John Conyers

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. I'm pleased now to yield as much time as he may consume to the gentleman from California (Mr. McNerney), a cosponsor.

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

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 985) to maintain the free flow of information to the public by providing conditions for the federally compelled disclosure of information by certain persons connected with the news media.

Mr. CONYERS. I ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks and that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks as well and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.

Mr. CONYERS. I yield myself such time as I may consume. Members of the House, the Free Flow of Information Act creates a qualified privilege to protect journalists from being compelled to disclose confidential sources or other than nonpublic information that they have collected in the course of their reporting. This is a very important and sensitive matter. I want to point out that the gentleman from Virginia, a senior member of the Judiciary Committee, has worked on and authored this bill for a number of years. It has been modified and brought before us. I think that it's of critical importance and continues to deserve the overwhelming support of this body, which it has received. Right at this moment, a Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter from the Detroit Free Press, David Ashenfelter, faces possible contempt charges for refusing to disclose sources who exposed serious prosecutorial misconduct. The bill has been carefully tailored, as will be explained. There's one other person I would like to single out for their excellent testimony in the last Congress, and that is Pulitzer Prize winner William Safire, who gave some very important insights into the scope and significance of this bill. We think that this is critical. It's supported by editorial boards, media companies, organizations, associations, News Corp, and all broadcast networks. We urge that this measure be given the careful consideration that it is due. I would also like to single out the gentleman from Indiana, Mike Pence, a distinguished member of the committee, and Bob Goodlatte of Virginia, whose efforts were vitally important in strengthening the bill and ensuring that it is a truly bipartisan measure that comes before the House today. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Madam Speaker, on behalf of myself and the Committee on the Judiciary, I would like to take this opportunity to recognize Rick Kaplan, who just recently left the House to take a position with the Federal Communications Commission. Mr. Kaplan served in the Office of the General Counsel for 14 months as an Assistant Counsel. We will miss him. Mr. Kaplan provided invaluable legal advice and representation to our Committee, particularly in connection with a landmark lawsuit that resulted in a decision recognizing the judicial enforceability of congressional subpoenas to executive branch officials. I and my staff relied on his expertise and guidance both in connection with the many tactical and strategic decisions we were required to make in the course of this important case, and in drafting the legal briefs that were filed in court setting forth the Committee's positions. Mr. Kaplan played a significant role in safeguarding the legal and institutional interests of the House of Representatives. He served the House with great distinction, and we know he will serve the Federal Communications Commission with that same level of distinction. On behalf of the Committee on the Judiciary, we thank him for his service to the House and extend to him our very best wishes for his continued success.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, due to events in my congressional district, I was unable to vote today. If I were present, I would vote ``yea'' to H.R. 1262, the Water Quality Investment Act of 2009, and ``nay'' to Representative Mack's amendment. Furthermore, I would vote ``yea'' to H. Res. 224.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. She is giving me further instructions, so I'll see what I can do between now and the time we introduce the manager's amendment.

Mr. CONYERS. I thank the floor manager, Judge Hastings, for his kindness. And I only rise to thank Dr. Foxx for her appreciation and pointing out to me one thing that we have added now to the manager's amendment, and that is the requirement of studies by the Government Accountability Office and other agencies, including the Office of Comptroller of Currency and the Office of Thrift Supervision. She appreciated that in the Rules Committee, I'm sure she does now, and I thank her for that important contribution. And I would yield to her.

Mr. CONYERS. Absolutely.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chair, Title I of H.R. 1106, the Helping Families Save Their Homes Act of 2009, is based in part on H.R. 200, legislation approved by the Judiciary Committee last month to give families whose home mortgage is in distress a better opportunity to come to terms with their lender on workable payment terms--more realistically based on current market interest rates and current home market values. Because the provisions in title I of this bill differ in a number of respects from H.R. 200 as reported, and differ further with the adoption of the manager's amendment, I am inserting in the Record a section-by-section analysis of this bill, as a further supplement to the legislative history in the floor debate today and last week, and in the hearings and committee report for H.R. 200. H.R. 1106, the ``Helping Families Save Their Homes Act of 2009,'' Section-by-Section Explanation (as Amended by the Revised Manager's Amendment) Section 1. Short Title; Table of Contents. Subsection (a) sets forth the short title of this Act as the ``Helping Families Save Their Homes Act of 2009.'' Subsection (b) consists of the table of contents. Title I--Prevention of Mortgage Foreclosures Subtitle A--Modification of residential mortgages Section 100. Bankruptcy Code section 101 defines various terms. Section 100 amends this provision to add a definition of ``qualified loan modification,'' which is defined as a loan modification agreement made in accordance with the guidelines of the Obama Administration's Homeowner Affordability and Stability Plan, as implemented on March 4, 2009 with respect to a loan secured by a senior security interest in the debtor's principal residence. To qualify as such, the agreement must reduce the debtor's mortgage payment (including principal and interest) and payments for various other specified expenses (i.e., real estate taxes, hazard insurance, mortgage insurance premium, homeowners' association dues, ground rent, and special assessments) to a percentage of the debtor's income in accordance with such guidelines. The payment may not include any period of negative amortization and it must fully amortize the outstanding mortgage principal. In addition, the agreement must not require the debtor to pay any fees or charges to obtain the modification. And, the agreement must permit the debtor to continue to make these payments notwithstanding the debtor having filed a bankruptcy case as if he or she had not filed for such relief. Section 101. Eligibility for Relief. Bankruptcy Code section 109(e) sets forth secured and unsecured debt limits to establish a debtor's eligibility for relief under chapter 13. Section 101 of the Act amends this provision to provide that the computation of debts does not include the secured or unsecured portions of debts secured by the debtor's principal residence, under certain circumstances. The exception applies if the value of the debtor's principal residence as of the date of the order for relief under chapter 13 is less than the applicable maximum amount of the secured debt limit specified in section 109(e). Alternatively, the exception applies if the debtor's principal residence was sold in foreclosure or the debtor surrendered such residence to the creditor and the value of such residence as of the date of the order for relief under chapter 13 is less than the secured debt limit specified in section 109(e). This amendment is not intended to create personal liability on a debt if there would not otherwise be personal liability on such debt. In addition, section 101 amends Bankruptcy Code section 109(h) to waive the mandatory requirement that a debtor receive credit counseling prior to filing for bankruptcy relief, under certain circumstances. The waiver applies in a chapter 13 case where the debtor submits to the court a certification that the debtor has received notice that the holder of a claim secured by the debtor's principal residence may commence (or has commenced) a foreclosure proceeding against such residence. Section 102. Prohibiting Claims Arising from Violations of the Truth in Lending Act. Under the Truth in Lending Act, a mortgagor has a right of rescission with respect to a mortgage secured by his or her residence, under certain circumstances. Bankruptcy Code section 502(b) enumerates various claims of creditors that are not entitled to payment in a bankruptcy case, subject to certain exceptions. Section 102 amends Bankruptcy Code section 502(b) to provide that a claim for a loan secured by a security interest in the debtor's principal residence is not entitled to payment in a bankruptcy case to the extent that such claim is subject to a remedy for rescission under the Truth in Lending Act, notwithstanding the prior entry of a foreclosure judgment. In addition, section 102 specifies that nothing in this provision may be construed to modify, impair, or supersede any other right of the debtor. Section 103. Authority to Modify Certain Mortgages. Under Bankruptcy Code section 1322(b)(2), a chapter 13 plan may not modify the terms of a mortgage secured solely by real property that is the debtor's principal residence. Section 103 amends Bankruptcy Code section 1322(b) to create a limited exception to this prohibition. The exception only applies to a mortgage that: (1) originated before the effective date of this provision; and (2) is the subject of a notice that a foreclosure may be (or has been) commenced with respect to such mortgage. In addition, the debtor must certify pursuant to new section 1322(h) that he or she contacted--not less than 30 days before filing for bankruptcy relief--the mortgagee (or the entity collecting payments on behalf of such mortgagee) regarding modification of the mortgage. The debtor must also certify that he or she provided the mortgagee (or the entity collecting payments on behalf of such mortgagee) a written statement of the debtor's current income, expenses, and debt in a format that substantially conforms with the schedules required under Bankruptcy Code section 521 or with such other form as promulgated by the Judicial Conference of the United States. Further, the certification must include a statement that the debtor considered any qualified loan modification offered to the debtor by the mortgagee (or the entity collecting payments on behalf of such holder). This requirement does not apply if the foreclosure sale is scheduled to occur within 30 days of the date on which the debtor files for bankruptcy relief. If the chapter 13 case is pending at the time new section 1322(h) becomes effective, then the debtor must certify that he or she attempted to contact the mortgagee (or the entity collecting payments on behalf of such mortgagee) regarding modification of the mortgage before either: (1) filing a plan under Bankruptcy Code section 1321 that contains a modification pursuant to new section 1322(b)(11); or (2) modifying a plan under Bankruptcy Code section 1323 or section 1329 to contain a modification pursuant to new section 1322(b)(11). Under new section 1322(b)(11), the debtor may propose a plan modifying the rights of the mortgagee (and the rights of the holder of any claim secured by a subordinate security interest in such residence) in several respects. It is important to note that the intent of new section 1322(b)(11) is permissive. Accordingly, a chapter 13 may propose a plan that proposes any or all types of modification authorized under section 1322(b)(11). First, the plan may provide for payment of the amount of the allowed secured claim as determined under section 506(a)(1). In making such determination, the court, pursuant to new section 1322(i), must use the fair market value of the property as of when the value is determined. If the issue of value is contested, the court must determine such value in accordance with the appraisal rules used by the Federal Housing Administration. Second, the plan may prohibit, reduce, or delay any adjustable interest rate applicable on and after the date of the filing of the plan. Third, it may extend the repayment period of the mortgage for a period that is not longer than the longer of 40 years (reduced by the period for which the mortgage has been outstanding) or the remaining term of the mortgage beginning on the date of the order for relief under chapter 13. Fourth, the plan may provide for the payment of interest at a fixed annual rate equal to the currently applicable average prime offer rate as of the date of the order for relief under chapter 13, as determined pursuant to certain specified criteria. The rate must correspond to the repayment term determined under new section 1322(b)(11)(C)(i) as published by the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council in its table entitled, ``Average Prime Offer Rates--Fixed.'' In addition, the rate must include a reasonable premium for risk. Fifth, the plan, pursuant to new section 1322(b)(11)(D), may provide for payments of such modified mortgage directly to the holder of the claim or, at the discretion of the court, through the chapter 13 trustee during the term of the plan. The reference in new section 1322(b)(11)(D) to ``holder of the claim'' is intended to include a servicer of such mortgage for such holder. It is anticipated that the court, in exercising its discretion with respect to allowing the debtor to make payments directly to the mortgagee or by requiring payments to be made through the chapter 13 trustee, will take into consideration the debtor's ability to pay the trustee's fees on payments disbursed through the trustee. New section 1322(g) provides that a claim may be reduced under new section 1322(b)(11)(A) only on the condition that the debtor agrees to pay the mortgagee a stated portion of the net proceeds of sale should the home be sold before the completion of all payments under the chapter 13 plan or before the debtor receives a discharge under section 1328(b). The debtor must pay these proceeds to the mortgagee within 15 days of when the debtor receives the net sales proceeds. If the residence is sold in the first year following the effective date of the chapter 13 plan, the mortgagee is to receive 90 percent of the difference between the sales price and the amount of the claim as originally determined under section 1322(b)(11) (plus costs of sale and improvements), but not to exceed the unpaid amount of the allowed secured claim determined as if such claim had not been reduced under new section 1322(b)(11)(A). If the residence is sold in the second year following the effective date of the chapter 13 plan, then the applicable percentage is 70 percent. If the residence is sold in the third year following the effective date of the chapter 13 plan, then the applicable percentage is 50 percent. If the residence is sold in the fourth year following the effective date of the chapter 13 plan, then the applicable percentage is 30 percent. If the residence is sold in the fifth year following the effective date of the chapter 13 plan, then the applicable percentage is ten percent. It is the intent of this provision that if the unsecured portion of the mortgagee's claim is partially paid under this provision it should be reconsidered under 502(j) and reduced accordingly. Section 104. Combating Excessive Fees. Section 104 amends Bankruptcy Code section 1322(c) to provide that the debtor, the debtor's property, and property of the bankruptcy estate are not liable for a fee, cost, or charge that is incurred while the chapter 13 case is pending and that arises from a claim for debt secured by the debtor's principal residence, unless the holder of the claim complies with certain requirements. It is the intent of this provision that its reference to a fee, cost, or charge includes an increase in any applicable rate of interest for such claim. It also applies to a change in escrow account payments. To ensure such fee, cost, or charge is allowed, the claimant must comply with certain requirements. First, the claimant must file with the court and serve on the chapter 13 trustee, the debtor, and the debtor's attorney an annual notice of such fee, cost, or charge (or on a more frequent basis as the court determines) before the earlier of one year of when such fee, cost, or charge was incurred or 60 days before the case is closed. Second, the fee, cost, or charge must be lawful under applicable nonbankruptcy law, reasonable, and provided for in the applicable security agreement. Third, the value of the debtor's principal residence must be greater than the amount of such claim, including such fee, cost or charge. If the holder fails to give the required notice, such failure is deemed to be a waiver of any claim for such fees, costs, or charges for all purposes. Any attempt to collect such fees, costs, or charges constitutes a violation of the Bankruptcy Code's discharge injunction under section 524(a)(2) and the automatic stay under section 362(a), whichever is applicable. Section 104 further provides that a chapter 13 plan may waive any prepayment penalty on a claim secured by the debtor's principal residence. Section 105. Confirmation of Plan. Bankruptcy Code section 1325 sets forth the criteria for confirmation of a chapter 13 plan. Section 105 amends section 1325(a)(5) (which specifies the mandatory treatment that an allowed secured claim provided for under the plan must receive) to provide an exception for a claim modified under new section 1322(b)(11). The amendment also clarifies that payments under a plan that includes a modification of a claim under new section 1322(b)(11) must be in equal monthly amounts pursuant to section 1325(a)(5)(B)(iii)(I). In addition, section 105 specifies certain protections for a creditor whose rights are modified under new section 1322(b)(11). As a condition of confirmation, new section 1325(a)(10) requires a plan to provide that the creditor must retain its lien until the later of when: (1) the holder's allowed secured claim (as modified) is paid; (2) the debtor completes all payments under the chapter 13 plan; or (3) if applicable, the debtor receives a discharge under section 1328(b). Section 105 also provides standards for confirming a chapter 13 plan that modifies a claim pursuant to new section 1322(b)(11). First, the debtor cannot have been convicted of obtaining by actual fraud the extension, renewal, or refinancing of credit that gives rise to such modified claim. Second, the modification must be in good faith. Lack of good faith exists if the debtor has no need for relief under this provision because the debtor can pay all of his or her debts and any future payment increases on such debts without difficulty for the foreseeable future, including the positive amortization of mortgage debt. In determining whether a modification under section 1322(b)(11) that reduces the principal amount of the loan is made in good faith, the court must consider whether the holder of the claim (or the entity collecting payments on behalf of such holder) has offered the debtor a qualified loan modification that would enable the debtor to pay such debts and such loan without reducing the principal amount of the mortgage. Section 105 further amends section 1325 to add a new provision. New section 1325(d) authorizes the court, on request of the debtor or the mortgage holder, to confirm a plan proposing to reduce the interest rate lower than that specified in new section 1322(b)(11)(C)(ii), provided: (1) the modification does not reduce the mortgage principal; (2) the total mortgage payment is reduced through interest rate reduction to the percentage of the debtor's income that is the standard for a modification in accordance with the Obama Administration's Homeowner Affordability and Stability Plan, as implemented on March 4, 2009; (3) the court determines that the debtor can afford such modification in light of the debtor's financial situation, after allowance of expense amounts that would be permitted for a debtor subject to section 1325(b)(3), regardless of whether the debtor is otherwise subject to such paragraph, and taking into account additional debts and fees that are to be paid in chapter 13 and thereafter; and (4) the debtor is able to prevent foreclosure and pay a fully amortizing 30-year loan at such reduced interest rate without such reduction in principal. If the mortgage holder accepts a debtor's proposed modification under this provision, the plan's treatment is deemed to satisfy the requirements of section 1325(a)(5)(A) and the proposal should not be rejected by the court. Section 106. Discharge. Bankruptcy Code section 1328 sets forth the requirements by which a chapter 13 debtor may obtain a discharge and the scope of such discharge. Section 106 amends section 1328(a) to clarify that the unpaid portion of an allowed secured claim modified under new section 1322(b)(11) is not discharged. This provision is not intended to create a claim for a deficiency where such a claim would not otherwise exist. Section 107. Standing Trustee Fees. Section 108(a) amends 28 U.S.C. Sec. 586(e)(1)(B)(i) to provide that a chapter 13 trustee may receive a commission set by the Attorney General of no more than four percent on payments made under a chapter 13 plan and disbursed by the chapter 13 trustee to a creditor whose claim was modified under Bankruptcy Code section 1322(b)(11), unless the bankruptcy court waives such fees based on a determination that the debtor has income less than 150 percent of the official poverty line applicable to the size of the debtor's family and payment of such fees would render the debtor's plan infeasible. With respect to districts not under the United States trustee system, section 108(b) makes a conforming revision to section 302(d)(3) of the Bankruptcy Judges, United States Trustees, and Family Farmer Bankruptcy Act of 1986. Section 108. Effective Date; Application of Amendments. Section 108(a) provides that this measure and the amendments made by it, except as provided in subsection (b), take effect on the Act's date of enactment. Section 108(b)(1) provides, except as provided in paragraph (2), that the amendments made by this measure apply to cases commenced under title 11 of the United States Code before, on, or after the Act's date of enactment. Section 108(b)(2) specifies that paragraph (1) does not apply with respect to cases that are closed under the Bankruptcy Code as of the date of the enactment of this Act. Section 109. GAO Study. Section 109 requires the Government Accountability Office to complete a study and to submit a report to the House and Senate Judiciary Committees within two years from the enactment of this Act a report. The report must contain the results of the study of: (1) the number of debtors who filed cases under chapter 13, during the one-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act for the purpose of restructuring their principal residence mortgages; (2) the number of mortgages restructured under this Act that subsequently resulted in default and foreclosure; (3) a comparison between the effectiveness of mortgages restructured under programs outside of bankruptcy, such as Hope Now and Hope for Homeowners, and mortgages restructured under this Act; (4) the number of appeals in cases where mortgages were restructured under this Act; (5) the number of such appeals where the bankruptcy court's decision was overturned; and (6) the number of bankruptcy judges disciplined as a result of actions taken to restructure mortgages under this Act. In addition, the report must include a recommendation as to whether such amendments should be amended to include a sunset clause. Section 110. Report to Congress. Not later than 18 months after the date of enactment of this Act, the Government Accountability Office, in consultation with the Federal Housing Administration, must submit to Congress a report containing: (1) a comprehensive review of the effects of the Act's amendments on bankruptcy courts; (2) a survey of whether the types of homeowners eligible for the program should be limited; and (3) a recommendation on whether such amendments should remain in effect. Title III--Mortgage Fraud Section 301. Short Title. Section 301 sets forth the short title of title III as the Nationwide Mortgage Fraud Task Force Act of 2009. Section 302. Nationwide Mortgage Fraud Task Force. Subsection (a) establishes a nationwide mortgage fraud task force within the Justice Department to address mortgage fraud in the United States. Subsection (b) mandates that the Attorney General must provide the task force with appropriate staff, administrative support, and other resources necessary so that the task force can carry out its duties. Subsection (c) requires the Attorney General to appoint one staff member to be the executive director of the task force who, in turn, will ensure that the task force carries out its duties. Subsection (d) requires the task force to establish, oversee, and direct branches in each of the ten states determined by the Attorney General to have the highest concentration of mortgage fraud. Subsection (e) requires the task force to coordinate with federal, state and local law enforcement to establish mortgage fraud initiatives; provide training; and collect and disseminate data. Subsection (f), among other matters, authorizes the task force to establish a toll-free hotline for reporting mortgage fraud; provide the public with access to information and resources with respect to mortgage fraud; establish a data base; and make legislative proposals. Subsection (g), for purposes of this provision, defines mortgage fraud as a material misstatement, misrepresentation or omission relating to the property or potential mortgage relied on by an underwriter or lender to fund, purchase, or insure a loan. Title IV--Foreclosure Moratorium Provisions Section 401. Sense of the Congress on Foreclosures. Subsection (a) expresses a sense of the Congress that mortgage holders, institutions, and mortgage servicers should not initiate a foreclosure proceeding or sale until the foreclosure mitigation provisions, such as Hope for Homeowners Program and the President's Homeowner Affordability and Stability Plan, have been implemented and determined to be operational by the Secretary of the Treasury and the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development. Subsection (b) states that the foreclosure moratorium should apply only for first mortgages secured by the owner's principal dwelling. Subsection (c) provides that if a mortgage holder, institution, or mortgage servicer (to which subsection (a) applies) reaches a loan modification agreement with a homeowner under the auspices of the Federal Housing Administration before any plan referred to in such subsection takes effect, subsection (a) shall cease to apply to such institution as of the effective date of the loan modification agreement. Subsection (d) states that any homeowner for whose benefit any foreclosure proceeding or sale is barred under subsection (a) from being instituted, continued or consummated with respect to any homeowner mortgage should not destroy, damage, or impair such property, allow it to deteriorate, or commit waste on the property. Subsection (e) provides that any homeowner for whose benefit any foreclosure proceeding is barred under subsection (a) from being instituted, continued, or consummated with respect to any homeowner mortgage should respond to reasonable inquiries from a creditor or servicer during the period during which such foreclosure proceeding or sale is barred.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Madam Speaker, today we are pleased to introduce the Patent Reform Act of 2009. The Patent Reform Act of 2009 is bipartisan and largely, bicameral legislation intended to tackle a number of problems in our patent system. The bill reflects the substantial progress made last Congress in both the House and Senate. Indeed, the text of the Patent Reform Act is in many ways a composite of the bill that passed the House and the bill that was reported out of the Senate Judiciary Committee last Congress. This bill is a starting point for further discussion and in the matter of inequitable conduct reform, I will be looking to my friend from Utah, Orrin Hatch for his insights on that issue. It is my intention to work closely with him to craft language on inequitable conduct that can be incorporated into the bill at a later time. I am proud to stand today with my colleagues, Representatives Lamar Smith, Howard Berman, Robert Goodlatte, and Sheila Jackson Lee to introduce this legislation that is directed toward encouraging innovation now and long into the 21st century. I particularly thank two of my cosponsors, Howard Berman and Lamar Smith, for their hard work and dedication to this endeavor through the years which has provided a common-sense framework of reforms upon which to build. This piece of legislation is among the most important things that we will work on as our Nation's economic future is dependent on our ability to innovate and efficiently and effectively protect the products of that innovation. I look forward to working with all interested parties in perfecting the Patent Reform Act in the coming months.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and insert extraneous material on H.R. 1106.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Cohen).

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself as much time as I may consume. Members of the House, this very important legislation would limit an anomaly in the Bankruptcy Code which prohibits judicial modifications of principal residences, even though every other class of asset, from second homes to yachts, airplanes, investment properties, family farm, hotels, and even office buildings, is eligible for such treatment. I believe that this proposal represents a critical step that we can take to not only protect hardworking and honest Americans struggling to keep their homes in the midst of a once in a lifetime economic calamity, but to limit the downward cycle of foreclosures that are now damaging our neighborhoods, while, at the same time, protecting financial intermediaries and ensuring that judicial modification is considered only after every reasonable effort has been taken to achieve voluntary modification outside of the bankruptcy. Mr. Chairman, on that note, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I just want my friend on the other side to know that the majority whip of the Senate did not make that statement. It is inaccurate. I now yield to the distinguished gentlelady from Florida, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, 2 minutes.

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 15 seconds to merely apprise my dear friend from California and distinguished member of the Judiciary that Mark Zandi, the GOP adviser to John McCain, said, ``The total cost of foreclosures to lenders is much greater than that associated with a chapter 13 bankruptcy.''

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 15 more seconds. There is no reason to believe that the cost of mortgage credit across all mortgage loan products should rise. That's a Republican economist. I now yield 2 minutes to my good friend from Massachusetts, William Delahunt, himself a distinguished member of the Attorney General's office in Massachusetts.

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from Houston, Texas, Sheila Jackson-Lee. (Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, it is with great pleasure that I recognize for 2 minutes the subcommittee Chair of Immigration, the head of the Ethics Committee, and a great leader in the Congress, Zoe Lofgren.

Mr. CONYERS. I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California, Linda Sanchez.

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire how many speakers my friend on the other side has remaining?

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, it gives me pleasure to yield the remainder of our time to the gentleman from North Carolina, Brad Miller.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. speaker, today I rise in strong support of H.R. 1105, The Omnibus Appropriations Act of 2009. This important legislation stands as a marker stone on the path to a sustainable and just economic future. With its passage today, we leave behind the bloated budgets of the past, under which the fiscally fortunate and the manufacturers of unnecessary Cold War weapons disproportionately benefited. With this bill we refocus our priorities with key investments in education, energy, health, and housing. At the same time, we also set the stage for future budgets, in which this Congress and our new President will recommit to pursuing policy priorities that will remake our nation as a society that values an environmentally sustainable economy, social justice, and opportunity for all. The most critical and wise series of investments made in this bill are in the area of improving access to health care. As this recession deepens, Americans nationwide are losing their healthcare due to no fault of their own. In the 31 days between December 2008 and January 2009, an average of 14,000 people per day lost their health care insurance. This legislation will help mitigate this drop in health security by providing $2.2 billion to community health clinics, $496 million will be appropriated for vaccinations for children, and an added $15 million above FY 2008 funding will be added to train nurses. Mr. Speaker, this new Congress understands that we must invest in human capital--our children--if we hope to sustain the economic recovery we are embarking upon. H.R. 1105 will ensure that 900,000 children have access to high quality preschool services by appropriating $15 billion for Title I grants to low-income children. The bill will also make college more affordable by expanding Pell grants to $4,360 per year. Working in concert with the President's foreclosure mitigation program and my cram-down bankruptcy reform, H.R. 1105 will also offer solutions to our housing crisis. It will provide an additional 1.3 million low-income families Section 8 vouchers. Moreover, $765 million will be appropriated to buy, rehabilitate and build housing for low- income and elderly Americans. Lastly, $3.9 billion is allocated for Community Development Block Grants which will fund vital local activities such as creating affordable housing, supporting anti-poverty programs, and ``right-sizing'' cities like Detroit through vacant housing demolition. During these tough economic times we must resist the temptation to forget the cataclysmic threat posed by global climate change. This omnibus bill keeps us on the path to planetary stability with a $375 million investment dedicated to promoting solar energy and housing stock weatherization. To better understand the science behind this crisis and keep our research up to date, this bill also includes a $755 million increase from Fiscal Year 2008 for climate change related scientific research. Lastly, $765 million will be used to develop energy generation and storage such as fusion energy and advanced batteries, so that we can move technology from the test lab to the product floor. Tomorrow, the President will propose a budget for fiscal year 2010 that will move the debate on many of the policies embodied in this legislation to the next level. Instead of merely covering the serious problems our nation faces with band-aid solutions, we will begin to consider end-game legislation that will eventually lead to a world where health care and global warming no longer threaten our families and our way of life. I stand ready to support these efforts, acknowledging that enacting lasting change will be a momentous task, but also knowing that it is necessary and achievable. But that is tomorrow. Today we act to lessen the pain of the moment-- to ease the uncertainly that comes with the opening of a paycheck or the arrival of a hospital bill. I encourage my colleagues to support this bill so that we can begin to move this country towards fiscal recovery.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Madam Speaker, Ranking Member Lamar Smith and I are introducing a bill to codify into positive law as title 41, United States Code, certain general and permanent laws related to public contracts. This bill was prepared by the Office of the Law Revision Counsel, as part of its functions under 2 U.S.C. Sec. 285(b). This bill is substantially identical to H.R. 4779, which the Committee on the Judiciary approved in last Congress, updated to incorporate a few enactments that took place after the earlier bill was prepared, and to incorporate a few technical clarifications suggested by interested parties. This bill is not intended to make any substantive changes in the law. As is typical with the codification process, a number of non- substantive revisions are made, including the reorganization of sections into a more coherent overall structure, but these changes are not intended to have any substantive effect. As the bill was already subject to extensive agency and public review in the last Congress, as well as in the Congress preceding, the Committee plans to report it to the House promptly and to seek its consideration on the floor as soon as practicable. The bill, along with a detailed section-by-section explanation of the bill, can be found on the Law Revision Counsel website at http:// uscode.house.gov/cod. Interested parties are invited to submit comments to Ken Paretzky, Senior Counsel, Office of the Law Revision Counsel, U.S. House of Representatives, H2-304 Ford House Office Building, Washington, D.C., 20515-6711, (202) 226-9061, as well as to the Committee.