Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Res. 459, which expresses support for the designation of June as National Safety Month. Promoting safety awareness will help to reduce thousands of preventable injury and deaths in the United

States in the workplace, on roads and highways, and in our homes and neighborhoods.

Each week of National Safety Month focuses on a different aspect of safety: traffic, workplace, home, and community. This year's National Safety Month themes are teen driving, fall prevention, overexertion, and distracted driving. The statistics on the types of safety that comprise this year's National Safety Month are jarring.

According to the National Safety Council, NSC, traffic crashes are the number one cause of teen fatalities, accounting for 38 percent of all teen deaths. In 2007, 20,600 people died from falls in U.S. homes and communities. Moreover, the U.S. Department of Labor documented that 8 percent of all occupational fatalities from trauma were caused by falling. Overexertion, particularly in the form of back injuries, affects over 1 million workers. Lastly, 80 percent of automobile crashes are the result of distracted driving. Given these drastic statistics, I believe that National Safety Month is an important effort to improve the well being of our country.

Injuries and loss of life due to preventable accidents are tragedies that traumatize workplaces, families, and communities. In addition to the suffering of the victims and their families, accidents in the home and on the road created over $600 billion in costs to Americans. Accidents in the workplace created over $175 billion in costs for workers and employers. I believe that National Safety Month will help to improve our national economy as we climb out of the economic downturn.

In my home State, the Texas Chapter of the National Safety Council is working hard to educate and influence the public in order to prevent accidental injury and death. The Texas Chapter contributes to Texas' public safety through events such as National Seat Check Saturday, National Child Passenger Safety Week, National Preparedness Month, and the Texas Safety Conference & Expo. I am proud of the work that the Texas Chapter of the NSC does to train safety professionals, reach out to the public for safety education, and raise awareness of safety.

By raising awareness and educating the public on safety, National Safety Month honors the work of safety experts and professionals. Safety experts research, analyze, and publish information on improving safety in many aspects of our daily lives. Safety professionals provide training in schools and colleges, workplaces, and communities, as well as to drivers across the country. The work of these men and women save countless lives each year, and through this resolution, we honor their contribution to society.

In addition to supporting National Safety Month, we must also recognize the achievements of the National Safety Council, NSC. The NSC was established in Illinois in 1913 to promote industrial safety. Since then, their mandate has expanded to include traffic safety, home safety, community safety, and workplace safety at large. In 1953, the NSC received a Congressional Charter. Today, over 51,000 labor organizations, businesses, schools, public agencies, private organizations, and individuals comprise the NSC. The NSC and its 40 member local chapters coordinate safety events, educate the public, analyze safety research, and raise awareness about safety issues. The NSC inaugurated the first National Safety Month in June 1996. In addition to National Safety Month, the NSC holds an annual Congress & Expo to exchange information among safety experts, safety professionals, and the safety industry. Their work is an invaluable contribution to the well-being of our country.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Res. 57, which expresses the importance of swimming lessons and recognizes the danger of drowning in the United States, especially among minority children. Though interest in swimming throughout the United States has increased due to national attention to sporting events like the success of the U.S. Olympic Swim Team, drowning is still amongst the leading causes of death of American children. A study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that in 2005 there were 3,582 unintentional drownings in the United States, and average of 10 per day!

According to an article in the NY Times, an even more daunting statistic is that African children and teens ages 5 to 19, are 2.3 times more likely to drown than Caucasian children in this age group. For children 10 to 14, the rate is five times higher. Nearly 6 out of 10 African-American and Hispanic children are unable to swim, nearly twice as many as their Caucasian counterparts, a concern often highlighted by U.S. Olympian Cullen Jones, who is African-American and swam the third leg of the winning men's relay this week. This unprecedented statistic is unacceptable as it is fairly easily preventable, steps such as adult supervision, regularly using life jackets, learning CPR, and fencing of backyard swimming pools can help save the lives of many of our youth according to the Centers for Disease Control.

Some alarming statistics as stated by my very own district of Houston, TX declare that from May of 2005 to May of 2007:

HFD responded to more than 50 drownings, resulting in at least 8 deaths.

Traditionally, apartment pools account for most of the submersions.

60 percent of the pool incidents occurred at apartments.

We also had several bathtub drowning incidents and several in lakes or bayous.

Most of the children involved submersions involved 4 years old and infants (0-1 year old). Although, all age groups had submersions.

Incidents occurred every hour of the day, though 1-2 p.m. and 4 p.m.- 7 p.m. had the higher number of incidents.

In 2006, The New York Times story ``Everyone Into the Water'' reported on why the barriers to swimming for black children are so high. The report stated that ``studies have shown that many Africans were avid swimmers when they were brought over as slaves, most slaves born in the United States were not allowed to learn to swim because it was a means of escape. That created generations of non-swimmers and spawned the myth that African-Americans could not swim. Though widely discredited, a 1969 study titled ``The Negro and Learning to Swim: The Buoyancy Problem Related to Reported Biological Difference,'' was printed in The Journal of Negro Education and fed the stereotype. The problem was compounded by segregation, which kept blacks out of many pools and beaches. The USA Swimming Foundation is trying to address the problem through its Make a Splash program, which is working to educate parents and increase swimming rates among all children. Donors who want to help can sponsor swimming lessons for children.

The passing of H. Res. 57 expresses the importance of providing access to swimming lessons for all communities in the United States as an integral part of drowning prevention. This Resolution celebrates the work of initiatives like USA Swimming Foundation's ``Make A Splash'' and Safe Kids USA to educate parents and caregivers on water safety and drowning prevention messages. H. Res. 57 also encourages the public and private funding to support current and future initiatives that provide all children access to swimming education.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support for H. Res. 738, Recognizing the 15th Anniversary of the Enactment of the Violence Against Women Act of 1994. I express my gratitude to Ms. Slaughter for her leadership in introducing this important bill. This is legislation that I have worked on since becoming a member of the House Judiciary Committee in 1995 and I have worked with my colleagues through the years to improve the legislation.

The need for such legislation is punctuated by the tragic murder of Yale graduate student Annie Le. While an investigation into this matter is still ongoing, Ms. Le's death appears to have been related to her wedding scheduled for today. As a Yale alumnae, I'm particularly grieved by this tragedy, and my heart and sympathies go out to Ms. Le, her family, and her mourning fiancee, on what would have been their wedding day.

Ms. Le's murder in a Yale research building shows that domestic violence has no barriers, and crosses racial, ethnic, and economic boundaries. It is in this backdrop that we celebrated legislation proposing a federal response to the problem of violence against women.

A review of history shows that the first legislative action on this matter was introduced in 1990, although such violence was first identified as a serious problem by Congress in the 1970s. In 1994, this legislative action culminated by the passage of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA). Funding under the bill emphasized enforcement as well as educational and social programs to prevent crime. The focus of the funding was on local government programs, an approach that the sponsors of the bill believed was the most promising technique for reducing crime and violence. They also cautioned that, because of the variety of programs funded through the states, the impact of the bill may be difficult to quantify. Funding through FY2000 was authorized through the Violent Crime Reduction Trust Fund (VCRTF). Authorization for VCRTF expired at the end of FY2000. Nonetheless, most of the programs in VAWA received appropriations for FY2001.

On October 28, 2000, President Clinton signed into law the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of 2000, which included the Violence Against Women Act of 2000. The Violence Against Women Act of 2000 (VAWA 2000) continued to support VAWA by reauthorizing existing programs and adding new initiatives, including grants to assist victims of dating violence, transitional housing for victims of violence, a pilot program aimed at protecting children during visits with a parent who has been accused of domestic violence, and protections from violence for elderly and disabled women. It also made technical amendments, and required grant recipients to submit reports on the effectiveness of programs funded by the grants to aid with the dissemination of information on successful programs. The bill amended the Public Health Service Act to require that certain funds be used exclusively for rape prevention and education programs. Moreover, the bill made it easier for battered immigrant women to leave and to help prosecute their abusers.

This last element is important to note. Under the old law, battered immigrant women could be deported if they left abusers who are their sponsors for residency and citizenship in the United States. VAWA 2000 created special rules for alien battered spouses and children to allow them to remain in the United States.

The original VAWA, established within DOJ and HHS discretionary grant programs for state, local, and Indian tribal governments. VAWA 2000 reauthorized many VAWA programs, set new funding levels, and created new grant programs to address sexual assaults on campuses and assist victims of domestic abuse.

VAWA 2000 also authorized the Attorney General to award grants to private nonprofit entities, Indian tribal governments, and publically funded organizations to increase the availability of legal assistance to victims of domestic violence, stalking, or sexual assault in legal matters, such as immigration, housing matters, and protection orders, at minimum or no cost to the victim. These grants may be used to establish or expand cooperative efforts between victim services organizations and legal assistance providers, by providing training, technical assistance, and data collection.

VAWA 2000 included grants to be administered by HHS for short-term transitional housing assistance and support services for victims of domestic abuse. The Keeping Children and Families Safe Act of 2003 and the PROTECT Act authorized funding of both HHS and DOJ transitional housing assistance programs for victims of domestic violence.

VAWA 2000 amended the language of the existing STOP grants and ``Grants to Encourage Arrest Policies'' to provide funds to increase protection of older individuals and individuals with disabilities from domestic violence and sexual assault through policies and training for police, prosecutors, and the judiciary. It

also created new grants, administered by the Attorney General, for training programs to assist law enforcement officers, prosecutors, and court officials in addressing, investigating and prosecuting instances of elder abuse, neglect, and exploitation, and violence against individuals with disabilities, including domestic violence and sexual assault.

VAWA 2000 authorized the Attorney General to award grants to state, local, and Indian tribal governments to provide supervised visitation and safe visitation exchange for children involved in situations of domestic violence, child abuse, or sexual assault.

Several studies were authorized in VAWA 2000. These included studies of (1) insurance discrimination against victims of domestic violence; (2) workplace effects of violence against women; (3) unemployment compensation for women who are victims of violence; and (4) parental kidnapping. VAWA 2000 also required the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) to develop a research agenda and plans to implement the agenda based on the National Academy of Sciences' recommendations in the report Understanding Violence Against Women.

VAWA 2000 contains the Battered Immigrant Women Protection Act of 2000, which provides for increased protection of immigrant women who are victims of domestic abuse, and creates special rules for alien battered spouses and children to allow them to remain in the United States. VAWA 2000 also established a task force to coordinate research on domestic violence.

VAWA 2000 established a definition for ``dating violence'' and amended the existing law so that STOP grants, Grants to Encourage Arrest Policies, and Rural Domestic Violence grants can be awarded for programs to combat dating violence, defined as violence committed by a person (A) who is or has been in a social relationship of a romantic or intimate nature with the victim; and (B) where the existence of such a relationship shall be determined based on a consideration of the following factors: (I) the length of the relationship; (ii) the type of relationship; and (iii) the frequency of interaction between the persons involved in the relationship.

In 2005, Congress reauthorized VAWA, through the Violence Against Women and Department of Justice Reauthorization Act of 2005 (VAWA 2005). VAWA 2005 reauthorized many existing programs for FY2007 through FY2011, and authorized a number of new programs for victims of domestic and dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking. The act emphasized collaboration among law enforcement, health and housing professionals, and women, men, and youth alliances, and encouraged community initiatives to address these issues.

VAWA 2005 advanced the ball to protect battered women and children. Specifically, VAWA 2005 programs sought to focus on young victims of violence; improve the health care system's response to violence; inform the public and employers about domestic and dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking; protect the privacy of victims of violence; provide housing assistance, including public housing, for battered women and children; and support outreach efforts to underserved populations such as ethnic, immigrant, and racial populations.

In an effort to more closely monitor the status and performance of some of these programs, VAWA 2005 provided for some grant recipients to submit reports on policies and procedures they followed. The act also provided funding for studies and research on effective interventions that prevent both acts and effects of domestic and dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking.

Over the past 15 years, the federal government, with the use of the public treasury has funded interventions which have lowered assault rates. This intervention is estimated to have saved over $14 billion in public safety resources that would have been required had VAWA programs not prevented or addressed cases of domestic violence in each of the fifty states and all of the U.S. territories.

I have worked with formidable organizations such as Texans Against Sexual Assault, who work to bring voices to women who have been victims of sexual crimes, and helping them along an emotional recovery. Also, the Texas Council on Family Violence, which has connected more than 15,000 Texas victims of domestic violence with emergency shelter and protection.

In 2005, I offered an Amendment to the VAWA to provide $2 million for the Office on Violence Against Women, the Violence Against Women Prevention and Prosecution Programs account for ``child abuse training programs for judicial personnel and practitioners.'' This allocation would be offset by the Edward Byre Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program and transferring the funds to the Office on Violence Against Women, Violence Against Women Prevention and Prosecution Program. Instead, I proposed that this money be channeled to a program that has been significantly under-funded for many years, the Violence Against Women Prevention and Prosecution Program's account for child abuse training programs for judicial personnel and practitioners as authorized by section 222 of the 1990 Act. Domestic Violence is of the utmost concern, to me and my constituents. However, in the past, the chronic lack of funding and resources has left a number of child victims in the cold to cope with the horrible and immense physical and psychological effects of the abuse that they have endured.

As we look down the road for future VAWA reauthorizations, I urge my colleagues to focus on how we can take a more comprehensive look at domestic violence. Indeed, violence between family members and others related by special relations requires a dedication of resources to address problems that could be addressed by conflict management counseling and other mental health treatment. Indeed, juvenile justice data shows that families who are separated as a result of VAWA programs may also have an unintended consequence of contributing to juvenile delinquency, particularly amongst children of color, young boys in particular.

Together we must take a stand and work together for Women's rights, as well as the rights for families. We must work on building a brighter future, and make gender based and family based violence a thing of the past. I urge my colleagues to support this important bill.

Mr. Speaker, just a few months ago we celebrated the 40th anniversary of the Apollo mission for NASA, and we are excited as a Nation to think of the brightness and the genius of our country.

Tomorrow, before the Science and Technology Committee, the author of the ``Augustine Report'' will present his findings regarding NASA. As a representative from the Houston area, where the Johnson Space Center is, I encourage America to be that same genius.

Let's continue manned space flight and continue our exploration in space, as well as our support for the international space station. Out of those efforts come new inventions, new cures for diseases, and new opportunities for the genius of America to be seen around the world. We must continue manned space flight.

Supporting the space centers in Florida and Alabama, California, Mississippi and Texas, I know America can achieve for the future.

Mr. Speaker, we have some joyous moments in this body, and I am delighted to say that we will have that tomorrow.

Gospel music is part of America's culture, and I was very pleased to pass the legislation, House Joint Resolution 12, to acknowledge gospel music as part of the great culture of America.

Tomorrow here in this House, we will celebrate the gospel music heritage legislation that was passed in this House and in the Senate by my colleague and friend Senator Blanche Lambert Lincoln. And we will celebrate it with the wonderful sound of Richard Smallwood.

We have the privilege and honor of celebrating this cultural aspect of America reaching from the East to the West, from the North to the South, in places like Nashville, Tennessee; to Iowa; to Atlanta, Georgia; to Houston, Texas; to New York, New York; and places in California and around this Nation. We had the pleasure of celebrating it at the Kennedy Center. Bryon Cage and the Ebenezer Choir, AME Church, was there on Saturday evening celebrating gospel music heritage.

We're excited about it. And we thank our House leadership for helping us pass this honoring of those wonderful gospel musicians that all of us have enjoyed over the years and decades: some starting out or gaining their rock and roll status like Elvis Presley from their original origins of gospel music

or Al Green, the gospel singer, or Mahalia Jackson or Marian Anderson or Yolanda Adams. So many great gospel singers have given all of us joy no matter from whence we have come.

So I would like to thank the House leadership. I would like to thank the majority leader and his staff and Chairman Towns and the ranking member of the Government Oversight Committee, all of whom helped this day come to fruition.

As we move into issues that require our attention, Mr. Speaker, I would like to comment very briefly on our position in Afghanistan. Tomorrow I will have the opportunity to join in listening to Ambassador Holbrooke, who has just returned back from Afghanistan, and I would like to offer these thoughts.

I do believe that Afghanistan is very important to the United States, and after 9/11 it was important to respond to the attack on this Nation. But now I think it is important to emphasize a diplomatic surge and the stand-down of the military soldiers, all who are valiantly working there. I believe it is important to allow the Afghan people, through the building of schools and roads and through the building of the Afghan Army, to take control of their own security. We cannot allow this to be a 20-year war as it was with Russia, and the Afghan people must stand up.

Some may say it is not the time, that it is a difficult time. And they are right, because instead of pursuing the cause in Afghanistan, over the last 8 years we failed and detoured into Iraq, Iraq that took thousands of American lives and still unfortunately and tragically struggles today with democracy and leadership in their own country. But I do believe it is time for a surge of diplomacy in Afghanistan, and I am going to work with my colleagues to see this happen.

I wish to mention Iran, as well, as the General Assembly gathers in the United Nations and particularly to focus on Camp Ashraf that has displaced Iranians. These individuals are in Iraq and they are subject to abuse. I'm calling upon the administration to demand for the people that are displaced that happen to be Iranians who are in Iraq to be treated with human dignity and for that camp to be protected and for the Iraqi military to protect that camp and not allow the intrusion into that camp and the rampage that's going on and the attack on women and children. Enough is enough. If Iraq claims itself to be a democracy, it is important.

I also call upon the General Assembly to comment on the abuses in Iran, the human rights abuse, the press abuse, the lack of freedom of press. Even as we debate this question of nuclear proliferation, we should not allow the kinds of abuses that are going on in Iran.

As I move to the domestic issue, Mr. Speaker, I think it is important that we clarify that health care is something that America wants. Sixty percent of the American people want health care. And as I was coming here to Washington, I met someone, Mrs. Wallace, in the airport who indicated that her son will have to have surgery costing a million dollars, and she pleaded that we get our job done. I said I would take her message to Washington, D.C. She was sending off her sister going to New Zealand. They have not been hampered by a program that is, in essence, underwritten by the government, but we're not asking for a program to be underwritten by the government; we are asking for people to have choice. But more importantly, we are asking to have an option, a public option, that will provide for the competitiveness that is so very important in providing health care for all Americans.

Let's stop all the myths and the attacks, and let's have an evenhanded debate to recognize that a public option provides for competition.

I want to conclude, Mr. Speaker, by simply saying we have celebrated this 1 year with the Lehman Brothers, but I will say to you that we have to have a recovery that makes sense, and this administration is working on it.

Mr. Speaker, just a moment of good news that tells the American people that their government is working. I look forward to holding my job fair number two in Houston, Texas, where it has been voted that Houston has the highest unemployment rate of our State, the State of Texas, at the Georgia R. Brown Convention Center in conjunction with the City of Houston, where we will be hosting private employers, local government and State and Federal Government because the stimulus dollars are working and the American people want us to create jobs.

Then we will have an opportunity to celebrate in my district the gospel music heritage legislation that myself and the Senator from Arkansas passed, Senator Blanche Lincoln, to commemorate America's great history in gospel music. We will be at the Grace Community Church on Friday, September 18, at 7:30.

I say that because there is a reason to be joyful in America. It's a great country, and that is why I pause now for a serious moment to reflect on 9/11 and to offer, again, my deepest sympathy and concern for those families and victims and just to remind Americans that we will never forget.

What brings me here today, to take all of that good news or all of that recognition that we are one country not divided by Republicanism or being a Democrat or an independent, but we are one family, loving our values and loving our democracy, makes me come today with a very saddened heart. For yesterday the President of the United States rose before this body and offered in the most poignant but kindest and firmest way an extended hand to work and to collaborate with Americans and those who represent Americans in this body. And I have had the privilege of hearing a number of Presidents speak to the Nation from this place.

And let me say to you that when a President comes here, he is a guest of this body. It is not Republicans and Democrats, it is the United States Congress. For the President's cabinet is here, the Senate is here. In some instances, the Supreme Court is here. Members are here from all over the country. Our guests are here as well.

And each time a President has come, whether or not I have an emotional opposition and a reasoned opposition to the position that they may be making, I hold their presence in reverence and respect. Last night my heart weighted with sadness, for as we spoke to the American people, adults, those of us who are elected, we found the highest level of disregard and disrespect.

Not only was there a shout-out, albeit the First Amendment is protected, there is a reasonable response of those elected to high public office that when the President stands, not the President the Democrat, or the Republican, but the President of the United States, I can say this, because I denounced the throwing of a shoe at our President on foreign soil, of any kind. I denounced the seeming tolerance of President Bush having a shoe thrown at him. It is horrific and a disgrace.

Just as I denounce holding up papers while the President is speaking. That happened last night. Just as I denounce having a sign in your lap, which we are not allowed to wear buttons expressing viewpoint. That happened last night.

Just as I denounce words coming out calling the President a liar. It should be denounced by the leadership of my good friends on the other side. This is not an individual act. It should be denounced as inappropriate decorum in this place.

And for those who wish to be equally rude by holding up something, let me suggest that it is a free country. And I do appreciate, sometimes we make mistakes, I admit to mistakes. We have to clarify those mistakes. But I believe it is important to clarify it so the President of the United States' ears can hear it and so this body can hear it.

And I would hope my friends on the other side of the aisle, the leadership, will come to this well next week and acknowledge that this place should be a place of decorum. Yes, Members have turned their backs, some Members have walked out. That is their privilege. We do not have a despotic Nation, and they have the privilege to do so, if they disagree with the words being spoken by the President of the United States. But remember, he or she is our guest. And when you invite someone into your home, you treat them with the highest level of respect.

I am not angry. I am simply saddened and disappointed, because so many of my friends on the other side of the aisle expressed their own disappointment, but somewhat in silence. It is important for the American people to know that whoever the President is, no matter where they come from, what background, what region, what State, they are the President of the United States.

The President told the truth last night, and the other side must tell the truth about inappropriate behavior and the lack of reverence. We need to respect each other, and I call for that.

I thank the distinguished gentleman from New York and the distinguished gentlelady from Florida.

This is a duty that we do not relish, but that we obligate ourselves to be able to be reminded of the lost souls of September 11, 2001. It changed the innocence of America, but yet we stood tall as we mourned with these families from far and wide that we are America that believes in justice and civil liberties and, yes, the Bill of Rights.

The Homeland Security effort was born during that time. I began to serve on the Select Committee and now the Homeland Security Committee. The work we do every day should be silent work, but it is work to ensure that the Nation's airlines and airports, train stations and railroads and mass transit and everywhere we go protects the American people. It is a world that stands up against terrorism, but understands that America can be a friend.

So today, as we come together as a Congress, as we did those few years ago and stood on the front steps singing ``God bless America,'' I rise today to tell those families we will never forget them. And it is our obligation to be diligent, to be responsive, and to be remembered.

God bless America.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the H. Res. 722. The legacy of the events of September 11, 2001 still resonates today. We will never forget the harrowing experience of the loss of more than 3,000 lives that marked this national tragedy. We will never forget the events of that day, nor those who paid the ultimate price. We will forever remember how the country suffered profound sadness, the likes of which we as a nation hope to never experience again.

Mr. Speaker, I recall vividly the intense emotions evoked as the attacks unfolded. The nation watched in horror as two airliners crashed into the Twin Towers and brought down the World Trade Center. That horror intensified as we witnessed an attack on the Pentagon, and a crashed airplane in Pennsylvania. Horror turned to anger as it came to light that the attacks were the actions of hate-filled cowards who had no respect for human life. I remember too, that in the aftermath of these senseless attacks, we came together as a nation and with friends from around the world united in grief and sadness. That moment transformed our country and the world, as the resolve of our nation strengthened and our principles hardened.

We remember the heroes from that day; those who ran into the danger, sacrificing themselves to save strangers. They were the brave firefighters, police officers, and civil servants who died in the service of protecting others. We remember the heroes from United Flight 93 who overpowered the terrorists and gave their own lives to prevent the deaths of countless others. We hope that their families can take some small measure of comfort knowing that Americans have made a permanent place for those heroes in our hearts.

In Houston, we mourned the loss of two of our own: Naval Petty Officer 3rd Class Daniel Martin Caballero and Army Lieutenant Colonel Karen Wagner. Twenty-one year old Petty Officer Caballero was an electronics technician who had a bright life ahead of him. Forty-year- old Lt. Col. Wagner had a distinguished career as a medical personnel officer in the office of the Army surgeon general. Both lives were taken when United Flight 77 was steered into the Pentagon. Also Councilmember Toni Lawrence lost her dear sister to this horrible tragedy.

Mr. Speaker, I ask that we also pay tribute today to those who have fought the wars born from September 11. In the years since that tragic day, our country has fought ardently to eliminate the enemies who would work to perpetuate the culture of fear and violence born from 9/11.

The men and women of the U.S. military prove daily that their commitment to protecting and defending our country is steadfast. Let us remember those who fought and died while serving the country, let us honor those who continue to fight, and let us pledge our unending support for our soldiers and their families.

As a Senior Member of the Foreign Affairs and Homeland Security Committees, I believe that we must continue to honor the fallen by working to prevent needless deaths. In the years since September 11, 2001, Congress has worked hard to make sure that such a tragedy will never happen again. In large part, we have taken heed of the advice of the 9/11 Commission and built a strong system to prevent future attacks.

Mr. Speaker, I rise before this body to say that our work is not yet done. Our nation's rail and mass transit lines continue to be vulnerable. Millions of Americans rely on our rail and mass transit for transportation. Terrorist attacks in Madrid in 2004 and London in 2006 indicate that transportation routes continue to be potential security threats. We must not let another tragedy occur. As Chair of the Transportation Security Subcommittee--we are working to increase America's security.

Preventing terrorism at home begins with addressing terrorism abroad. We must engage nations that are susceptible to the influence of extremists and arm them with the tools to fight radicalism. That means increasing education, improving living conditions, and increasing the capacity to govern. The struggle against terrorism will be won in the hearts and minds of people around the world.

Mr. Speaker, I urge all members to join me in supporting H. Res. 722. Let us remember this day and the tragedy that befell the nation by properly honoring the victims with our renewed commitment to America's security and Democracy.

Madam Speaker, it is a delight to be back with my colleagues, but more importantly, it was enriching to be with my constituents at some 10 townhall meetings and at any number of personal appearances before organizations to talk about changing America's health care system for the better of all Americans. After 60 years, we now have an opportunity to address the question of the uninsured and to make sure that those who have insurance can keep it.

I have read page 16. What it says is that your private insurance is grandfathered in and that, if your insurance in 5 years does not meet basic standards, we'll require your insurers to do so. There is nothing on page 16 that says anything about eliminating your insurance, but it does reform the insurance industry of America--no preexisting disease; preventative care. We can pay for it. The Congressional Budget Office said so.

So today, Madam Speaker, I am here gladly to stand with the President and to join him in the question: What will you do? It's time to move on health care reform with a vigorous public option.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 3269, the ``Corporate and Financial Institution Compensation Fairness Act of 2009''. I would like to thank my colleague Representative Barney Frank for introducing this resolution, as well as the cosponsors.

I stand in support of this important resolution, because it is designed to address the perverse incentives in compensation plans that encourage executives in large financial firms to take excessive risk at the expense of their companies, shareholders, employees, and ultimately the American taxpayer--risks that contributed to the recent financial collapse.

One of the solutions it offers is practically the manifestation of common sense itself--let the stockholders of the company, the people the corporate executives are supposed to be working for, have a say in how those executives should be compensated. For example, the bill requires shareholder non-binding votes on so-called ``golden parachutes.'' It requires publicly-traded corporations to allow shareholders to take non-binding votes during annual meetings on the top five executive compensation packages. And it allows SEC to exempt small companies from the nonbinding vote requirement if it finds such an exemption necessary.

The bill also seeks to change the incentives for the sort of financial firms that brought our economy to the brink of collapse, so that those who manage the money of our countrymen are not even tempted to take us back to that precipice. The bill authorizes the SEC, along with the federal financial regulatory agencies, to develop regulations for financial firms with at least $1 billion in assets that proscribe the use of employee compensation structures that pose a risk to financial institutions and the broader economy. It also specifically, authorizes the regulations to restrict or prohibit ``inappropriate or imprudently risky compensation practices'' at these large financial firms, and further requires financial firms with at least $1 billion in assets to disclose to the federal regulators any compensation structures that include incentive-based elements.

The bill does not require disclosure of any individuals' compensation information; nor does it allow government pre-approval of anyone's compensation. Rather, the bill is the first step towards enacting comprehensive financial regulatory reform to make sure we never face another historic financial crisis that depletes the retirement savings of millions, locks businesses out of much-needed credit, and threatens the entire economy.

Finally, the bill requires the compensation committees of the Boards of Directors of public companies to be made up of independent directors. It further requires that these compensation consultants satisfy independence criteria established by the SEC. I would also point out that this bill will, in practice, only apply to companies already sufficiently large enough--it specifically allows the SEC to exempt small companies from the non binding vote requirement if it finds such an exemption necessary.

Not only is this bill common sense personified, it is also long overdue. Corporate culture has, in the past three decades, undergone a transformation for the worse, where the most economically powerful have come to see, not just stockholder profit, but short term profit, as the greatest good. Today, the people with most economic influence see little or no incentive in seeking anything but the next bonus.

It was not always so--from the end of World War II until the mid 1990s, prominent public and private company CEOs almost universally viewed their responsibilities as being equally split among shareholders, employees, customers, and the Nation. This broad sense of corporate responsibility was actually so widely

and comfortably held that in 1981, the Business Roundtable, which is the key public policy arm of the Nation's largest public companies and their CEOs, officially endorsed a policy that said that shareholder returns had to be balanced against other considerations.

However, just as the Business Roundtable was making its policy statement, the deregulation and laissez-faire era that was born in the Reagan administration was starting to chip away at the statement's core contention. And by 2004--even after many of the myriad scandals and outright thefts that have hallmarked the last decade of American business had already come to light--the Roundtable amended its position. It said that the job of business is only to maximize the wealth of shareholders.

But even that statement did not, in any meaningful way, restrict or amend their pursuit of personal wealth, as board members effectively wrote their own paycheck. So not only were our corporate leaders explicitly no longer concerned with stakeholders other than those with the bottom line, they saw little concern for the long term well being of their company. A well-connected man could just as easily make sure the short term profits were inflated as much as possible, so it would look like he was doing a good job, and jump off when the bonuses get handed out.

We see this behavior, for example, among the companies Americans entrust their health care with. In 2001, Aetna's CEO made $3.5 million; 7 years later, it increased nearly seven-fold, to $24.3 million, making over $100 million in the past 9 years. In 2000, Coventry paid its Chief Executive $2.2 million; apparently that wasn't enough; because in 2007 they gave him nearly $15 million. In the past 9 years, ten individuals--people who are in charge of companies, whose source of profit is the denial of care to the people who take large cuts in their paychecks to give them money--made over $690 million.

In 2007, several high profile corporate executives resigned and received multimillion dollar financial packages. That year, Home Depot CEO Robert Nardelli resigned and received a severance package worth $210 million, which followed several other ``golden parachutes,'' including the $122 million retirement package for Pfizer's former CEO, the $175 million package for KB Homes' former CEO, who retired after he was found to have manipulated the company's stock, and the $85 million severance package for Viacom's CEO who was on the job for less than a year.

That was the year our noble body tried to act. The House passed a bill that would have required publicly traded corporations, beginning this year, to allow shareholders to take a non binding vote on executive compensation and golden parachutes. Our colleagues in the Senate, however, never acted on the measure.

And, as everybody sitting in this noble body knows, the outrage has only grown. In 2008, one man--the head of a financial firm--made over $700 million. Another CEO, of the Oracle Company, made over half a billion dollars that same year. Six energy companies paid their CEOs nearly $800 billion. All told, in 2008, less than 10 individuals made over $2 billion, over 1 percent of the Gross Domestic Product of my home city of Houston.

During the worst days of the financial crisis, a raw nerve was struck when workers generally became aware, many for the first time, of the huge salaries being earned on Wall Street and on other streets far removed from Main Street. Wherever earned, excessive executive and CEO compensation, simply by being ``excessive,'' belies the principles of a meritocracy, which is what corporations should be. Managers rise to something akin to royalty when their compensation is at unjustified levels and when the rewards of employment are not more commonly and fairly shared with the general employee base.

To conclude: This regulatory overhaul is urgently needed to avoid the possibility of a repeat of the recent financial disaster which nearly crippled our economy. It does so through common sense measures to curb executive power to write their own checks, and dis-incentivizes them from taking the mad risks that nearly brought us to ruin. It is long overdue, and becomes only more necessary as time passes. And so I support the bill.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to support my bill, H.J. Res. 12, that will

designate September 2009 as Gospel Music Heritage Month and honor gospel music for its valuable and longstanding contributions to the culture of the United States. Gospel music is an American art form that has spanned hundreds of generations and its musical roots can be heard throughout many musical genres that we love today. It is important that we recognize and celebrate the vital role gospel music has had on music history. For this reason, I ask that you join me in supporting my resolution expressing support for designating September 2009 as ``Gospel Music Heritage Month,'' honoring gospel music for its valuable long-standing contributions to American culture. I would also like to thank the 6 co-sponsors who have seen fit to honor our gospel music heritage.

The history of gospel music can be traced back to African American spirituals that blended diverse elements from African music, melodic influences from Irish folk songs and hymns, and ultimately borrowed from other uniquely American musical styles including ragtime, jazz, and blues.

The influence of gospel music can be found infused in all forms of secular music, from rock & roll, country, soul, R&B, and countless other styles. The legacy of gospel music includes some of the most memorable voices and pioneers in American history, such as Thomas Dorsey, Mahalia Jackson, James Vaughan, Roberta Martin, and many more. Gospel music has laid down the musical foundation for legendary recording artists such as Elvis Presley, Marvin Gaye, Aretha Franklin, Buddy Holly, Whitney Houston, Ray Charles, Dolly Parton, Mariah Carey, Bob Dylan, and Randy Travis.

Gospel music has had an overwhelming influence on American culture and this bill recognizes gospel music's contributions by celebrating the rich heritage of gospel music and its artists in the month of September, 2009.

I urge my colleagues to support this bill as we move it to the floor for a vote.

The joint resolution was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, was read the third time, and passed, and a motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

Mr. Speaker, we've had a long session of hard work, and I believe this is an appropriate ending to be able to honor some of America's culture. And so I rise today to acknowledge the passing of H.J. Res. 12, to designate September 2009 as Gospel Music Heritage Month and honor the gospel music for its valuable and longstanding contributions to the culture of the United States.

I thank the majority leader and the Republican leadership. I thank the chairman of the committee, Chairman Towns, and Ranking Member Issa of Government Oversight, all of those who have worked, along with my 16 cosponsors who recognize the value of the songs sung by the likes of Mahalia Jackson singing Precious Lord; Yolanda Adams, The Battle is the Lord's; Sandi Patty; and the work that Elvis Presley did when he sang his gospel songs; Israel, out of Lakewood Church; Kurt Carr with This Little Light of Mine; Donnie McClurkin, Just Stand; and Rev. Gregg Patrick, who is both a producer and a singer.

We have a wide vastness of musical talent in this Nation. I'm glad we're celebrating gospel music.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker, and I thank my good friend from Oregon for giving such a detailed presentation of the enormity of the work that we have generated in collaboration with this administration and what ``change'' actually means.

Sometimes the television news bites and other activities that, by the very nature of our Nation, which is so diverse, may draw upon our thinking, we don't get to the bottom line of the kinds of opportunities that we've seen over the past 8 months, 7 months, of hard work from the time that President Barack Obama was sworn in as President of the United States and Congress was sworn in for the 111th Congress. Our work is not yet finished. And we want to continue that work in dialogue with our constituents.

So I wanted to speak today some with a little lightheartedness and some

with enormous sincerity and seriousness.

I want to acknowledge the passing of the mother of the mayor of Acres Home, Willie Baker in my congressional district. I offer them my deepest sympathy. I rose to the floor yesterday to acknowledge the passing of Vermel Cook. A pioneering surgical nurse who worked with Dr. Michael E. Debakey and Dr. Michael Cooley. These are issues that members address as Federal Representatives in the people's House.

So to those families, the Cook and Baker families, I offer my deepest sympathy.

It seems then relevant to suggest that in addition to the many issues that we confront, I had the privilege of joining the Senate in having passed today by unanimous consent H.J. Res. 12, which, for many of my colleagues, 61 of them who cosponsored, many of them recognized the cultural richness of America, particularly in music which I happen to be a fan of and I believe it's so much a part of the American character whether it's country western or whether it's jazz, whether it's pop or whether it is gospel.

So H.J. Res. 12 acknowledged today along with the United States Senate that we would designate September 2009 as Gospel Music Heritage Month and it would honor the gospel music for its valuable and longstanding contributions to the culture of the United States. I hope that those who are members of various faiths throughout this Nation will take the time during their religious services to celebrate gospel musicians, gospel singers, gospel producers, gospel writers, and their own church choir or their place of faith's church choir, wherever they are practicing their faith. If there is a choir and it draws the kind of celebratory respect for their faith, I hope they will celebrate it.

So I am very pleased to have done this for a second time and to recognize the importance of the many artists and the many different influences, including country western music on gospel music. To recognize Thomas Dorsey, and Mahalia Jackson, the Stamps Quartet, the Statesmen, The Soul Stirrers, James Cleveland, Ray Hearn, Rex Humbard, the Mighty Clouds of Joy, Kirk Franklin, the late Brenda Waters and Carl Preacher and Shirley Joiner, The Winans, and Kathy Taylor, and so many others.

And then those who went on from gospel like Al Green and Elvis Presley and Aretha Franklin, Alan Jackson, Dolly Parton that had a gospel influence.

So in this place that is the people's House, we likewise attempt to be sensitive to items of joy, and I'm very proud that we will have an event in September, on September 12, at the Kennedy Center honoring gospel music heritage, and I hope my friends will do so.

But as we do that, we recognize that there are painful experiences so many of our constituents are having. So I rise today to thank my colleagues for joining me in sponsoring H.R. 3450. That is the Automobile Dealers Fair Competition Act of 2009.

We expect that because of the bankruptcies of GM and Chrysler that we are in direct line of losing some 200,000 jobs--I believe some 40,000, some 10,000 in the State of Texas--from the closing of automobile dealerships. Not only that, we realize that automobile dealerships, many of them, were the anchors of our community, the supporters of little leagues. Some of them, of course, gave us the best deals of our life. Maybe some of them didn't give you the best deal or the deal you wanted, but they are your neighbors.

Dealerships in the 18th Congressional District hire people. They're like family. They provide cars for our law enforcement, our city government. They make a difference. And by the closing, we know that they're closing small businesses. According to estimates, all termination actions combined could lead, as I said, to the loss of 200,000 direct jobs and many, many productive small businesses will be destroyed.

We also know that this termination has been in contrast to the contractual relationship called a franchise that the different dealerships had with GM and Chrysler.

So what does H.R. 3450 do? The bill deals with automobile dealers by giving them, if you will, the ability to have antitrust protection. They can now have the right to protect themselves by asking the question, Is the closing of automobile dealerships anti-competitive?

So in this bill, the bill will provide enforcement teeth to this right by giving dealers in an expedited court process to enforce the restraint of trade rights.

The bill is, in essence, giving them the right to protect themselves by going to court. This would deem decisions by auto manufacturers, specifically the Automobile Dealers Fair Competition Act of 2009, would deem decisions by auto manufacturers not to grant franchise extensions to old GM and Chrysler dealers provided they can demonstrate that they are still operating as a viable operation, that they can provide or they can show that that is an illegal restraint of trade.

In addition, the bill will provide enforcement teeth to this ride by giving dealers an expedited court process to enforce the restraint of trade rights. If new GM or Chrysler doesn't grant a replacement franchise to a growing concern within 90 days, the dealer can petition to Federal court, district court and ask the court to refer the case to a special master who will be required to hear the case and make a ruling within 90 days.

We don't want these dealerships to be closed, particularly those that are viable and are working in our community, as many have been, who have provided an economic engine to the community. It is our belief that there is empirical evidence and quantitative analysis that can be done to determine the impact of GM's mass dealer terminations to GM's market share.

If you close dealerships and you leave open Honda and Toyota and Lexus and other foreign-made car dealerships, are you impacting the competitive nature of our manufacturers and car dealers by giving them a noncompetitive edge because you have shut down competitive dealerships trying to sell American cars and you're leaving the other guys--which we welcome here in the United States; we're open to opportunity--but you let the foreign-made cars have the higher number of dealerships and therefore you deny jobs, you deny the manufacturers a forum for selling their cars. It's just not right.

So I ask my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 3450 to provide for the Automobile Dealers Fair Competition Act of 2009. It is H.R. 3450. We're delighted to already have a number of sponsors. It is bipartisan. We believe it can be another legislative initiative, and I am on many, to protect and provide for automobile dealers and say to the car manufacturers, our good friends in GM and Chrysler, we care about the suppliers, the car dealerships, and all of the workers that may now look to unemployment because those dealerships are closing. Those are good, good-paying jobs, and we want them back.

So, Mr. Speaker, I'm hoping that my colleagues, as they return from the August break working in their districts, will look at H.R. 3450 so we can likewise move that forward as quickly as possible.

Now, Mr. Speaker, I would like to emphasize the importance of good health care: health care for all America, health care with a public option. And for some reason, we think that this is something strange, but every single policy that has asked the question, Would you favor or oppose creating a public health insurance option to compete with private health insurance, not closing down private health insurance, you can see the increasing strong numbers: 65 percent, 83 percent, 76 percent and 72 percent.

One of the highest, I believe, indicated that this would not close anyone's private health insurance. In fact, it said: public plan option creating a new public health insurance plan that anyone can purchase. Some of the other polls say: ensuring that you can continue in your own choice.

And so I'm very proud that I support the public health insurance option that allows people to have insurance to stay where they are, but it allows all the small businesses to be able to provide themselves with insurance so they can do their business right.

What about leaving a job, getting fired and wanting to be a sole proprietor? You won't have to worry about being covered with good quality health insurance. Preexisting disease, you

won't have to be worried about being covered by good health insurance. The idea that you're not old enough for Medicare, you won't have to worry about good public insurance.

Let me give you an example--and this is happening in districts around America. In the 18th Congressional District, for example, up to 14,600 small businesses could receive tax credits to provide coverage to their employees; 5,300 seniors would avoid the doughnut hole in Medicare part D, 480 families would escape bankruptcy each year due to unaffordable health care costs; health care providers would receive payment for $49 million in uncompensated care each year. Ask your hospitals. They do not get reimbursed when they are the Good Samaritans and take people into their emergency rooms or take people who are sick. Once they're in the emergency room, they admit them.

Uncompensated care in my district alone will get $49 million and 184,000 uninsured individuals would gain access to high-quality health care.

How can we beat this? Help the small business, individuals who have ideas, want to get out and show their entrepreneurship, want to be a sole proprietor. Maybe they have two employees or 10 employees. You will get a public option. Don't let those scare tactics of you lose your insurance or it will accelerate beyond belief, because we have cost control in this bill.

In addition, don't let anyone misdirect their anguish at physician- owned hospitals. They are valuable. Do you realize that doctors come together and save hospitals from closing? They do that in Texas with Saint Joseph's Hospital. They want to do that in my district with ATH Heights Hospital. Some of my colleagues have told me about rural hospitals that are closing but doctors who care about the Hippocratic oath believe that they're there to be caregivers, and they run and they provide the saving grace by putting money into investing in those hospitals and saving them and keeping them from closing.

They, too, should be allowed to take in patients under this health care reform. And I'm fighting to make sure that that happens because they're not double-dipping. We want the quality to be high. We want to regulate it. But anyone that knows a doctor that has interest in a hospital by way of ownership, small amount kept regulated, you know that that hospital, if it's a general acute hospital, can give good care, if it's a specialty hospital, can give good care. And so I am looking forward to the opportunity to again begin this debate because I believe it is important.

Mr. Speaker, I also want to acknowledge the critics that say that the stimulus package has not worked. Well, I will tell you that Houston Metro in Houston, Texas, as a new start transportation system, is going to be eligible for stimulus dollars as we move forward. I only use the 18th Congressional District because it is right at my fingertips.

But there are jobs being created. Just alone in my district, housing and urban development, we've had $13.6 million in stimulus dollars; education, $42.5 million in stimulus dollars. And we want to continue to raise a question for our Governor to take out the $3.2 billion that is in the Rainy Day Fund in the State of Texas and utilize those stimulus dollars to put teachers back to work.

We were able to ensure that every teacher in Texas will get an $800 salary increase the day they start work when the new school year starts. Those are stimulus dollars that came through the working of the Democratic Congressional delegation of the State of Texas, $800 increase in their salary. $22 million in Social Security, and Small Business Administration, $8.5 million. That means in loans to our small businesses that are receiving monies from this important generating of jobs.

And so we have been able to fix our courthouse with $807,000. We have been able to fix our Federal building with $109 billion. We have been able to work, if you will, with the Catholic Charities emergency food and shelter, $24,000. We have been able to reach the Community of the Streets Outreach with $25,000. We have been working with new Kid Care emergency food and shelter. They have received dollars. Northwest Assistance Ministries has received dollars.

This is one district, but multiply it for the needs across your community. We have been able to keep nonprofit workers to help those people who have been unemployed. I think that is a far cry. Cleme Manor Apartments, new construction, substantial rehabilitation. Garden City Apartments, new construction, substantial rehabilitation.

Mr. Speaker, we are putting people to work. They are working on the construction and rehab of those apartments where individuals live. They are giving individuals a cleaner, safer, better quality of life by improving their apartments.

What I would ask my colleagues to do and those who may be listening, go to your local city halls. It's public knowledge. Ask them to print out for you a list of the stimulus dollars that have already come. More are going to come. Those will be grant dollars. It means that any of the nonprofits in your States or cities or counties can apply for dollars that will put people to work.

Right now, we have the ability to utilize some $700 million in what we call ``green'' jobs. Of course, you can't see it overnight. You couldn't see it in March. You couldn't see it possibly in February. Maybe you didn't see it in April or May because, yes, processing is important, documenting your dollars, where are your tax dollars going, making sure we have the right report is correct.

In Houston, I am very proud to have worked on the stimulus dollar legislation providing language to ensure that minority- and women-owned and small businesses would be recipients of those dollars in the appropriate manner so that we don't leave out small businesses who would have the ability to legitimately be receiving stimulus dollars through a government process and work that they would be doing.

And construction dollars for all of the construction workers out there. Rehabilitation is a right way to work. I'm glad that the Houston Heights Tower received some $95,000--those are where a lot of my senior citizens live--for new construction and rehabilitation. I remember going to the Heights Tower during Hurricane Ike.

And so it is important to refute some of the negative commentary that the stimulus dollars don't work. They do. Settegast Heights, again, $877,000 have gone to my city of Houston in the 18th Congressional District alone; new construction, substantial rehabilitation. People will have a better quality of life.

Wesley Square Apartments, $508,000, new construction, substantial rehabilitation. Some of the homeless persons who have come upon hard times, many of them homeless veterans, will be able to have a better quality of life because stimulus dollars were utilized.

So, Mr. Speaker, I believe that we have come to the end of a portion of the 111th Congress, and I am very proud that we passed an SCHIP bill that enrolled more children in health care, that we increased the minimum wage, that we provided for parity for women in working, that their income or their salary is competitive with men, that, as well, we have begun to stand down in Iraq. And our Defense Appropriation bill speaks to helping move the defense of Iraq to the Iraqi National Forces.

I offer my deepest sadness and reflection on those lives that have been lost, our soldiers on the front line, those that are now being lost in Afghanistan, and we will work hard to stand down there to ensure that the country of Afghanistan can stand up. But we've been working hard to ensure that that happens.

I've been working hard to help the people of Pakistan. We passed a Pakistan relief bill, in essence, out of Foreign Affairs so that they can stand up, so they can help with social programs, they can help economically, that we can help those who are in the camps because of the violence that was perpetrated, that we can show the respect for the soldiers in Afghanistan, their own soldiers in Afghanistan, Afghanis and the Pakistanis, who have lost soldiers themselves fighting terrorism.

We passed H.R. 2200, the bill I authored, helping to secure transportation--airports, trains, busses--to emphasize more training for flight attendants, to provide more resources for the Transportation Security Administration, to ensure that America is safe.

And so this House has been busy. And as we go home to our districts, we will not run away from the idea of good health plans. Because, my friends, I don't know what my friends on the other side of the aisle have, a bunch of question marks about the health plan that my friends on the other side of the aisle have offered.

I want them to join us. I can articulate what we have done. I realize that we've made great strides. I know that the people want, if you will, good health care.

And so as I close, I want to thank the Speaker. And I just want to leave you with this forceful message: We're going to get the job done. We're going to get health care for all Americans, and the stimulus is going to work for you. And celebrate Gospel Music Heritage Month in September as we help our automobile dealers return to their jobs and to retain their jobs. You know we've been working.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to celebrate the 75th anniversary of my hometown airline, Continental Airlines. I would like to thank all of the employees, past and present and those in the future, who have continued to serve our community and the Nation. We thank them for their original beginnings with great history and great leadership.

I'm reminded of one of their transfer names, Eastern Airlines. I'm reminded, of course, of the uniforms and the admiration that children would give the pilots and flight attendants. We still do that today.

Continental Airlines is in my district, and as well the Bush Intercontinental Airport, which is their hub airport.

Let me thank them for the many economic dollars they provide to the fourth largest city in the Nation, Houston, Texas, and as well let me congratulate them as they move forward in a new structure that will allow more diversity, more competition, but stronger airline services and customer relations.

Thank you to the leadership of Continental Airlines and to their CEO, Larry Kellner, and all of the hardworking employees. You've had 75 years. You should be proud.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to salute a woman of success and pay tribute to Vermel Cook, 95 years old, who passed just this last week, born on November 24, 1913, a woman that has a very special place in my heart, and that of the city of Houston. Mr. Speaker, can you imagine a woman born before the conclusion of World War I, in the midst of a segregated South, who became an important surgical nurse who attended to the surgeries of the famed surgeon, Dr. Michael DeBakey, and Dr. Denton Cooley, at the Methodist Hospital.

What an achievement. And she did that for 30 years. In her 30 years I would imagine she saw some of the first heart transplants. She saw the first opportunities to give new life to patients through the genius of Dr. Michael DeBakey, already passed, and Dr. Denton Cooley, who still lives in our community. I'm very proud that this woman raised beautiful children, 6 children. She has 8 grandchildren, 4 great grandchildren.

And one of her wonderful children was a dear friend of mine, the Mitchell family. Her granddaughter, Pam Mitchell, who is saddened by her death, is one of the 8 grandchildren. And her wonderful daughter, surviving daughter, JoAnn Griggs, as well, had the opportunity to live with a great mother and a great father. Her husband, deceased, Leroy Cook, they were married for 50 years and produced great talent for the Mitchell family. Mr. and Mrs. Mitchell and granddaughter Pam and grandson, her young grandson, traveled around the community and provided great music.

She was a woman of religion as well, a member of the Progressive New Hope Church under the Reverend Ennis Brown, and she served at that church for many, many years, a great historic church in the city of Houston. But then as Pastor Brown passed away, she moved to one of the up-and-coming starring churches under the leadership of my dear friend, Pastor Samuel Ratliff, Brentwood Baptist Church. And I am reminded of my visits to that church when Pastor Ratliff and all of the leadership of that church always rallied around Sister Cook. They always were so grateful of her presence there, and, as well, the spark and the laughter and the smile that she brought to the congregation.

I will always remember her, generous in spirit and heart, a nurturer. And now I know why. A surgical nurse in the midst of a segregated America, living through World War I and World War II, standing at the side of the founder of the veterans hospital system of America, Dr. Michael DeBakey. And then his tutee, Dr. Denton Cooley, two giants in the field of medicine. Now their fallen hero goes alongside of Dr. DeBakey, my very dear friend, Sister Vermel Cook.

As she is buried this coming weekend I would ask that we remember her challenges, but also her spirit. I will always be proud to have known her and to have recognized the greatness of her service and how she pioneered for nurses who now have come behind her. She'll be funeralized on Saturday, this coming Saturday, August 1, 2009, at the Brentwood Baptist Church. Though we are saddened by her passing, we know that this will be a commemoration, a celebration of the pioneering spirit and the successes that she had. We pay tribute to Vermel Cook; yes, fallen, but yet successful, a woman that we can be very proud of in this great Nation that gives us opportunity. God bless you, Vermel Cook, and God bless America.

Mr. Speaker, let me tell you very clearly: Medicare in 1965 saved lives. Can you believe it has been six decades, 60 years, since we have been able to come together around the common goal of getting a public option with health care reform? Now six decades later, America has debated this broken system, but we're closer than we've ever been before, and the American people understand 83 percent, high numbers. They want a public health insurance option. They get it.

Premiums have doubled over 9 years. You ask yourself the question, Can I afford to pay $1,800 a year more every year for a family of four? Health care reform will keep Americans from financial ruin. Go to the bankruptcy courts. Catastrophic illnesses have shoved Americans into these courts. They've lost all that they have. We have to stop it now. We want to leave doctors in charge of their patients and not the insurance companies, whose main opportunity is to say, N-O, no.

The American people get it. The public health insurance option, that is what we're doing; and we're doing it now.