Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, let me say that when Democrats gather, good things happen for the American people. Our health care bill is a bill that will bring down premiums, save lives, and create a magnificent reform comparable to saving lives when Medicare was passed in 1965. It is only those who are scared and apprehensive and not ready to go forward for the American people that won't allow us to move forward on the health care reform.

Just as when we gather together behind closed doors, Democrats, again, are promoting transparent legislation and creating jobs for Americans. We stand with the small businesses in providing them more resources and credits because they are the backbone of America. We realize that job training, and specifically a bill that I am offering that says that if you're unemployed and get unemployment compensation, you can be in a scholarship program that will train you for the jobs of the future.

The health care bill will be providing jobs on top of jobs: health care jobs, nursing, doctors, and physician assistants. Americans need jobs, and Democrats are not afraid to take the risks that are necessary to provide for them.

As we pass the appropriations bill, we are creating jobs for America, and, therefore, I'm asking my colleagues to assist and not cast about the fears of doom. We are moving this economy. We are helping health care. We are providing the opportunities for America. And I am glad to be a Democrat serving on behalf of the American people.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to stand before you today in support of S. 1472 to establish a section within the Criminal Division of the Department of Justice to enforce human rights laws, to make technical and conforming amendments to criminal and immigration laws pertaining to human rights violations, and for other purposes.

This bipartisan legislation would make it easier for the Justice Department to hold accountable human rights abusers who seek safe haven in the United States. The end of the 20th century and the beginning of the current 21st century have seen ongoing human rights atrocities all over the globe, such as Burma, Sudan, and Bosnia. While an increasing number of perpetrators of such human rights abuses are held accountable in international or state tribunals, many have escaped accountability for their crimes. Some of these human rights abusers have even fled to the United States.

As a representative of the state of Texas, I understand the urgency of creating an effective mechanism for investigating human rights violators that seek to hide out here in the United States. In a 2008 report, retired five-star General Barry McCaffrey warned of a refugee catastrophe that could greatly affect the state of Texas. General McCaffrey warns that ``Mexico is on the edge of abyss'' and that ``it could become a narco-state in the coming decade.'' According to General McCaffrey's report, there could be a surge of millions of refugees crossing the U.S. border. Those millions will almost certainly include individuals who have committed human rights violations in Mexico. And those individuals must be held accountable for their actions.

How the United States treats suspected perpetrators of human rights abuses sends an important message to the world about our commitment to human rights and the rule of law.

The United States has a rich history of protecting human rights and holding violators of such rights accountable. Over 60 years ago, the U.S. led efforts to prosecute Nazi perpetrators at the Nuremberg Trials. The U.S. also supported the prosecution of human rights crimes before the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, the Special Court of Sierra Leone, and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda. But, the United States must do more. The U.S. must make a stronger effort to hold those human rights violators who have found safe haven in the United States accountable for their atrocities.

The Human Rights Enforcement Act would seek to build on the foundations already laid by creating a section inside the Department of Justice's Criminal Division that would focus entirely on enforcing human rights laws. The bill combines the Office of Special Investigations, whose work includes investigating and denaturalizing human rights offenders and the Domestic Security Section, which has broad jurisdiction over human rights violations. This consolidation allows for the Department of Justice to more effectively utilize law enforcement resources to investigate and, where necessary, prosecute, denaturalize, or deport human rights offenders.

The rule of law and human rights are fundamental American values. In accordance with those values, the United States has a rich history of leading the promotion of human rights worldwide. We have a responsibility to set an

example for the rest of the world by demonstrating our commitment to end human rights atrocities and hold perpetrators accountable.

Mr. Speaker, I strongly encourage all of my colleagues to join me in support of S. 1472.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to stand before you today in support of H. Res. 150, expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that A. Philip Randolph should be recognized for his lifelong leadership and work to end discrimination and secure equal employment and labor opportunities for all Americans.

A. Philip Randolph was born on April 15, 1889, in Crescent City, Florida. In 1917, Randolph co-founded The Messenger, a widely read and respected magazine known for its radical persuasion.

Randolph was perhaps most widely known for his work advocating for the rights of workers, and working to end employment discrimination. Randolph worked tirelessly on behalf of African American workers in forming the ``Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters'' (BSCP), an organization designed to advance the claims of African Americans to dignity, respect and a decent livelihood. After Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal forced the Pullman Company to negotiate with the BSCP in 1937, Randolph successfully negotiated the first-ever contract between a company and a black union.

Randolph became one of the most widely known spokespersons for the African American working class in America. In 1940, after Franklin Roosevelt refused to issue an executive order banning discrimination against black workers in the defense industry, Randolph called for 100,000 African Americans to march on Washington, DC. Support for Randolph's march grew so wide that President Roosevelt was forced to issue an executive order on June 25, 1941 declaring ``there shall be no discrimination in the employment of workers in defense industries or government because of race, creed, color or national origin.''

Randolph's legacy of working for labor opportunities and employment justice is alive and thriving today. In my home town of Houston, Texas, students at the University of Houston have carried on the torch of justice for laborers in founding the University of Houston Students Against Sweatshops. These students organized the largest boycott of modern student activism against Russell Athletic, due to labor violations in their factory in Honduras. Thanks to the student effort, Russell has recently agreed to meet worker demands and improve labor conditions for its 1200 workers.

The above example is a testament to the lasting and widespread effects of Randolph's work. As a champion for African American laborers, Randolph was able to shape our nation's values on employment and equality. Today, students from all over the country, including my home state of Texas, have picked up the torch in support of labor rights worldwide.

I ask my colleagues to stand with me in support of H. Res. 150.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H. Res. 971, expressing the sense of the House of Representatives regarding guidelines for breast cancer screening for women ages 40 to 49. I appreciate the leadership of the bill's author, my Judiciary Committee colleague Representative Wasserman Schultz.

This resolution was introduced on the heels of new breast cancer screening guidelines issued last month by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (the ``Task Force''), an independent panel of medical experts. These new guidelines have created cause for concern by some due to the change from the Task Force's 2002 mammography recommendations concerning mammography screening for women age 40-49.

In light of this concern, this resolution underscores the sense of the House that the Task Force recommendations should not prohibit insurance companies from providing mammography services in addition to those in the Task Force recommendations, and should not be used by insurers to deny women coverage for routine screenings. This resolution also urges the National Cancer Institute to continue to invest and provide leadership regarding research to develop more effective screening tools and strategies for improving detection of breast cancer.

This is not the first time recommendations about the use of mammography and breast self exams have been revisited--by the Task Force or NIH or any number of cancer-related research or advocacy groups. Just as we have seen with prostate cancer screening, immunization schedules, and other preventative care measures, new interpretations often result in a change in what experts tell us works most effectively. As the science of medicine evolves, so too, should the recommendations on the best use of that science.

Evolution and improvement are what the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force set out to achieve in undertaking a review of its 2002 mammography guidelines. The Task Force sought to take a fresh look of what has been learned over the last several years, and based upon that body of work, to provide its best professional judgment on what doctors and their patients should consider when they are making decisions about breast cancer screening. Despite the contention on this issue, I trust that the Task Force's deliberations and conclusions were driven by science and not by cost or insurance coverage.

Not withstanding the scientific basis for these new guidelines, I share the concern of Ms. Wasserman Schultz and others such as the Susan G. Komen for the Cure Advocacy Alliance who point out that one-third of all American women do not undergo regular screening. Many of those who go without screening are African American and younger women. According to the Susan G. Komen for the Cure Advocacy Alliance the failure of age-appropriate women to undergo mammography costs lives and reflects problems with access to care and breast cancer education.

Mr. Speaker, we need to work as rapidly as possible to correct these deficiencies, and continue to fund research and education designed to eliminate health care disparities. We want to eliminate any impediments to regular mammography screening for women age 50 and below. While there may be disagreement about the exact timing of breast cancer assessments, I believe there is unanimous consensus over the importance of guaranteeing access to screening.

New screening approaches and more individualized recommendations for breast cancer screening are urgently needed. I support research initiatives designed to improve screening, and believe that it is imperative that this research move forward rapidly. Furthermore, I encourage African American and other women with unresolved questions about breast cancer screening to engage in discussion with their health care providers.

If the new guidelines have done nothing else, I believe it has at least raised awareness, not only amongst women, but amongst all Americans. As such, I encourage my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 3714, the Daniel Pearl Freedom of the Press Act of 2009. This legislation amends the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 by expanding. the Annual Country Reports on Human Rights Practices to include information about freedom of the press in foreign countries and establishing a grant program to promote freedom of the press worldwide. I support this resolution because I believe that freedom of the press is an important pillar of democracy and should be actively promoted in our foreign policy.

I would like to first thank my colleague, Congressman Adam Schiff, for introducing this valuable legislation. Freedom of the press is essential to a functioning democracy. In 1823, Thomas Jefferson said, ``The only security of all is in a free press. The force of public opinion cannot be resisted when permitted freely to be expressed. The agitation it produces must be submitted to. It is necessary, to keep the waters pure.'' Unfortunately, the truth of that statement, which is codified in the United States Constitution, is not universally recognized and the freedom of the press is not universally protected.

In Iran, for example, the government assiduously monitors the press and journalists and media outlets face government repression if protocol is not followed. An Iranian journalist, Fariba Pajooh, has been detained since August of this year without being told of her charge. That is merely the tip of the iceberg: according to Reporters without Borders, since the June Presidential election, the Iranian government has arrested more than 100 reporters and sentenced those reporters to more than 65 years in prison.

Not coincidentally, those governments that refuse to recognize the freedom of the press are the same governments who have the most to fear from democracy. Governments that suppress, intimidate, or oppress journalists do so because their regimes do not have the full legitimacy that marks democratic governments. It is understandable but not forgivable that a government afraid of the destabilizing influence of the truth would restrict the press. The long-term best interest of any country is protected, though, when a country is allowed to know the truth about its government and the world.

H.R. 3714 provides the United States and the world with a powerful tool to advocate for freedom of the press. Under this legislation, the State Department will be required to include freedom of the press in the Annual Country reports on Human Rights Practices. The State Department will describe the positive and negative steps that governments have taken with regards to freedom of the press. Additionally, H.R. 3714 establishes a grant program whereby the U.S. State Department can fund activities by nonprofit and international organizations to strengthen independent journalism, promote laws protecting the freedom of the press, and provide training to professionalize journalists.

This legislation will raise the profile of freedom of the press around the world. By enumerating the abuses committed as well as the positive steps taken towards a free press, the

world will see plainly the status of democracy in every country. Additionally, it will allow the United States to help foster independent journalism in countries in every region that do not have the tradition or the capacity for a professional free press.

In addition to the foreign policy benefits, I support this legislation, because I believe that it is a fitting tribute to a great American, Daniel Pearl. Mr. Pearl was a Wall Street Journal correspondent who was abducted and beheaded in Karachi, Pakistan in early 2002. His life was spent in the pursuit of spreading truth through professional journalism and in his death he has become a symbol of the free press. This bill adds to the legacy he built with his life.

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2194, the Iran Refined Petroleum Sanctions Act of 2009. This legislation provides another tool for the President to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons by allowing the administration to sanction foreign firms who attempt to supply refined gasoline to Iran or provide them with the materials to enhance their oil refineries. These sanctions would further restrict the government of Iran's ability to procure refined petroleum. Currently, the availability of petroleum products is stagnant in Iran. Private firms have decided that the government of Iran's refusal to cooperate with the multilateral community on nuclear proliferation generates a significant risk to doing business with Iran.

I would like to thank Chairman Berman, for incorporating my concerns about the human rights situation in Iran into the findings of this legislation. It is important that we acknowledge that, throughout 2009, the government of Iran has persistently violated the rights of its citizens. The government of Iran's most overt display of disregard for human rights happened in the Presidential elections on June 12, 2009. As I said on June 19, 2009, ``we must condemn Iran for the absence of fair and free Presidential elections and urge Iran to provide its people with the opportunity to engage in a Democratic election process.'' The repression and murder, arbitrary arrests, and show trials of peaceful dissidents in the wake of the elections were a sad reminder of the government of Iran's long history of human rights violations. The latest violations were the most recent iteration of the government of Iran's wanton suppression of the freedom of expression.

It is important that we are clear that our concerns are with the government of Iran and not its people. The State Department's Human Rights Report on Iran provides a bleak picture of life in Iran. The government of Iran, through its denial of the democratic process and repression of dissent has prevented the people from determining their own future. Moreover, it is the government of Iran that persecutes its ethnic minorities and denies the free expression of religion. As we proceed with consideration of this legislation, we should all remember that the sole target of these sanctions is the Iranian government.

Madam Speaker, the government of Iran has repeatedly shown its disdain for the international community by disregarding international nonproliferation agreements. Iran's flagrant violation of nonproliferation agreements was evidenced most recently in the discovery of the secret enrichment facility at Qom. The government of Iran's continued threats against Israel, opposition to the Middle East peace process, and support of international terrorist organizations further demonstrate the necessity for action.

Iran's recent actions towards the international community reflect a very small measure of progress. Iran's decision to allow International Atomic Energy Agency, IAEA, inspectors to visit this facility was a positive sign, but not a sufficient indication of their willingness to comply with international agreements. The recent announcement that Iran will accept a nuclear fuel deal is also indicative of their willingness to engage in dialogue, though it remains to be seen what amendments that they will seek to the deal. While these actions indicate a small degree of improvement in Iran's position, the legislation before us today demonstrates that only continued dialogue and positive actions will soften the international community's stance towards Iran.

I would also like to emphasize that the legislation before us provides only one tool for achieving Iran's compliance with international nonproliferation agreements. I continue to support the Administration's policy of engagement with Iran and use of diplomatic talks. I believe that diplomacy and multilateralism are the most valuable tools we have to create change in Iran. After those tools fail, I believe that the sanctions are an appropriate recourse.

Madam Speaker, I join my colleagues as a member of the Subcommittee on the Mideast and South Asia on the House Foreign Affairs Committee. Today our committee debated a very important initiative dealing with Iran sanctions. But it is interesting that we find ourselves in one domino effect after another: Iran, Iraq, and then, by extension, Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Today I rise with a plea to this government and to the State Department to save those who are now huddled at Camp Ashraf in Iraq; this government that we have propped up, that we have seen thousands of our treasure lost in Iraq so that we could have a democratic government, so that it would have its own boundaries and its own sovereignty, so it would not be governed and be a puppet of some other country. But yet Iranian dissidents are now huddled, fearful for their lives. In fact, Assistant Secretary of State Jeffrey Feldman said, We're actually more concerned about an Iraqi desire to move Camp Ashraf to someplace else inside Iraq. The expectation is that they would try to forcibly move them to a different location in Iraq and that, too, would lead to bloodshed.

Iraqi authorities under Amnesty International says it must not forcibly relocate 3,400 Iranian opponents and that forced removals of the residents of Camp Ashraf would put them at risk of arbitrary arrest, torture or other forms of ill treatment and unlawful killing.

I've met with Iranians, their families, many of whom are in this camp, a niece, a mother, a brother, and they have no relief. They have no refuge but us. And so it is crucial that we intervene with the present Iraqi Government, seemingly sometimes a puppet of Iran, to not in any way cause the bloodshed and the loss of these dear souls.

All they wanted to do is to be in freedom. Yes, they have disagreement with the present government, but they are refugees in the world order; in the world sense they are refugees, fleeing oppression. And let me tell you where Iraq wants to send these huddled few thousand who simply want to be left alone, who have already been under the eye of the storm, who have seen loved ones lost, bloodshed inside the camp.

And where do they want to send them? To the east of this area is Al Busayyah and to the west is Al Shabaka, the resting place for tribes and migrants who live in the Iraqi desert. Moving sand hills, which in the summer reach temperatures of 158 Fahrenheit under the heat of the sun, prevent growth of plants and creation of waterways and toilets for the migrant tribes. Some of the small and large wild trees which cover a small part of the area are desperate to survive during sandstorms and the relocation of moving sand hills. Many of them have been trapped under the moving sand hills while many others, despite having deep roots, are taken in the sandstorm to locations dozens of kilometers away. This is where the members of Camp Ashraf will be sent--a vast desert of death.

And so it is imperative that this government that we have propped up, that we have sent our soldiers to die for, don't have the authority to kill 4,000 Iranian dissidents who simply want to live in peace and alone. I hope that we can reach our government to provide safe solace for them, which is one of the reasons that I supported H.R. 2194, the Iran Refined Petroleum Sanctions, which deals with the question of who might attempt to supply refined gasoline to Iran or prevent them with the materials to enhance their oil refineries. This is to make a firm stance against Iran's nuclear proliferation, but it is also a stance against its human rights abuses and its penetration in countries around its area, including Iraq, where they cannot seem to be independent enough, that is, the Iraqi Government, that they would do the bidding of the Iranian despotic government and try to move these innocent persons--women, men and children--to a place where they will surely die.

I am grateful in the language that was submitted in this bill, H.R. 2194, that my language was kept that had to do with concerns of human rights in Iran and that this was put in the findings. It is important that we acknowledge that throughout 2009, the Government of Iran has persistently violated the rights of its citizens. Again I believe it is important for the United States to support the dissidents inside Iran who continuously charge the government with an irregular and illegal election. I hope that we can move forward in saving these lives.

Madam Speaker, as I close on Pakistan and Afghanistan, Pakistan is an ally to the United States in trying to bring peace to Afghanistan.

Let me thank the distinguished gentlelady from the great State of Wisconsin for her persistence in the work that I found her doing when I visited her district some several years ago. She has been persistent and consistent, and I'm delighted to join her this evening, along with my friend and colleague from Virginia. I served with Bobby Scott as the Chairman of the Subcommittee on Crime. But he has redefined that committee, and he realizes, with his experience on the Education and Labor Committee, that we are going down the wrong direction. And I combine the idea of steering people away from a life of crime or the mistakes that we've made in the criminal justice system with the poor response that we have given to our education system. I really think that we have, or we took our education system for granted. It was there. We were at a point in our lives in the 19th century, the 20th century, most particularly when we were really churning in the economy and we were at the cutting edge of invention. We had televisions; we were doing transistor radios; we did the telephone. We were really, if you will, at the peak of the envy of all the world, and we took for granted that individuals would start school, public school, by the way, and they would finish school and some would finish high school, but they would still be at an economic level that they could provide for their families. And others went to college. And so I'm listening to this discussion about our international competitiveness, and I read this sentence to you: America no longer has the smartest students or the smartest workforce in the world.

I would take issue with that and say that we have the smart people, but we have not cultivated them and provided them the support system that a TRIO provides, a steering. It's almost as if you had a playing field and you told people to just get out on that playing field. There were no guidelines, there were no bases to make, there were no touchdowns to make, and what would you get? You'd have very poor results. But if you had some guidelines, if you told them that they had to go from one point to the next, that they had to kick the ball into the field goal area, or they had to make a touchdown, or they to had hit a home run. And that's why I've come to the floor today, because I want to share these statistics, but I want to refute these statistics and I want to say, it's time now to go back to the old, to reinvest in our education as if we cared about it.

And so let me cite these numbers that may have already been put into the Record, but I believe it's important, that show the 2007 trends in international mathematics and science study, which is really a baby of mine. I've been on or served on the Science Committee for 12 years. In that, my emphasis was math and science and NASA and what NASA can do to inspire our young people to want to be scientists and mathematicians. It measures the math and science knowledge of fourth and eighth graders.

Our students don't perform like those in competitor nations. Only 10 percent of U.S. fourth graders and 6 percent of U.S. eighth graders scored at or above the international average in math. That means that 94 percent of our eighth graders are getting beat by countries like Singapore, Hong Kong, England and Russia, and Kazakhstani students scored better in math than our own fourth graders. What does that mean? It means that there is a legitimate argument for TRIO because TRIO provides the kind of road map that gives you the support systems that really cause students who come from disadvantaged backgrounds to get to the finish line, to be able to kick the goal, to make the touchdown, to make the home run.

And I believe that we've been lax in the funding. It's always easy to cut funding for the vulnerable. We don't have to worry about any funding for

the vulnerable because their voices cannot be heard. We know that just across the country, the University of either Southern California or Berkley has students who have been picketing and sitting in for weeks because of tuition increases. So we know how disadvantaged students are more disadvantaged as they raise tuition costs and they don't have support systems.

So, for example, here is what TRIO has done, college going rates for TRIO versus non-TRIO students: All low-income students, 41 percent enrolled in college; Upward Bound participants, 77.3 percent; Upward Bound Math-Science, 86.5 percent; and Talent Search, 79 percent.

What is there to convince that TRIO works, that the support system works?

Student Support Services, low-income bachelor degree attainment with a 6-year period: Student Support Services, 30.9 percent; receive Pell but no support, 21 percent, way down; receive neither Pell nor support, 8.9 percent. They just don't make it.

I'll be happy to yield.

You are eloquent in crafting the frustration that you experience and so many of us experience. And do you know what the answer is? They just don't get it. Not the friends and allies who work so hard, the chairman of the Appropriations Committee on the House side, so many Members who understand what TRIO means, but the overall thinkers about education and how to cut dollars just don't get it.

TRIO costs an average of about $1,000 per student per year, $1,000. Pell is estimated to spend approximately $25 billion helping over 7 million students get aid. The combination of a TRIO effort for a student counters the tragedy, and let me just retract that word and not utilize ``tragedy,'' but when you look at it and you say we are the country that spent the 20th century just inventing about everything the world now uses, when we think of China, we are glad that it has made gigantic steps of development. It still is a developing nation, and a lot of what China has made its economic rise on has been what we invented in the 20th century and now they make it in a cheaper manner.

So what we are losing is we are losing the genius of our invention and inventiveness. H-1B is what you're talking about. The H-1B visas have become the popular response. So I'm not going to worry about the fact that our children don't know math and science. Forget about it. We'll just import thousands upon thousands.

I have no quarrel with them. We just stood today and introduced a comprehensive immigration reform bill. There is no quarrel with the idea that this Nation is a nation of laws and immigrants, but there is a quarrel when we throw to the side those disabled, those veterans, those disadvantaged students, those children who have a single parent who would not have the ability to be able to follow through on college.

So what do we lose? Again, we lose the ability to invent for the next generation. We lose the scientific minds that are going to be at the cutting edge of finding the right kind of cure for HIV/AIDS or stopping the H1N1 pandemic or finding a cure for cancer or being able to fix crumbling bridges. This is what we lose. And, frankly, I believe we are long overdue for the reckoning that comes with the idea that we are ignoring our children.

I would like to just use as an example the fact what we call AP classes and advanced classes. You poll and find out how many of those classes are still being kept, advanced placement. It's all about budget. We don't respect or appreciate how much money good education can generate, and I think that we lose our rightful competitive place in the world. And I would much rather invest $1,000 in TRIO than $1,000 in making war and taking a chance of losing one of our bright young men or bright young women who has gone on the front lines. We appreciate them.

But what I'm saying is we should give equal opportunity for those who are either after their military service or in the midst of their military service or that want to go to school, we should give them the opportunity to do so, and that is what TRIO is all about.

I'd be happy to yield.

Well, I think this discussion should be a roadmap, but it also should be a primer, a tutorial for us not heading toward the disaster that we are heading toward. We should heed some of the comments that have been made.

I would like to build on this issue of the criminal justice system, which has just grown exponentially. I would say to the gentlelady that there are at least 1 million persons in our prison system throughout the Nation. It is known to be the largest prison system in the civilized world. It is called the ``prison industrial complex'' because there is so much money spent in incarcerating persons, and it does not seem that we have gotten it again to invest on the front end.

So I would just like to share with you, according to the National Center for Education Statistics, which studies the math skills of 15- year-olds throughout several industrialized countries, our United States students ranked 25th internationally. Why? Probably not embraced by the TRIO concept, the support system concept. High school graduates, only 75 percent. I realize that TRIO goes forward into the college area, but it means that these students are not getting support early.

High school graduation, only 75 percent of first-year high school students graduate within 4 years; 25 percent of our students are left behind. Today, 1 in 10 24-year-olds still lack a high school degree. According to the Alliance for Excellent Education, 76 percent of white students graduate in a 4-year period, compared with 55 percent of Hispanic students and 51 percent of African American students. There lies the crux of the need for TRIO, because we need that kind of inspiration.

Let me just finish. The Alliance estimates that high school dropouts from the class of 2008--listen to this number--will cost the United States $319 billion in lost wages over their lifetime. Is there any defense for not supporting TRIO, for not funding it to the max so that we can draw these students through the high school period into the college and then see them graduate and invest that $319 billion into the economic engine of this economy, and on the other side, having skills that are marketable skills?

I started out by saying that we have been cited as not having the smartest students in this century or this time frame. I said, no, these are smart students; we just have not given them the rules, we have not laid out the plan, we have not directed them, we have not provided them the TRIO support system that can be so helpful in providing the kind of economic engine for America.

So in this climate of high unemployment and all of this talk about creating jobs, we cannot ignore America's education system for our children.

If I may say a word of appreciation for you and say a picture is worth a thousand words, these tall bars, if they can be seen, show what happens to Upward Bound participants, Upward Bound Math and Science and Talent Search, much higher than the little low bar here that shows students without assistance.

One last point is that one in nine African American men age 20 to 34 are behind bars. Black men are more likely to be in jail than to have a graduate degree. We can lock up people, but we can also break that chain, take the key and open the doors to opportunity.

The gentlelady has told and expressed to us her story. It's a powerful story. I would say that we need to give everyone the same chance that so many of us have had for a great opportunity.

Mr Speaker, I rise before you today in support of H. Res. 55, ``Expressing support for the designation of a National Prader-Willi Syndrome Awareness Month to raise awareness of and promote research into this challenging disorder.'' I would like thank my colleague, Rep. Edward Royce, for introducing this act of solidarity, as well as the co-sponsors.

Prader-Willi syndrome is a complex genetic disorder that occurs in approximately 1 out of every 15,000 births, and is the most commonly known genetic cause of life-threatening obesity.

It affects males and females with equal frequency and affects all races and ethnicities, causing an extreme and insatiable appetite, often resulting in morbid obesity, which is the major cause of death for individuals with the syndrome. The syndrome also causes cognitive and learning disabilities, and behavioral difficulties, such as obsessive-compulsive disorder and difficulty controlling emotions.

The hunger, metabolic, and behavioral characteristics of Prader-Willi syndrome force affected individuals to require constant and lifelong supervision in a controlled environment; Studies have shown that there is a high morbidity and mortality rate for individuals with Prader- Willi syndrome, and there is no known cure.

Early diagnosis allows families to access treatment, intervention services, and support from health professionals, advocacy organizations, and other families who are dealing with the syndrome. Recently discovered treatments, such as human growth hormone, are improving the quality of life for individuals with the syndrome and offer new hope to families, but many difficult symptoms associated with Prader-Willi syndrome remain untreated.

Increased research into this disease can lead to a better understanding of the disorder, more effective treatments, and an eventual cure for Prader-Willi syndrome, and is likely to improve our understanding of common public health concerns, including childhood obesity and mental health.

That is why I join this body in supporting raised awareness and educating the public about Prader-Willi syndrome. I also join in applauding the efforts of advocates and organizations that encourage awareness, promote

research, and provide education, support, and hope to those impacted by Prader-Willi syndrome.

This resolution does all this, as well as recognizing the commitment of parents, families, researchers, health professionals, and others dedicated to finding an effective treatment and eventual cure for Prader-Willi syndrome; supporting increased funding for research into the causes, treatment, and cure for Prader-Willi syndrome; and expressing support for the designation of a National Prader-Willi Syndrome Awareness Month.

Madam Speaker, I rise before you today in support of H. Res. 779, ``Recognizing and supporting the goals and ideals of National Runaway Prevention Month.'' I would like to thank my colleague Representative Judy Biggert for introducing this very important piece of legislation.

It is appalling that in the United States of America, the greatest country in the world, there is a staggering number of runaway and homeless youth. Studies suggest that every year, between 1,600,000 and 2,800,000 youth live on the streets of the United States. Running away from home is a widespread epidemic, and youth aged 12 to 17 are at a higher risk of homelessness than adults. What is terrifying is that traffickers exploit abused runaways or so-called ``throwaways''-- children abandoned by their parents and living on the streets.

Runaway youth most often are youth who have been expelled from their homes by their families; physically, sexually, and emotionally abused at home; discharged by State custodial systems without adequate transition plans; separated from their parents by death and divorce; too poor to secure their own basic needs; and ineligible or unable to access adequate medical or mental health resources.

There are effective programs supporting and assisting runaway youth. These programs succeed because of partnerships created among families, community-based human service agencies, law enforcement agencies, schools, faith-based organizations, and businesses. We must support and create more of these organizations in order to save the future of this nation.

Preventing youth from running away from home and supporting those in high-risk situations should be a family, community, and national priority. The future well-being of the Nation is dependent on the opportunities provided for youth and families to acquire the knowledge, skills, and abilities necessary for youth to develop into safe, healthy, and productive adults.

I want to recognize the National Network for Youth and its members for advocating on behalf of runaway and homeless youth, and for providing an array of community-based support to address their critical needs. Additionally I would like to recognize the National Runaway Switchboard for providing crisis intervention and referrals to reconnect runaway youth to their families and link youth to local resources that provide positive alternatives to running away from home.

I urge my colleagues to support this legislation and to support National Runaway Prevention Month in November to increase public awareness of the life circumstances of youth in high-risk situations, and the need for safe, healthy, and productive alternatives, resources, and support for youth, families, and communities.

Madam Speaker, I rise with a very sad duty today. As the chairwoman of the Transportation Security and Infrastructure Protection Committee on Homeland Security, I rise to pay tribute to the late Edward Joseph Kelly III, who passed away this month.

He was born October 1, 1942, in New York. He joined the Navy and served his country and graduated from the University of Scranton in 1967, and he retired as vice president and controller of Emery Worldwide in 2000.

He truly is an American hero, for after 9/11 he could not sit still. In response to that horrific tragedy, Mr. Kelly left retirement to join the Department of Homeland Security, signing on as the first general manager of the air cargo security for the Federal Transportation Security Administration, whose mission is securing the Nation's transportation network.

Air cargo industry officials have indicated and gone on record to say he transformed the industry. If future airline passengers feel safe about what is carried in the belly of a cargo plane, then they should credit Mr. Kelly. Officials who worked with him said that he was an impeccable professional. He loved this country. Yes, a Navy man. And the president of the Cargo Security Alliance said that he was front and center on this work.

Madam Speaker, his contributions were immeasurable. He is a great American hero. I pay tribute to this distinguished American, Edward Joseph Kelly III. Thank you, and may you rest in peace.

Madam Speaker, I wish to take this time to commemorate the life of a great American, and an outstanding public servant--Edward Joseph Kelly III, who died Saturday at Inova Alexandria Hospital of Legionnaires' pneumonia.

He was born Oct. 1, 1942, in New York, the third child and oldest son of the late Edward and Jessie Cobane Kelly. Mr. Kelly completed service in the Navy before graduating from the University of Scranton in 1967, and retired as vice president and controller of Emery Worldwide in 2000.

In response to 9/11, Mr. Kelly left retirement to join the Department of Homeland Security, signing on as the first general manager of air cargo security for the Federal Transportation Security Administration, whose mission is securing the Nation's transportation network.

Air cargo industry officials have gone on record saying he had transformed their industry. If future airline passengers feel secure that the commercial cargo in the belly of their flight will not blow up or poison them, they should credit Mr. Kelly, officials said. Walt Beadling, president of the Cargo Security Alliance, a trade group, told reporters ``He's been front and center in this work of implementing the plan to secure air cargo.'' Acting TSA administrator Gale D. Rossides wrote in an e-mail to employees, ``Ed's contributions to TSA are immeasurable.''

He was responsible for implementing a Federal law that requires screening of all cargo transported by flights originating in the United States by next August. The voluntary system established by Mr. Kelly and his team shifted screening responsibility to shippers before cargo reach airports. TSA certifies shippers and their facilities.

His friendships span the globe. He and his wife, Ann, enjoyed a network of family and friends on many continents and most loved returning home to Lake Ariel and Ireland. He loved the sea and spent his early retirement years traveling by boat from San Francisco, to Newport, R.I. On this trip, he and Ann bravely cruised the Pacific coasts of California, Mexico and Central America, passed through the Panama Canal into the Atlantic and crossed the Caribbean Sea.

He is survived by his wife and three sons, Edward IV and wife, Sasithorn, Bangkok, Thailand; Packy and wife, Robyn, Redwood Shores, Calif.; and Daniel and wife, Crissy, Fairfield, Conn.; three sisters, Maureen Kelly Dufour, Kathleen Kelly Hoban and Rosemary Kelly Morgan; three grandchildren, Devin, Mairead and Catherine; several nieces and nephews.

That is why I stand here today--to offer my condolences to Mr. Kelly's family, and gratitude for his public service.

Thank you very much to the distinguished convener, Congresswoman Fudge from Ohio. I'm delighted to join the chairwoman of the Congressional Black Caucus, who has been just superb on gathering us together on what is an enormous crisis. I'm going to take the liberty of mixing a number of issues that I think are crucial to the topic that addresses this question of dealing with homelessness and hunger and joblessness. So I want to let the American people know that when the Congressional Black Caucus set out its multipoint plan, a letter that was sent to President Obama, interestingly enough, the broadness of our concepts dealt with the most deprived and devastated communities.

Those communities are American Indians, Native Americans. Those communities are Hispanics, Latinos, African Americans, women. And I evidence this by the article in The Washington Post on Saturday--it was referred to in our recent caucus by one of my colleagues, ``Missing More Than a Meal.'' And it cites the families, since they've been publicly noted, of Christina Koch, it cites the family of Anajyha Wright Mitchell, and it cites--these are children who are suffering because parents don't have work.

It cites the family, I guess Christina Koch is here noted. And the quote that I think is most potent says, ``This more nuanced picture is emerging as the problem has become more widespread. With the economy faltering, the number of youngsters living in homes without enough food soared in 2008 from 13 million to nearly 17 million'' children in America. If we can imagine--17 million children are going to bed or waking up or going to school hungry because these breadwinners, single parents, have no jobs.

And so my message today is that this is not a, if you will, an opportunity to do good legislative work. This is a crisis of insurmountable definition. This is at a pinnacle. This is the mountain top, and there must be nothing that stops us from focusing on the necessities of getting work. Let me lay out two or three points that I think are interwoven into this circumstance and the arguments that I think call for immediate action.

My focus has been in training, and I have, I think, a unique perspective to work with those who may be on unemployment. You say, well, they're on unemployment, leave them alone. Well, unemployment is at different levels. If you happen to have been a person who had a part-time job, you know the level of your unemployment. What I'd like to do is to get those people out of those cyclical jobs, one job after another, and put them in training, where they keep their unemployment and they get a stipend so that the electricity can be turned on, the food can be bought. And when they come out on the other end, one, they've been kept out of the unemployment lines for a year, and they come out as a nurses aid or a technician of some sort to get them eligible for these jobs. I think that is imperative.

This weekend, I met with a nonprofit that has about $22 million in weatherization dollars. I gathered small businesses who had never heard of the opportunities for weatherization, which would create jobs in our community. We also had the General Services Administration, and I think it's important to note that that is such a complexity of getting jobs to small businesses. What happens is they have what they call GSA lists. I believe the Federal Government should be the great job maker, and therefore, we should make easy the ability for small businesses to access opportunities. So I want to see legislation that demystifies the GSA list. I want to see legislation that tells the Federal Government that they cannot have one narrow way of presenting jobs to America, which is on the Web site.

If you have a job fair and you have the Federal Government there, they don't bring anybody to hire someone on the spot. They tell you to go to the Web site. Well, some people are homeless, are qualified, but they're in a predicament. Many people don't have access to the Web site. So these are simple administrative changes. Let me just add this on the Small Business Finance and Investment Act that the President has talked about.

One of the things in the meeting that I had over the weekend, my friends, on weatherization--and I know they meant well. They came to the meeting, and we had had a pre-meeting, and they came to the meeting, 30 or 40 or 50 people in the room, and they said, Here's the criteria: Your bank account must be secure, and must be, if you will, flourishing. They said that you must have Department of Energy experience, Congressman Payne. You must already have had that experience. Some of my people in Texas, no disrespect, DOE? They thought it was the Department of Education. Then they said that you must have, no disrespect to them, you must have past experience. Well, weatherization, these dollars are to build capacity. These dollars are to get small businesses so that they can build capacity, so they can become weatherizers in the future.

So we need to eliminate all these barriers of being able to work under Federal dollars. They're taxpayers dollars. Don't tell them to have Department of Energy experience. Tell them do they know how to put a window in? Do they have enough money to pay workers? And so this is, I think, a way of simplifying. I'm going to yield to the gentleman on these two points if I might. This idea of giving money to States is an abomination. Those of us who have diversity in state leadership, different from the majority party here, see that money going, and we never see it again in the hands of our constituents. That is a crisis.

And then I know that we are on jobs, but let me tell you that this issue is, as I yield to the gentleman, we now have a health care bill that is making its way through the Senate. In that bill, there is a provision about promoting jobs in the health profession, scholarships for doctors and nurses and physicians' assistants. I want to ask the question: How much longer do we have to wait for the distinguished Senator from Connecticut to block health care over and over again and block jobs? And so I'm calling today for reconciliation. If that is a procedure that can

get us moving so that people can have jobs and good health care, I believe they're intertwined together. And with that I would say, this is a time for a fight, a real fight.

And I'd be happy to engage the gentleman from Minnesota on some of the very points that he has raised. And I am delighted to be part of his legislation, which is a magnificent comprehensive jobs effort. And I hope he'll join me in the training aspect as well.

Madam Speaker, I salute my colleagues with the Congressional Black Caucus for tackling one of the most important issues of the day facing not just African Americans and Latino Americans, but all Americans. Let me share with you that in my District, which covers parts of the Nation's fourth largest city, Houston, TX, our unemployment rate stands at nearly 9 percent. While this rate is more than a full percentage point below the national average, we know at least anecdotally, the unemployment rates for African Americans and Latinos in Houston are much higher.

Yet, this ``jobs disparity'' is not limited to Houston, data from the Department of Labor indicates that African Americans throughout the Nation today, in the era of President Obama, are still the last hired and the first fired. Specifically, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that the unemployment rate for African American men, 20 and older, was 16.5 percent as of October of this year, and 12.4 percent for African American women at the same age level.

Historically, experts have suggested that the anecdote to unemployment is education. However, Labor Department statistics appear to indicate that education, alone, does not level the playing field. In fact, higher education amongst African Americans may strangely enough even make it more difficult to obtain a job. For the first 10 months of this year, as the recession has dragged on, unemployment for least educated workers was the same for African- Americans and the general population. However, in 2009, the unemployment rate for African American college graduates 25 and older has been nearly twice that of their Caucasian American male counterparts, 8.4 percent compared with 4.4 percent. According to a New York Times article published on December 1, even African American college graduates with degrees from Ivy League schools such as Yale, my alma mater, are finding themselves in the ranks of the unemployed.

In addition to the racial dimension of this ``jobs disparity,'' the recent economic downturn has focused a spotlight on a widening gap between employment rates amongst men and women, particularly in the African American community. It has been reported that since the Nation's slowdown has been most pronounced in the manual labor sectors, men with the lowest levels of education have suffered the brunt of the unemployment crisis. CNN commentators recently described our current economic condition as a ``man-cession.''

According to a recent Bureau of Labor Statistics report, the unemployment rate for African American men aged 20 and older was 4.1 percent higher than the unemployment rate for African American women of the same age group, which was 12.4 percent. This gender unemployment gap among African Americans mirrors a similar gap between Caucasian and Latino Americans, thus demonstrating a nationwide trend.

Friends, we are in a battle for the hearts and souls of America, literally and figuratively. To win this battle, we must take bold action, like passing health care reform legislation in both chambers of Congress. Madam Speaker, I concur with the assessment that the health reform legislation voted out of this chamber last month in fact a ``jobs bill.''

As evidence of this, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that last month's slight dip in the unemployment rate was caused by the fact that for the third straight month, hospitals reported solid payroll additions, with 6,800 new jobs created. In the first 11 months of this year, the healthcare sector created 249,700 new jobs, an average of 22,700 new health care jobs each month, according to BLS' preliminary data. Since the start of the recession in December 2007, overall 7.9 million people in America have lost their jobs, while the healthcare sector has created 613,000 jobs.

In an article published in HealthLeaders Media, it was reported that the healthcare sector--from hospitals, to physicians' offices, to residential mental health homes, kidney dialysis centers, and blood and organ banks--grew by 21,000 payroll additions in November and 613,000 payroll additions since the start of the recession in December 2007. The home healthcare services sector reported 7,300 payroll additions in November, BLS preliminary data show.

Recognizing this Madam Speaker, I am working with health care and labor leaders to craft a jobs bill that create innovative new retraining programs in partnership with our Historically Black Colleges and Universities like Texas Southern University in my District or Howard University, here in Washington, DC. These training programs would focus on retooling workers for jobs in the growth sectors such as health, biotech, and information technology. In addition to funding for job training, I propose that we provide stipends to those who are unemployed and who participate in training programs to assist them in caring for their families. Along with this, my jobs bill would allow unemployed workers participating in job retraining to continue receiving unemployment benefits.

As a senior member of the Judiciary Committee, I am also working with the DOJ to incorporate into my jobs legislation a measure that would assist ex-offenders who are returning to the job market with strikes against them. In addition to eliminating any barriers for ex- offenders, I am also studying how we can encourage States to suspend criminal prosecution of fathers and other parents who are delinquent in child support so long as they are making good faith efforts to find jobs in this difficult employment market.

Madam Speaker, I also propose that we task the Department of Labor to expand its definition of the unemployed to cover not only those currently receiving unemployment compensation, but also those who have run out of unemployment insurance, known as the long term unemployed. I suspect that if we had accurate data that captured the entire unemployment picture, we would see jobless figures of upwards of 25-30 percent.

In addition, Madam Speaker, I also plan to propose we offer assistance to the underemployed, including thousands of lawyers and other professionals who work as part-timers or temp workers. Many of these professionals split their time between working for others and operating their own small firms. Furthermore, it has been noted that while larger firms are enjoying the benefit of government funded bailouts, our African American law firms, accounting firms, investment banking firms and media outlets are being left out of the funds directed at stimulating Wall Street. As Comcast and NBC Universal and other firms seek government permission to merge, I intend to work with these companies to ensure that our African American businesses are included, not left out of the deal flow.

Another jobs initiative would focus on creating apprentice and internship programs managed by cities and nonprofits like the Urban League. This is a take off of a Department of Labor that was very successful in the 1970s, which helped our Nation rebound from its last recession.

Madam Speaker, during the 1930s-40s, the FDR administration developed the Work Progress Administration, WPA. The WPA created thousands of jobs and helped lift our Nation from depression. I am drafting legislation that would create a WPA for the 21st century. This concept involves providing stimulus dollars to several Federal agencies such as Interior, Transportation, and HHS to fund large-scale projects.

Under my legislation, the new WPA would include modern-day infrastructure and other projects including making broadband wireless Internet service available for all Americans, not just in wealthier suburban and downtown districts. In addition, we should create high- speed rail and environmentally friendly highways and byways.

Finally, I plan that we work with HHS and the Energy Department to build new Green Hospitals across the country. This project would ensure that our Nation's healthcare facilities are themselves healthy.

Madam Speaker, many of our unemployed constituents in Houston and around the Nation are asking us a simple question: how long, how long before I can find a job? I say to them, not long . . . help is on the way. With the introduction and passage of jobs legislation offered by myself and the rest of the Congressional Black Caucus, help for the unemployed and underemployed, help for small businesses, is on the way.

I appreciate the leadership of the Congressional Black Caucus on this issue and dedicate to my constituents in the 18th Congressional District of Texas that it can count on me to work with my colleagues to deliver in this time of great need. How long, not long, with the help of the Almighty and hard work of my colleagues, help is on the way.

If the gentleman will yield.

You are right. And statistics, of course, help to lay the framework for how devastating it is for so many of us who are listening may not have the broadness of it because our constituency goes across all lines.

And what I'll tell you is that people are more and more going to places where there are mass feasts and feeding. And when you go among those people, you hear the stories of mothers and fathers who have lost work. There are now more families coming into these broad feasts or open feeding that we've had. I just participated in one yesterday in my district. And you see the families with little children who you know are dependent--and you made a very good point. I heard it on this floor. These people may have had two and three jobs. That's the kind of person we're looking at when we see these parents whose children are now going to bed hungry, 17 million across America. And what they're saying is that not only can they not make ends meet, but they can't find the ends for the means.

So we have to bypass State governments to get funds directly into the hands of these individuals by way of work. They want work. We've got to break down the attitudes about not building capacity and small businesses, because they could hire these very mothers to do minimum work on weatherization. They could be skilled. We have to pass the health care bill that gives us the kind of work that is available for these mothers.

And I will conclude on this. Do you know, Congresswoman Fudge, because you're from this area, there is some, I want to call it silliness--and I ask deference for any disrespect that using the word ``silly'' on this floor might suggest. But we put a tax on steel that China is bringing in and, okay, that's by America. Then we have black businesses who are in the business of transporting pipe or giving pipe to various companies--and when I say ``pipe,'' giving steel to various companies, steel pipe known as oil company tubular goods, pipes. And can you believe that these small businesses that have workers and truck drivers, minority companies that transport this steel, cannot buy any steel from American companies.

So what I would say to the gentlemen, Yes, I hear the pain in our houses of worship. I hear the pain in grocery stores, and I hear the pain when we go to these mass feedings that more people are coming to now in more numbers than I have ever seen before. It just reemphasizes the fact: Are we going to answer the pain, the call that is being made upon us? And I would hope the Congressional Black Caucus will be front and center on doing that.

I thank the gentleman very much for yielding.

There's nothing like delay, delay, delay when we begin to talk about helping the American people. If my good friends on the other side of the aisle would look at what the intent of this bill is, I think we'd find common ground. So I rise to support the rule and the underlying bill because it does point to some of the major crises that we have been contending with.

I am glad that we are ending the bailout and preventing the rise of institutions that are ``too big to fail.'' We're dismantling large, failing institutions, and we're getting money back for the taxpayer. I am very glad that we have a financial stability council that has been enhanced by the Congressional Black Caucus where we will have diverse membership so the oversight will be effective and consistent. Executive compensation gives shareholders a say on pay. Never before have we had that. This is long overdue. Investor protections and certainly to be able to respond to too big and too fat cats like Madoff, it's long overdue.

Then to emphasize the importance that I have heard from so many of my constituents on the whole question of mortgage foreclosure modification, and that is they need to have real foreclosure modification, and only 6 percent of those that have been in trial modifications have now been moved to permanent foreclosure modifications. The process is too slow.

We are kicking this down the road by adding $3 billion from the Federal Troubled Assets Relief Program toward mortgage relief for jobless Americans. The measure would designate another $1 billion for a program that gives grants to State and local governments to purchase foreclosed properties and use them for many productive purposes, according to the members of the Financial Services Committee and the Congressional Black Caucus task force that have worked with Congresswoman Maxine Waters. We stand together united on the idea that the financial structure has not worked for the jobless, the poor, and working Americans. This legislation helps to generate that kind of pathway and that kind of roadway.

I thank the distinguished gentleman.

I think it is extremely important that we protect and consider our credit unions. I have met with those today, and I want to ensure that if this bill has any language in it about the overdraft not being protected that, in essence, we work through that process. They are very much a part of this, and I want to make sure that this bill is supported.

I support the rule and the underlying bill.

Madam Chair, today I rise in support of H.R. 4173--``The Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act.'' I support this legislation because I believe that it is an important step in preventing the conditions that created last year's financial crisis from occurring again.

Last year's financial crisis put hundreds of thousands of Americans out of work and our economy into turmoil. The White House estimates that 5 trillion dollars worth of American household wealth disappeared in approximately three months. Credit markets froze as bank after bank after bank failed or require government assistance to stay afloat. This weak financial system and credit market impacted businesses large and small throughout the Nation. Furthermore, the weak credit market affected student loans, credit cards, and purchases of automobiles and homes.

In response, Congress, in collaboration with President Obama passed sweeping legislation to help hardworking Americans soften the blow from the worst economy in years.

Although I still believe that our response was necessary to help bring America out of the recession, we must ensure that actors in the financial industry are never again able to behave recklessly as to threaten the economy of not only our Nation, but also the world. I do not believe that the financial industry acts with malice toward people or our economy; however, some firms in the financial industry are prone to taking risks in a manner that threatens our economic structure. As President Obama said in New York on September 15, ``We will not go back to the days of reckless behavior and unchecked excess at the heart of the crisis, where too many were motivated only by the appetite for quick bills and bloated bonuses. Those on Wall Street cannot resume taking risks without regard for consequences, and expect that next time, American taxpayers will be there to break the fall.''

This legislation is a response to the dangers and loopholes that persist, and it will serve to protect the American investors, students, home and auto buyers, and business owners. A new Consumer Financial Protection Agency will protect families and small businesses by ensuring that bank loans, mortgages, and credit cards are fair, affordable, understandable, and transparent.

We have tough rules that keep companies from selling us faulty toasters that burn down our houses, but there is currently no agency that has as its sole mission oversight of potentially harmful financial products sold to consumers. This critical enforcement is necessary to ensure that consumers get information that is clear and concise from banks, mortgage servicers, and credit card companies. It is critical to prevent the financial industry from offering predatory mortgage loans to people who can't afford repayment that marked the subprime lending era. Finally, it will put in place common sense regulations to stop abuses by the financial industry, such as payday lending and exorbitant overdraft fees.

Secondly, this legislation will put an end to ``too big to fail'' financial firms, providing the government with the tools--funded by big banks and financial firms and NOT taxpayers--it needs to manage financial crises so we are not forced to choose between bailouts and financial collapse.

This includes the ability to preemptively dismantle big banks whose risky and irresponsible behavior could bring down the entire economy, as well as an orderly process to wind down failing firms.

This legislation will end taxpayer-funded bailouts and Help ensure American taxpayers are never again on the hook for bailing them out by requiring big banks and other financial institutions (with $50 billion in assets) to foot the bill for any bailouts in the future. These institutions would pay assessments based on a company's potential risk to the whole financial system if they were to fail.

These new consumer safeguards will require that all financial firms that pose risk to the financial system--not just banks--are subject to strong supervision and regulation, including stronger capital standards and leverage rules.

They will increase transparency at the Federal Reserve, which has played an enormous role in shoring up big banks and other financial institutions in this crisis, subjecting it to scrutiny by Congress's Government Accountability Office with audits of the Fed's lending programs.

This legislation will also stop predatory and irresponsible mortgage loan practices including prepayment penalties, deceptive mortgage documentation, and making extra profits for steering borrowers to higher cost loans that played a major role in the current financial meltdown. Help ensure that the mortgage industry follows basic principles of sound lending and consumer protection.

The legislation also imposes tough new rules on the riskiest financial practices by strengthening enforcement by the Securities and Exchange Commission to better protect investors and prevent future Bernie Madoff Ponzi schemes.

It creates rules to curtail excess speculation in derivatives and growing use of unregulated credit default swaps that devastated AIG and Bear Stearns.

It provides more transparency and tougher regulation of hedge funds, private equity firms

and credit rating agencies, whose seal of approval gave way to excessively risky practices that led to a financial collapse.

Finally, it requires investment advisors to act for the sole benefit of their client under the law, exercising the highest standard of care.

Finally, this legislation addresses egregious executive pay compensations by putting an end to compensation practices that encourage executives to take excessive risk at the expense of their companies, shareholders, employees, and ultimately the American taxpayer.

It also provides shareholders of public companies with an annual, non-binding vote on executive compensation and golden parachutes for the top five executives, requires independent directors on the compensation committees of public companies, and authorizes the SEC to restrict or prohibit ``inappropriate or imprudently risky compensation practices'' at large financial firms (with at least $1 billion in assets).

In conclusion, this legislation will modernize America's financial regulations as we seek to prevent last year's financial conditions from ever happening again. America is on the road to recovery, and we need this legislation to ensure that the recovery is permanent.

Mr. Speaker, I rise before you today in support of H.R. 3980, the ``Redundancy Elimination and Enhanced Performance for Preparedness Grants Act''. I would like thank my friend and colleague, Representative Cuellar, for introducing this act of solidarity, as well as the co-sponsor, Representative Richardson.

Congress instructed FEMA in the Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act of 2006 and in the Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007 to develop performance metrics for its homeland security grants programs. As the House Committee on Homeland Security discovered in our October 27th subcommittee hearing for the Emergency Communications, Preparedness and Response Subcommittee, these requirements remain poorly implemented and difficult to comprehend.

What is most disconcerting is that FEMA still cannot determine our Nation's overall preparedness or how homeland security grants have helped to protect our Nation from acts of terrorism.

It is for these reasons that I come to you today to ask for your support of H.R. 3980, the Redundancy Elimination and Enhanced Performance for Preparedness Grants Act.

This legislation would require FEMA to work in conjunction with state, local, tribal and territorial stakeholders to develop a plan to: Streamline homeland security grant reporting requirements, rules and regulations to eliminate redundant reporting; create a strategy including a set timeline for establishing the much needed performance metrics for grant programs to ensure that the funds are being directed to the areas where they will be best spent; and require FEMA to take inventory of each homeland security grant program to include the purpose, objectives and performance goals for each.

The plan will be submitted to the Committee on Homeland Security no later than 120 days after the bill's enactment. It will be updated biannually to ensure that the Committee is able to maintain a watchful eye on redundancies in the law that might confuse grant recipients. Finally, this bill will help identify inefficiencies with the DHS grant programs and this bill will increase the quality of services received by DHS grant recipients.

It is for these reasons that I rise in support of Representative Cuellar's legislation before us, and why I encourage my fellow Members to do the same.