Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H. Con. Res. 242, to honor and praise the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People on its 101st Anniversary. The NAACP was founded in New York City on February 12, 1909, because of America's pressing need for a large, coordinated civil rights organization. Today, the NAACP holds true to its initial values.

The objectives of the NAACP are:

To ensure the political, educational, social, and economic equality of all citizens;

To achieve equality of rights and eliminate race prejudice among the citizens of the United States;

To remove all barriers of racial discrimination through democratic processes;

To seek enactment and enforcement of federal, state, and local laws securing civil rights;

To inform the public of the adverse effects of racial discrimination and to seek its elimination; and

To educate persons as to their constitutional rights and to take all lawful action to secure the exercise thereof, and to take any other lawful action in furtherance of these objectives, consistent with the NAACP's Articles of Incorporation and this Constitution.

For 101 years the NAACP has remained committed to ensuring the political, educational, social and economic equality of all persons and to eliminate racial hatred and racial discrimination. The organization was originally founded out of the dire need for civil rights among African Americans in the United States. Today however, the NAACP is determined to advance the cause of civil rights not only for African Americans, but for all American people, regardless of color.

The NAACP has aided in achieving the passage of several important pieces of legislation throughout their 101-year existence. These include the Civil Rights Act, the Voting Rights Act of 1965, and the Fair Housing Act. The NAACP has also influenced several groundbreaking legal cases that have advanced the causes of civil rights in our nation, such as the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education case. The NCAAP has and continues to serve as a beacon to those who want to make a difference. They have proven that progress can be made in the face of oppression through non-violence and political action.

The NAACP claims over 360,000 members and it continues to grow. Heading into its second century of service, the NAACP is focused on disparities in economics, health care, education, voter empowerment and the criminal justice system as is also continues its role as a legal advocate for civil rights issues.

The organization remains just as committed today to continuing the fight for political, social, educational and racial equality as it was over a century ago when it was first conceived. For this reason that I rise in support of H. Con. Res. 242.

Madam Speaker, everyone knows that we are in the grips of trying to overcome the devastation of the gulf and to help the people of that region. That is why I want to applaud the serious work that was done at the White House to establish the independent framework that I called for 2 weeks ago, which was to ensure that the impacted communities--restaurants, fishermen, shrimpers, oyster persons, and people with small restaurants and large restaurants--in the gulf region, from Florida to Texas, have the ability to secure the kind of compensation needed now to make their bills.

This is not compensation for the injury as much as it is compensation to survive. For anyone to suggest that this was a shakedown is a misinterpretation and a distortion to the American people.

What do they want the government to do? They want the government to be responsive, to make sure that we work on their behalf and to make sure that people whose lights are being turned off can pay their bills.

Good news. We can now get claims and can help the people in the gulf region.

I rise to claim time in opposition, but I will not oppose the amendment.

Madam Chair, I am delighted to have Mr. Cao join me in my amendment that I offered in the Rules Committee, and I am delighted that he was able to rise to claim the time for this amendment. This is an amendment that I have written, and I have asked Mr. Cao to join me, as he had a similar amendment. I appreciate very much the support that he has given, and I recognize the concerns that he has expressed.

I want to support the underlying bill as well and to make note of the fact that small businesses are now facing the most difficult time in the worst recession in our history.

According to a February 2010 report of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, total bank loans and leases declined for the sixth straight quarter, with total loans to commercial and industrial borrowers declining by 4.3 percent and real estate construction development loans declining by 8.4 percent.

What that means is that small businesses are taking the strongest hit. This bill will focus, in particular, on the question of providing a lending scheme, a lending structure, which is paid for to provide the start-up credit for our small businesses.

Well, here we find ourselves addressing an enormous crisis that has occurred in the gulf. During the Memorial Day recess, I did a flyover of the gulf and of the Deepwater Horizon, and I saw the magnitude and the growth of this disaster. Somewhere between millions--or at least a million gallons--but somewhere between 20,000 and 40,000 barrels per day are gushing into the gulf. We don't know where this is going to stop.

Many small businesses are impacted in the Gulf States. That would include Florida. That would include Texas.

That would include Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana. This amendment, for which I am delighted to be joined by Mr. Cao, will, in fact, cause lending institutions to focus resources on the small business community.

Even Linda Smith, who owns the Alligator Cafe in Houston, Texas, is shut down because she cannot get product. When I visited New Orleans, there were restaurants that seemed to close early because they couldn't get product. What about the oystermen and shrimpers and fishermen who can't seem to get a lump sum payment from BP for which we've advocated?

In speaking just a few minutes ago to an oysterman in Pointe a la Hache, he indicated he had not gotten his money. So, therefore, I am asking my colleagues to support this amendment.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I thank the gentleman from Louisiana and New Orleans, especially for his leadership. I look forward to working with him as we go forward on legislation that addresses some of the concerns I have heard him express so as we may establish a real national energy policy.

I would ask my colleagues to support this amendment. As I have indicated, I have obtained the time in opposition, but I will not oppose the amendment that we have both offered on the floor of the House. I will argue vigorously that this is an excellent opportunity to protect small businesses which are yet noted, which are yet listed, which are going to be impacted across that gulf from tourism in Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, on to the shrimpers, fishermen, oystermen, and to the restaurants that are now in conditions where they are shutting down and where they are letting go of their employees. They are pleading for assistance.

This is a good amendment, and it is a good amendment to this legislation. It focuses on our small businesses, so I would ask my colleagues to support this amendment.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

Madam Speaker, because I was chairing the committee addressing the question of the United-Continental merger, I was unavoidably detained and I missed the vote of H. Con. Res. 242, honoring and praising the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People on the occasion of its 101st anniversary. If I had been present, I would have voted an enthusiastic ``aye.''

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Res. 1389, ``Recognizing the immeasurable contributions of fathers in the healthy development of children, supporting responsible fatherhood, and encouraging greater involvement of fathers in the lives of their children, especially on Father's Day.''

This resolution commends the millions of fathers who serve as wonderful, caring parents for their children. It simultaneously calls on fathers across the United States (1) reconnect and rededicate themselves to their children's lives; and (2) express their love and support for their children, not only on Father's Day, but everyday.

Fathers all over the United States are involved in their children's lives in multitude ways that go beyond the traditional roles of economic provider. Fathers are also involved by having direct contact with their children, engagement; making themselves available to their children even when they are not in physical contact, accessibility; and taking responsibility for their children's care and welfare, again regardless of physical proximity, responsibility. For this reason and many others, I salute the millions of fathers who have embraced the attributes of fatherhood.

However, this piece of legislation also recognizes the need for fathers to take there place in their children's lives and become more involved. The statistics on children without an active father in their lives are alarming:

63 percent of youth suicides are from fatherless homes (U.S. Department Of Health/Census)--5 times the average

90 percent of all homeless and runaway children are from fatherless homes--32 times the average

85 percent of all children who show behavior disorders come from fatherless homes--20 times the average. (Center for Disease Control)

80 percent of rapists with anger problems come from fatherless homes--14 times the average. (Justice & Behavior, Vol 14, p. 403-26)

71 percent of all high school dropouts come from fatherless homes--9 times the average. (National Principals Association Report)

75 percent of all adolescent patients in chemical abuse centers come from fatherless homes--10 times the average. (Rainbows for All God's Children)

70 percent of youths in State-operated institutions come from fatherless homes--9 times the average. (U.S. Department of Justice, Sept. 1988)

85 percent of all youths in prison come from fatherless homes--20 times the average. (Fulton Co. Georgia, Texas Department of Correction)

Clearly, fathers represent a lot more than just a paycheck to a child; they represent safety, protection, guidance, friendship, and someone to look up to. This resolution urges men to understand the level of responsibility fathering a child requires, especially in the encouragement of the mental, moral, social, academic, emotional, physical, and spiritual development of children.

In conclusion, not only is this issue imperative to the development of the future of America's youth, but also to the prosperity of the country as a whole. I am diligently seeking ways to bring families back together and this resolution can be the catalyze to promote such unity; by promoting fathers who already exemplify these qualities.

I must pay tribute to my own father Ezra C. Jackson. I thank him for being a father to my brother Michael and me. For also being a grandfather to our children. He was God-fearing, funny and a great mentor to young men who were not his children. Thank you Dad for being in my life, although you are no longer with us--your guidance will always be appreciated.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 4855, the Work-Life Balance Award Act.'' Thank you to my colleagues: Congresswoman Woolsey and Congressman Miller for introducing this important legislation that establishes, in the Department of Labor, an annual Work-Life Balance Award for employers that have developed and implemented work-life balance policies.

We are all aware of the benefits of holding a job, but too little attention has been paid to the dangers associated with stressful working conditions. Long hours have a significantly negative impact on life satisfaction and time-related stress, which in turn have a negative effect on wellbeing.

Non-standard work hours, and stressful workplace environments cause health problems, higher levels of stress, psychological distress, greater relationship conflicts for dual-income couples, less time spent with children and lower life satisfaction.

A peer-reviewed study of 10,000 Londoners tracked since 1985, published in the European Heart Journal, found that rates of angina, nonfatal heart attacks and death from heart-related conditions were 60 percent higher in people who worked at least three hours beyond ``the normal, seven-hour day'' compared with those who didn't work that amount of overtime. The study notes that overtime work ``has increased in recent years'' and that the U.S. is one of the countries that is well above average in percentage of people working overtime.

A Canadian study found that ``people experiencing time pressure have lower levels of satisfaction, higher levels of stress, lower self- reported physical and emotional wellbeing, and greater insomnia. Work- life conflicts can lead to higher levels of anxiety and depression; sleep disturbances and a host of other ailments.''

The World Health Organization (WHO) highlights recent research in the domain of occupational health psychology shows that many stressful experiences are linked to being offended--for instance, by being offended or ridiculed, by social exclusion, by social conflict, by illegitimate tasks. According to the WHO, ``Such experiences of being treated in an unfair manner constitute an `Offence to Self,' and this may have quite far reaching consequences in terms of health and well- being.''

In the United States, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) is greatly concerned with the health effects of workplace stress. According to the CDC, ``evidence is rapidly accumulating to suggest that stress plays an important role in several types of chronic health problems--especially cardiovascular disease, musculoskeletal disorders, and psychological disorders.''

Mr. Speaker, although some employers create unhealthy work environments, other employers now recognize that staff who feel able to balance the demands of work and home are more engaged, productive and motivated. These trendsetters deserve to be recognized for their compassion and leadership. This is why I support the Work-Life Balance Award Act.

Research has identified organizational characteristics associated with both healthy, low-stress work and high levels of productivity. According to the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), examples of these characteristics include: recognition of employees for good work performance, opportunities for career development, an organizational culture that values the individual worker, and management actions that are consistent with organizational values.

Mr. Speaker, widespread workplace stress is costly to our citizens and our nation. Stressful work environments ruin lives and are costly to our healthcare system. It is often said that prevention is the best medicine; establishing a balance between work and life is a vital disease prevention measure.

Once again, I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation.

I thank the gentleman for his leadership, and I thank the full Committee on Ways and Means for being a lifeline for small businesses. And I ask my colleagues on the floor of the House to join them.

Without this effort, small business doors across America will close. And, frankly, I believe it is important. As my colleague just said, let us walk the walk and talk the talk. For it is now time to invest in small businesses, which, in actuality, create the backbone of the economy of America and provide for employment in our rural and urban areas across this Nation. In fact, I think it is important to note this bill is paid for. By closing the black liquor loophole and the gift loophole, it will create $8 billion to ensure that we can do the right thing for our small businesses.

I come from an area that is now being impacted by a major oil spill. I visit businesses whose doors are closing for lack of assistance. And I'm glad that we have a President who realizes who is important and is ready to sign this bill.

Small businesses are in need. And so what we have here is an opportunity for banks to refocus their lending policies and give startup credit and access to dollars to help build these small businesses.

Many of us heard of the redirection of the moneys that we lent to big banks in order to help them help America. Well, unfortunately, they couldn't find the doors of small businesses, many of my constituents. And so I am eager to have this legislation passed that's paid for to provide startup costs for small businesses that always have had a major impediment in getting in the door of these banks. Therefore, any relief for small startups is a plus by increasing the amount allowed to be deducted from the bottom line. And the capital gains issues as well that will be very important.

I believe, finally, we need to hold these banks accountable by asking them to provide a plan to ensure that they are providing lending to these businesses. I ask for support of this legislation.

I rise in support of the Small Business Jobs Tax Relief Act of 2010, H.R. 5486. I also want to thank Chairman Sandy Levin and the members of the Committee on Ways and Means for their hard work on this legislation. The bill amends the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide tax incentives for small business job creation, and for other purposes.

This bill provides targeted relief for the Nation's small businesses. Without this relief, many small businesses will close, adding to the U.S. unemployment rate, still historically high at 9.7 percent. The tax relief in this bill will begin to address a number of issues confronting the owners of small businesses:

(1) Start-up costs for small businesses have always been a major impediment to their success. Therefore, any relief for small businesses start-ups is a plus. By increasing the amount allowed to be deducted from the bottom line, a small business can then use the additional resources to grow and to expand his or her business. The bill would increase the deductible amount for start-up costs from the current $5000.00 to $20,000.00 for 2010 and 2011.

(2) The bill also eases restrictions on real estate holdings where qualified Small Business Investment Company (SBIC) loans are involved.

(3) This bill will increase, from 50 percent to 100 percent, the exclusion from gross income of the gain from the sale or exchange of qualified small business stock acquired after March 15, 2010, and before January 1, 2012. By reducing the tax liability related to gains on the sale of small business stock, this will free resources to be used for other business purposes in this tight economy.

(4) Another important provision in the bill will exclude from gross income any amount paid under the small business borrower assistance program. Again, tax relief in any shape or form for small businesses is critical to sustained economic growth and economic recovery.

In addition to these tax reliefs, the bill also requires the Commissioner of the Internal Revenue to provide annual reports to Congress on penalties relating to tax shelters and other transactions. Any additional measure designed to promote transparency and accountability must be supported. Again, this bill is a timely measure that will grant relief to a major segment of the Nation's business sector, suffering from the lasting effects of the worst recession in our history. I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 5486.

I thank my colleague from Ohio very much, and I am delighted to be able to join her, and as well my chairwoman of the Congressional Black Caucus and other Members who I know have a great interest in this area of reminding the American people of the great strides that we have made in the passing of this outstanding new attitude for health care in America. It is long overdue, and it was an enormous struggle.

I can remember that weekend of March 2010 and the week that led up to it and the days that we stayed over on Saturday to gather our resources and to continue to work and to push, working and ensuring that the Senate would bring the bill over to the House so on that Sunday, we could cast a vote for what has to be a monumental change in American life and will go down as a monumental move in American history.

Just a few minutes ago, I had the privilege of listening to our Secretary of Agriculture, Secretary Vilsack, and he reminded us of how diverse America is. Rural America, for example, with all of its needs and all of its specialness--of course, just on the floor of the House, we stood in silence to acknowledge the loss of lives in rural Arkansas in a terrible flooding. And then he expressed the inequity in terms of poverty in some of our rural communities and the need for investment in that community. And I would venture to say that alongside of that investment, this health care bill, which as our chairwoman just said, it is not respective of region or what party you're in or who represents your district; you will have access to health care. That means that many of the rural Americans, some of whom scratch their survival out of the earth, some of whom are still tenant farmers, some may have small family farms, and many of them have sacrificed to invest in those farms and have probably ignored the need for health care because of the cost. Now we have that opportunity to ensure that those Americans, hardworking Americans who put bread on our table, have the ability to provide for their family.

The Secretary made mention of the fact of the First Lady's commitment to, in essence, stamping out obesity, particularly in our children. This health care bill provides for preventative measures, preventative care, and a focus on nutrition and an emphasis on helping children, something long overdue. And it compliments the First Lady's effort and the Secretary of Agriculture's acknowledging that we must have healthy foods, for example, in our school cafeterias to make healthy children. But at the same time, it is important to note that that child who may be obese as we speak should have access to some form of health care.

Now, with the passage of this health care bill, that child will have that opportunity to have a better life, a healthier life, to have a nutrition plan--we don't like to call plans for children diets, but a good healthy nutrition plan that can be governed by their family practitioner now or their pediatrician, to which they will have access, either through the National Exchange or through health care that now this family farm or their family can purchase.

Just a week or so ago, during Memorial Day week, I had the privilege of announcing a $1 million grant that was to allow an inner city hospital--the only African American hospital in the State of Texas, and one of very few in the Nation--to receive a grant to servicemembers and their families, active duty servicemembers and their families for PTSD, post-traumatic stress disorder. We know that is a prominent and prevalent condition that many of our soldiers are coming back from Iraq and Afghanistan and have been impacted by that.

But what about mental health and the need for mental health care across America that people who have had mental health concerns have literally suffered because we never had parity in our health care insurance coverage? It has never been required federally until recently. The legislation, of course, shepherded by the late Senator Ted Kennedy, and our friend and colleague, his son, Patrick Kennedy. But for so many years, we did not have mental parity; insurance companies could ignore it. Just think if you would ignore the servicemen and their families who are impacted by post-traumatic stress disorder.

Well, many Americans feel isolated with mental health concerns and not being able to access good care. This health care bill turns a corner on mental health care, and I want to say to the American public that physical illness has no position to be raised up over a mental health condition. There should be no stigma, and you should have access to as good a care for a physical ailment, a broken arm, an upset stomach, diabetes, kidney disease, terrible diseases, of course, but you should equally have access to mental health care. Well, this health care bill allows that to happen, and I think that that is a step forward for the American people.

It's good to note that families who have raised children who are now entering the work world or looking for work and coming out of college, used to be an enormous burden of, how do I care for my child when they have aged out of my insurance? Well, now we have the opportunity for them to remain on the insurance until 26. But let me give an admonition--and I think this is going to be important for the Congress to do. In the legislation, there are several oversight provisions in the bill--in fact, our own Congressional Black Caucus, working with Congresswoman Edwards and some others, were very insistent on making sure that the raising of the cost did not inappropriately or unfairly burden middle class, upper middle class Americans, just by the nature of who it falls on.

But the other aspect of it is, the rumor is that if insurance companies are required to keep children on until they're 26, that ugly word of ``increased cost'' is going to rise. What I would say is that we need to pay attention to the actuarial tables and the database that suggest how many times a 26-year-old or under utilizes health care and not let insurance companies just willy-nilly on their own regard, on their own basis make the determination, well, they're giving me something to do, I'm going to raise the cost, because that's what people are afraid of. We have to say to the American public, we're going to be your watchdog in the United States Congress and ensure that that doesn't happen.

Let me also take note of the federally qualified health care clinic. I'm excited about that. I debated this some years before when we were talking about trying to put more funding into the legislation to increase the number of federally qualified health clinics even before this health care bill because for a long time, these clinics were not even known about. But the idea to be able to walk out your front door and walk down your block and go to a health care facility that is not an emergency room will make an enormous difference on the healthiness of Americans, preventative care.

Right now I am, in my community, assessing different locations in my congressional district that a federally qualified health clinic would be suitable; the population, the partnership, 501(C)(3)s, and petitioners who would

want that to be in their neighborhood. I'm excited about it. And I'm excited about the Martin Luther King Center. That is a health clinic that I helped fund so many years ago when their doors were about to close. They are not only open today, but they have sprung two more Federally qualified clinics in order to be able to serve the public. This is a good investment.

As was indicated earlier, our small businesses will finally be able to spell the word relief, r-e-l-i-e-f. They will be able to say, I will be able to not only pay for the owners, but my employees will be able to get insurance, and that is a great mechanism. And we should not let anyone, in essence, dump on our parade. We should not let anyone miscalculate or mischaracterize, if you will, how much of an impact the small business tax exemption will be for those small businesses to allow them to be able to provide health insurance for their employees.

Small businesses are the backbone of America. They are probably the largest employers of the American economy. They want to provide insurance for those mothers and fathers who work for them every day, who are committed and dedicated--sometimes they are mothers and fathers with family businesses--and now they will be able to do so, and I believe that is very important.

The doughnut hole was the most horrific vote that was taken here in the United States Congress some years ago, which was for Medicare part D. We lasted on the floor of the House until 6 o'clock because our friends on the other side of the aisle could not get a vote until they squeezed it out of some of our colleagues. It was horrific. For those who don't understand it, it means that you pay for your prescription drugs, which are going through the roof, until you, as a senior, fall in the hole because you've gotten a catastrophic illness, and they will wind up paying for you. What an atrocity. We're going to close that hole in the next 2 years.

As well, right now, seniors should be receiving $250 checks in their hands. We recognize the undermining of your health care because of Medicare part D. First of all, it was unrealistically expensive, and certainly, it was a plan that we Democrats have indicated was a wrong- headed decision. Obviously, we have been proven right. Part of our deficit, which was spoken so loudly about by the other side of the aisle, was caused by Medicare part D, and the large majority of our party, our caucus, voted against it. Really, it was a wrong-headed direction to take.

Here is another negative that the naysayers would say: well, you can hardly get into doctors' offices today. How are you going to get into their offices now? They're standing in line. I'm afraid that I'm not going to be able to see a doctor.

They were scaring seniors with that kind of information. Well, I think that when people are inclined to serve, there is a great deal of love and affection for the medical profession. Yet one of the reasons we don't have the numbers is that we have not been able to give people opportunities. It is very expensive training, so we will be engaged in providing resources to train nurses, nurse practitioners, and physicians. We will actually have resources to give young people who want to go into that profession.

I spoke at the High School for Health Professions in my district. They have a diverse student body, but many of them are not going into the health profession. Yet many are, and more would if they had the resources to do so. So we are excited about that.

As I focus on closing on some of these points, let me quickly bring something in that you might not think is related to the health care bill, but it is. The BP oil spill is plaguing the gulf coast. More importantly, there is human devastation, if you will. There is the devastation of not working in the shrimping, fishing and oyster industries. There are some energy industry workers who are now not working as well. All of those individuals were probably living off their salaries or off the revenue that they brought in day to day and month to month. I would imagine that some of those individuals did not have health insurance. They might have even been paying a fee for service because they made choices of putting money into businesses as opposed to into health care. Well, now we have an opportunity for these individuals, if they are at risk, to either go into a high-risk pool or to prospectively be able to go into a health exchange to be able to get the most cost-effective health insurance that they might be able to get.

With that in mind, I would like to indict, if you will, those States for refusing to get into the health exchange program, like my State, which has the highest number of uninsured, as evidenced by Dr. Oz, who came to Houston, but also as evidenced by the data that says that Texas needs opportunities for people to be insured. So I would hope that we would have the kind of energy and excitement around this idea of the health exchange so that States would have to engage in it because the people would rise up and would say that they wanted it.

Of course, under this bill, hospitals which have been facing increasing costs with no compensation now will have the opportunity to be paid for uncompensated care. We hope those numbers will go down now because, obviously, if they go down, it will mean more people will have gotten their own insurance; but just in case, these hospitals will have that.

I want to close on these last two points which I think are unique to the Congressional Black Caucus. One is to express great applause to the CBC Health Care Task Force with Dr. Donna Christensen and to the Tri- Caucus health effort, because out of that effort came the very important language on disparities or on the continuing work on disparities that we see amongst our minority population, such as with regard to diabetes, kidney failure, heart failure, and such as with regard to devastating breast cancer. These are elements that are clearly as a result of disparities that were not addressed, and I think we will see more opportunities for clinicals where minorities will be used so we will be able to find causes and will begin to find cures for some of these devastating diseases in the minority community.

Lastly, our work is yet unfinished. I worked very hard on the issue of physician-owned hospitals. Many of us thought that the passage of the bill was worthy of our looking down the road and of our making sure that we would cure that problem. It is a serious problem because these hospitals were stigmatized as hospitals that were all for-profit and not for service. I know for a fact that the hospitals that are in the State of Texas which hire or which have at least 40,000-plus employees are serving their constituents with OB/GYN and with full service care. One of the hospitals in my district was the only hospital that had a wing dedicated to H1N1 when it was rampant here in the United States.

I am looking forward to the leaders of these hospitals having the opportunity to come back to Washington to sit down with our leadership and to talk about making sure that these hospitals are not discriminated against as it relates to Medicare reimbursement. Some language allows that to happen in the bill, but it is a very peculiar formula that may not match all of the needs of the constituents who need to be taken care of by these hospitals.

So I thank the distinguished gentlelady from Ohio for her constant leadership. She has a great medical community in Cleveland, a community that certainly was engaged in this process of putting together this very, very strong health care reform bill, historic in its own efforts; and I thank her for her leadership.

My final words are: it is never easy to make hard decisions. We said that as we debated and as we compared this to the 1964 Civil Rights Act and to the 1965 Voting Rights Act. There were many in their home districts who threatened them for taking that vote. Where would America be today if we had not taken the strides to break down the shackles of discrimination to allow all Americans to vote? I hope and I pray and I believe that we will have the same opportunity to look back on history in 2010 and will be able to say how we have changed the lives of Americans and how we have saved the lives of Americans.

With that, I yield back to the gentlelady, and I thank her again for her leadership.

Mr. Oberstar, thank you for your leadership. Chairman Cummings, as well, thank you for your leadership.

The Coast Guard is poised in the gulf working overtime, waiting for this drawdown, which is a reimbursable drawdown. But we have to do something now. We have to do something for the shrimpers, the fishermen, the oystermen, the restaurants. We have to do something for the people who are bleeding and need our help.

This is a BP problem, but it is an oil industry problem. We have to see them rise to the occasion, to develop a better claims system, to develop a recovery plan. But right now, the Coast Guard, as told to us in a meeting with them last week with Chairman Cummings and Chairwoman Brown, they need the money now. This is an important step.

We can go back and look at the noes, but we've got to say yes today. Vote for this legislation.

I also wish to thank Senator Reid for introducing this very important piece of legislation in such a timely manner. Today, I rise in support of S. 3473, an amendment that would authorize advances from the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund as created by the Oil Pollution Act of 1990.

BP is dragging its heels on the oil spill cleanup. The sooner we can get the wheels turning on the cleanup, the sooner we can make families whole again and ensure a safe environment for the Americans that had to bear the brunt of this disaster of mammoth proportions. Releasing some of the funds from the aforementioned trust will allow individuals to be able to support themselves in their Gulf-based industry. Just yesterday I testified before the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee and proposed legislation that would allow for the release of 100 million dollars from the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund.

The sooner we address the problem, the more likely we are to prevent more extensive damage. It has been well noted that BP's efforts alone will not suffice. As members of Congress, we must do everything we can to address and resolve this crisis in the most expedient manner, and releasing these funds will allow for a more efficient response.

This amendment would provide a much-needed source of recourse and restitution for those victimized by this environmental disaster of massive proportions, caused by the April 20, 2010 explosion on the Deepwater Horizon oil vessel. It will also provide an avenue for accountability, which should be assigned, appropriately, to the parties responsible for imposing such suffering on the residents of the Gulf Coast area.

We are all very much aware of the hardship that has been inflicted upon the people in the Gulf Coast region. The oil, gushing at a rate of at least 12,000 to 19,000 barrels a day, has now spread over 42 miles beyond the spill site, 3,300 miles beneath the surface of the ocean. In its most concentrated areas, oil plumes created by the spill are sometimes over 15 miles long and 1,500 feet thick, depths below the water. This does not even account for the immense volume of oil which is less concentrated, but still very much diluted with the water of the Gulf Coast.

The immediate effects of the spill are being felt as far west as Houma, Louisiana, and as far east as the Apalachicola Bay in Florida. Not only have there been serious environmental effects, but marine wildlife has been seriously impeded by the developments. Fishermen and workers in related industries are

being deprived of their very source of income and livelihood. Even further, there are health effects resulting from the disaster that are increasing in number, daily.

According to a recent CNN article, there have been 71 reported cases of oil disaster related health problems ranging anywhere from headaches and coughing to more serious ailments. Additionally, the oil has reached shorelines across the coast, and is affecting beaches and their patrons.

It is imperative not only that the victims and potential claimants be afforded a source of recourse for the significant interruption of their way of life, but that the remedy process be made available in a timely fashion, as the effects of the oil spill are being compounded every day.

The Oil Pollution Act of 1990, adopted in response to the Exxon Valdez Alaska oil spill in 1989, governs the claims process associated with the British Petroleum disaster. According to the Act, any party liable for any threat or actual discharge of oil from a vessel or facility to navigable waters, adjoining shorelines, or the exclusive economic zone of the United States, is responsible for all cleanup costs incurred. Additionally, claimants may recover damages for injury to natural resources, loss of personal property, economic losses, and loss of subsistence use of natural resources. However, the Act caps economic damages at $75 million from the party or parties responsible for an oil spill.

Seventy five million dollars is simply insufficient to compensate the victims of such a massive disaster. The law was passed in light of the Exxon Valdez oil spill. That spill was considered to be one of the largest environmental disasters in history, and involved the disgorgement of at least 10.8 million gallons of crude oil into Alaska waters.

I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. Speaker, the research by USA Today shows that Americans are paying the lowest tax rates since the 1950s-- not the 1990s, not 2001 or 2002, but since the 1950s. The Democrats' tax cuts for middle class and small businesses are helping this economy. The economy continues to move in the right direction and it is being sustained. Unemployment is going down in 90 percent of our metropolitan areas.

And the President is attacking the BP oil spill in the right way. But as I represent the gulf region where fishermen and oystermen are, as well as oil workers, we've got to ensure that we continue to save jobs. That means the industry has to reform itself. No permit should be issued unless there is a defined recovery plan that is approved and vetted by experts that are independent of the government and the industry.

We are saving and creating jobs, but we are as concerned about safety and security. This is the right path. Democrats reduced taxes. The President is in charge. We're going to be able to see America recover.

My good friend is absolutely right. We're here today to talk about the reform of FHA and to really give relief to the borrowers who will have the ability to see the current cap on mortgage insurance premiums increase and generally give opportunity for Americans to make whole and make good on the home buyers market to get back into the market.

The sub-prime debacle, the whole foreclosure devastation, tragedy happened on the last administration's clock, the Republican administration's clock. So I wonder now when we stand here to try to help new home buyers get into the market, work with the real estate industry, and make people whole, there seems to be an opposition.

The whole GSE reform was something that could have been done under the last administration's clock, but they wanted to take a sledge hammer and axe and destroy the opportunity for individuals to be able to access the kind of moneys and resources so you could get into a home.

I support this legislation, H.R. 5072, the FHA Reform Act, because what it will do is to give Americans back their wealth again, allow them to buy homes, give them the insurance premiums that they need, and to get us back on track. This is the right direction. Let's keep going forward to help America stay strong.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 5072--``FHA Reform Act of 2010''. The Chair of the Financial Services Committee, Barney Frank, Chairwoman Maxine Waters of the Subcommittee on Housing and Community Opportunity, and the co-sponsors of this bill must be applauded for moving this important legislation to the floor. This legislation amends the National Housing Act to authorize the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, HUD, to increase the maximum annual premium payments for mortgage insurance, and makes the charging of the premiums discretionary instead of mandatory.

The Federal Housing Administration, FHA, has its origins in the post- depression era. However, in the last several years, FHA has been a major force in breathing life into the depressed housing market. With 51 percent of African Americans homebuyers and 45 percent of Hispanic families who purchased homes in 2008, using FHA financing, FHA is far and away the leader in helping minorities purchase and maintain their homes.

Subprime mortgage loans, which were at the heart of the housing crisis, were disproportionately made to blacks and other minorities. For example, Wells Fargo loan officers described the high interest rate mortgages targeted at Black homeowners as ``ghetto loans,'' an unacceptable and terribly offensive reference. As a result, a disproportionate number of blacks and minorities have been forced into foreclosure. In predominantly Black neighborhoods, 1 in every 8 loans dispersed by the large lender, Wells Fargo, resulted in foreclosure, while in predominantly White neighborhoods, only 1 of every 59 Wells Fargo loans resulted in foreclosure.

With the increase in foreclosures, foreclosure rescue and loan modification scams have been on the rise. The Internet has been flooded with schemes by fraudulent organizations and individuals who are charging fees for counseling services, a service that HUD provides free of charge. Some of these scams go as far as to require homeowners to sign over or transfer the deeds to their homes, and many are simply absconding with the mortgage payments that homeowners are struggling to make.

Something must be done to protect these hard working Americans, who are already facing financial distress and the potential loss of their home, from these predatory schemes. The Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP) was implemented just over a year ago to aide homeowners in modifying their loans as opposed to turning to these fraudulent schemes. Unfortunately, the program has been unable to keep pace with the quickening pace of foreclosures.

In 2010, over 40 years since the Federal Housing Administration was established, FHA is playing an increasingly important role in stabilizing economically disadvantaged communities, while providing assistance to families across a wide-range of incomes. As John Taylor testified before the Financial Services Subcommittee Housing and Community Opportunity, ``research by Dan Immergluck shows that FHA lending is more likely in communities experiencing high unemployment, smaller metropolitan areas, metropolitan areas experiencing large home price declines, and Zip codes with lower median home values. In other words, FHA lending has increased while conventional lending has decreased in communities hardest hit by the current severe recession.''

Despite this, more must be done to protect home owners and enable prospective homebuyers. This reform bill is a vital step toward that end. Section 4 of this legislation authorizes the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development to terminate approval of a mortgagee to originate or underwrite single family mortgages if the mortgagee's rate of early defaults and claims is excessive. This will help to reverse the damage caused by predatory lending, and help families keep their homes. This will have a ripple effect throughout countless cities because entire neighborhoods are currently at risk of being abandoned due to foreclosures. Saving these neighborhoods will keep communities intact, and will preserve neighborhoods for revitalization that is vital to the nation's economic recovery efforts.

Section 14 of this legislation authorizes the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development to reimburse servicers of HUD-insured residential mortgages for the costs of obtaining the services of specified independent third parties, including a HUD-approved housing counseling agency, to make in-person contact, at no charge, with mortgagors whose payments are 60 or more days past due, solely to provide information regarding: (1) HUD-approved housing counseling agencies; and (2) mortgage loan modification, refinance, and assistance programs. During these trying economic times, this HUD-approved counseling must be a vital tool for families at risk of defaulting on their mortgagees, as they decide on the best financial course of action at no cost to them.

It is my hope that this legislation will help to enable these disadvantaged groups, as well as struggling homeowners to retain their homes if they own one, or to buy homes for the first time if they do not. As Graciela Aponte of the National Council of La Raza testified before the Financial Services Subcommittee on Housing and Community Opportunity, ``communities of color, low-income families, and first time homebuyers--FHA's target market--have been disproportionally impacted by the toxic subprime mortgages on the housing market.''

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Once again, I strongly urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the FHA Reform Act of 2010, H.R. 5072. Legislation this important to the American homeowner and to our economy must be passed immediately.

Mr. Chair. I rise in support of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010. As a member of both the Foreign Affairs and Homeland Security Committees, I support Chairman Ike Skelton and the Democratic leadership's investment in our military to increase our national security. I support our men and women in the armed forces and our need to ensure our national security.

This defense bill reflects our commitment to support the men and women who fight to secure not only our citizen's freedom, but the freedom of others. This bill will provide the necessary resources to protect the American people and our national interests at home and abroad. The Armed Services committee has provided for military readiness; taking care of our troops and their families; increasing focus on the war in Afghanistan; and improving

interagency cooperation, oversight, and accountability in this year's defense authorization bill.

I thank the Chair for this opportunity to explain the amendments I propose to the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010. My first amendment would require the Secretary of Defense to provide a report, not later than December 1, 2010 to the Congressional Black Caucus, that includes a list of minority-owned, women-owned, and disadvantaged small businesses, who receive contracts resulting from authorized funding to the Department of Defense. The list shall cover the 10 calendar years preceding this Act and shall include for each listed business, the name of the business, the business owner and the amount of the contract award.

Mr. Chair, I have long supported efforts to increase opportunities for small businesses, especially those that are minority-owned, women- owned and disadvantaged. We know that small businesses are the engine to our economy and that they provide much needed support for communities across the country. Small businesses employ 57.4 million Americans. Many Americans seek to fulfill the American dream by becoming small business owners and everyone in the United States should be given the same opportunity to fulfill that dream.

Women and minorities have long been disadvantaged when it comes to getting business opportunities and it is important to provide educational resources that will enable women, minorities and other disadvantaged business owners to arm themselves with the necessary tools they need to operate viable and thriving businesses. This will only improve communities throughout the United States.

My second amendment would make available post-traumatic stress counseling for civilians affected by the Fort Hood shooting, and shootings at other domestic military bases.

Many of those who passed in the November shooting were at Fort Hood preparing to risk their lives for our country. I would like to express my deepest sympathies for the loss of these 13 soldiers. My thoughts and prayers go out to their families during their time of bereavement. It is unacceptable that soldiers should fear attacks on American soil. I want the military and their families to always be protected as they are the backbone of American society. It is not only our soldiers who make sacrifices to protect our great nation, but their families and civilians as well. I am deeply saddened and troubled by the shootings at Fort Hood, especially because soldiers and their families from my own district are there.

I want to commend the soldiers at Fort Hood for their valiant and selfless acts of bravery. Soldiers rushed to treat their injured colleagues by ripping their uniforms into makeshift bandages. The top commander at Fort Hood is crediting a civilian police officer, Sgt. Kimberly Munley, for stopping the shooting. Fort Hood police Sgt. Kimberly Munley and her partner responded within three minutes of reported gunfire, and Munley shot the gunman four times despite being shot herself.

Another story of heroism is that of 19 year old Amber Bahr. The nutritionist put a tourniquet on a wounded soldier and carried him out to medical care. And only after she had taken care of others did she realize she had been shot. Both women heroically intervened despite being shot.

Incidents like this bring light to the types of issues our military service men and women face on a daily basis. When I visited Fort Hood, and spoke with the victims of the shooting, I was reminded that we can not ignore the side effects of military service, and we must ensure that both the physical and mental health of those who serve our country is carefully attended.

Although the shootings all took place on one day, they will leave a legacy on each soldier, contractor, and civilian on the base. Many base personnel, like Sergeant Munley and Ms. Bahr witnessed events as horrific as those on any battlefield. Similar to returning from the battlefield, soldiers and contractors who were at Fort Hood must go through a painful rehabilitation process to come to terms with the events they witnessed and experienced.

There have been numerous reports of Enlisted Personnel, National Guards, Reservists and Veterans suffering from PTSD-like symptoms for well over 100 years. Some examples are veterans of U.S. Civil War who suffered emotional problems and were said to be afflicted with ``soldier's heart'' or ``Da Costa's Syndrome'', veterans of World War I was diagnosed as ``shell shocked'', veterans of World War II were classified with ``battle fatigue'' or ``combat fatigue''. Other terms used to describe military-related mood disturbances include ``nostalgia'', ``not yet diagnosed nervousness'', irritable heart'', effort syndrome'', ``war neurosis'' and ``operational exhaustion''. War veterans are the most publicly-recognized victims of PTSD; long-term psychiatric illness was formally observed in World War I and the syndrome entered public consciousness after the Vietnam War.

Enlisted Personnel, National Guards, Reservists and Veterans with PTSD have lived through traumatic events that caused them to fear for their lives, bear witness to horrible things, and feel helpless and hopeless. PTSD symptoms usually start soon after the traumatic event, but they may not manifest until months or years later. If provided proper medical care, about half, 40 percent to 60 percent, of people who develop PTSD get better at some time.

Although veterans who served in combat are most frequently afflicted by PTSD, events such as the Fort Hood shooting highlight the physical and psychological dangers facing military personnel in all roles. Consequently, it is extremely vital to extend to our civilian personnel the same benefits and support that we give to our active duty military. Civilians and military members on Fort Hood have equal responsibility to protect our nation and, as such, it is morally imperative that we honor these civilians by providing then with equal support in the aftermath of such traumatic incidents.

I have worked with my colleagues to secure $1 million in Federal funding in the Fiscal Year 2010 Defense Appropriations Bill for Riverside General Hospital in Houston, Texas. Riverside General Hospital was founded due to the heroic efforts of veterans in the First World War. Riverside General Hospital, formerly the Houston Negro Hospital was erected in 1926 in memory of Lieutenant John Halm Cullinan, 344th FA, and 90th Division AEP. Today, Riverside General Hospital is the only private African-American-owned hospital in the state of Texas that is contracted to provide inpatient psychiatric and inpatient detoxification services to TRICARE Beneficiaries. These funds will provide trained experienced physicians, nurses, therapists and other healthcare professionals the necessary services to treat post traumatic stress disorders for enlisted personnel, National Guards, Reservists and veterans discharged and/or on leave of duty. In addition, Riverside will provide psychiatric, medical emergency medical inpatient, and outpatient services.

It is time to end this distinct method of discrimination and we should not rest until this message is clear. Every American has the right to stand among their peers to undertake the noble task of defending this great nation. The U.S. military loses patriotic and talented men and women every day due to the discriminatory ``Don't Ask Don't Tell'' policy. Since 1993, DADT has forced over 13,000 qualified and patriotic men and women to leave the service. It has made many thousands more decide not to re-enlist. There is empirical data existing in the Armed Services of our allies as we stand with them in Iraq and Afghanistan. The militaries of the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, Israel and the Netherlands are clear examples that, in spite of concerns before the change, it became a nonissue once gays and lesbians were allowed to serve. Now we must do right by all of our American warriors and move forward together on repealing DADT.

In 1965 as the commencement speaker at Howard University, President Johnson stated, ``We seek not just equality as a right and a theory but equality as a fact and equality as a result.'' Do we deny the freedom of an openly gay man or woman who serves in our military? The ``Don't Tell, Don't Ask,'' policy violates both openly gay men and women constitutional rights to privacy and their right to be treated equally with heterosexuals. I support the ``Don't Tell, Don't Ask Repeal,'' policy.

We must maintain our efforts to restore military readiness in order to meet current military challenges and prepare for the future, and civilians area a major part of the military readiness equation. Importantly, this defense bill:

Establishes a $500 million DOD Rapid Innovation Program to help DOD quickly transition innovative, life-saving equipment from small businesses and other innovative firms into the hands of our men and women in combat.

Authorizes $2.6 billion for Homeland Defense and counter proliferation activities, including $1 billion for the Defense Threat Reduction Agency and $1.6 billion for the Chemical Biological Defense Program.

Fully funds the $20 million budget request for two cyber security new start programs.

Expands ``1206 funding'' authority to build the capacity of foreign military forces to participate in military and stability operations to support efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan, including $75 million to build the capacity of counterterrorism forces of the Yemeni Ministry of the Interior.

Extends DOD's Pakistan Counterinsurgency Fund through FY11.

Provides $200 million to address urgent force protection needs in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Authorizes $9.7 billion for unclassified National Security Space programs, including $40 million for additional ORS satellites to meet commanders' urgent needs.

Provides a 1.9 percent pay raise to troops.

Expands TRICARE health coverage to include adult dependent children up to age 26.

Increases family separation allowance for troops who are deployed away from their families.

Increases hostile fire and imminent danger pay for the first time since 2004.

Expands college loan repayment benefits.

Includes the most comprehensive legislative package to ever address sexual assault in the military, including 28 provisions to implement into law many of the recommendations of the Defense Task Force on Sexual Assault.

Establishes a pilot program to offer an alternative career path to military officers, providing a broader range of experiences over a longer career.

Establishes a pilot program to help military spouses take advantage of their personal skill sets to identify and obtain desirable and portable careers.

Authorizes an additional special one-time payment to seriously wounded servicemembers to pay for the relocation costs of their caregivers;

Provides $1.2 billion with broad authorities for projects in Afghanistan to allow our commanders on the ground to immediately respond to military construction needs in theater.

In closing, I hope my colleagues will join me in support of H.R. 5136. I believe we are all on one accord that without reservation we support our men and women of the United States military. I support this bill and I ask my colleagues to support my proposed amendments and H.R. 5136.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Res. 1258, ``Expressing support for designation of May 2010 as Mental Health Month.''

Mental health issues pose a serious problem for the people of this nation. Roughly 57 million people in the U.S. suffer from some form of mental illness. These illnesses affect not only the quality of life of the individual, but also the health of our communities, families, and our economic stability. Untreated mental illness is the leading cause of lost productivity and absenteeism in the workplace, resulting in an estimated $193 billion per year in lost earnings.

In addition to lost time and productivity, untreated mental illnesses far too frequently result in lost lives. In recent years, the suicide rate has been double the homicide rate; suicide is the third leading cause of death for people between 15 and 24. While the problem of mental illness and depression knows no demographic boundaries, suicide rates are particularly high among the elderly and Native Americans.

The challenges of mental illness impact our military as well. Roughly a quarter of our service members suffer either psychological or neurological disorders, including depression and PTSD.

I support the designation of May as Mental Health Month, and urge my colleagues to join me. We need to recognize that mental well-being is as important as physical well-being for our citizens, families, and communities, and that our failure, as a nation, to prioritize mental health care is a tragedy. We need to remove the stigma from mental illness and encourage people to seek assistance, promote public awareness of the problem, and improve access to appropriate services for our citizens.

Madam Speaker, I rise to address the Chair regarding my absence from rollcall votes 246-248 on Wednesday, May 5, 2010.

Madam Speaker, I was not able to cast my votes during rollcall 246- 248 on May 5, 2010 because I was on official business. I would like to state for the record how I would have voted had I been present.

For rollcall vote 246, on motion to suspend the rules and agree as amended to H. Res.

1320, ``Expressing support for the vigilance and prompt response of the citizens and law enforcement agencies in New York and Connecticut to the attempted terrorist attack in Times Square, May 1, 2010,'' I would have voted aye;

For rollcall vote 247, on motion to suspend the rules and agree as to H. Res. 1272, ``Commemorating the 40th anniversary of the May 4, 1970, Kent State University shootings,'' I would have voted aye;

For rollcall vote 248, on motion to suspend the rules and agree as amended, H. Res. 1301, ``Supporting the goals and ideals of National Train Day,'' I would have voted aye.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2711, the Special Agent Samuel Hicks Families of Fallen Heroes Act. I also want to thank my colleague, Mr. Rogers, for introducing this important legislation.

This legislation aims to authorize the FBI to pay the relocation and moving expenses for families of FBI agents who are killed in the line of duty. At present, the law only provides for the FBI to cover these expenses if an FBI agent or an employee is killed overseas. However, payment for the relocation of a decedent's immediate family if the death occurs in the U.S. falls outside the ambit of the current statutory provision.

Special Agent Hicks, the man after whom this legislation is named, was a former police officer with the Baltimore police department. Upon receiving an assignment as an FBI agent, Hicks and his family relocated to Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Special Agent Hicks regrettably lost his life when he was fatally shot on November 19, 2008 at the age of 33 while executing a Federal search warrant associated with a drug distribution ring. He is survived by his wife and their 2-year-old son. The Bureau was unable to assist the Hicks family in moving back to Baltimore because of restrictive construction of the statute providing only for the financial assistance to families of agents perishing overseas.

This instance of a family of a federal law enforcement officer being denied the financial assistance they required to relocate is indicative of the error in the construction of the initial remedial statute. Allowing for domestic family members of fallen federal agents or employees to receive the same assistance that foreign families receive will widen the scope of the statute and provide much needed relief to those persons touched by such tragedy.

FBI employees take on tremendous responsibilities to ensure the safety and the security of these United States. As such, agents and their families are moved throughout the country, dispersed to its very corners, in pursuit of this nation's protection. In the event of an untimely and tragic death, we would like to bring help to the fallen hero's family within the perimeter of this new legislation--regardless of whether the tragedy strikes abroad or here at home.

Unfortunately, in the recent past there have been instances in which such authority was needed to support the families of agents or employees who gave their lives for this country, and received no assistance at all. This legislation seeks to remedy this wrong, and hopefully with its passage the immediate family of FBI agents or employees will receive the help they deserve.

The foregoing reasons outline the importance of our attention this legislation seeks to afford those families of federal agents or employees that the initial statutes did not cover. We must provide financial assistance to the families of domestic fallen heroes.

I urge my colleagues to support this bill.