

withstand those severe conditions, requiring them to remain on scene could place the vessels and their crews in jeopardy. In addition, it is severely risky to board a standby vessel in severe weather conditions. For these reasons I would support a feasibility study to determine the effectiveness of using standby vessels for manned stations.

In addition, I support the amendment offered by Representative Thompson that would add a new section to the end of Title II in the bill to open admissions to the U.S. Coast Guard Academy to eligible candidates nominated by Congress.

Specifically, the amendment would require the U.S. Coast Guard to ensure that, beginning in academic year 2014, half of the incoming class is composed of eligible candidates nominated by the Vice President or, if there is no Vice President, by the President pro tempore of the Senate; Senators; Representatives; and Delegates to the House of Representatives. This will help to ensure that the Coast Guard has an even more diverse pool of candidate from across the United States.

The Coast Guard has a proud legacy and their role in our national strategy is vital to keep our homeland secure. The safety and security of our nations and its citizens must be our highest priority, despite difficult economic circumstances. We need to make sure the Coast Guard is fully funded, and have the resources they need.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of S. 894, the Veterans' Cost-of-Living Adjustment Act of 2011. This

legislation increases the rate of disability compensation for veterans and their dependents. It also increases disability, old age, and survivor benefits provided under Title II of the Social Security Act. This bill will benefit many; there were more than 3.2 million veterans receiving total disability compensation in 2010.

The Veterans' Cost-of-Living Adjustment Act provides a much needed cost of living adjustment for the courageous men and women who served in the Armed Forces. It is in a spirit of deep gratitude and appreciation that I fight to provide for our troops fighting abroad, and our veterans who have returned from deployment. It is the responsibility of Congress and the Administration to fulfill our moral obligation to those who have fought for freedom and democracy.

In the State of Texas, we have nearly 1.7 million veterans, and the 18th District is home to 32,000 of them. Of the 200,000 veterans of military service who live and work in Houston; more than 13,000 are veterans from Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan, and Operation Iraqi Freedom. Additionally, there are almost 34,000 soldiers from Texas currently deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan. I am supporting this legislation to ensure that our men and women in uniform are taken care of when they return from combat.

Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom have presented unanticipated challenges, greater threats, and higher stakes than ever before. The men and women who have served in these operations during the course of the past decade were tasked with the enormous responsibility of protecting America from a new enemy, one that does not identify itself with uniforms, or declare war, or invade by driving tanks over a border. The Veterans' Cost-of-Living Adjustment Act ensures that disabled veterans are properly compensated for their sacrifices.

Throughout my tenure in Congress, I have remained committed to meeting both the needs of veterans of previous wars, and to those who are now serving. Veterans have kept their promise to serve our Nation; they have willingly risked their lives to protect the country we all love. We must now ensure that we keep our promises to our veterans.

We promise to leave no soldier or veteran behind. Politics and partisanship should never be a factor in our support for American veterans or troops. On the battlefield, the military pledges to leave no soldier behind. As a Nation, let it be our pledge that when they return home, we leave no veteran behind. I am pleased at the bipartisan nature with which my colleagues have approached this legislation. We must resolve together that we will provide returning veterans with the welcome, services, care, and compassion that they deserve. Let us all remember that one of the things that makes our Nation truly great are the young men and women willing to fight to defend it, to defend us, and to defend our way of life.

I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting S. 894, the Veterans' Cost-of-Living Adjustment Act of 2011.

Mr Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1070, ``Small Company Capital Formation Act of 2011'' which would require the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to create a new and larger exemption, effectively raising the limit from $5 million to $50 million for its Regulation A security offerings and permitting a more stream- lined approach for smaller issuers. Presently, the limit for Regulation A security offerings is $5 million; however, this avenue is rarely pursed due to the small size of issuances permitted. The bill would permit SEC to impose conditions on issuance under the rule, and would require periodic review of the limit.

Regulation A was enacted during the Great Depression to stimulate the economy by improving small businesses' access to equity capital. While the initial offering threshold of $100,000 has been increased over the years to the current $5 million set by the Commission in 1992, it has not been increased to reflect the rising costs associated with bringing

a small company public over the last two decades.

In this day and age, a small to medium company simply cannot afford to go public at a cost of $5 million. For the last 19 years we have had substantially fewer companies that have chosen to go public. The $5 million threshold has resulted in a chilling effect. In the last year, only 3 companies have utilized this process. Going public allows a growing company to have access to capital, equity, and additional financial resources. They need to raise capital in order to grow their business. Currently, there are 5,100 public traded companies. In 1997, there were 8,873 publicly traded companies. This legislation is intended to reverse a downward trend.

Due to the low offering threshold, and without a corresponding state ``Blue Sky'' exemption for Regulation A offerings, Regulation A has not provided a viable capital-raising vehicle for smaller companies in recent years. Amplified by increased difficulties for smaller companies resulting from the recent financial crisis, these shortcomings of Regulation A have invited renewed focus on this regulation.

The legislation before us today is designed to encourage small companies to attract additional capital which will allow them to invest and hire additional employees. As part of a broader effort to tie the financial regulatory environment to U.S. job creation and economic competitiveness.

Small and medium companies would be able to offer securities up to $50 million publicly without the full cost of a registered offering, potentially expanding their access to capital beyond the private offerings many now use. Additional protections for investors were added to this bill. Companies utilizing Regulation D are required to provide investors with audited financial statements annually.

We must implement policies that achieve the right balance between the competing objectives of promoting valid investment business opportunities and protecting citizens from inappropriate risk and fraudulent schemes. This bill allows States to retain their ability to review these generally high risk offers as a means for protecting investors. Additional protections include giving investors legal recourse for misstatements made by companies in the prospectus documents. Regardless of an investors sophistication level, when a company is dishonest, the investor must be protected.

Small businesses need access to loans and other lines of credit in order to build their businesses and create jobs. Before us is a measure that would allow small businesses to get the support they need. This bill will provide small businesses with increased access to capital.

According to the U.S. Small Business Administration, small businesses account for 52 percent of all U.S. workers. They are the life blood of our economy. Small businesses in the U.S. produced three-fourths of the economy's new jobs between 1990 and 1995, and represent an entry point into the economy for new groups. Women, for instance, participate heavily in small businesses.

The number of female-owned businesses climbed by 89 percent, to an estimated 8.1 million, between 1987 and 1997, and women-owned sole proprietorships were expected to reach 35 percent of all such ventures by the year 2000. They were hindered in large part because of lack of access to traditional forms of credit. Before us today, is a measure that would help businesses grow. Small firms also tend to hire a greater number of older workers and people who prefer to work part- time.

We must always remember that American small businesses are the heart beat of our nation. I believe that small businesses represent more than the American dream--they represent the American economy. Small businesses account for 95 percent of all employers, create half of our gross domestic product, and provide three out of four new jobs in this country.

Although I support the bill before us today, it is important to highlight that having an opportunity to invest in small businesses is important. However, given the risky nature of such investments, these opportunities should be made available to investors who understand the risk and have the financial wherewithal to handle any losses that may come as a result of the investment. Small business needs access to capital in order to grow and flourish. Individuals who invest in these companies and startup should understand the unique risk associated with such investments.

The success of small business is America's success. This success can be achieved by encouraging small business growth and entrepreneurship. Especially, as our nation is facing a prolonged period of high unemployment and slow economic growth. Many of us have seen businesses disappear since the financial crisis. These businesses did not fail because of their inability to compete, or due to shortcomings in their business plan or because of the goods and services they produced. They failed because they could not get loans from banks.

Without access to capital, Houston native Michael Dell would not have been able to start one of the most successful computer retail businesses in the world. His $1,000 dollar initial investment in the 198os allowed Dell Computers to become a household name. Without this capital, America would not have had one of its premier innovators.

The economic impact of this legislation is encouraging because businesses require capital in order to expand and flourish. When businesses are presented with this opportunity, jobs are created that in turn, will stimulate economic growth. Dell's headquarters alone employs roughly 16,000 people.

I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 1965, ``To amend the securities laws to establish certain thresholds for shareholder registration, and for other purposes.''

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1965, which seeks, ``To amend the securities laws to establish certain thresholds for shareholder registration, and for other purposes.'' This legislation amends the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 regarding registration of securities to modify the registration threshold for an issuer that is either a bank or a bank holding company as well as for an issuer that is neither a bank nor a bank holding company. It raises the Exchange Act's shareholder cap from 499 to 1,999 shareholders for banks and permits banks with less than 1,200 shareholders to cease its reporting requirements under the Exchange Act. As well as, raises from $1 million to $10 million the threshold for total assets of an issuer that requires registration of a certain class of equity security.

This legislation would increase ability of banks to raise capital from a larger shareholder base, which would create a level playing field for smaller community banks. It also raises the Exchange Act's shareholder cap from 499 to 1,999 shareholders for banks and permits banks with less than 1,200 shareholders to cease reporting requirements under the Exchange Act.

Under current law, banks and private companies have a 500 investor threshold. Since 99.5 percent of banks reach the asset threshold for registration as a public company, the only meaningful test of whether a bank should be registered as a public company is the number of shareholders. But while the asset threshold has been increased tenfold since 1964, the shareholder threshold has stayed the same. Banks that are nearing the 500 shareholder threshold may have nowhere to turn to raise capital they need to meet the credit needs of their communities.

This provision limits the amount of capital banks and private companies can raise before they have to adhere to the Security Exchange Commission's (SEC) reporting requirements. The SEC reporting process is extensive and expensive. Small businesses, especially, can ill afford to comply with this stipulation at the cost of their ability to innovate and procure capital. As it stands community banks are part of a highly regulated industry governed by numerous statutes and regulations affecting almost every aspect of banking activity. Each banking institution is regulated by two agencies: a primary federal regulator and, in the case of state chartered banks, by the state regulator, as well.

Significant financial and other information regarding every bank and savings association can be publicly viewed on the website maintained by the FDIC. All banks are required to make annual reports available to both their customers and investors. Most provide financial and other information to investors through their company websites. The advantage to the small community banks from increases in the registration and deregistration thresholds would not be a lack of transparency, since keeping shareholders and the public fully informed about the bank's performance is essential to its presence as a community bank. Rather, it is a reduction of regulatory burdens and reporting requirements that pose a disproportionate burden on small community banks.

Banks should focus on lending money to small business rather than fulfilling a regulation that should be modified. If we alleviate this burden from banks, I expect these same banks will give loans and provide other financial resources to our nation's businesses-- especially for our nation's small businesses.

Our nation's businesses need our help. Because of the 2008-2009 financial crises, the business environment has been suffering from decreased access to credit. Appropriate access to credit allows for innovation and encourages startups which may one day become major employers. Currently, there is a distinct lack of capital procurement.

Small businesses need access to loans and other lines of credit in order to build their businesses and create jobs. Before us is a measure that would allow small businesses to get the support they need. This bill will provide small businesses with increased access to capital.

According to the U.S. Small Business Administration, small businesses account for 52 percent of all U.S. workers. They are the life blood of our economy. Small businesses in the U.S. produced three-fourths of the economy's new jobs between 1990 and 1995, and represent an entry point into the economy for new groups. Women, for instance, participate heavily in small businesses.

The number of female-owned businesses climbed by 89 percent, to an estimated 8.1 million, between 1987 and 1997, and women-owned sole proprietorships were expected to reach 35 percent of all such ventures by the year 2000. They were hindered in large part because of lack of access to traditional forms of credit. Before us today, is a measure that would help businesses grow. Small firms also tend to hire a greater number of older workers and people who prefer to work part- time.

There are hundreds of stories of start-up companies catching national attention and growing into large corporations. Just a few examples of these types of start-up businesses making it big include the computer software company Microsoft; the package delivery service Federal Express; sports clothing manufacturer Nike; the computer networking firm America On-Line; and ice cream maker Ben & Jerry's.

Without access to capital, Houston native Michael Dell would not have been able to start one of the most successful computer retail businesses in the world. His $1,000 dollar initial investment in the 1980s allowed Dell Computers to become a household name. Without this capital, America would not have had one of its premier innovators.

The economic impact of this legislation is encouraging. Businesses require capital in order to expand and flourish. When businesses are presented with this opportunity, jobs are created that in turn, will stimulate economic growth. Dell's headquarters alone employs roughly 16,000 people.

We must always remember that American small businesses are the heart beat of our nation. I believe that small businesses represent

more than the American dream--they represent the American economy. Small businesses account for 95 percent of all employers, create half of our gross domestic product, and provide three out of four new jobs in this country.

I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 1965, ``To amend the securities laws to establish certain thresholds for shareholder registration, and for other purposes.''

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 2061, ``The Civilian Service Recognition Act of 2011.'' This bill authorizes the presentation of a United States flag at the funeral of federal civilian employees who are killed while performing official duties or because of their status as a federal employee. The bill affords the head of an executive agency the ability to present the United States' flag to an individual who was an employee of the agency and dies of injuries incurred in connection with such individual's employment with the Federal government, suffered as a result of a criminal act, an act of terrorism, a natural disaster, or other circumstance as determined by the President.

As a senior member of the Judiciary Committee, I value the lives of all American citizens who devote themselves to the public cause. America has a longstanding tradition of honoring soldiers, sailors, marines, and airmen who have fallen in battle. The debt we owe our nation's armed service members, especially those who have fallen, cannot be quantified. It is imperative that we recognize and fully appreciate the men and women who risk their lives each day for our freedom.

Just as we recognize our military for their bravery, we must recognize our civil servants for their dedication to this nation. Our country is made great on the backs of millions of federal employees. Much like the men and women of the Armed Forces, the individuals tasked with federal law enforcement and protection put their lives on the line every day.

In March 2011, Deputy U.S. Marshal John Perry died from a critical gunshot wound while attempting to apprehend a fugitive wanted for assaulting a police officer and drug possession in St. Louis, MO. Mr. Perry dedicated his life to federal law enforcement, and sacrificed his life to make the country safer for all Americans. Deputy U.S. Marshal John Perry was a brave and patriotic civil servant who certainly deserves the honor of the United States flag.

NASA employee David Beverly was employed by the Johnson Space Center in Houston, Texas, where I represent the 18th Congressional District. On April 20, 2007 Mr. Beverly was fatally shot in the chest during a hostage ordeal inside the Space Center. An electrical parts specialist, David Beverly fostered innovation and space exploration for the benefit of all Americans.

I have met many Americans who are proud of the work our government does. These sentiments can only be attributed to the civil servants who are the first line of contact to the federal government. Federal workers offer themselves in service to their country. They serve their duties with great pride. Federal employees serve this nation because they believe in their sense of civic duty. Civil servants believe their work provides them with an opportunity to protect and build the nation for future generations. They seek to serve their country rather than their own self-interests, and share in the belief that country comes first above all else.

Federal employees are our neighbors; they are husbands and wives, sisters and brothers, sons and daughters. They sacrifice time spent with their families. They work long hours to support and defend the Constitution. They pledge their allegiance to this land of freedom and opportunity. They take the initiative to develop new and innovative programs, techniques, and tools to improve the way the federal government serves its citizens.

In my home state of Texas, approximately 190,000 people work for the federal government. Houston employs approximately 30,000 federal workers. They represent the values that we hold dear to our democracy. These values are grounded in patriotism dedicated to making this nation realize its loyalty to its citizens.

These civil servants make a positive difference in the lives of Americans. They play an essential role in addressing challenging and critical national issues. They create strong, sustainable, inclusive communities and quality affordable homes for all. They help keep terrorists and their weapons out of the U.S. as well as secure and facilitate trade and travel while enforcing immigration and drug laws. These federal agencies care for our troops when they return from battle. The agencies make sure our borders are safe. They make sure the air we breathe and the water we drink are clean. I am extremely proud of the work that these federal employees do. I want them to know that I support them and will forever be indebted to their great deeds.

We cannot forget our children, and I ask that this body not close the doors on the Good Samaritan. Let that person in.

I would encourage the support of H.R. 83 that has focused on protecting our children from bullying. I have founded and cochaired the Congressional Children's Caucus with my colleague from Illinois, a bipartisan caucus that wants to remember the children. I encourage my colleagues to sign on to H.R. 83 so that we can have a national statement against bullying and begin to fund the best practices that our communities can work on to protect our children.

And then I want to ensure that the 2.5 million Americans that will lose their unemployment in 2012 are protected. Let's determine that those who have worked not be left in the cold without unemployment benefits.

And as we look forward to Veterans Day, I want to stand publicly and say that I oppose any cuts to veterans benefits by the supercommittee. I stand in support of our veterans and declare that if they gave us a promise and their willingness to sacrifice their life, we must stand in promise to them to never cut their benefits. Let me say to the homeless veterans that I visited, we, too, respect your condition and your service. We will not cut veterans benefits.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 2940, ``Access to Capital for Job Creators Act,'' to remove the prohibition against general solicitation or advertising on sales of non-publicly traded securities, provided that all purchasers of the securities are ``accredited investors.'' Requires the Securities Exchange Commission to write rules on how an issuer would verify that the purchasers of securities are accredited investors.

The legislation before us today is designed to encourage companies to advertise in order to attract additional capital which will allow them to invest and hire additional employees. As part of a broader effort to tie the financial regulatory environment to U.S. job creation and economic competitiveness. The bill amends section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933 to permit use of public solicitation in connection with private securities offerings.

At present, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) rules (including Rule 506) create a ``safe harbor'' for companies that want to issue private securities to raise an unlimited amount of money from an unlimited number of accredited investors (and up to 35 other investors). However, the safe harbor does not permit the use of general solicitation or advertising to market these securities. This measure requires the SEC to revise Rule 506 within 90 days to provide that companies can use general solicitation or advertising to market these private securities, providing that all purchasers of the securities are accredited investors.

In addition, it mandates SEC to write rules requiring issuers using general solicitation to verify that investors are accredited, rather than rely on investor self-certification, as is currently permitted. In addition to a number of different types of institutions, an ``accredited investor'' is an investor with more than $1 million in assets excluding the primary residence,

or an annual income greater than $200,000 for an individual and $300,000 for a couple.

Before us is a measure that will allow companies to more easily raise capital by removing restrictions on general solicitation and advertising for certain private securities. It fairly balances the need to ease capital formation to spur job creation, with a provision to better protect investors by putting greater responsibility on the issuer.

One of the more important provisions in the bill is to ensure the identities of investors. The onus is on the issuer to verify that an investor actually is eligible to purchase the offered securities. Currently, investors only self-certify that they have $1 million in assets or make $200,000 a year to qualify to purchase the private security.

This has created the balance we need to ease restrictions on capital formation with protecting investors from fraud. NASAA continues to oppose the private offering process generally, which does not provide notice to the States, and therefore opposes this bill. This bill will ease a regulation that implements stipulations on garnering investors and capital.

Without access to investors and capital, Houston native Michael Dell would not have been able to start one of the most successful computer retail businesses in the world. His $1,000 primary investment in the 1980s allowed Dell Computers to become a household name. Without this capital, America would not have had one of its premier innovators.

The economic impact of this legislation is encouraging. Businesses require investors and capital in order to expand and flourish. When businesses are presented with this opportunity, jobs are created that in turn, will stimulate economic growth. Dell's headquarters alone employs roughly 16,000 people.

I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 2930, ``Entrepreneur Access to Capital Act''; this will ease SEC restrictions in order to stimulate our economic recovery and job creation.

Madam Chair, I rise today in support of H.R. 2930, ``Entrepreneur Access to Capital Act'' to amend the securities laws to provide for registration exemptions for certain crowdfunded securities, and for other purposes. This bill reduces the regulatory burdens on capital formation by small businesses and addresses regulations on crowdfunding.

The concept of crowdfunding focuses on collective cooperation where investors try to get funding publicly instead of from personal contacts. The network is large, and many investors are often found through the Internet. It is a valuable tool for startups and other fledgling businesses. As I have said time and time again, startups are the lifeblood of our economy and American innovation. They provide necessary jobs, especially in this sluggish market.

This bill provides a crowdfunding exemption to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) registration requirements for firms raising up to $5 million, with individual investments limited to $10,000 or 10 percent of an investor's income. As per the exemption, limits are removed on the number of investors until the first $5 million of capital is raised. This exemption provides smaller investors the chance to support startups, which is currently not an option under SEC regulation. There is a current 499-shareholder cap for private companies. The bill excludes crowdfunding investors from the cap for private companies and removes the ban on general solicitation that exists in many current exemptions.

I support this bill because its purpose is to ease the regulations that implement stipulations on garnering investors and capital. It is a measure fledgling small businesses benefit from. Also it should limit fraud and promote the jobs America needs.

Without access to initial investors and capital, Houston native Michael Dell would not have been able to start one of the most successful computer retail businesses in the world. His $1,000 dollar primary investment in the 1980s allowed Dell Computers to become a household name. Without this capital, America would not have had one of its premier innovators.

The economic impact of this legislation is encouraging. Businesses require investors and capital in order to expand and flourish. When businesses are presented with this opportunity, jobs are created that in turn, will stimulate economic growth. Dell's headquarters alone employs roughly 16,000 people.

I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 2930, ``Entrepreneur Access to Capital Act,'' this will ease SEC restrictions in order to stimulate innovation, and promote regulations that open up the sphere for startups that would not have the opportunity to succeed without a wide network of investors. This, in turn, promotes economic recovery and job creation.

I am delighted to join my friend and colleague from the great State of Minnesota--the distinguished cochair of the Progressive Caucus, of which I have the privilege of serving as a vice chair.

I truly want to say to our colleagues that the Progressive Caucus has been on the mark, and in fact it stays on a pattern, frankly, that should draw good-thinking, well-intentioned Americans from both sides of the aisle. Let me recount for my cochair the number of job fairs and summits that we've had. We have not yet finished, and we'll probably go into 2012.

I want to focus on just a couple of points that I believe have been the Progressive message. It is the good Samaritan message, the secular good Samaritan message: that we're all in this together. It is to recognize that the Nation is not so broke--or it is not broke--that it cannot help the most vulnerable.

In a supercommittee hearing, it was delineated by the head of the OMB that, actually, Mr. Ellison, our debt-deficit is 8\1/2\ percent of the gross domestic product. That means that 92 percent is rolling along, not the way we would like it, but it is rolling along. It's as if we took a family's budget, and they said, ``You know what? We have less than 10 percent debt--we've got 100 percent, but 10 percent debt. Let's work to diminish that debt, but let me not stop feeding the three children, and let me not stop paying the mortgage,'' if that were the ratio of our debt.

I think it is important for the Progressive message in that we are saying there are ways of pulling us up by our bootstraps:

One, we can close our eyes, and in a moment, the Bush tax cuts can expire, and we will generate billions of dollars that will help promote jobs. We can pass the Jobs Act, which really focuses on infrastructure, providing for our veterans, small businesses, and in fact, focuses on creating the millions of jobs that we can generate out of that particular legislation. We can eliminate the discrimination of the chronically unemployed, and we can give a $4,000 tax credit to employers for hiring, as I indicated, the long-term unemployed.

Are we remembering that on December 31, 2011, we will be bringing home--or by that time, our President has said that soldiers from Iraq will come home? That is an immediate infusion of dollars back into our bank account; although, we must be able to protect our soldiers who are coming home and provide for them.

We have on the horizon, Mr. Speaker--and I know that all who are listening are excited about the fact that an omnibus jobs bill is about to come forward from the Progressive Caucus. But the only reason I just say that without giving the details of it is we have found a way to pay for creating jobs and answering the clarion call of the American people. So I believe the Progressive message is the secular Good Samaritan, that we cannot leave the vulnerable along the streets and highways of despair. We must be able to ensure that we are looking out for those who cannot look out for themselves.

I will finish on these two points: The supercommittee is doing the very best that it can do. I am grateful that we will be opening opportunities for our own hearing in the coming week. But there is a dilemma; and that dilemma is that there is a certain amount of the vulnerable, needy of America that are protected, but there are some that are exposed. And what that means is that we will be looking in the face of America in 2012, looking back in our rearview mirror, and we will see along the highway of life the despair in those that have been left out by the draconian cuts that had to come because we have raised no revenue. That is a crisis.

And if I might do a personal moment on my final closure. If we have States like the State of Texas that are, in essence, left with elected officials who have ``N''-head Rock--and I am coming to my closure, so you can understand how I prioritize what we should be doing. The ``N''- word Rock. We have got States--I come from that State. I am ashamed of that description but am proud to make it known on the floor of the House. Or we have State agencies that we fund. The Texas Motor Vehicle Board--the State of Texas gets Federal funds--was about to issue a Confederate license plate issued by the State of Texas on November 10. I will be in Austin to oppose it.

But the reason why I say that is, if we have time to deal with these negatives, do we not have the time to galvanize States and Representatives and Governors to focus on the most vulnerable? Don't we have time to call for the voices to be raised, to be able to give encouragement to the supercommittee, encouragement to those who are not willing to raise revenue, that the better way for America is to take that 8.5 percent deficit opposed to the GDP, boost the GDP, build, rebuild, create jobs, create jobs for small businesses? Let's steer ourselves away from negative Confederate flags and ``N''-head and get all of the States to work together, Democrats and Republicans, to follow the Progressive message, which is liberty and justice for all and opportunity for all.

I thank the gentleman for yielding to me on this occasion.

Before you close, I want to just comment on the gentleman from Illinois.

Thank you, Mr. Jackson, for what I know you are about to begin, which is an eloquent presentation on the importance of construction. It looks as if the airport that you have been fighting on for many years, and if we would listen to you on the particular project that you are speaking of, but also as we look to infrastructure around America, we would be able to create what I'm getting ready to see. We would be able to compete with some of these other nations that he will cite that will have probably more airports than the United States.

I just want to thank you, Mr. Jackson, for your astuteness, and we look forward to hearing you. And thank you for the Progressive message.

Mr. Speaker, one day before the Nation gathers to commemorate Veterans Day, a day that brings all of us together, it saddens me to come to the floor of the House and announce under the leadership of Governor Perry, on November 10 in Texas, the Department of Motor Vehicles board will be voting to authorize a State- issued Confederate license plate.

Now, I realize that our work here in the Congress is about passing the jobs bill, which we are advocating to do. But I think it is a disgrace on the history of this Nation that a State-elected agriculture commissioner by the name of Patterson continues to push forward this untimely and ill-fated action.

The Confederate flag does not protect or honor Confederate soldiers. You can do that in museums. The symbol of a Confederate flag is that of a Klansman of the late 1880s and early 1900s; the brutality of slavery; the oppression of slavery; the Jim Crowism of the 1940s and 1950s. It's an ugly reminder of the past of our history. It is time to take America forward and Texas forward.

I will be in Austin on November 10 opposing that action. I ask all good-faith, well-intended Texans that want to take Texas forward to come and oppose any vote that would issue a Confederate flag. And I make a clarion call to all Americans who would like to drive to Texas, come to Austin and stand up against this dastardly deed. Stand up against promoting slavery and oppression. Come to Texas and tell Governor Perry and Commissioner Patterson enough is enough. Take the Nation forward. Don't take it backwards.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Con. Res. 13, rise today ``Reaffirming `In God We Trust' as the official motto of the United States'' which would support and encourage the public display of the national motto in all public buildings, public schools, and other government institutions. This motto reflects our nation's rich history of religious freedom and tolerance.

More than three hundred years ago, bound by their common faith and desire for tolerance and liberty, a small group of pilgrims journeyed to America. They sought a place where they could safely and freely worship according to their own beliefs.

The tradition of religious freedom is one of the fundamental liberties upon which our nation was founded. The founding document of our nation, The Declaration of Independence, states that men are ``endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.'' Reaffirming `In God We Trust' as the national motto does not violate these rights; instead, this is an acknowledgement of our nation's unwavering commitment to religious freedom.

The English word God does not exclusively refer to a Christian God or God from any one religion. There are names of God in a variety of religious traditions throughout the world, including Hinduism, Sikhism, Christianity, Islam, Judaism, indigenous African religions, and Native American religions. In all of these diverse faiths, names of God are invoked to address the Supreme Being or deity in liturgy and prayer. In fact, the word God is defined as referring to the Supreme Being, the creator and ruler of the universe. This definition does not imply that God is tied to a specific religion, but rather unique to individual faith traditions.

We are a diverse nation, filled with people from around the world, people of varying backgrounds, races and religions. In Houston, where I represent the 18th Congressional District, 44 percent of the population is Hispanic, and 25 percent are African Americans. Houston is also home to the third largest Vietnamese community in the country, as well as the 5th largest Indonesian population, and a sizeable community of individuals from Nigeria, India, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Norway. Within these diverse cultural backgrounds, there are many different religions, faiths and customs.

The 18th Congressional District recently made great progress in celebrating all of Houston's religions. On October 18, 2011, Houston's Institute of Interfaith Dialog broke ground for the Houston Interfaith Peace Garden, a multi religious center. The goal of the organization and the Peace Garden is the promotion of understanding among different faiths through shared experiences.

As my constituents in the 18th Congressional District have shown, promoting understanding between religions strengthens communities, and unites Americans. For centuries, religion has been a comfort to people in tragedy, and way to celebrate in triumph. Reaffirming `In God We Trust' as the national motto is a reaffirmation of faith, a reaffirmation of a creator and Supreme Being, and uniting all religions under the comfort this brings. However, in no way should this legislation or my vote for H. Con. Res. 13 deny the superior constitutional standing of the 1st Amendment of the Bill of Rights in the Constitution guaranteeing freedom of religion in the United States of America.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of S. 1280, ``The Kate Puzey Peace Corps Volunteer Protection Act of 2011.'' This bill amends the Peace Corps Act to require sexual assault risk- reduction and response training. It requires the development of a comprehensive sexual assault policy, the establishment of an Office of Victim Advocacy, and the establishment of a Sexual Assault Advisory.

On October 14, 1960, during the final three weeks of the presidential campaign, candidate John F. Kennedy addressed students at the University of Michigan. He challenged these students to give two years of their lives to help people in developing countries. The root of the Peace Corps is in former President Kennedy's challenge to those students, and to us all. Since the Peace Corps was founded, more than 200,000 volunteers have served in 139 countries, helping people build better lives for themselves, and better futures for their children.

The Peace Corps mission trains the citizens of developing nations in a vast variety of skills and subjects, promotes a better understanding of Americans, and promotes a better understanding of the culture of the nation in which they are serving. Those who volunteer their service to the Peace Corps are fulfilling an unwritten commandment of service to the least among us, and their safety must be protected. The Peace Corps has served as a great vehicle of cultural exchange and awareness for the last 50 years and I applaud the organization and all of its volunteers. However, the Peace Corp must do more to address the concerns raised by current and former volunteers and establish a comprehensive sexual assault program.

At this time 234 of the 7,109 volunteers, nearly five percent of all members, are from my home state of Texas, where I represent the 18th Congressional District. These altruistic Texans currently serve people in Belize, Zambia and Kazakhstan, and other developing nations throughout the world. I commend all of the brave humanitarians serving in the Peace Corps. We must ensure that all Peace Corps volunteers receive the training they need to provide for their safety and security as they travel the world.

This bill was named after a Peace Corp volunteer Kate Puzey. Kate was serving in Benin on the Western coast of Africa when she began to suspect that some of the young girls in the village were being sexually exploited. Kate informed the School Director, who did not want to confront the suspected individual. Kate's mother reports that Kate was becoming increasingly concerned with his behavior, and in February, 2009, he confessed to Kate that he had raped two students. Because there were no clearly outlined procedures to report such complaints, Kate had no official avenue to report the disturbing information. Furthermore, Constant Bio's brother worked as an Assistant Director in local Peace Corps Headquarters, so, in late February 2009, Kate elected to travel to another Peace Corps work-station where she requested assistance from the Peace Corps Benin Director.

On March 2, 2009, Kate was emailed, confirming receipt of her report, and four days later, she was sent another email informing her Mr. Bio's contract would not be renewed, and that he would be informed why. Kate never received these emails; not having Internet access in her village, she had requested to be contacted by phone. Her confidentiality was not maintained, and her accused killer was informed of her role in his firing. On March 11, 2009, Kate was found murdered at her home in the village of Badjoude. Mr. Bio is currently in custody for this horrific murder.

Unfortunately, the tragic murder of Kate Puzey is not the only devastating event that has affected a Peace Corps volunteer. An average of 22 women reported being raped in the Peace Corps every year between 2000 and 2009. I am greatly saddened that any of our Peace Corp volunteers, our nation's representatives have suffered from the malicious crimes of sexual assault.

I am further troubled that many of these crimes have not received the attention they deserve. The victim of a sexual assault, should not be victimized again by inaction. This bill would provide men and women with the knowledge they need to report and act upon reports of sexual assault. According to the Congressional Research Service, 60 percent of volunteers in the Peace Corps are women, with an average age of 28 years old. It is essential that these volunteers are protected.

The Peace Corps was established to show the world that America's greatness is cemented in its goal to maintain world peace and friendship. Thousands of Americans have volunteered to promote these values through kind deeds in countries whose cultural attitudes and values are much different than those of America's, especially towards women. In this country, we value women's rights, and implement laws and policies to protect those rights. When those laws are violated, we go to great lengths to see that justice prevails.

We, as all Americans, value the Peace Corps. This Congress has passed legislation that makes it possible for the Peace Corps to continue doing its great work representing the essence of America's values. With this legislation, in honor of Kate Puzey, Congress will ensure that the Peace Corps will be sufficiently responsive and sensitive to victims of crime. I am pleased to support this bill, and urge my colleagues to do the same.

Mr. Speaker, we've been waiting for a jobs agenda now for as long as this Congress has been in session, and I can convey to my colleagues that an easy way of attending to creating jobs is by passing the jobs bill.

Moving on, Mr. Speaker, let me thank Governor Perry for making a personal and public statement of his opposition to the State-issued Confederate license plate. Yet I would advise Governor Perry that his Department of Motor Vehicles board--nine appointed by him--have now scheduled that vote for November 10. All good-willed persons, all good- willed Texans who would oppose a State-issued oppressive license plate reflecting upon the oppression of slavery need to show up on November 10 in Austin, Texas, to indicate their opposition to such a draconian and devastating blow to the people of Texas.

I would also remind Governor Perry that the North Forest Independent School District that is now leading and educating 7,500 students, a majority minority district, has now been given a denial on its appeal, meaning an attempt by the Texas Education Agency to kill a majority minority school district in the State of Texas.

Governor Perry, come home. We need you.

I thank the gentlelady from Ohio for her leadership after spending some time with her on the floor listening to the voter suppression occurring in Ohio. I'm grateful for this opportunity. I want to thank the Whip for his leadership on voting rights, election rights, for any number of sessions, starting as early as the election in 2000, when we were brought to confront the issue of voter improprieties.

Let me first of all say that we are seeing the ugly head of the suppression of votes rising across America. Forty States have implemented voter ID laws.

Let me explain to the voters: Voter ID can only respond to voter impersonation. Statistics will tell you that most voters do not show up at the polls trying to be somebody else. In addition, most voters will have a voting card. Now you will suppress those who are elderly, disabled, young, who do not have a State-issued voter ID.

In my district alone this past weekend, I met a woman who was 97 years old in a wheelchair who had attempted to get her voter ID with a photograph pursuant to Texas law that she thought was in place now. It was a difficult challenge. Her relatives went with her, and she could not get her voter ID. I made a commitment that my office would go with her because of the extensive requirements and the intimidation and fear.

But it is also in the State of Texas that we are hearing that many polling people who are in charge of elections for this November 2011 have confused the precinct judges so much that they have even told them that the voter ID law will be in place as of November 2011, and it doesn't go into effect, if it does, until January of 2012--again, to suppress voters, the elderly and minority voters.

I would encourage and ask the Justice Department to be diligent on reviewing all of these voter ID laws. Texas is now being reviewed and it has not been pre-cleared. We ask the Justice Department to declare that it is in violation of the Voting Rights Act.

Let me say that voting is a precious right. I want everyone to be able to vote. And it is documented that fraud is very limited in voting. To eliminate same-day registration, there are no grounds to suggest that there is fraud that occurs in same-day registration.

From the oppression of those who could not vote because of a poll tax, because of counting of the jelly beans in a jar, all of that leads to the oppression that keeps people from voting.

So I stand today on the floor of the House to say we will never give up the fight. We're going to fight these voter ID laws. We're going to fight these laws that are going to intimidate our voters. Intimidation, fear, and oppression will not survive this election of 2011 or 2012. We are going to stand with you, and the Department of Justice will be reviewing on behalf of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

I thank you.