Judy Biggert

Mrs. BIGGERT

Mrs. BIGGERT. Madam Speaker, as many of my colleagues know and as the gentleman from Texas has said, I have been part of a group of Members from both sides of the aisle and from both Chambers who have been meeting actually over the past few months to try to find common ground on SCHIP legislation. I am afraid that some of the facts that the gentleman from Wisconsin stated, he made some statements that I would hope he would join our group and we could go over those facts, such as the $83,000. For my colleagues who have taken part, they know very well that these discussions that we have been having were productive at times and less productive at other times. But despite our disagreements and the bumps in the road, I think we persisted and continued to meet because we believe this is one of the most important issues that Congress will address. The genesis of these meetings originated from a letter that 38 House Republicans sent to the President on October 18, and in that letter we laid out principles that we believed would be necessary to secure our votes on the legislation and make this truly a bipartisan reauthorization of SCHIP. These basic principles included covering low- income children first, SCHIP for kids only, SCHIP should not force children out of private health insurance, SCHIP is for American children, and the funding should be stable and equitable. It is important to note that the letter did not mention the tax increase or the $35 billion in additional spending, two significant concerns for many Members on this side of the aisle. Democrats also had their principles for the reauthorization. With these principles, we agreed to discuss how we could change the bill in a way that would gather the support of a significant number of House Republicans and still have the support of the Members on the other side of the aisle. After weeks of negotiations, we came to a point where I think both sides realized that if a deal was going to be possible, we both had to give some ground for the benefit of a bill. I think that we are and were very close to agreement in principle and a framework that both sides can support. To be frank, the agreement isn't a bill that I would write if I had the choice. I am sure that my friends on the other side of the aisle feel the same way. But this is how a negotiation works. I think if we both came away with a little bit of feeling like we hadn't won, then that's a true negotiation and both sides have compromised. Unfortunately, I think we've run out of time for this year, and given that the current reauthorization ends on the 14th and there are a number of States projected to run out of SCHIP funding next year, I hope we can agree to an 18-month extension with additional funding to ensure that States will not have to drop children from the program. But I would also ask that we continue working on a final bill when we return in January. I have spoken with the leadership on both sides and expressed my desire to do so. We need to put partisanship aside, and I would hope that we can continue to discuss this issue.

Mrs. BIGGERT

Mrs. BIGGERT. I thank the gentleman for yielding. And, Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my strong support for H.R. 2517, the Protecting Our Children Comes First Act of 2007. I was very pleased to be a cosponsor of this important bill which reauthorizes the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children through fiscal year 2013. I would like to take a moment to thank my fellow cochair of the Congressional Missing and Exploited Children's Caucus and sponsor of the bill, Representative Lampson, for his hard work on child protection issues, and Chairwoman McCarthy for her work in leading this bill through the committee. It seems like every time I open the newspaper, I read another story of a child that has been abducted or has been sexually abused by a sexual predator. Naperville, Illinois, in my district, a city that has twice been voted by Money Magazine as the top city in the nation to raise children, has alone experienced over 30 cases in the last 4 years involving online sexual solicitation of a child. Clearly, more can and must be done on this issue. This problem is not regional. It is not isolated to big cities. It is not isolated to rural communities. This is a real national problem that will not go away until we give organizations like the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children the tools and the resources they need to fulfill their mission and protect our children from current and emerging threats. Since authorized by Congress in 1984, NCMEC has been extremely successful in this mission. In fact, NCMEC has received nearly 2.3 million telephone calls, printed and distributed nearly 43 million publications, trained 231,000 law enforcement, criminal justice, and health professionals, worked more than 136,000 missing children cases, and, perhaps most importantly, played a role in reuniting more than 118,700 children with their families. In fact, the National Center's child recovery rate is an impressive 96.3 percent. For generations, the message was simple. Parents told their children that they should never talk to strangers. My parents told me and I told my children. But times have changed. There are more threats to our children today, and our message must change with technology. Similarly the role of the National Center has changed. This is why we need this bill passed on the floor today, to expand the National Center's congressionally mandated mission to include recent enhancements in technology and give them the resources to address these and other protective issues. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Mrs. BIGGERT

Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Chairman, I yield the remainder of my time to the gentleman from Alabama, the ranking member, Mr. Bachus.

Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Chairman, I would like to echo the remarks of Mr. Kanjorski and thank him and my colleagues, Mr. Hodes, Mrs. Capito and Ms. Moore, for working on this amendment, which is based on H.R. 3837, the Escrow, Appraisal and Mortgage Servicing Improvements Act. Overall, this amendment addresses deceptive, abusive and fraudulent mortgage lending practices related to titles on escrow accounts, mortgage servicing and appraisals. We worked hard following our markup last week to clean up language in this amendment regarding the prompt crediting of payments and Truth in Lending Act and the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, commonly known as RESPA, liability, in addition to making several more technical changes. We have more to do, especially further developing the language in the payments and escrow sections in this bill; but I'm confident that, based on the bipartisan progress that we've made this far, we can work out our differences as the bill continues to move through the legislative process. Again, I thank Mr. Kanjorski and my colleagues from both sides of the aisle for their hard work and cooperation on this amendment. It has broad bipartisan support, and I urge my colleagues to vote for it. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition, although I am not opposed.

Mrs. BIGGERT. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank Chairman Frank and Ranking Member Bachus for working with Members from both sides of the aisle to craft legislation to help consumers secure sound mortgages and shine a light on the mortgage practices from day one of the home-buying process. I would also like to associate myself with the remarks of our distinguished ranking member, Mr. Bachus, and add just a few points. First, I would like to thank Chairman Frank for adding two of my bills to the underlying legislation, H.R. 3019, the Expand and Preserve Homeownership Through Counseling Act, which has become title IV of the bill; and H.R. 3017, the Stop Mortgage Fraud Act, which has become section 212 of the bill. Why are these important? Well, first, for so many, the problems out there could have been avoided through one simple thing: housing counseling. If consumers understand what they are getting into before signing on the dotted line for a mortgage, they would be armed with the ability to make better decisions about a mortgage. Title IV elevates housing counseling within HUD, and the Office of Housing Counseling will expand HUD's capacity to offer grants to States and local agency. The language also tasks HUD with conducting a study on defaults and foreclosures and launching a national housing outreach campaign so that consumers know where to find a legitimate HUD-certified counselor. They can get the help they need now to buy and keep their homes. Second, section 212 of the bill authorizes additional funds for the FBI investigators and Justice Department prosecutors to crack down on mortgage fraud. It's no secret that organized crime gangs, many operating in Chicago, have discovered a more lucrative business than drugs. Mortgage fraud scam artists inflate appraisals, flip properties, and lie about information, such as income and identity on loan applications. Finally, as a former real estate attorney, I know that any mortgage legislation reform should first aim to do no harm. By that, I mean five basic pieces. First, it should preserve access to credit and homeownership opportunities for qualified low- and middle-income borrows; second, facilitate transparency in the mortgage market; third, create a level playing field; fourth, promote strong underwriting standard; and, fifth, foster competition. Achieving these objectives is critical for both primary and secondary mortgage market participants, from homeowners to investors. Has the bill under consideration fully realized these goals? I would say we have come a long way on mortgage reform, but our work is not finished. Today, several Members will offer amendments to improve the bill: the manager's amendment offered by Mr. Frank and Mr. Bachus, and additional amendments by Ms. Ginny Brown-Waite, Mr. Garrett, Mr. Hensarling, Mr. McHenry, Mr. Gary Miller, and Mr. Price. I urge my colleagues to support these amendments. I would like to particularly thank Mr. Kanjorski for working with me on H.R. 3537, which we will offer as an amendment today. It's important for future American homeowners and our economy that we put political agendas aside and get this right. Too much action and we worsen the problem; too little action and we allow it to happen again.

Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mrs. BIGGERT

Mrs. BIGGERT. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my strong support for H.R. 4120, the Effective Child Pornography Prosecution Act. I am very pleased to be the lead Republican cosponsor, and I thank the gentlewoman from Kansas for all of her hard work, but I am proud to be part of this important bill which will close an unacceptable loophole in the Federal criminal code. As my colleagues have already pointed out, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit handed down a decision this year which freed a defendant who had been convicted of receiving and possessing child pornography. The case of U.S. v. Schaefer was not overturned for lack of evidence but rather because the prosecution failed to prove that images downloaded from the Internet moved across State lines in ``interstate commerce.'' The judges who decided this case pointed out that the use of the phrase ``in commerce'' instead of ``affecting commerce'' in the law signaled Congress' intent to limit Federal jurisdiction in the prosecution of child pornographers. As cochair of the Missing and Exploited Children's Caucus, I can assure you, Mr. Speaker, nothing could be further from the truth. We in Congress know the horrible consequences that result from the sexual exploitation of children used to create these images. We also take very seriously our duty to do everything in our power to protect children, punish predators and deter future acts of abuse. That is why the bill we are considering today deserves our full support. It will close the loophole in current law by replacing the phrase ``in commerce'' with the phrase ``affecting commerce'' in the child pornography statute. It classifies the intent of Congress and will ensure that predators that use the Internet to transmit child pornography end up behind bars where they belong. I would like to take this opportunity to again thank the gentlewoman from Kansas, my good friend, Nancy Boyda, for introducing this legislation. I also would like to thank the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children for their assistance and counsel in drafting the bill. Mr. Speaker, as a mother of four and grandmother of seven, I know there is nothing more important than safeguarding our children from predators. We must not allow those who sexually exploit children to avoid prosecution because of a technicality. I urge all my colleagues to support H.R. 4120 to help close this egregious loophole in the law.

Mrs. BIGGERT

Mrs. BIGGERT. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Neugebauer amendment. I think that we have to look at bureaucracy. And I must say that I think that the existing federally administered program designed to serve the housing needs of low-income Americans, the HOME Investment Partnership Program, is a program that's already in place. It has the personnel system, the regulatory oversight in place to accomplish the same objective as the National Housing Trust Fund. And instead of creating a new Federal bureaucracy to address low-income housing availability, I think we should focus our efforts on improving the HOME program. Mr. Neugebauer's amendment creates a pilot program, and I think we could call it ``HOME Lite,'' within the HOME program. And so instead of reinventing the wheel and establishing another Federal trust fund and a brand new program, I support improving and being creative with an existing program. If we look at the HOME program, the staff is already participating, they understand the jurisdictions the HOME program will be looking at, and so there is no learning curve for implementation. Revitalizing the HOME program will be more efficient by having less start-up costs, administrative costs, and the funds will be distributed to the project sooner, and not later. At the same time, I think the national trust fund would be administered by exactly the same people who will be administering the program in the States and at the local level, so it will be able to allow them to operate under one program instead of two separate programs with a little different objectives but not much. So they will be doing the same thing twice and having to work with two different bureaucracies to establish an affordable housing program. So I think there might be some changes to the HOME program to align it more closely to some of the things that have been spoken about in the trust fund program. But I think that this would be a good compromise and would still have the trust program that will provide the affordable funding but do it through HUD at a program that has already been established.

Mrs. BIGGERT. I thank the gentleman. Mr. Chairman, I rise to oppose the creation of the National Affordable Housing Trust Fund. While I share Chairman Frank's goal of increasing the amount of available affordable housing, I do not think that H.R. 2895 is the right way to do it. I will make three quick points to explain why. First, let's look at how the trust fund is financed. Thanks to self- defeating provisions in both the GSE reform and the FHA reauthorization bills, low- and middle-income Americans, including the elderly, are going to pay for it. How will it work? It is estimated that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, two entities that purchase or securitize almost 80 percent of American families' mortgages, will be taxed at more than $3 billion over a 5- year period to pay for the trust fund. Where will they get the money? As publicly traded companies, accountable to their shareholders, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac will inevitably pass along these new assessments to their customers. America's low- and middle-income homeowners will be footing the bill. That is not a good plan. It amounts to a mortgage tax on these hard-working, low- and middle-income Americans seeking to secure, maintain or refinance their home mortgages. In short, it is robbing Peter to house Paul. What is worse, the Congressional Budget Office has estimated that the FHA trust fund provision could include a $370 million surplus in 2008 and a $2.1 billion surplus over the 2008 to 2012 period. Where does this come from? Well, the majority of FHA's surplus would come from reverse mortgage premiums that are paid for by our seniors, suggesting that they have been overcharged. I have supported ideas aimed at giving this surplus back to our seniors in the form of reduced premiums, which the Financial Services Committee rejected. I would agree with the chairman that the funds for this trust fund should not be used for other purposes that have nothing to do with housing. But here with the FHA funds, in fact, I think that the money should stay in FHA, period. Second, why are we creating yet another Federal housing program, when we have so many housing programs already in existence, over 100? The National Low Income Housing Coalition cites that nearly 600 housing trust funds have been created in the cities, counties and States in this country, generating more than $1.6 billion per year to support housing needs. Third, to the extent that the State programs fall short in some way, I must point to the existing federally administered program designed to serve the housing needs of low-income Americans, the HOME Investment Partnership Program. This program already has the personnel, systems and regulatory oversight in place to accomplish the same objective as the National Housing Trust Fund. Instead of creating a Federal bureaucracy, let's improve on the home loan program.

Mrs. BIGGERT

Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Chairman, I would like to express congratulations to the ranking member on her taking over as the ranking member of the Housing Subcommittee. Mr. Chairman, I have always known Chairman Frank to never shy away from a debate. I appreciate his acknowledgement that he would have liked to have had the opportunity to debate the amendments that were not made in order. I know how concerned he was about that and it shows by his vote on the floor. So I really appreciate that. He has always been ready, willing and able to know what the opposition is and their concerns and to debate that. Mr. Chairman, Chairman Frank and I did introduce H.R. 1682 earlier. That was the Flood Insurance Reform and Modernization Act of 2007. That was to address the much-needed reforms to NFIP, the Nation's largest single-line property insurance provider. Unfortunately, the legislation before us today, I think, jeopardizes our commitment to enact these reforms because it does couple H.R. 1682 with H.R. 920, which is Representative Taylor's bill. We all know how sincere he is about this much-needed reform. But it does add wind to the National Flood Insurance Program. I really am concerned about this. We had several hearings. Witness after witness testified that adding wind to the flood insurance program was not a good idea. At one of the hearings, adding wind to NFIP, the National Association of Insurance Commissioners, the insurance experts, environmental groups, floodplain management groups, the Treasury and FEMA all were opposed to such an expansion. In previous Congresses, flood modernization bills virtually identical to H.R. 1682, the Frank-Biggert bill, enjoyed broad, bipartisan support. During the last Congress, the Financial Services Committee considered H.R. 4973, the Act of 2006, which the House passed by a vote of 416-4 on June 27, 2006. But instead of embracing this approach and the recent track record of bipartisanship on NFIP, the other side of the aisle has chosen to introduce this new bill and include language that I think really threatens the passage of necessary reforms to the program. I am disappointed by this action. NFIP needs reform now, not a controversy and costly program expansion. For the majority of its 39-year history, NFIP has been a self-funding program. However, flood insurance claims from the 2005 hurricane season have grown to almost $18 billion, a total greater than all the claims from all the other years combined. Unless the NFIP program is reformed soon, the program will face insolvency. In January, the GAO placed the flood insurance program on its High-Risk Series list, which recommends increased congressional oversight for troubled programs. So, Mr. Chairman, it is clear that NFIP reform is needed now. Therefore, before expanding the NFIP program to include wind, we should keep our commitment to reform NFIP and move H.R. 1682 instead of the bill before us today. The administration has said that if the wind provision is included in this bill, the President will veto it. So adding wind, really, to me, is a poison pill to the flood insurance reform bill and is compromising our efforts to enact much-needed bipartisan reform of the National Flood Insurance Program.

Mrs. BIGGERT

Mrs. BIGGERT. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to this rule governing the consideration of H.R. 3121. I had hoped that the committee would see the wisdom in providing an open rule on this important legislation, and in the absence of an open rule, that it would at least make in order amendments that both sides of the aisle took the time and effort to draft. Unfortunately, as has been said repeatedly, of the 26 amendments filed with the Rules Committee, only 13, half of the amendments filed, were made in order, and of those 13 amendments that the Rules Committee made in order, not one, not one Republican amendment was made in order. Has the majority again gone back on its promises to have an open, fair, and bipartisan operation of the House floor? On December 5, 2006, Majority Leader Hoyer was quoted in Congress Daily PM as saying, ``We intend to have a Rules Committee that gives opposition voices and alternative proposals the ability to be heard and considered on the floor of this House.'' Clearly, today, the leadership of this Congress has again turned its back on its promises. The original Flood Insurance Reform Bill, H.R. 1682, which Chairman Frank and I introduced together earlier this year, enjoyed substantial bipartisan support in the Financial Services Committee. However, due to political pressure, a bill was introduced by my friend from the other side of the aisle, Congressman Taylor, to add wind to the National Flood Insurance Program. The flood reform bill turned partisan. So the majority introduced a new flood reform bill, H.R. 3131, and expanded the flood insurance program to include wind. While nine out of 13 witnesses, insurance experts, testified before the Financial Services Committee that wind should not be added to NFIP, the majority did it anyway. The new flood-plus-wind insurance passed out of the committee; and in July, at a hearing on adding wind to the NFIP, the National Association of Insurance Commissioners, insurance experts, environmental groups, floodplain management groups, the Treasury, and FEMA all opposed this expansion. That is why we are concerned about not having these amendments come to the floor. Members on our side of the aisle had hoped to be given the same opportunity to debate important issues on the House floor. The amendments filed by my colleagues Mrs. Miller, Mr. Garrett, Mr. Hensarling, Mr. Pearce and Mr. Rohrabacher were not made in order, and Mr. Price's amendment was not even considered. In particular, I wanted to say something about Mr. Hensarling's amendment. This should have been allowed. This is a hugely important issue. The other side has added a whole new Federal commitment on wind to flood insurance. At the Rules Committee, where I presented the majority request for an open rule, Mr. Frank stated that he would welcome all amendments that address significant issues. Now, it is the prerogative of the Rules Committee, and we had a great discussion on that at the committee, and it seemed to talk more about SCHIP, but it is the prerogative of the committee to make amendments in order. But when they hear from the chairman of the committee, Financial Services, in this case, they did not follow his suggestion. There was no more significant issue than adding wind to the flood insurance. So I guess that Republicans don't deserve the right to participate in the amendment process, whether it is as a member of the committee of jurisdiction or as a Member of the U.S. House of Representatives. Only through an open rule is that possible. For this reason, I rise in strong opposition to the rule being considered here today.

Mrs. BIGGERT

Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the distinguished gentleman from Texas (Mr. Poe).

Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 1389, the Star-Spangled Banner and War of 1812 Bicentennial Commission Act. The commission established by this legislation would be responsible for developing programs, observations, and activities commemorating the historic events associated with the War of 1812. The commission would also enhance the visitor experience at the War of 1812 sites and facilitate scholarly research on the people and events associated with the War of 1812. This legislation would provide for appropriate commemorative activities to increase public understanding, particularly that of young people, of the meaning of the War of 1812 and the history of the United States. There is much to be learned about the effect of the War of 1812 on American history, including the victories at Fort McHenry, New Orleans and Plattsburg. As one example, it is often overlooked or even forgotten that Francis Scott Key wrote the Star-Spangled Banner during the War of 1812. The commission is intending to raise public awareness through observations that will bring this important chapter in American history to thousands of visitors. I urge support of this bill. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Speaker, it is my understanding that the majority has offered an amendment that I think improves this bill. I support the amendment and would encourage others to join me in supporting H.R. 1389, establishing the Star-Spangled and War of 1812 Bicentennial Commission. I applaud the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Sarbanes) for his introduction of this bill, and I would urge passage. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. BIGGERT

Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of House Resolution 658, a resolution supporting the goals and ideals of designating September 2007 as Federal Credit Union Month. First, I would like to thank the Congresswoman and the Congressman from New York, Mrs. Maloney and Mr. Walsh, for their leadership and for introducing this important resolution. I would also like to thank my colleague from Pennsylvania (Mr. Kanjorski) for managing this resolution. Second, I, too, would like to recognize credit unions for the important role that they play in our community. This resolution honors the 5,000 Federal credit unions that serve the financial needs of 50 million Americans, or about 17 percent of all U.S. citizens. Democratic organizations that are run by their members, credit unions have provided millions of Americans the credit and financial services that they need to buy cars, build homes, and pay for education. Of particular importance is that credit unions across the country promote financial education and are a part of our national effort to increase financial literacy rates, especially among our Nation's youth. The mission of credit unions is to serve those of modest means. In my congressional district, the 13th District of Illinois, credit unions serve policemen, teachers, post office employees, airline pilots, and health care professionals. Credit unions also serve scientists, engineers, and their support staff at Argonne National Laboratory, a Department of Energy laboratory that supports cutting-edge basic research and the advanced development of advanced energy technologies ranging from next generation nuclear reactors to fuel cells for hydrogen-powered cars. It could be said that by serving scientists and engineers in my congressional district, credit unions are helping, literally and figuratively, to drive our future. Finally, I would like to recognize all of the credit unions and associations, especially those in Illinois, for their contributions to our communities. Specifically, I would like to recognize and thank the Credit Union National Association, the National Association of Federal Credit Unions, and the Illinois Credit Union League. Last but not least, I would like to thank all of the employees, in particular, Chairwoman JoAnn Johnson, at the National Credit Union Administration, the Federal credit union regulator. Again, I thank the cosponsors of this resolution.

Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. BIGGERT

Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of House Concurrent Resolution 140. This resolution recognizes the low presence of minorities in the financial services industry and minorities and women in upper-level positions of management. It also expresses the sense of Congress that active measures should be taken to increase the demographic diversity of the financial services industry. I would like to thank the gentleman from New York, Congressman Meeks, for introducing this resolution and for his leadership in the very important issue of diversity in the financial services industry. As co-Chair of the Women's Caucus Business Task Force and as one of only 13 women in the U.S. Congress, including the House and the Senate, who serve on a committee overseeing the financial services sector, I would like to focus my remarks today on women in this industry. As I have learned from my own experience on the Financial Services Committee, women are few and far between in upper-level positions of management and in financial services. This resolution acknowledges this factor and rightly encourages industry to take action to increase diversity. Mr. Speaker, women and minorities are still just that, the minority, in corporate boardrooms throughout the financial services industry. According to a publication called ``Women in Financial Services: The Word on the Street'' released by Catalyst in 2001, women cited a number of reasons why they might be missing at the table. Almost three-quarters of the women surveyed cited a lack of mentors as an obstacle barring them from advancing. Well over 50 percent of the women cited exclusion from informal networks of communication, lack of women role models, failure of senior leadership to assume accountability for women's advancement, and several additional factors as barriers to success. The same report cites that 65 percent of women have to work harder than men to get the same rewards, and that women are paid less for doing similar work. The Government Accountability Office released the report that Mr. Meeks just spoke about revealing that over an 11-year period, the commitment to diversity in the financial services industry was strong. However, the GAO found that this commitment has yet to translate into any real progress for women. The GAO report also said, ``Research reports suggest that minority and women-owned businesses have difficulty obtaining access to capital for several reasons.'' According to another Catalyst study, ``a small minority of women, 18 percent, report that opportunities to advance to senior leadership in their firm have increased over the past 5 years,'' and ``60 percent of women report opportunities to advance to senior leadership have improved somewhat or slightly.'' So, what do we do about the relatively small number of women leaders in the financial services industry? I would suggest that step one is to recognize the problem, which we are doing with this resolution today, and step two is to encourage the financial services industry to take action and explore ways to increase the involvement of women and minorities in the financial services industry. Currently, programs like those sponsored by Girls, Incorporated are working to promote economic and financial literacy among young women. I would like to commend them for their work, and also commend the efforts of all of those involved with Women's Policy Inc., Women Impacting Public Policy, the Small Business and Entrepreneurship Council, and many others who are promoting women in business. In addition, it is my hope that during this Congress we can go beyond this resolution. I hope that we can examine ways to propel women in business, women in financial services forward and help them secure leadership roles in the industry. As the new ranking member of the Financial Services Subcommittee on Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit, I intend to request that our subcommittee hold a hearing to examine the issues of access to capital for women business owners, especially those in the financial services. I hope that we can hold such a hearing during this Congress. It is important that we continue to examine the barriers confronting women in business and find ways to help them overcome these barriers. I believe that increasing the number of qualified women in leadership roles in the financial services industry will both enrich the industry and make it more competitive. Again, I thank the author of this resolution, Mr. Meeks. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. BIGGERT

Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, the present-day Veterans of Foreign Wars organization traces its origin to 1899 when two organizations were founded to achieve benefits and recognition for United States veterans of the Spanish-American War. These veterans were committed to ensuring that their efforts in that conflict were recognized, honored, and respected by their government. As the United States became involved in later foreign conflicts, the number of members of the VFW grew. The VFW received its congressional charter in 1936. Currently, there are 2.3 million members of the VFW and the Ladies Auxiliary. Efforts by the VFW were instrumental in establishing a Department of Veterans Affairs, the GI Bill, the national cemetery system, and assisting combat-wounded veterans to receive compensation for their injuries. In recognition of their achievements in peacetime and the role of its members in wartime, I would ask that my colleagues honor the VFW and declare a Veterans of Foreign Wars Day. I urge my colleagues to join in supporting House Resolution 663. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. BIGGERT

Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 1520 establishes two important and historically based commissions. One commission recognizes the explorations of Henry Hudson and Robert Fulton in New York and Vermont, and the other recognizes Samuel de Champlain's discoveries in the same region. The overall goal of the Hudson-Fulton 400th Commemoration Commission is to plan, develop, and perform activities to commemorate the 400th anniversary of Henry Hudson's voyage on the New York river named in his honor and the 200th anniversary of Robert Fulton's voyage. In 1609, Englishman Henry Hudson, under the direction of the Dutch East India Company, was named the first European to sail up the river later to be named for him and his significant exploration. In 1807, Robert Fulton's breakthrough use of commercial steam navigation revolutionized water-based commerce, naval warfare, and international relations. It was these important expeditions which brought about the earliest encounters of Native Americans and Europeans. These voyages introduced new methods of commerce and trade and also introduced new religious beliefs, cultural exchange, and traditions which extend into the present day. Together, these two historic events will be celebrated through the creation of the Hudson-Fulton 400th Commemoration Commission. The same year of Hudson's exploration, Francis Samuel de Champlain became the first European to discover the New York lake later to be named in his honor. The Champlain Quadricentennial Commemoration Commission will coordinate its festivities and celebrations with the Hudson-Fulton Commission. These commissions promote continued education and observations of historic events such as these which have helped to make our country what it is today. They influence the culture, heritage, and way of life for all early citizens of America. I urge my colleagues to support the passage of H.R. 1520.

Mrs. BIGGERT

Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. House Resolution 303 establishes a day to bring awareness to the issues surrounding missing persons. I congratulate the sponsor on this bill. Each year tens of thousands of people go missing in the United States. Probably there isn't a day goes by that some newspaper doesn't report either a child or adult that is missing. It is a national crisis affecting thousands of families. I think these families struggle through the loss and pain of losing their loved ones and often need support and guidance during the search for their missing friends or family members. Through effective legislation, grants have been provided to our organizations tasked with tracking missing persons and provide much- needed support services to families. Legislation has also ensured that agencies are able to keep updated databases on missing persons. It's important that we take time to recognize and applaud the work of law enforcement agencies, concerned citizens, and, of course, the families who unite together to find their loved ones and support prevention efforts. I urge the passage of this resolution. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. BIGGERT

Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I would like to thank my colleague from Illinois, Danny Davis, for managing this resolution today. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to urge my colleagues to support House Resolution 584, which supports the goals and ideals of designating September 2007 as National Life Insurance Awareness Month. I also would like to thank my friend and colleague, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Kanjorski), for introducing this resolution with me for the fourth year in a row and for his support on this important issue. Congressman Kanjorski serves with me both on the Financial Services Committee and the Financial and Economic Literacy Caucus and has been an outstanding leader on the important issue of financial security. I would also like to thank the gentleman from California, Chairman Henry Waxman, and the gentleman from Virginia, Tom Davis, for moving this resolution through the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. And, last, I would like to acknowledge and thank Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska and Senator Saxby Chambliss of Georgia for their contributions to this effort. They worked with those of us on this side of the Capitol to craft identical resolutions that garnered both bipartisan and bicameral support. It's my hope that the Senate will soon pass its version of the resolution soon. Mr. Speaker, life insurance too often is thought of only when it is too late. How many times have we heard friends or loved ones who are sadly reflecting that the deceased had no life insurance or had too little life insurance? Today, only four in 10 adult Americans own an individual life insurance policy; and among those who do have life insurance, the amount often is too small to safeguard the financial future of their loved ones. Because of insufficient coverage, family members often are forced to work extra jobs or longer hours, borrow money, or move to less desirable housing. In short, these outcomes are only symptoms of the crisis of underinsurance that exists in our Nation today. Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 584 calls on the Nation to observe the month of September as Life Insurance Awareness Month. The Life and Health Insurance Foundation for Education, the National Association of Insurance and Financial Advisors, the American Council of Life Insurers, and a coalition representing hundreds of leading life insurance providers and advocates have designated September 2007 as Life Insurance Awareness Month. Our collective goal for this month is to make consumers more aware of their life insurance needs, seek professional advice, and take the actions necessary to achieve financial security for their families. Many of my colleagues on both the Financial Services and the Education and Workforce Committees have been working very hard to increase the level of financial literacy and economic education in this Nation. Understanding how financial products work and how they work to build financial security are two important ingredients in a complete financial education. It is my hope that recognizing Life Insurance Awareness Month will motivate Americans to seek out information about the benefits of life insurance so that if premature death of a loved one does occur, they will be spared the economic hardships that often accompany tragedy. I ask my colleagues to join me and support the goals and ideals of designating September National Life Insurance Awareness Month. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. BIGGERT

Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Speaker, I would urge my colleagues to vote for this resolution, and yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. BIGGERT

Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I, too, applaud Peter Roskam of Illinois for his introduction of this resolution. He had every intention of being here, but unfortunately he missed his plane, so he is not able to make it at this time. During World War I, Grace Seibold's son, George, served with the British Royal Flying Corps in France. While on combat duty, he regularly sent letters home to his family in Washington, D.C. Around Christmas of 1918, the letters stopped and the Seibold family never heard from him again. Because his military unit was under British control, the U.S. had no information of his whereabouts or safety. After months of waiting, they received notice of his death. Throughout the war, Grace Seibold had been spending her time visiting with soldiers in military hospitals and providing solace and assistance with their recuperation. After her own son's death, she met with fellow mothers of soldiers who had been killed serving their country. The women began to share their grief and quickly found support for each other. Their uncommon bond brought them closer and helped them to heal. The group also encouraged community service by volunteering at local hospitals for veterans. After years of careful planning, in June of 1928, 25 mothers joined in Washington, D.C. to form the American Gold Star Mothers, Incorporated. The mission of the organization is to honor the men and women who made the ultimate sacrifice for their country and to assist veterans with processing claims made to the Department of Veterans Affairs. The service provided by the Gold Star Mothers does not end there. They inspire patriotism and love of country. They promote peace and goodwill through annual special events. The Gold Star Mothers work in cooperation with all veterans organizations and lend their support giving many hours of volunteer work and personal service to veteran families. It is an organization that inspires community service, honor of country, and takes great pride in having our brave men and women serving in our Armed Forces. I am proud to honor these brave women for their continued efforts and their tireless support of our Nation. With that, Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.