Floor Statements

I thank the ranking member from California, and I thank the chair of the committee.

Madam Speaker, I rise to support House Resolution 268, reaffirming our Nation's unyielding support for our great ally Israel. Madam Speaker, the lack of progress in the peace process thus far stems from the Palestinians' refusal to negotiate despite historic Israeli concessions. They could choose dialogue, they could choose peace-- instead they have chosen violence and hatred by partnering with Hamas.

Israel cannot be expected to negotiate with an organization that refuses to accept the internationally recognized Quartet principles, continues to murder innocent Israelis, and refuses to free Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit.

This resolution comes to us as the PA pursues plans to avoid direct negotiations altogether and unilaterally declare statehood at the United Nations.

Madam Speaker, just weeks ago here in this Chamber, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu reminded us what we clearly already know--that peace cannot be imposed; peace must be negotiated. By passing this resolution, Congress will uphold this principle, will reaffirm our commitment to Israel's security, and will express our unyielding support for the Israeli people in their quest for a true and lasting peace. I urge a ``yes'' vote on this resolution.

Mr. Speaker, tomorrow marks the fifth anniversary of the abduction of Israeli soldier Staff Sergeant Gilad Shalit from inside Israel's borders by the terrorist organization Hamas. For 5 years, Hamas has violated international human rights conventions by denying Shalit contact with his family and visits by the International Red Cross.

Now Hamas wants to be partners with the Palestinian Authority. If the Palestinian Authority is determined to pursue unity with Hamas, then President Abbas must demand that his new partner free Sergeant Shalit.

Israel can never be expected to negotiate with an organization that remains bent on its destruction. But if Hamas ever expects to have a seat at the table, it must show good faith now and immediately release Gilad Shalit.

We stand here today with our great ally, Israel. We stand here with allies from Europe and throughout the world. We stand with all who believe in and fight for basic human rights. Anyone who can hear my voice knows that Gilad Shalit must be released.

Madam Speaker, today we will vote on a bill to deprive impoverished mothers and their children of nutritional assistance at a time when record numbers of Americans are unfortunately relying on these programs.

There is no better indication of the majority's misplaced priorities than when you examine their cuts to meals for low-income seniors and the cuts to our Nation's emergency food banks. My Republican colleagues love to say that these painful cuts are necessary to reduce the deficit. Don't believe it for a second. If we repeal the Bush tax cuts for millionaires for 1 day, just for 1 day, we could preserve every penny of the $100 million in cuts to senior food, aid senior hungry and soup kitchens.

We're recovering from the worst economic disaster since the Great Depression. Poverty is on the rise across America. During these tough times, we could ask millionaires to go without their special tax cuts for 1 day. Instead, Republicans are asking some of America's poorest, most vulnerable seniors to go hungry for 1 day and more.

Madam Speaker, our Nation deserves better than that.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Ofer Bavly, the Consul General of Israel to Florida and Puerto Rico for his many years of service to the South Florida Jewish Community, which is being honored this evening by the Jewish Community Relations Council of the Jewish Federation of South Palm Beach County.

The son of Israeli diplomats, Mr. Bavly has dedicated his life to public service since his graduation from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem with duel degrees in International Relations and Middle Eastern Studies. Like many Israelis, Mr. Bavly courageously served his country in the Israel Defense Forces, rising to the rank of Captain.

In 1991, Mr. Bavly joined Israel's Foreign Ministry, and has since served his country in Israel's Embassies around the world, including Madrid and Rome. Mr. Bavly's success as a diplomat and foreign policy expertise led to his appointment as a Policy Advisor to the Foreign Minister of Israel in 2005. Subsequently, Mr. Bavly was appointed Counselor in the Foreign Ministry's North America Division in 2006.

Mr. Bavly's diplomatic career has culminated with his 2007 appointment to his current position of Counsul General of Israel to Florida and Puerto Rico. It has been an honor working side by side with Mr. Bavly to further America's unshakeable relationship with Israel.

I congratulate Mr. Bavly, his wife Ayala, and their three children for their great honor tonight, and I look forward to many more years of strong partnership with Mr. Bavly as we work towards our shared goals of advancing the safety and security of Israel and creating a lasting peace.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Paul Hirschon, the Deputy Consul General of Israel to Florida and Puerto Rico for his many years of service to the South Florida Jewish Community, which is being honored this evening by the Jewish Community Relations Council of the Jewish Federation of South Palm Beach County.

Born in London, Mr. Hirschon spent his early life in South Africa and pursued degrees in accounting, law, and business before immigrating to Israel. Upon his move to Israel, Mr. Hischon served in the Israel Defense Forces and worked in the Civil Service.

After a brief time back in England, Mr. Hirschon returned to Israel and spent ten years as a respected businessman in the hi-tech sector, where he focused on developing lasting relationships with businesses throughout the Middle East. However, in 2004, Mr.

Hirschon returned to public service and joined the Foreign Service.

Mr. Hirschon was quickly promoted up the ranks of Israel's Foreign Ministry, working for the Consul General's Office in the Persian Gulf countries before being named the Deputy Consul General of Israel to Florida and Puerto Rico in 2008. It has been an honor working side by side with Mr. Hirschon as Israel and the United States continue advancing our shared core values of freedom, equality, and democracy.

I congratulate Mr. Hirschon for this great honor tonight, and I look forward to many more years of strong partnership with Mr. Hirschon.

Mr. Speaker, the partisan debt resolution was dead on arrival yesterday. But what really should have been DOA is the Republican plan to end Medicare and turn seniors over to private insurance companies.

Today, despite the outright rejection of this plan from south Florida to western New York and all across America, Republicans will try to deem and pass the reckless Ryan budget. That's right: those who decried ``deem and pass'' during the health care reform debate now seek to use it to end Medicare.

In fact, it was the distinguished chairman of the Rules Committee who, in an effort to stoke fear over the Affordable Care Act, derisively labeled deem and pass the Slaughter Solution. Apparently using deem and pass to help insure 150 million Americans is an abomination but using it to end Medicare, that's courageous.

What would truly be courageous is if my Republican colleagues abandoned their plan to gut Medicare and Medicaid and instead supported deficit reduction that ends giveaways to Big Oil and more $100,000 tax cuts for millionaires.

I thank the gentleman from Colorado.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this rule.

From the retirees that I serve in south Florida to the middle class families of western New York, the American people have overwhelmingly rejected the reckless Republican budget.

The Republican budget ends Medicare and replaces it with a coupon, a coupon that fails to even approach the cost of private health insurance. It guts Medicaid, depended on by millions of impoverished children, nursing home patients, seniors who need home health services, and disabled Americans. Its hatchet job on our budget will destroy

2.1 million jobs when we cannot afford higher unemployment.

This plan is opposed by the Senate, the President, and, most importantly, the American people. Yet today Republicans will vote to deem and pass the Ryan budget.

The distinguished Rules Committee chairman, who decried deem and pass during the health care reform debate and claimed ``process is substance,'' has apparently had a stunning change of heart. We were told that using deem and pass to extend health care coverage to the uninsured is an abomination. Apparently, we learned today it should be reserved for slashing benefits to seniors.

I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this rule. The American people want a bipartisan budget that responsibly reduces the deficit, creates new jobs, and protects Medicare and Medicaid for disabled and elderly Americans. Not this Republican budget.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the twenty-six students from Florida schools that have been named winners in the America's Young Heroes contest to promote respect and prevent bullying. These students have admirably put forth concrete, practical, and creative solutions to prevent bullying in America's schools. However, even more important than the proposals is the contest's climate of acceptance and respect that is being spread to schools across Florida through the America's Young Heroes Program.

Founded by Vera Hirschhorn, the America's Young Heroes contest was created in 1999 to improve students' self-esteem through the submission of original stories, poems, music, short films, and artwork about their experiences with bullying. The America's Young Heroes contest has dedicated itself to remedying the bullying epidemic facing our schools by placing an emphasis on positive thoughts and actions to solve bullying situations.

I congratulate Vera Hirschhorn, the America's Young Heroes contest, and the twenty-six Florida students for their great work to end bullying in our schools. Their great work and advocacy on behalf of respect and acceptance is truly making Florida schools a safer place for our children.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the eleven Broward residents--Joel Fass, Bea Hedigan, John Gargotta, Maria Thereza Mayo, Kenneth S. Rubin, Mayor Emma Shoaff, Esmie Straw, Lora Thomson, Belle Trebuck, Dr. Steven Weisberg, and Commissioner Lois Wexler--that were recently elected to the Aging and Disability Center of Broward County's Dr. Nan S. Hutchison Broward Seniors Hall of Fame. These eleven volunteer and community leaders have dedicated much of their retirement to improving Broward County, and it is my privilege to congratulate them today for this great achievement.

This group of elected officials, business leaders, lawyers, and community activists has tirelessly worked to improve the quality of life for Broward's seniors. Their continuous service to the South Florida community, especially their humanitarian efforts and their advocacy for the less fortunate, makes me proud to call these 11 individuals my neighbors and friends.

Mr. Speaker, it is my honor to stand before you today and recognize the achievements of this year's Dr. Nan S. Hutchinson Broward Seniors Hall of Fame inductees. Their dedication and hard work has truly made Broward County a better place.

Mr. Chair, on rollcall No. 318, had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.''

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor and to celebrate the State of Israel on her 63rd birthday.

Sixty-three years ago, Israel was founded against all odds, through enormous courage and after a difficult struggle. Now she is the beacon of freedom and hope throughout the region.

As the only true democratic society in the Middle East, Israel has built a technologically advanced and thriving economy. Israel's a world leader in biotechnology research and is home to some of the world's great entrepreneurial success stories. Her people enjoy freedom of expression in all forms, and she boasts one of the strongest records on human rights.

The United States, as the first country to recognize Israel's independence, forged an unbreakable bond with Israel through our shared values and goals, and the partnership and cooperation between our two countries has never been stronger. The United States is committed to ensuring Israel's ability to defend herself and will continue to provide the most advanced assistance in security and the most robust economic aid.

In 63 years, Israel has persevered against all odds, against foreign armies, terrorism, and those who deny her right to exist.

Today we reaffirm the bond between the United States and Israel, that it will not be broken. And today the United States stands firmly with our great ally Israel in true friendship and celebration.

Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Madam Chairman, a little more than a year ago, the BP Deepwater Horizon oil drilling vessel exploded in the Gulf of Mexico. Over several months, millions of gallons of oil were dumped into the gulf. The oil spill caused irreparable damage to delicate ecosystems, damaged natural barriers that protect States along the Gulf of Mexico from deadly storm surge, and was devastating to local jobs and livelihoods along the gulf coast. Indeed, the oil spill caused significant harm to my State of Florida's environment and economy from which we are still recovering.

My amendment will have no impact on the overall bill. While I do oppose weakening the Federal review process of lease applications for energy development, production and exploration of the Gulf of Mexico, the purpose of my amendment is simply to correct an injustice to the residents of Florida and Alabama in the bill as it is written. My amendment would strike section 202, which imposes an exclusive venue in the Fifth Circuit for civil actions relating to the leasing of Federal lands in the Gulf of Mexico for energy development, production and exploration.

Under this provision, litigation relating to leases on energy development can only be filed in a district court in the Fifth Circuit. And while the Fifth Circuit includes the Gulf States of Mississippi, Louisiana and Texas, two States that comprise substantial gulf coastlines, Florida and Alabama, are in the 11th Circuit, and it makes no sense that the residents of these States will have to travel to the Fifth Circuit to have their cases heard. The effect of this section would be to prevent the district courts in Florida and Alabama from considering civil cases related to the issuance of leases for energy development, production and exploration off the coastlines of these States.

Congress has no business telling courts within a State that they are prohibited from considering issues involving a lease for energy development, production and exploration that have the potential to cause irreparable environmental and economic damage to the gulf coast area of that State.

In addition, requiring these cases to be moved from Florida and Alabama to a State within the Fifth Circuit will cause substantial hardship for the parties involved in the litigation, substantial hardship for the witnesses who would need to testify, and would result in substantial costs. Striking this exclusive venue provision would ensure that Florida and Alabama courts could hear these cases and reach a just result that reflects the needs of that State.

Section 202 does provide an exception only in cases in which there is no proper venue in a court within the Fifth District. However, this exception fails to address these very serious concerns. The parties involved in litigation on leasing would first have to determine that there is no court within the Fifth Circuit that would be able to consider the case. Only after determining that there was no court in the Fifth Circuit, then the parties will be permitted to file in Florida or Alabama.

In short, section 202 will prohibit the courts in Florida and Alabama from considering and rendering a decision in lawsuits on leases for energy development, production and exploration off their coasts. My amendment would strike the section. It makes no changes to the overall bill. It provides a simple solution to address this bill's unwarranted restrictions on which courts

will be able to review these leases should they pose a threat to the gulf coast area. I urge its adoption.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I yield 15 seconds to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings).

May I ask how much time is remaining.

Madam Chair, the gentleman's opposition to this amendment is premised on a very interesting, and I would respectfully suggest dangerous, interpretation of what is our responsibility as Members of this House. The gentleman spoke of the need to have uniformity of decisionmaking. Uniformity of decisionmaking. As I understand the role of the Federal judiciary, the role of our court system is to provide justice. The role is not to ensure that we have the same decision in every court.

My amendment simply says that if you are a judge in the State of Florida or a judge in the State of Alabama, that you are in a position just as well as a judge in Texas or these other Gulf States to make a determination about how the law should be interpreted--the idea that judges have to have a sufficient background, and that if courts throughout the country were able to hear these, we would not be able to reach a logical conclusion.

The fact is we're not asking courts throughout the country to hear these cases, Madam Chairman. We're asking the judges within the States whose coastlines would be dramatically affected and have been affected in the case of spills like the Deepwater Horizon.

Madam Chairman, I would respectfully suggest that if our goal here is to seek justice, then we must seek justice in those courts in the States that have seen the damage.

I ask for the adoption of this amendment.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Will the gentleman yield?

I would like to confirm. Therefore, if the language in the bill were very clear that for cases to be brought affecting the leasing and the exploration of oil in the gulf, that if those cases could be brought in any of the Gulf States, including Florida and Alabama, then the bill's sponsor would not oppose this amendment?

So just to confirm, the gentleman's position is that in fact the courts in Florida and Alabama are just as well equipped to hear these cases as are the courts in Texas and the other Gulf States.

If the gentleman would yield for one final question, I would also note that while the Natural Resources Committee has acted on this bill, this provision very clearly should have been debated in the Judiciary Committee where all of these issues could have been worked out. It is for that reason, given what we have to work with, that I would again ask for adoption of my amendment, which helps to bring justice and some clarity to what is otherwise a murky provision in this piece of legislation.

Madam Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Dr. Ronald Feinman, a constituent of mine from Boca Raton who will retire from teaching at the end of June after 39 years.

Dr. Feinman, a Senior Professor of History and Political Science at Broward College in Pembroke Pines, and an Adjunct Professor of History at Florida Atlantic University in Boca Raton, moved to South Florida in 1989 after teaching for 17 years in New York at Queens College, New York Institute of Technology, and Pace University. A graduate of Queens College, Dr. Feinman earned his PhD from the City University of New York Graduate Center in1975.

A student of history from an early age, Dr. Feinman has dedicated his life and professional career to ensuring future generations grow up with an appreciation of American history, politics and government. This dedication is evident in the pure enthusiasm he shows for his students and the topics he professes, and the strong reputation he has established amongst his peers and his students is a direct result. He has developed strong friendships with many of his students throughout his teaching career, and some of them have taken him for as many as eight classes along their way to completing their degree.

The author of Twilight of Progressivism: The Western Republican Senators and the New Deal, 1933-1945, Dr. Feinman regularly contributes articles and book reviews in a wide range of academic journals, lectures on modern American topics throughout South Florida, and maintains a blog discussing daily political topics. While he is looking forward to retirement and having the opportunity to spend more time with his family and travel, after taking a year off, he intends to return to teaching part-time to continue doing what he loves.

Mr. Speaker, Dr. Ronald Feinman embodies the true essence of an educator and a role model for our younger generations. I know I speak not only for myself, but for the thousands of students whose lives he has positively impacted throughout the four decades of his career in congratulating him on his retirement and wishing him the best going forward.

I rise today in opposition to H.R. 3, but I also rise in great disappointment that the people's House is again engaging in a debate about the rights of women rather than a discussion about the challenges our Nation faces.

For months, Democrats have urged this body to refocus its efforts on jobs; yet since the Congress convened in January, the Republican majority has failed to bring to the floor any measures to help create jobs. Their negligence is showing. Instead of working in a bipartisan way to regain America's economic strength, we again find ourselves on the floor in a divisive debate over women's reproductive freedoms.

That's right. Rather than wage a war on unemployment, my Republican colleagues are waging a war on women's health.

Under this legislation's logic, anyone who has government-subsidized insurance coverage--which is really everyone who has private health insurance, for we exempt employers from paying taxes on health benefits--would be forbidden from abortion.

Where does it end? The answer is it doesn't end. Even in the face of overwhelming support for women's rights among the American people, even in the face of more pressing challenges, real challenges like the jobs crisis, nothing stops my Republican colleagues from their assault on a woman's right to choose.

I urge a ``no'' vote.

Tomorrow, my Republican colleagues will bring a 2012 budget to the floor of the House, a budget that rolls back generations of progress and, quite simply, ends Medicare as we know it.

Fifty years ago, before Medicare and Medicaid were signed into law, Americans preparing to retire faced tremendous uncertainty. Private health insurance was simply out of reach. Savings put away during years of employment could barely cover those bills, if they could cover them at all. Seniors were forced to rely on their own children, many of whom were struggling to raise families of their own, to pay for medical care.

When the financial support of family and relatives was not an option, elderly Americans found themselves with the choice of a life without the care of doctors or a life of destitution. This was the status quo before Medicare and Medicaid were signed into law, and the American people found it unacceptable.

We believed then, as we believe now, that we have a responsibility to ensure that seniors, children, and the permanently disabled, the most vulnerable in our society, have access to quality health care. It was this sense of shared responsibility that Congress codified in 1965 through the creation of Medicare and Medicaid.

As President Lyndon B. Johnson said as he signed this historic legislation, ``No longer will older Americans be denied the healing miracle of modern medicine. No longer will illness crush and destroy the savings that they have so carefully put away over a lifetime so that they might enjoy dignity in their later years.''

Today, 45 million seniors depend on Medicare's guaranteed quality benefits. Now this year, as in every year, we find ourselves in the middle of a budget debate. At times, both Republicans and Democrats can be accused of hyperbole. However, it is no exaggeration to say that the Republican budget headed to the House floor tomorrow abandons America's seniors and does away with the concept of guaranteed Medicare benefits. It is no overstatement to say that it hands Medicare over to the private health insurance industry, and it is no lie to say that this plan ends Medicare as we know it.

This budget is no Path to Prosperity; for seniors, it is a path to the poor house. You can call it premium support; you can call it a voucher; you can call it a coupon; you can call it the golden ticket if you'd like; but changing the name won't change the fact that this Republican plan will force America's seniors to hand over most of their income to America's insurers. Maybe instead of ``premium support,'' this plan should be called ``insurance company profit assistance.''

By the time the Republican plan begins distributing coupons to seniors in 2022, most retirees will be unable to afford health care. After all, these coupons will be worth only 32 percent of the insurance bill. According to the nonpartisan analysts at the Congressional Budget Office, in less than two decades a private health insurance plan as good as Medicare will cost about $30,000. Unfortunately, the Republican voucher that will be sent out under this budget plan will only be worth $9,700. This means that there will be an insurance bill worth about $21,000 sitting in the mailboxes of America's seniors.

The Republican budget plan is no work of genius; it just shifts the burden of rising health care costs from the Federal Government to seniors and calls it a day. Through Medicare, Americans made a moral commitment as a people to ensure that seniors are not bankrupted by a hip replacement or diabetes medication. Likewise, with Medicaid, we made a moral commitment to ensure that elderly nursing

home patients, impoverished children, the permanently disabled, and the neediest in our society can afford basic care. In fact, two-thirds of all Medicaid spending goes to caring for older adults and people with disabilities. The cost of long-term care, like in rehabilitation centers and nursing homes, is prohibitive. Medicaid serves as a lifeline for these individuals. And it is not an expensive program. In fact, compared to private sector health care costs, Medicaid is cheap, growing half as fast.

The GOP plan cuts Medicaid when physicians and hospitals can barely afford to treat these patients because of such low reimbursement rates. It is no mystery why Medicaid is beginning to strain State and Federal budgets. With so many Americans out of work, enrollment in Medicaid has skyrocketed as more and more families come to rely upon this safety net.

I have said it before and I will say it again: Medicaid is not too expensive. People are too poor. That's why we should be focused on creating new jobs. One hundred days into this new Republican Congress and not a single jobs bill.

Madam Speaker, this plan is not a price that I'm willing to pay. We can do better. We will do better. America's seniors are watching.