Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise to commemorate the tragic passing of Neil Godleski, nephew of my friend and constituent, Suzanne Murphy of Southampton, New York.

Neil was a rising senior at Catholic University. He was fatally shot on August 22, 2010, while riding his bicycle home from a restaurant where he worked as a waiter. He was 31 years old and had returned to college with plans to pursue a career in science. His assailant was a 16-year-old boy who shot him six times with a .38 caliber handgun and then robbed him.

Suzanne's family has been wrenched with grief over the sudden end of this young man's life. While no vigil or memorial could ever begin to take away the pain of this loss, Suzanne has found a way to channel her grief and focus her energy. She has become an advocate for gun control.

When roughly 100,000 Americans are killed or wounded each year, reasonable people can agree that we can achieve evenhanded policies that protect Americans from senseless gun violence that do not infringe on any American's right to possess a firearm.

Mr. Speaker, I applaud Suzanne's efforts to reach out and bring awareness to the problem of gun safety. We must not let her nephew become just another chilling statistic in the battle to make our community safer, leaving another family struggling to get past the pain and the loss.

Mr. Speaker, it is with great appreciation for his service to the people of my district that I thank and recognize Colonel John R. Boule II, commander of the New York district of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. I have known Colonel Boule since he assumed command of the New York District in 2009 and have been proud to work with him on Long Island to improve navigation and protect our shores, which have a direct effect on the local economy.

Covering not only Long Island, the New York district is responsible for the Corps' water resource development, navigation and regulatory activities in northeastern New Jersey, eastern and south-central New York State, and parts of Vermont, Massachusetts and Connecticut. The district is also responsible for design and construction at Army and Air Force installations in New Jersey, New York and overseas in Greenland. Colonel Boule also holds the title of Supervisor of New York Harbor.

Under Colonel Boule's leadership, my district has directly benefited from maintenance dredging of Shinnecock Inlet, Lake Montauk Harbor and the Long Island Intracoastal Waterway. We have also benefited from the completion of the Orient Harbor (Route 25) emergency shoreline stabilization and the execution of the feasibility cost share agreement with the Town of Brookhaven for the Forge River ecosystem restoration study. Furthermore, we successfully completed an agreement with the U.S. Department of Interior on a tentative federally supported plan for the Fire Island to Montauk Point reformulation study.

Colonel Boule is originally from Plattsburgh, New York and graduated in 1986 from the U.S. Military Academy at West Point with a Bachelors of Science in Civil Engineering. After earning two masters of science degrees from Stanford University and his professional engineer certification, he taught hydrology in the Department of Civil and Mechanical Engineering at the United States Military Academy.

Colonel Boule served in a variety of operational, command and staff assignments in the U.S. and overseas. His most recent assignment was Assistant Director of Civil Works at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' headquarters in Washington, D.C. where he performed numerous duties until attending senior service college at the Industrial College of the Armed Forces (ICAF) where he earned a masters of science in national resource strategy as a distinguished graduate in June, 2009.

Colonel Boule's previous assignments include serving with the 16th Engineer Battalion, 1st Armored Division in Furth, Germany. As a captain, he volunteered for service in Operation Desert Storm with the 27th Engineer Battalion. He then served as a staff officer and company commander with the 41st Engineer Battalion, 10th Mountain Division, deploying his unit to south Florida and Somalia in support of Operation Hurricane Andrew Relief and Operation Restore Hope. After company command, Colonel Boule performed duties as a division plans officer. As a major, he served as the battalion executive officer of the 1st Battalion, 1st Infantry Regiment.

Upon graduating with distinction from the Naval Command and Staff College, Colonel Boule relocated to Korea, serving as a battalion executive officer for the 2nd Engineer Battalion, 2nd Infantry Division. Following this tour, he was assigned to the Pentagon on Army staff, serving in the G-8, with specific duties managing current force modernization and setting the force operations. In June, 2004, Colonel Boule assumed command of

the 62nd Engineer Battalion at Fort Hood, Texas. Beginning in December, 2005, Colonel Boule led the battalion on a one-year deployment to Iraq in support of the 4th Infantry Division.

Colonel Boule's decorations include the Legion of Merit, the Bronze Star Medal, six awards of the Meritorious Service Medal, the Ranger Tab, and the Combat Action Badge.

Mr. Speaker, it is evident from his long list of accomplishments and accolades that Colonel Boule has dedicated his life to serving our great nation. I am honored to have worked with him to improve our nation's coastal waterways and the lives of Long Island residents. I wish him the best of luck in his future endeavors and thank him again on behalf of the First Congressional District of New York.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize my good friend and distinguished colleague from Illinois, Congressman Jerry Costello. It is an honor for me to join my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to commend and thank him for his outstanding leadership and long record of service to this nation.

As this session's adjournment and his retirement approaches, I also wish to take this opportunity to thank Jerry for his friendship and guidance as my senior colleague on the Transportation & Infrastructure Committee, on which I have had the honor of serving with him since I was first elected in 2002. When I first met Jerry, he was already a veteran member of this body with a broad knowledge and understanding of the many important and complicated issues under our committee's jurisdiction.

Jerry's guidance and counsel in those early years were invaluable to me as a new Member. I have continued to look toward Jerry in this Congress as the standard-bearer for our committee with an unrivaled insight, institutional knowledge, and vision of the many complex issues facing our nation.

As the former chairman and now ranking member of the aviation subcommittee, Jerry has performed a critical service in shaping federal aviation policies to ensure our system remains unrivaled and the safest in the world. As a senior member of the Science, Space & Technology Committee, Jerry has proven there is no stronger advocate or more successful champion for our nation's space program or national STEM initiatives to better prepare students for a 21st Century economy.

Indeed, Jerry has achieved tremendous success and distinguished himself with an impeccable record of accomplishments in public service and leaves an indelible mark on the House of Representatives.

Mr. Speaker, I wish Congressman Jerry Costello the best of luck in his future endeavors and bid the gentleman from Illinois a fond farewell.

Mr. Speaker, today's opening prayer was delivered by Nayyar Imam from Mt. Sinai, New York--in my district on Long Island.

I am honored to welcome Nayyar to the House as a distinguished representative of Long Island's Muslim-American community.

I also welcome his wife of 24 years, Rizwana, and their son, Ahmer, who attends Baruch College, City University of New York, who are joining us from the gallery.

I am especially pleased that Nayyar was able to make the trip during Ramadan, the holy month of fasting and spiritual renewal.

I have known him for ten years--as a trustee of his mosque in Selden, New York and as a leading authority of Islamic culture across Long Island. He also serves the Islamic Association of Long Island and the Suffolk County Commission on Human Rights.

As the first Muslim-American chaplain of the Suffolk County Police Department, Nayyar has delivered the benedictions at its memorial services. He has also delivered opening prayers of the Suffolk County legislature.

I commend him for his service to my district and Long Island, as well as for the spiritual leadership he provides my constituents.

I thank Nayyar Imam and his family for joining us to open the chamber with today's prayer.

Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.

In its current form, I am.

Mr. Speaker, this is the final amendment to H.R. 6169. It will not kill the bill nor will it send it back to committee. If adopted, H.R. 6169 will immediately proceed to final passage, as amended.

My amendment is simple and straightforward and is a reasonable, additional parameter to a bill, the purpose of which is to set the parameters for tax reform during the 113th Congress.

Mr. Speaker, my amendment simply preserves two of the most important, popular, and widely supported deductions in a future tax reform package to be considered under expedited procedures in the House: the mortgage interest tax deduction and the charitable contribution tax deduction.

The mortgage interest tax deduction helps millions of American families achieve that most celebrated and sought-after part of the American Dream: homeownership. Nearly every Member of this body benefited from this deduction and nearly every homeowner in our districts has utilized this critical tax deduction to buy a home for their family and become part of the larger community. In fact, 199 Members, including 114 Republicans, are cosponsors of H. Res. 25, a resolution expressing the sense of Congress that the mortgage interest tax deduction should not be restricted in any way.

I will submit for the Record a list of the cosponsors of H. Res. 25.

As we head home for the August work period, I urge every Member who votes against this amendment, especially those Members who are cosponsors of H. Res. 25, to return to their districts and tell their constituents, many of whom still struggle to pay their bills or to put a child through college, why they oppose protecting the mortgage interest tax deduction.

As Chairman Camp recently suggested, it is critical that we do nothing to undermine the housing market as our economy marches toward recovery. Because the value of the mortgage interest deduction is capitalized into the price of housing, curtailing or eliminating it would reduce the value of housing across the United States, put more homeowners underwater, and take the wind out of recovery. Simply put, this Congress should not be throwing up obstacles to the American Dream.

Mr. Speaker, my amendment also seeks to preserve the charitable contribution deduction that is essential to the economic viability of thousands of organizations, both large and small, national and local, to advance important causes or provide critically needed services to our most vulnerable constituents. From the neighborhood church to the local food pantry to international organizations like the Red Cross and the Salvation Army, these organizations play a crucial role in the lives of millions of Americans as well as the international community.

We've heard many times from our Republican colleagues how charitable organizations can and should relieve the Federal Government of some of its responsibilities, especially those responsibilities of assisting the most vulnerable Americans. With thousands of families slowly regaining their footing after the housing crisis, now is not the time for Congress to make it more difficult for charitable organizations to provide meals, clothing, job training, temporary shelter, and other vital aid to our struggling neighbors.

Repealing the charitable tax contribution could result in a loss of as much as $150 billion, or 69 percent, of annual charitable giving. By one report, private giving must already multiply more than tenfold by 2016 just to keep up with the proposed House Republican budget cuts.

If a Member votes against my amendment, I would urge that Member to go home to his or her district and visit a local food pantry or place of worship and tell their volunteers why they will need to slash their programs and reduce their outreach to the community.

Our Republican colleagues have proposed deep cuts to SNAP, to childhood nutrition programs, affordable housing, and job training. Will they now vote to create another obstacle for organizations that, by their own reckoning, should fill the void of reduced Federal investment for social programs?

My Republican colleagues can't have it both ways. The Republican budget claims that it will lower everyone's taxes in a revenue-neutral fashion by closing loopholes and capping or eliminating deductions. However, when pressed for details about which deductions they plan to cap or eliminate, they refuse to give specifics. Now is the time for specifics.

The underlying bill establishes the parameters of the upcoming tax reform debate. Will my Republican colleagues protect homeowners and the Nation's most vulnerable, or will the richest Americans enjoy another tax cut at the expense of the middle class? There is one way to find out. A vote for my amendment is a vote for protecting the middle class.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Bill Summary and Status

H. Res. 25

Latest Title: Expressing the sense of the Congress that the

current Federal income tax deduction for interest paid on

debt secured by a first or second home should not be

further restricted.

Sponsor: Rep Miller, Gary G. [R-CA-42] (introduced 1/6/2011)

Cosponsors: 199

Committees: House Ways and Means

Latest Major Action: 1/6/2011 Referred to House committee.

Status: Referred to the House Committee on Ways and

Means.

Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Speaker, I was not present in the House chamber on Thursday, July 19 to vote on rollcalls 487

through 498. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcalls 489, 490, 494, 495,497 and 498. I would have voted ``nay'' on rollcalls 487, 488, 491, 492, 493 and 496.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize Shirley E. Coverdale, First Lady of the First Baptist Church of Riverhead, New York, who is being honored on July 21st for thirty years of service to her church and community.

In her tireless work on behalf of others, Mrs. Coverdale has come to embody the mission of the church where her husband, Charles Coverdale, serves as pastor. As a faith community, First Baptist seeks to offer hope and service to both its members and the community at large. Mrs. Coverdale's hand and heart have been instrumental in almost every aspect of the church's work.

Specifically, Mrs. Coverdale has served as Sunday school superintendent; director of an after-school mentoring program in collaboration with the Riverhead School District; developer of a computerized membership and financial management database for the church; project manager for C.A.R.E, which established a volunteer corps of senior citizens; grant writer; fundraiser; and catalyst for legislation that improves the quality of life for ordinary people.

Furthermore, Mrs. Coverdale is committed to social justice, care for the elderly and infirm,

education, and leadership development. She is a powerful voice for people in need, and an advocate for the less fortunate among us. In her current work as Executive Director of the Family Community Life Center in Riverhead, New York, she is spearheading the development of a Community Benefit District that includes housing for working families, a recreation complex, an early childhood development center and an adult day health program.

In typical fashion, Mrs. Coverdale also finds time to do the important hands-on work of the church and is presently the caregiver and guardian for the oldest widow in the church. I am proud to know Shirley Coverdale and to represent her as a constituent in New York's First Congressional District. I know that her husband, two children, eight grandchildren and great-grandchild are also proud of her.

Mr. Speaker, Shirley E. Coverdale has indeed earned the title of First Lady of her church in a multitude of ways, perhaps most importantly through being a living example of the ideals she espouses.

Mr. Speaker, I was not present in the House Chamber on Thursday, June 21 to vote on rollcalls 392 through 411. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcalls 393, 394, 395, 396, 397, 398, 400, 403, 405, 406, 407, 408 and 409. I would have voted ``nay'' on rollcalls 392, 399, 401, 402, 410 and 411.

I thank the gentlelady for yielding.

Madam Speaker, the U.S. Call Center Worker and Consumer Protection Act, H.R. 3596, is a bipartisan bill. It has 128 Democratic sponsors. It has seven Republican sponsors. And the bill is very straightforward.

It would do four things. It would require companies that plan to move a call center overseas to notify the Secretary of Labor no less than 120 days before the relocation occurs. If a company does move a call center overseas, that company would be ineligible for any Federal grants, contracts, or loans during the time that the call center workers are overseas. It would require the Secretary of Labor to maintain a publicly available list of all employers that relocate a call center overseas. And it would allow customers who are calling customer service communications at the beginning of the call to request that the call be transferred to a U.S.-based call center, if they so chose.

There are two dimensions to this bill: one is about jobs, and the other is about the security of consumer data. They are both very important. But let me start with the more important, which is jobs.

Now we talk a great deal in this Congress about how the number one priority has to be the creation of jobs. It does. And we have to move beyond the lip service that I think the Republican majority has given to the creation of jobs and actually put policies in place that will create jobs. But we also have to protect the jobs that we have. And one of the scourges of our economy right now is the outsourcing of jobs. Just in call centers alone, in the last 5 years, we have lost over 500,000 call center jobs. These are good, solid middle class jobs. To add insult to injury, the companies that are offshoring the jobs have taken millions of dollars of incentives from local taxpayers to open call centers in the U.S., only to offshore those jobs a short time later and leave local communities devastated and still paying the bill.

And the U.S. consumers are getting it. U.S. consumers have become more and more skeptical of the toll that outsourcing plays on the American economy. A paper by the Council on Foreign Relations noted that over two-thirds of Americans think companies sending jobs overseas is a major reason why the economy is ailing. In a paper done by a Harvard economist, more recent polling data suggests that these feelings have increased, where now over half of all Americans are ``resentful of businesses that send jobs overseas,'' and over 80 percent have ``concern for their family future'' due to outsourcing. So this job creation and job protection dimension of the bill that I have filed--as I say, with bipartisan support--would address these issues at least in one piece of our economy, and that is call centers.

Let me move to the issue of the protection and security of consumer data. Outsourcing call center work exposes the confidential and vulnerable personal information of American consumers to foreign workers. Foreign call centers are not subject to the same rigorous oversight as American call centers. As American companies look to less developed countries for offshoring their jobs, call center companies are actually subsourcing call center work without their American customers' knowledge.

It's expensive and difficult to conduct proper background checks on foreign call center workers, and up to one-quarter of all foreign call center applicants provide false or incorrect information. Foreign call center workers have been caught offering to sell personal consumer data to undercover journalists, threatening to release Americans' medical records and employment disputes, misleading American bank customers in schemes to bolster sales, and attempting to sell trade secrets to their employers' competitors.

A March 18, 2012, article published in The Times of London cited that undercover journalists were offered data such as credit card numbers, medical records, and loan data for hundreds of clients for just pennies. So clearly, from both dimensions here--from a job protection dimension and from a consumer data security dimension--this bill addresses both of these issues; and we simply must put in place these kinds of protections.

States have already done this. State legislatures in Florida, Georgia, and New Jersey have all passed bills that are very similar to the bill that we have before us. This is a commonsense proposal that enjoys bipartisan support. Let's vote ``no'' on the previous question so that we may consider this job-saving bill.

I thank my friend from Minnesota for yielding.

I rise in support of the motion to instruct conferees.

Let me start by just making clear that this issue of categorical exclusion is one that's important for us to all

recognize. The 35W bridge, the rebuild was subject to a categorical exclusion, so it was not held up.

Again, I will repeat what my friend from Minnesota said: 96 percent of the projects that go forward with highway bill funding are subject to a categorical exclusion. We really have to ask ourselves if we are going to continue to allow unemployment in the construction industry at 35 percent for 4 percent of the projects that are constructed under the highway bill.

This motion would direct conferees to adopt a final conference report no later than this Friday, June 22. In fact, June 22 represents the 100th day since the Senate passed MAP 21 with an overwhelming bipartisan majority of 74 22. It's fully paid for, and it will save or create an estimated 3 million jobs. In fact, in my State alone, at least 115,000 jobs will be saved or created if we can get either a successful conference report or the passage of MAP 21.

It's been 126 days since the House Rules Committee began considering H.R. 7 for floor consideration, which faltered soon thereafter when my Republican colleagues could not gain consensus within their own caucus and the bill died. It's now been 62 days since the House passed a shell bill to allow conference negotiations to begin.

Finally, and most importantly, we are a mere 6 legislative days away from the expiration of our highway programs when the current 90-day extension expires on June 30.

During this entire time, one fact has been a constant: that the men and women of our construction industry continue to suffer with one of the highest rates of unemployment for any industry. We continue the lack of certainty that a multiyear highway bill would provide. It would provide States the ability to plan and initiate projects, to put people back to work and begin the much-needed improvements to our roadways, bridges, and transit systems desperately needed.

I applaud my Senate colleagues who put aside partisan politics to advance a bipartisan bill. To their credit, the Senate put forward that which they could agree on and set aside to a later date that on which they could not agree. It was a sensible and successful strategy.

With Senate Democrats, Senate Republicans, House Democrats and the White House all supporting MAP 21, it is clear that if we can just get the House Republicans on board we can get a bill, and that's what we need to do. We can get a bill, because a temporary extension--yet another--is not a strategy that works. A temporary extension is not the answer. We will soon exhaust the trust fund, States and municipalities will not have the certainty they need to plan, thus construction companies will not be able to hire, and we will lose yet another construction season.

A temporary extension is not the answer. Passing a conference report by June 30, or passing MAP 21, is the answer.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the students, both past and present, of the Longwood School District in my district on Long Island for the completion of two major projects--the Longwood Veterans Walk and the accompanying Longwood Veterans History Project, which honor those men and women who have served this nation in overseas conflicts.

In tribute to the service our veterans have given to this country, a monument commemorating the service of former Longwood school students who served in the Gulf War, the Iraq War, and the continuing War in Afghanistan, has been constructed and will be dedicated on June 16, 2012, in Bartlett Pond Park.

This monument is the last in a series honoring the Longwood veterans from every war in our nation's history, dating back to the Revolution. The first, dedicated in 2007, created an enthusiasm for local history and the personal stories of these men and women.

Since then, the students of Longwood Junior High School have, using a variety of sources, conducted their own research to locate the names and lives of every Longwood veteran, an undertaking that resulted in six volumes of biographies. Through the generosity of the local community, sufficient funds were raised for the completion of this ambitious and moving project.

Mr. Speaker, I am deeply proud of this project and the students who have made it a reality. On behalf of New York's first congressional district, I urge my colleague in the U.S. House of Representatives to join me in recognizing the inspiring civic duty demonstrated by these students who have honored our community's veterans.

Mr. Speaker, I have a motion at the desk.

I am in its current form.

Mr. Speaker, this is the final and only amendment any Member has been given the opportunity to offer to this bill. It will not kill the bill or send it back to committee. If adopted, H.R. 436 will immediately proceed to final passage as amended.

The amendment I offer is a simple, commonsense effort to discourage American employers from outsourcing American jobs. It conditions the repeal of the medical device tax on an employer keeping jobs in the United States. If a device manufacturer sends jobs overseas during a calendar year, then the repeal of the tax does not apply to that manufacturer for that year.

Both Democrats and Republicans want to create conditions that get American families back to work; both Democrats and Republicans agree that the Tax Code should discourage employers from shipping jobs overseas; and both Democrats and Republicans want American families to prosper and have the opportunity to achieve limitless possibilities. But we have different approaches to achieving that goal. While we have different approaches, I think all reasonable people can agree that the ultimate job destroyer is outsourcing.

I listened very carefully to the debate that took place on the underlying bill. Virtually every speaker on the Republican side of the aisle mentioned jobs, mentioned employment, mentioned job-killing regulations, job-killing taxes. I think the best way to kill a job isn't a regulation and it isn't a tax. The best way to kill a job and to kill American opportunity is to have that job done by someone overseas instead of by an American simply because it's cheaper to have that job done overseas.

This is an issue that weighs heavily on the minds of our constituents. A 2009 Harvard study found that half of all Americans are resentful of businesses that send jobs overseas, and over 80 percent have concern for their family's future due to outsourcing. No American should be fearful that their job will be shipped overseas, and this Congress should end those policies that provoke this anxiety.

The Tax Code still gives incentives to employers who create jobs in foreign countries rather than here at home. Our Republican colleagues rail against foreign aid, but isn't providing another country a job that an American could do the ultimate example of foreign aid?

I doubt we'll be able to eliminate outsourcing, but with this amendment, this Congress can discourage it. Adopting this amendment is our first step towards reforming our tax system in a way that benefits American businesses and American workers. Every time a U.S. business moves operations overseas, we lose opportunity, we lose economic growth, we lose competitiveness, and we lose desperately needed revenue necessary to reduce the deficit.

This bill was considered under a closed rule, so Republicans can't justify their opposition with the usual claim that Democrats are trying to subvert an open amendment process. An open amendment process simply didn't exist for this bill. This time there is no hiding: Either you support American jobs for Americans or you don't.

I urge all Members to support this amendment and to protect American jobs.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. Chairman, my amendment is simple: It reduces by $75 million the amount that DHS can spend on construction of laboratory facilities--specifically, the National Bio and Agro-Defense Facility, or NBAF, planned for Manhattan, Kansas--and returns those funds to the research, development, acquisitions, and operations account. This unnecessary government spending is little more than an attempt to earmark funds for a project that the Obama administration zeroed out in its FY13 budget proposal, that the DHS acknowledges will cost over $1 billion to construct, that the National Academy of Sciences has raised real concerns about the possibility of foot and mouth disease release, and that many in the agricultural community are asking, why take the chance?

When the National Academy of Sciences last reviewed the NBAF proposal, they indicated that the risk of foot and mouth disease in the Nation's Heartland was a 70 percent risk over a 50-year period. The academy also estimated the cost of a potential release of foot and mouth disease at $9 billion to $50 billion.

While it is correct that earlier this year DHS indicated this risk had been mitigated with additional design features, the National Academy of Sciences is still revising the Revised Risk Assessment. Common sense requires that until the Revised Risk Assessment is complete, we should not be entertaining the idea of appropriating precious taxpayer dollars for construction of this project.

NBAF has also become a financial boondoggle. The estimated cost of construction has skyrocketed from an original estimate of $451 million only a few years ago to well over $1 billion today. At this time, it is a colossal risk to the American taxpayer to advance a project the cost of which has doubled in less than 5 years, and when funding for fiscal years 2011 and 2012 remain unobligated.

At a time when my Republican colleagues continually argue that our Nation's debt is out of control and the deficit must be reined in, it is both hypocritical and unwise to spend taxpayer dollars that the President has not requested for a project that is still under design review, to be placed in a region that is acutely sensitive to the horrible diseases that will be studied at the facility. The only logical, responsible thing to do while the many questions surrounding NBAF remain unanswered is to wait to invest taxpayers' hard-earned money and continue to utilize existing DHS assets to study the various animal diseases that face our agricultural community.

Mr. Chairman, funding for the construction of NBAF is tantamount to a $75 million earmark for the Kansas delegation. Funds were not included in the President's budget, and the project has yet to spend the money that has already been appropriated. DHS has other important research and more pressing construction projects than NBAF.

I urge my colleagues to support my amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.

Madam Chair, I rise to support the Tonko- Bishop-Hirono-Welch amendment, and I commend my good friend and fellow New Yorker on his steadfast commitment and long-standing leadership on this issue.

The increase to weatherization funding provided in this amendment brings the Weatherization Assistance Program funding close to its pre- Recovery Act levels, which helped States retrofit close to 100,000 homes a year. In addition, nearly 92 percent of the Recovery Act funds appropriated to the Weatherization Program have been spent, meaning that the recommended funding level in this bill will result in a majority of States receiving reduced Federal funding for weatherization. Arguments to the contrary with respect to available funds are simply not accurate.

New York has spent the entirety of its Recovery Act funds on time and under budget, weatherizing nearly 70,000 units, 20 percent, over its initial goal. On Long Island, the Community Development Corporation of Long Island weatherized 3,000 units, thanks to the Recovery Act, and has continued to spend down the regularly appropriated funds it receives to retrofit qualified homes.

Weatherization Assistance continues to be a successful program, and we must build on its success. Even after the Recovery Act and regular appropriations, the CDC of Long Island has a wait list of 8,000 qualified homes that could be retrofitted for energy efficiency. The demand is there. And this is just Long Island.

Adequately funding the Weatherization Assistance Program to meet this demand will have several positive effects on communities and the economy. It will reduce energy costs for homeowners, which is absolutely critical as these costs continue to climb. Perhaps

most important, it will put local contractors back to work retrofitting homes to be more energy efficient. This means job creation in local communities.

Most recognize that this is the time when Washington must balance spending reduction with wise investment. If we all agree that this Congress must do more to foster an environment of job creation, then I urge all of my colleagues to support this amendment.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Dr. Shetal I. Shah, MD, FAAP, who this year celebrates his fifth anniversary serving as Legislative Chairman for the Long Island Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics.

Dr. Shah is a lifelong resident of Long Island after his parents, Dr. Indravadan C. Shah, MD, FACS and Dr. Saroj Shah, MD, FACOG emigrated from India over 40 years ago. Upon earning degrees from Princeton, Cornell, Duke and New York Universities, Dr. Shah returned to Long Island as a pediatrician and neonatologist, focusing his work on caring for vulnerable and critically-ill newborns.

In his capacity as Legislative Chairman, Dr. Shah has provided thorough analyses of health care policy proposals and their impact on the welfare of children on Long Island. He has served as a valuable resource on important topics such as immunization policy, research funding for child health, and children's health insurance coverage.

Dr. Shah's expertise was particularly valuable during the 111th Congress as House and Senate committees worked to draft the Affordable Care Act. Guided by the American Academy of Pediatrics, Dr. Shah ably assisted my office in understanding the impact of the various legislative proposals on children's health, providing a local context in which to frame my assessment and support of the final legislation.

In addition to providing intensive care to premature infants at Stony Brook Long Island Children's Hospital, Dr. Shah's immunization research and subsequent advocacy work has resulted in the passage of two New York State laws aimed at protecting newborns from influenza and whooping cough, both of which can be life-threatening to young children. He has been recognized as a ``Physician-Leader'' by the American Medical Association, is a former Fulbright Scholar, and has been honored by the American Association of Physicians from India.

Mr. Speaker, Dr. Shah has been an ardent advocate for our nation's children and I thank him for his contributions to the policymaking process. On behalf of New York's first congressional district, I ask my colleagues to join with me in congratulating Dr. Shah on his accomplishments in the field of pediatric and child health and extend best wishes to him and his family on this celebratory occasion.