John Conyers

Mr. CONYERS

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

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak on H.R. 2642, the most recent authorization bill placed before the Congress to fund the continuing occupation of Iraq. Forged in the backrooms of the Capitol by Washington politicians, this bill seeks to strike an uneasy compromise. While it continues to fund overseas conflicts, the bill also includes long-overdue aid for segments of the American public desperate for help. Specifically, the bill provides $52 million for an expanded G.I. Bill, extends unemployment benefits in states, like Michigan, that have been hit the hardest by the current economic downturn, and postpones seven Medicaid reimbursement rate cuts. I support such aid, while rejecting the appropriation of an additional $165 million in war funds. As a responsible legislator and a man of peace, I urge my colleagues to understand that we can have guns or butter, but not both. Mr. Speaker, it's unfortunate that it has taken the consideration of a war-funding bill to address these important domestic priorities. As you know, up until recently, the Administration and the Republican leadership have complained that the inclusion of this domestic funding in a war supplemental smacks of fiscal irresponsibility. To them, spending federal dollars to improve G.I. bill benefits for our battle- weary veterans, to extend unemployment benefits for those left behind by failed trickle-down economic policies, and to safeguard the reimbursement amounts paid to doctors, who provide medical care to the most vulnerable Americans, is spending that this country cannot afford. Mr. Speaker, I have a message for this Administration and their congressional allies: Bettering and strengthening the lives of the American people is the purpose of this great institution. Such action is not optional. It is our sworn duty. And if anyone has shown fiscal recklessness, it has been this President. After 6 years of bloody war, this Nation is $592 billion dollars poorer. It is the height of callousness to say that we don't have enough money for our veterans, the unemployed, or our Medicaid doctors; that it is they who are expendable--even as the President burns through billions of taxpayer dollars in Iraq. I suppose that we shouldn't be surprised that this Administration is willing to sacrifice the American people, while its allies at Halliburton, ExxonMobil, and Blackwater continue to make record profits off of this war. After all, this Administration ceased being accountable to the American voter long ago. In a recent interview with ABC News, the Vice President himself admitted as much. When asked whether or not it was significant that two-thirds of the American people now believe that the War in Iraq is no longer worth fighting, Mr. Cheney responded, ``So?'' Mr. Speaker, the President and the Vice-President have forsaken their duty to be responsive to the public. As such, we in the Congress must step in and fill this void. Someone must give the American people a voice, especially when Executive Branch officers act in ways contrary to the public good. Mr. Speaker, setting aside issues of education funding, job aid, and other worthy public policy aims, this body must not ignore the one undeniable reality that dominates everything that we will talk about this day: As of today, we have been at war for 1865 days, with no end in sight. If we approve this war funding, that number will likely climb to over 2000 days. We as a Nation have endured 1865 days of civil war, IEDS, ethnic cleansing, aid-worker beheadings, suicide bombings, sweetheart no-bid contracts, rank government corruption, and solemn vigils over flag draped coffins. Mr. Speaker, this war must end. The American people and the Iraqi people have endured enough. I urge my colleagues to vote against funding this war another day. Tomorrow, we will have been at war for 1866 days. It will be 1866 days too many.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of S. 188, which would rename the Fannie Lou Hamer Rosa Parks, and Coretta Scott King Voting Rights Act Reauthorization and Amendments Act of 2006, to include the names of civil rights pioneers Cesar E. Chavez, Barbara C. Jordan, William C. Velasquez, and Dr. Hector P. Garcia. It passed the other body unanimously, and I would hope that this House would follow suit. I want to commend Sheila Jackson-Lee, a distinguished Member of the Judiciary Committee from Texas, who introduced legislation in the House. It is vitally important that we all remember the many courageous leaders whose achievements make possible the work we do today. The reauthorization of the Voting Rights Act was an important achievement. The extension of this historic civil rights legislation passed in the last Congress with broad bi-partisan support. The Voting Rights Act has, since its enactment in 1965, helped to fulfil the promise of this nation to the world that all are created equal, and all have an equal right to determine their destinies. Although the 15th Amendment to the Constitution was meant to guarantee that ``[t]he right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude,'' that guarantee was not given full effect for many former slaves and their descendants for a full century after its adoption. The Voting Rights Act changed the legal landscape and gave citizens, backed up by the Department of Justice, new legal remedies to ensure that their voices would be heard at the ballot boxes--freely, fairly, and equally. It is therefore fitting that we should add the names of these four civil rights leaders to the title of the Voting Rights Act. Who were these leaders? Cesar Chavez dedicated his life to the rights of some of the most vulnerable and powerless in this nation. The migrant farm workers who pick our crops were unable to provide even the most basic needs for their families. Lack of decent pay, schooling, education, sanitation, housing, and political power made them some of the most oppressed Americans. In a land of plenty, these workers had nothing. Edward R. Murrow rightly called it our ``Harvest of Shame.'' Cesar Chavez organized the unorganized, built a national movement, and won a contract and a life with dignity for these workers. As the founder of the United Farm Workers, he brought hope, dignity, and self- respect to thousands of hardworking Americans who had faced bleak oppression and disenfranchisement. With the founding, and the success, of this movement, nothing would ever be the same. Barbara C. Jordan was a distinguished Member of this House from Houston, Texas, from 1973 to 1979, and a member of the Judiciary Committee. In 1966, she became the first African American to serve in the Texas State Senate since 1883. In 1972, she and and Andrew Young became the first African Americans elected to Congress from the South since 1898. If those dates are jarring, they should be. The post-Reconstruction era was marked by violence, state-sponsored terror, and legal roadblocks that disenfranchised African Americans throughout the South. These efforts were so effective in undermining the plain command of the 15th Amendment, that no African American would represent the South in this House until we enacted and began enforcing the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Representative Jordan was both a symbol of that new law, and an activist who gave those legal guarantees real meaning. When it came time to reauthorize the Voting Rights Act in 1975, Representative Jordan sponsored legislation broadening it to include Hispanic Americans, Native Americans, and Asian Americans. Thanks to her efforts, the Voting Rights Act now protects the rights of voters with limited English proficiency. Always a tireless fighter for social justice, Barbara Jordan was known for her passion and her eloquence. In 1976, she became the first African American to deliver the keynote speech at the Democratic National Convention. For her outstanding contributions to this nation, Barbara Jordan was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom by President Bill Clinton in 1994. A legal scholar, a skilled legislator, an educator, and a fighter for social justice, Barbara Jordan's name belongs on the Voting Rights Act. William C. Velasquez, another Texan, and another Presidential Medal of Freedom honoree, founded the Southwest Voter Registration and Education Project, the nation's largest voter registration project aimed at the Hispanic community. Under his leadership, the SVREP launched hundreds of successful get- out-the-vote and voter registration drives throughout the Southwest, greatly expanding the number of registered Latino voters and increasing Hispanic participation in the political process. Mr. Velasquez, who was also a leader in the United Farm Workers and helped found the Mexican American Youth Organization, and la Raza Unida, helped others believe as he did that ``Su voto es su voz''--your vote is your voice. When President Clinton posthumously awarded Mr. Velasquez the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 1995, he was only the second Latino to receive the nation's highest civilian honor. His contributions make it more than appropriate for us to add his name to the Voting Rights Act. Dr. Hector P. Garcia was a decorated veteran of World War II, a physician, and the founder of American GI Forum. Organized by Dr. Garcia in a Corpus Christi elementary school classroom one evening in March, 1948, the GI Forum ultimately spread across the United States and became a leading civil rights organization. World War II was very much a watershed in opening up new opportunities for Texas Mexicans. But civil rights between 1945 and the late 1950s did not come to Mexican Americans automatically. Many housing developments, restaurants, movies, swimming pools, and even hospitals were considered off-limits to Mexican-Americans. Police and other law enforcement agencies, such as the Texas Rangers and the Border Patrol, all too often reminded Tejanos of their second-class citizenship through disparagement or intimidation. Employment opportunities diminished quickly. Politically, Texas Mexicans had to pay the poll tax, and cope with other voting and office-holding restrictions. Mexican American farm laborers, like those in a labor camp in nearby Mathis, Texas, endured inhuman living conditions. Disabled Mexican American veterans were left starving or sick when a dilatory Veteran's Administration failed to send financial and medical benefits. Local school officials blithely admitted on the radio that Mexican American children were segregated. This was the Texas that Dr. Hector Garcia returned to after World War II. In 1966, through the efforts of the Forum and other groups, the Texas poll tax was repealed. The Forum also undertook a march on the Texas State Capitol to protest the low wages of Mexican agricultural laborers. In 1967, President Johnson appointed Dr. Garcia alternate ambassador to the United Nations. He was tasked with the improvement of relations with Latin American nations. Dr. Garcia made history when, on October 26, he became the first United States representative to speak before the U.N. in a language other than English. President Johnson also appointed him to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. In 1972, Garcia was arrested at a sit-in protest of the de facto segregation in Corpus Christi school district. In 1987, he became involved in the struggle against the campaign to name English the official language of the United States. His final project was to improve the standard of living in the colonias in the Rio Grande Valley along the United States-Mexico border. A fighter for this nation in combat, a distinguished physician, a courageous leader in the struggle for equality and freedom, it is fitting for us to add Dr. Garcia's name to the Voting Rights Act. I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H. Res. 31, which commends the Honorable Andrew L. Jefferson, Jr. This resolution honors the professional excellence aid community leadership of Judge Andrew Jefferson upon the establishment of an endowment for a trial advocacy chair in his honor at Texas Southern University's Thurgood Marshall School of Law in Houston, Texas. I believe that it is important for Congress to recognize the contributions of our constituents to the overall development of our communities. I commend Representative Sheila Jackson-Lee, a distinguished Member of the Judiciary Committee from Texas, who introduced this legislation for highlighting the contributions of Judge Jefferson. It is vitally important that we all remember the many courageous leaders whose achievements make possible the work we do today. Judge Jefferson is a noted legal scholar and institution of legal education in the Eighteenth Congressional District of Houston, Texas. His experience ranges from service in the Judge Advocate General corps in the United States Army Reserve to labor relations. He has been appointed and elected to the Texas state courts and nominated for a seat on the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. In addition to serving both the bar and bench, Judge Jefferson has participated in the life of the Houston community and has been honored by numerous organizations, ranging from the Anti-Defamation League to the League of United Latin American Citizens. The endowment of a chair in his honor at the Thurgood Marshall School of Law is a fitting tribute for such a distinguished member of the bar and community. I salute his record of achievement and encourage all Members to support this resolution in his honor.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Madam Speaker, on June 17, 2008, I regret that I was not present to vote on H.R. 2964, H.R. 3702, and H.R. 1275 due to a personal business conflict. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on all votes.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 5749, the Emergency Extended Unemployment Act of 2008. This bill would establish a temporary program providing extended unemployment benefits in every State to individuals exhausting their regular unemployment compensation. The duration of these extended benefits would equal the lesser of 13 weeks or half the duration of regular unemployment compensation. This bill could not be any timelier. It is no longer debatable as to whether the retraction of the economy is hurting every-day Americans across our nation. Over the first three months of 2008, the U.S. economy lost a total of 232,000 jobs. With the labor market in such a steep decline, more workers face the possibility of layoffs and current unemployment compensation recipients face greater difficulty in becoming reemployed. The total number of unemployed workers has already grown by 1.1 million over the last twelve months. The economic forecast is even worse in my home state of Michigan. While economists worry about the overall health of our economy, as the national unemployment average creeps above 5.5 percent, prospective employees in Michigan face a 7.6-percent unemployment rate--one of the highest state rates in the nation. Luckily, this bill recognizes that the retraction of the economy has hurt some communities more than others. Under this bill, states with high unemployment, like Michigan, would be able to provide an additional 13 weeks of extended benefits. This would give the unemployed a total of 26 weeks of coverage as they transition into new positions. Madam Speaker, we need to help our workers, especially those in who have been hit the hardest by this economic downturn. At the same time, we need to stimulate our economy in the most effective manner possible to prevent the downturn from spiraling into a recession. This bill accomplishes this goal. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office released a study this past January specifically endorsing the use of extended unemployment benefits as a cost-effective way to boost the economy. We in the Congress need to be both smart and compassionate. Let's help the unemployed while protecting those who currently have employment. Let's stimulate the economy and create new sustainable job opportunities for the American worker. Let's pass H.R. 5749.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, today, I rise in support of the S. Con. Res. 70, the conference report to the FY 2009 Budget. Every day, new reports suggest our economy is slowing. It is imperative that the Congress help Americans during these tough economic times. I am supportive of the Democratic budget because it will expand health care for needy Americans, provide tax relief for the middle class, strengthen safety net programs, and reject the President's draconian funding cuts. In effect, S. Con. Res 70 will lead America in a new direction. The Bush budget slashes a half trillion dollars from Medicare and Medicaid over the next decade. The Democratic budget rejects the President's proposed cuts to health care, and instead provides program improvements to State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP). Last year, the President twice vetoed legislation that would have expanded this essential program. S. Con. Res. 70 will provide $50 billion for SCHIP, which significantly reduces the number of uninsured children. The Democratic budget further helps Americans with the skyrocketing cost of health care by investments in health information technology and research grants in medical technology. The Democratic budget provides tax breaks for low- and middle-income families, including an extension of the child tax credit, marriage penalty relief, extension of the 10% individual income tax bracket and an extension of the deduction for state and local sales taxes. S. Con. Res. 70 will also stop the Alternative Minimum Tax from raising taxes on more than 20 million middle-class tax payers. In this era of globalization, it is crucial that we give our youth the best possible education without burdening them with insurmountable debt. The Bush budget would eliminate important educational programs such as the Thurgood Marshall Legal education, Perkins Loans Cancellations, Mental Health Integration and Reading is Fundamental. In contrast, the Democratic budget provides significant increases to vital programs in education, job training, and social service programs. Mr. Speaker, my home state of Michigan is facing serious economic challenges, in part due to the President's failed policies. The Democratic budget will offer working families a chance at the American dream. I urge my colleagues to support the resolution.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Madam Speaker, it's with great pride that I rise today to congratulate our Detroit Red Wings on winning this year's National Hockey League championship. It has been 6 long years since the Red Wings have last brought the Stanley Cup back to Hockey Town, which is what we call Detroit in our good seasons, but their hard work and their hard-won victory on defeating the Penguins in six games is the epitome of teamwork at its absolute best. If ever a championship fits the personality of a community, this one does. This team was about true sportsmanship and selflessness. Every Red Wing could vie for the Most Valuable Player award because each of them played with remarkable fortitude and consistence. Whether Detroit won because of the stepped up play of goalie Chris Osgood, the excellent leadership of the Captain Nicklas Lidstrom (the first European Captain to hoist the Stanley Cup), Henrik Zetterberg's post-season offense led the way (scoring 13 goals in the playoffs), or the tremendous Red Wings bench. They are a true model of what can be achieved with team work: Success. I am particularly excited that the city of Detroit won this championship at this time. Madam Speaker, during the past few years the Metro Detroit area has lost tens of thousands of manufacturing jobs, some of which will never come back to this great city. The Detroit Red Wings winning this championship has brought back hope and a sense of optimism that Detroit desperately needs. The team's success exemplifies the strength and tenacity both of the Red Wings and of the great citizens of Detroit. The moral of this championship is that you never now what you can achieve until you try. Go Red Wings.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, we cannot allow our cultural, historical or visually significant treasures to disappear into the fog of time. That is why I fully support both reauthorizations contained within H.R. 5893. Our written traditions have libraries which archive and preserve them. The program we reauthorize today provides a mechanism for similar archiving for sound and visual arts, encouraging their preservation and accessibility for ourselves and for future generations despite rapid changes in visual and sound recording media. H.R. 5893 would reauthorize the sound recording and film preservation programs of the Library of Congress and make a few small changes to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the programs such as by encouraging more active participation by board members. I am particularly interested in the progress of the Library of Congress on its study and report on sound recordings. In speaking with members of the artist community, it has become clear to me that art forms such as jazz are not being archived, preserved, and restored to the extent necessary to prevent the disappearance of some of the older recordings. This reauthorization will enable the Library of Congress to continue the study and report on ways the National Recording Preservation Board can better ensure the continued availability of seminal pieces of historical jazz and other forms of music. This country, indeed the world, recently lost a music great, a pioneer who helped lead rhythm and blues into rock and roll, an artist of the highest esteem, ``Bo Diddley.'' Through the continuation of these important archive programs, we can help make sure that Bo Diddley and others will be long remembered for their special contributions to our culture. Though we may mourn the passing of the musician, we need never mourn the loss of the music.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Madam Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 3021, the 21st Century Green High-Performing Public School Facilities Act. The bill authorizes $6.4 billion for school construction projects for fiscal year 2009, and ensures that school districts will quickly receive funds for school modernization, renovation, and repairs. A majority of these funds must be used for projects that meet green building standards for energy efficiency and carbon footprint reduction. This important bill will improve the health of our Nation on a variety of levels. As an economic stimulus, it will create jobs all across the Nation as local citizens join together to build and repair schools. The bill also improves the teaching and learning climate in America's schools by combating overcrowding, decreasing student and teacher sick days, and improving school air quality for our nation's 60 million school children. This legislation also improves energy efficiency by mandating the use of renewable resources in our schools. These same energy efficiencies will also play a positive role in combating global climate change by limiting the carbon emissions emitted by school buildings. Finally, the inclusion of Davis-Bacon protections ensures that workers will receive a fair and prevailing wage. At a time when our economy is reeling, with unemployment and inflation on the rise, this bill will infuse our faltering job market with the resources it needs to flourish. This $6.4 billion investment in our Nation's infrastructure will create 100,000 new design and construction jobs--4,041 of which will be located in Michigan. Citizens working in other sectors will also see an improvement in their financial stability, as property values improve in communities with these new schools. The bill will also dramatically improve the teaching and learning climate for America's school children. We all know that children can't learn if they're sick. The average American school was built half a century ago. As a result, too many of our children attend overcrowded schools housed in buildings with leaky roofs, faulty electrical systems, and outdated technology. This tremendous investment in physical facilities would help alleviate these problems by repairing and removing infrastructure rife will black mold and asbestos. Some may decry the spending associated with this bill. I however, see it as a smart investment that will pay out cost-saving dividends in the very near future. Green schools created by this bill will cost, on average, 2% more than conventional schools but provide financial benefits that are 20 times as large. This is enough savings to hire two additional full-time teachers in most communities. Although not obvious at first, the bill will also play a substantial role in our nation's multifaceted response to the threat posed by global climate change. When one thinks about the causes of global warming, images of exhaust spewing SUVs and coal plants billowing out black smoke spring to mind. In fact, 39 percent of all green house gas emissions come from buildings--including many of our country's school buildings. The energy efficiency improvements that will be built into our schools will have an immediate impact on this front. Each green and energy efficient school will lead to annual emission reductions of 585,000 pounds of carbon dioxide. Finally, I am happy to see that the bill will include Davis-Bacon protections to all grants for school modernization, renovation, and repair projects. The inclusion of these protections exemplifies the tremendous differences between the two major parties on issues of worker's rights. I am continually reminded that during the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, our President attempted to rescind Davis-Bacon protections at a time when local workers could least afford to have their living standards depressed. In contrast, with this bill, this Democratic Congress emphasizes its commitment to the belief that the government has a responsibility to provide workers with a living wage as they work to improve their communities. I applaud Representative Chandler and the rest of the Leadership for this bill. As I noted two weeks ago in the Congressional Record, one of the hallmarks of this Congress has been its attempt to provide comprehensive solutions to complicated problems. I believe that this bill is a proud example of this trend. In a bill aimed at decreasing class sizes, the Congress has also chosen to attack climate change, promote worker's rights, and improve air quality. I urge my colleagues to vote for this bill and send a clear message to the American people: This Congress is committed to smart solutions to the real problems that this country will face in the 21st Century.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to support H. Con. Res.-134, the Establishment of a Bebe Moore Campbell National Minority Mental Health Awareness Month. As disproportionate numbers of African Americans, Latinos, Asians, and others of color continue to be affected by a lack of resources for mental illness, we can now take steps to bring solutions to the public consciousness with the establishment of this awareness month. According to the 1999 Surgeon General's Report on Mental Illness, more than 54,000,000 Americans have a mental disorder in any given year, although fewer than 8,000,000 seek treatment. Minority mental health consumers often fall into the category of the ``working poor'', facing additional challenges because they are underinsured or uninsured, which often leads to late diagnosis or no diagnosis of mental illness. According to the 1999 Surgeon General's Report on Mental Illness, African Americans are misdiagnosed at a higher rate within the mental health delivery system, and greater effort must be made to accurately assess the mental health of African Americans. Bebe Moore Campbell through her dedication and commitment sought to move communities to support mental wellness through effective treatment options, open access to mental health treatment and services, and improve community outreach and support for the many loved ones who are unable to speak for themselves. Here in Congress, we must lead the fight for important issues such as mental illness, for all of our citizens regardless of their ethnicity or medical hardship. As our health care systems continue to advance in the field of mental illness, an awareness month such as the Bebe Moore Campbell National Minority Mental Health Awareness Month can encourage increased knowledge and possible treatment for families who are affected by such a debilitating problem. I strongly support the designation of the Bebe Moore Campbell National Health Awareness Month and I have profound respect for the late Bebe Moore Campbell who made great strides in bringing mental health awareness to both the African-American and the general American public, through her literary works and advocacy. As a celebrated writer and journalist, noted author, radio commentator, community activist, advocate, and recipient of numerous awards and honors, Bebe Moore Campbell was an exceptional individual and it is beyond fitting to name this awareness month in her and her work's honor. I would like to commend Congressman Wynn and Congresswoman Watson for their leadership in bringing this resolution before Congress.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to bring to the attention of the Congress and to the American people the plight of the western hemisphere's second oldest republic, Haiti. The Haitian people are being negatively affected by market forces out of their control that have driven food prices up drastically. Haiti, where about 4 out of 5 people live at or below poverty, is an island nation that consists of approximately 8.7 million people. To put this in perspective, imagine the City of New York; now imagine that same city with 80 percent of its citizens in poverty. The American people and Congress have already assisted Haiti with the HOPE and HOPE II (Haitian Hemispheric Opportunity through Partnership Encouragement) Acts. HOPE was the tip of the iceberg. It provided jobs to allow Haitians to overcome poverty. HOPE II will create even more gainful employment and more sustainable jobs for Haitians and create a self-sustaining infrastructure. These acts will provide jobs needed to help more Haitian citizens emerge from poverty and gain employment which will lead to a more prosperous Haiti. However, there is much more work to be done, Mr. Speaker. Right now the World Food Programme is in need of $755 million to meet immediate demands and USAID also needs an additional $240 million. Increases in these programs will ensure that school food programs in the developing world are not eliminated due to current food price inflation. The food price escalation is also affecting the region as a whole. Due to escalating market prices, in rural El Salvador, with the same amount of money today, people can purchase 50 percent less food than they did 18 months ago. This means that, in principle, their nutritional intake, on an already poor diet, is being cut by half. In Nicaragua the price of tortillas went up 54 percent between January 2007 and January 2008. We cannot let our neighbors suffer due to circumstances out of their control. We have taken small steps but now the government of the United States must be an active agent in the development of the third world. We must follow the lead of our philanthropic and non-profit sectors. Too often those in government see aid to developing nations as a waste of money, throwing taxpayers' dollars down a well. India is a great example of the benefits of foreign aid. In the 1960s American dollars funded fertilizer subsidies and high-yield seed varieties led India out of poverty and famine into self-subsistence. India is now entering the developing world, so much so that their demand for processed foods is now decreasing the supply of food aid available to countries such as Haiti. This can happen in Haiti if the United States focuses on delivering basic goods to the hemisphere's poorest people. By increasing vaccines, textbooks, water pipes, and medical care we will not make countries dependent, we will be giving Haitians the basic inputs they need to improve their lives. We must invest in high-yield, proven, and scalable strategies to empower the Haitian people and those suffering throughout the world. I have submitted for the record an article from the New York Review of Books authored by Jeffrey D. Sachs. [From the New York Review of Books, Dec. 21, 2006] How Aid Can Work (By Jeffrey D. Sachs) In a very different era, President John Kennedy declared ``to those peoples in the huts and villages across the globe struggling to break the bonds of mass misery, we pledge our best efforts to help them help themselves, for Whatever period is required--not because the Communists may be doing it, not because we seek their votes, but because it is right. If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich.'' It is difficult to imagine President Bush making a similar pledge today, but he is far from alone in Washington. The idea that the US should commit its best efforts to help the world's poor is an idea shared by Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, and Jimmy Carter, but it has been almost nowhere to be found in our capital. American philanthropists and nonprofit groups have stepped forward while our government has largely disappeared from the scene. There are various reasons for this retreat. Most importantly, our policymakers in both parties simply have not attached much importance to this ``soft'' stuff, although their ``hard'' stuff is surely not working and the lack of aid is contributing to a cascade of instability and security threats in impoverished countries such as Somalia. We are spending $550 billion per year on the military, against just $4 billion for Africa. Our African aid, incredibly, is less than three days of Pentagon spending, a mere $13 per American per year, and the equivalent of just 3 cents per $100 of US national income! The neglect has been bipartisan. The Clinton administration allowed aid to Africa to languish at less than $2 billion per year throughout the 1990s. A second reason for the retreat is the Widespread belief that aid is simply wasted, money down the rat hole. That has surely been true of some aid, such as the ``reconstruction'' funding for Iraq and the cold war-era payouts to thugs such as Mobutu Sese Seko of Zaire. But these notorious cases obscure the critical fact that development assistance based on proven technologies and directed at measurable and practical needs-- increased food production, disease control, safe water and sanitation, schoolrooms and clinics, roads, power grids, Internet connectivity, and the like--has a distinguished record of success. The successful record of well-targeted aid is grudgingly acknowledged even by a prominent academic critic of aid, Professor Bill Easterly. Buried in his ``Bah, Humbug'' attack on foreign aid. The White Man's Burden, Mr. Easterly allows on page 176 that ``foreign aid likely contributed to some notable successes on a global scale, such as dramatic improvement in health and education indicators in poor countries. Life expectancy in the typical poor country has risen from forty-eight years to sixty-eight years over the past four decades. Forty years ago, 131 out of every 1,000 babies born in poor countries died before reaching their first birthday. Today, 36 out of every 1,000 babies die before their first birthday. Two hundred pages later Mr. Easterly writes that we should ``put the focus back where it belongs: get the poorest people in the world such obvious goods as the vaccines, the antibiotics, the food supplements, the improved seeds, the fertilizer, the roads, the boreholes, the water pipes, the textbooks, and the nurses. This is not making the poor dependent on handouts; it is giving the poorest people the health, nutrition, education, and other inputs that raise the payoff to their own efforts to better their lives. These things could indeed be done, if American officials weren't so consistently neglectful of development issues and with many too cynical to learn about the constructive uses of development assistance. They would learn that just as American subsidies of fertilizers and high-yield seed varieties for India in the late 1960s helped create a ``Green Revolution'' that set that vast country on a path out of famine and on to long-term development, similar support for high-yield seeds, fertilizer, and small-scale water technologies for Africa could lift that continent out of its current hunger-disease-poverty trap. They would discover that the Gates and Rockefeller Foundations have put up $150 million in the new Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa to support the development and uptake of high-yield seed varieties there, an effort that the US government should now join and help carry out throughout sub-Saharan Africa. They would also discover that the American Red Cross has learned--and successfully demonstrated--how to mass- distribute antimalaria bed nets to impoverished rural populations in Africa, with such success and at such low cost that the prospect of protecting all of Africa's children from that mass killer is now actually within reach. Yet they'd also learn that the Red Cross lacks the requisite funding to provide bed nets to all who need them. They would learn that a significant number of other crippling and killing diseases, including African river blindness, schistosomiasis, trauchoma, lymphatic filariasis, hookworm, ascariasis, and trichuriasis, could be brought under control for well under $2 per American citizen per year, and perhaps just $1 per American citizen! They would note, moreover, that the number of HIV-infected Africans on donor-supported antiretroviral therapy has climbed from zero in 2000 to 800,000 at the end of 2005, and likely to well over one million today. They would learn that small amounts of funding to help countries send children to school have proved successful in a number of African countries, so much so that the continent-wide goal of universal attendance in primary education is utterly within reach if financial support is provided. As chairman of the Commission on Macroeconomics and Health of the World Health Organization (2000-2001) and director of the UN Millennium Project (2002-2006), I have led efforts that have canvassed the world's leading practitioners in disease control, food production, infrastructure development, water and sanitation, Internet connectivity, and the like, to identify practical, proven, low-cost, and scalable strategies for the world's poorest people such as those mentioned above. Such life-saving and poverty-reducing measures raise the productivity of the poor so that they can earn and ingest their way out of extreme poverty, and these measures do so at an amazingly low cost. To extend these proven technologies throughout the poorest parts of Africa would require around $75 billion per year from all donors, of which the US share would be around $30 billion per year, or roughly 25 cents per every $100 of US national income. When we overlook the success that is possible, we become our own worst enemies. We stand by as millions die each year because they are too poor to stay alive. The inattention and neglect of our policy leaders lull us to believe casually that nothing more can be done. Meanwhile we spend hundreds of billions of dollars per year on military interventions doomed to fail, overlooking the fact that a small fraction of that money, if it were directed at development approaches, could save millions of lives and set entire regions on a path of economic growth. It is no wonder that global attitudes toward America have reached the lowest ebb in history. It is time for a new approach.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Madam Speaker, officials recently participating in a Texas hurricane evacuation drill were shocked to learn that the Border Patrol, CBP, planned to check the citizenship or immigration status of the people that they were helping to evacuate. Such a policy is fraught with problems. One car with a flat tire can back up an evacuation for hundreds of miles. Just think about how disruptive and dangerous immigration checkpoints would be, and how many people would remain in harm's way for fear of arrest. The outrage in Texas, and across the country, was instantaneous. Other law enforcement agencies, State officials, and the press condemned the announcement, and DHS started backpedaling. But this was not an isolated incident or just a mistake. Rather, this comes on the heels of other evacuations in which DHS' priorities have been confused. Such as the California fires in which undocumented aliens were afraid to risk immigration checkpoints and died in the flames. And the administration's refusal to suspend immigration enforcement in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, as had been done after September 11. The immigration enforcement mission must be carried out in the proper context; in the face of a natural disaster or mass casualty event, public safety and humanitarian exigencies must take priority. We asked for an immediate briefing to get to the bottom of this. Just hours before they were supposed to come brief us, the Border Patrol suddenly said that they had reassessed the policy in light of last week's exercise. They told us that CBP's ``primary role in such events will be the safeguarding of life. No enforcement role will be undertaken that will in any way impede the safe and orderly evacuation of any member of the south Texas population.'' Frankly, I would have been more reassured if the CBP's purported change in policy had not been couched in such equivocal terms. Later yesterday, Secretary Chertoff stated that ``Priority Number One'' will be ``the safe evacuation of people who are leaving the danger zone.'' He said that clear instructions have been given to the Border Patrol ``to do nothing to impede a safe and speedy evacuation of a danger zone.'' So the message seems to have been heard. Rest assured that we will be watching to make sure that the focus truly is on having all hands on deck for humanitarian and evacuation needs, as opposed to diverting DHS resources into ill-conceived--and dangerous--immigration enforcement. I am very troubled by this episode. It comes on the heels of revelations in recent weeks about medical abuse of immigration detainees. And it comes in the wake of a massive raid in Iowa that disrupted a Department of Labor investigation and resulted in assembly line arrest and prosecution of workers, but not of those who may have abused them. This cascade of controversy leads me to pose one overarching question--what kind of agency is DHS that there need to be congressional inquiries on so many of their actions before they take into account basic standards of life, safety, health care, due process, and constitutional rights? I am inserting into the Record a letter about the ill-conceived evacuation from leading national Latino and Asian-American civil rights groups: the Asian American Justice Center, the League of United Latin American Citizens, the Mexican-American Legal Defense and Education Fund, the National Association of Latino Elected Officials, and the National Council of La Raza. I am also inserting a fact sheet from the United Food and Commercial Workers about the raids in Iowa, where there are disturbing allegations of union-busting and labor exploitation on the part of the factory owners. I look forward to working with these groups to make sure that DHS remembers its duty to protect the civil rights of everyone on U.S. soil, regardless of their race, natural origin, or immigration status. May 20, 2008. Hon. Michael Chertoff, Secretary, Department of Homeland Security, Washington, DC. Dear Secretary Chertoff: We are writing to express our utter outrage that the Border Patrol would jeopardize the safety of residents of the Rio Grande Valley in the event of a hurricane evacuation by checking the documents of evacuees before they are allowed to board evacuation buses. If you are interested in undercutting the safety of a large segment of the community you are charged with protecting, this is exactly the way to go about it. Indeed, the very news that such an effort is planned, which was reported by the Rio Grande Guardian on May 14, has already undercut the ability of the federal government to protect the population which could be affected by a hurricane or some other natural disaster. To put it quite simply, a substantial segment of the population--immigrants and U.S. citizens alike--will not participate in an evacuation effort if they believe it to be tainted with the goal of immigration enforcement. Americans with immigrant family members will not participate for fear of jeopardizing their loved ones. In addition, most American citizens do not carry documentation that proves their citizenship. If you proceed with this approach, a great many U.S. citizens will be kept off of evacuation buses because they failed to bring their passports and birth certificates when they fled their homes. To put such people on Border Patrol buses and subject them to immigration enforcement, possibly separating them from their family members in a time of crisis, is foolish and offensive. We have written to you on this subject in the past, when your decision not to suspend immigration enforcement in the wake of Hurricane Katrina made this the first Administration of either party to jeopardize the safety of disaster victims by conducting immigration enforcement during a rescue and relief operation, We have pointed out publicly that insisting on immigration enforcement in a time of crisis will jeopardize the safety of the American public by undercutting public confidence in vitally important public safety and public health initiatives. To put it bluntly, if the next major crisis is a flu epidemic, the actions of your agency will guarantee that major segments of the population will not come forward for vaccinations out of fear of immigration enforcement. This tactic by the Border Patrol is not simply offensive, it is dangerous, and we are shocked and outraged that it has proceeded this far. We urge you in the strongest possible terms to suspend it immediately, and reassure the public that the United States will not undercut our security in a time of crisis by asking for papers before taking people to safety. Sincerely, Karen Narasaki, Asian American Justice Center. Rosa Rosales, League of United Latin American Citizens. John Trasvina, Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund. Arturo Vargas, National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials. Janet Murguia, National Council of La Raza.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to support H. Con. Res. 325, Celebrating the 50th Anniversary of the Mackinac Island State Park Commission's Historical Preservation and Museum Program, which began on June 15, 1958. In 1958, the State of Michigan granted authority to the Mackinac Island State Park Commission to restore and interpret Fort Mackinac and other historical properties at the Straits of Mackinac. The Mackinac State Historic Parks complex is one of the most successful historic site complexes in North America. The Mackinac Island State Park Commission helps bring tourism to the Upper Peninsula of Michigan and aids the local economy. This resolution commemorates the restoration and opening of Fort Mackinac to the public in 1958. As a native Michigander, I have always enjoyed the beautiful and abundant natural resource that is Mackinac Island. All of my visits to Mackinac Island have been rewarding and fulfilling. I join my fellow colleagues, in honoring the accomplishments and creation of the Mackinac Island State Park Commission's Historical Preservation and Museum Program, and to commemorate the 50th anniversary by supporting this resolution.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Madam Speaker, I rise to voice my strong support for H.R. 5613, the Protecting the Medicaid Safety Net Act. This important bipartisan bill extends a moratorium until April 1, 2009 on seven Administration-imposed Medicaid regulations that if implemented, would severely reduce federal Medicaid funding. Without the moratorium, Medicaid funding to states for vital programs and services would be cut by $18 billion over the next 5 years. These cuts include restrictions on Medicaid payments for graduate medical education, GME, rehabilitation services, and outpatient hospital services, among other services. It would be irresponsible to think about cutting funding to academic medical centers and residency training programs when we currently face a shortage of physicians. If these cuts were allowed to go into effect, we would be unable to provide necessary medical services to many people who depend upon Medicaid. Constantly cutting funds to the very services which keep our fragmented, nonsystem of health care afloat is inhumane and nonsensical. The tactic of underfunding federal programs in an attempt to undermine their effectiveness demonstrates the Administration's lack of commitment to the programs that faithfully and effectively serve the American people. Madam Speaker, passage of H.R. 5613 is simply a necessity. We must halt the underfunding of important Medicaid programs. I wholeheartedly support the passage of H.R. 5613, the Protecting the Medicaid Safety Net Act.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Madam Speaker, I rise to voice my strong support for H.R. 5501, the Tom Lantos and Henry J. Hyde United States Global Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Reauthorization Act of 2008. This important legislation authorizes appropriations for fiscal years 2009 through 2013 to provide assistance to foreign countries to combat HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria, and for other purposes, including program monitoring, operations research, and impact evaluation research of U.S. HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria programs. Since the HIV/AIDS epidemic began, 20 million men, women, and children have died from the disease. Forty million around the globe are HIV-positive, and each and every day, another 6,000 people become infected with HIV. Tuberculosis and malaria are devastating diseases in their own right, particularly in developing countries. However, tuberculosis (particularly drug-resistant strains) in the immuno- compromised poses a particularly vexing treatment challenge. HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria are sometimes referred to as the ``diseases of poverty;'' without question, Africans and various peoples of African descent have been hit the hardest by this global epidemic. In three of the larger countries in the Caribbean--the Bahamas, Haiti, and Trinidad and Tobago--more than 2 percent of the adult population is living with HIV. Higher prevalence rates are found only in sub-Saharan Africa, making the Caribbean the second-most affected region in the world. AIDS is now one of the leading causes of death in some of these countries, with Haiti being the worst affected. An estimated 16,000 lives are lost each year to AIDS in Haiti, and tens of thousands of children have been orphaned by the epidemic. As well, Haiti has the highest per capita tuberculosis burden in the Latin America and Caribbean region. After HIV/AIDS, TB is the country's greatest infectious cause of mortality of both youth and adults, resulting in 6,000 deaths annually. What must not be overlooked in the gobal pandemic of HIV/AIDS is the need for preventative care. For example, the Act directs the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) to develop a program to facilitate availability of proven microbicides that prevent the transmission of HIV. The Act also creates linkages and requires patient referrals between HIV/AIDS and tuberculosis programs, and creates a new plan to stop tuberculosis by enhancing testing and treatment in countries with high tuberculosis rates. New tactics for attacking drug-resistant tuberculosis are also supported. Most importantly, the Act provides funding for treatment based on scientific principles and evidence-based practices. It is our duty to battle these life-threatening illnesses, and it is inappropriate to forebear moral judgment or other inherent prejudices upon those suffering from these terrible diseases. The Act's purpose is to help provide treatment and support to those who are unable to provide these services on their own. It implores us to care for one another, for we are all brothers and sisters in the eyes of our Creator. Madam Speaker, there is a moral imperative to combat this epidemic, and the late Congressmen Lantos and Hyde, both dear friends and colleagues, fought long and hard on this important issue. Please honor their efforts by supporting H.R. 5501, the Tom Lantos and Henry J. Hyde United States Global Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Reauthorization Act of 2008.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise to voice my strong support for H. Res. 1134, supporting the goals and ideals of Mental Health Month. This legislation applauds the hard work of practitioners and national and community organizations in promoting mental health awareness, and supports improving the overall quality of life for those with mental illness. H. Res. 1134 also supports the findings of the President's Commission on Mental Health that the nation's failure to prioritize mental health is a national tragedy. Mr. Speaker, mental health is no less important than physical health. In fact, as science is proving, mental health and physical health are intertwined in complex ways that are only beginning to be understood. The relationship between depression and heart disease is just one example of the inherent symbiosis of psychiatric and somatic illnesses. Just as the heart is the organ upon which heart disease preys, the brain is the organ plagued by diseases of the mind. Likewise, death as a result of suicide is no less tragic than death secondary to a heart attack. Those suffering from severe psychiatric illness should not be held to a lesser standard of care than those suffering from physical illnesses. Ensuring access to appropriate services is central to improving the quality of life for those with mental illness. The issue of mental health insurance parity, in my opinion, is a civil rights issue. Inequity of coverage with regard to mental health and substance abuse treatment benefits is tantamount to discrimination against the mentally ill, and it reinforces the strategy of insurance companies to deny care rather than provide care. The mental health community scored a victory for its patients earlier this year when the House voted to pass H.R. 1424, the ``Paul Wellstone Mental Health and Addiction Equity Act of 2007.'' It has taken courage on the part of Congressmen like my colleague Patrick Kennedy to stand up to special interests and ``do the right thing'' when it comes to ending discrimination against the mentally ill and standing up to health insurance companies. There is still work to be done before a mental health insurance parity bill is signed into law. Hopefully, the bill will soon be reconciled into a form which will benefit psychiatric patients and end discrimination against the mentally ill. Mr. Speaker, let us applaud the tireless work and unending determination of those fighting to improve the lives of the mentally ill. Let us also be reminded that there is much work to be done before the stigma associated with mental illness is ended, and the lives of those suffering from mental illness are valued as much as those suffering from other medical illnesses.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of this common sense piece of legislation offered by my dear friend, Representative Charlie Rangel, the Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee. If enacted, his bill will marshal the tremendous economic power of our Nation's physical and human capital and direct it towards solving the twin challenges of energy dependence and global warming. Through $20 billion investment in renewable energy tax incentives, carbon mitigation provisions, transportation efficiency tax credits, and energy efficiency incentives, this bill offers a comprehensive strategy that empowers both individual citizens and the private sector. The bill empowers everyday Americans by providing tax credits to green citizens who add energy-efficient improvements to their homes and businesses and purchase plug-in electric cars. The bill helps the private sector push the limits of research and development by encouraging the building of carbon capture and sequestration demonstration projects. The bill also creates incentives for the energy production sector to invest in nontraditional cutting edge energy production methods. I am particularly excited that this bill will, for the first time, incentivize investment in technologies that will harness the power of the waves and tides found in our Nation's Great Lakes and oceans. I am also proud of this body's recent efforts to address the global climate change crisis. This bill is a logical and important next step toward this end. For too long, our country lagged behind the rest of the industrialized world in recognizing and taking action to address the climate change crisis. Global warming endangers all of us, but threatens to have the most devastating impact on the poorest and the most vulnerable. By encouraging our Nation's citizens and businesses to act in a carbon-conscious way, we protect not only ourselves, but show compassion for our brothers and sisters around the world. At a time when global public opinion regarding our Nation is at an all-time low, the important positive impact this bill will have on our country's public diplomacy efforts should not be downplayed. Lastly, I believe that this bill serves as a powerful example of the tax policy differences between the 110th Congress and past Congresses. Instead of using the tax code to promote inequality and corporate largess, the American people now know that the tax code can be used to promote personal responsibility, national security, compassion, and global sustainability. I am proud to join with my colleagues here today as we continue to establish a progressive tax policy for the 21st century.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Madam Speaker, today I am introducing the ``Domestic Violence Volunteer Attorney Network Act,'' legislation that addresses the need to increase legal services for victims of domestic violence by creating a coordinated, nationwide system of attorney referrals to assist domestic violence victims. I am joined in this effort by Representative Poe. Domestic violence continues to be a problem in our country. Nearly one in four women will be a victim of domestic violence in her lifetime, and between three and ten million children witness acts of domestic violence each year. Domestic violence is not just physical but affects every aspect of a woman's life, including her mental and emotional well-being. In 2005, Congress reauthorized the Violence Against Women Act, continuing programs such as STOP and Legal Assistance for Victims, as well as adding new programs that focus on prevention and services for youth and children. But there is still a huge gap in services and resources for victims who need help navigating the legal system. Obtaining effective protection orders, initiating divorce proceedings or designing safe child custody arrangements are all key components to stopping the violence, because these are often the first real steps that battered women can take to leave an abusive home. The problem is not that the resources do not exist; in fact, many lawyers want to volunteer their time to provide legal assistance to victims of domestic violence. The problem is in bridging the gap between these willing and able advocates and the victims seeking access to the justice system. Our bill, the Domestic Violence Volunteer Attorney Network Act, has several components: Creates an electronic network of volunteer attorneys. The network will be managed by the American Bar Association Commission on Domestic Violence, which will solicit and mentor the lawyers and conduct training and provide other technical assistance. Authorizes new funds to the National Domestic Violence Hotline to update the system and train advocates on how to provide referrals for voluntary attorneys. Creates a pilot program to implement the volunteer attorney network in five states. The program will be administered by the Office of Violence Against Women in DOJ. After these five years, if successful, the program will be rolled out nationally. Establishes a Domestic Violence Legal Advisory Task Force, which will monitor the program and make recommendations. Mandates a study by the National Institute of Justice to assess the scope and quality of legal services available to battered women in each state. The GAO will report to Congress within one year. The legislation is supported by a broad range of interests and experts, including the National Network to End Domestic Violence, the Legal Resource Center for Violence Against Women, the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence, the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, the ABA, National Legal Aid and Defenders Association, the National Association for Attorneys General, and the National Center for the Victims of Crime. This legislation is an important next step in our fight to defeat domestic violence and assist victims. A companion bill has been introduced in the Senate by Senators Biden and Specter. I am hopeful that Congress can move quickly to enact this worthwhile and timely legislation.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, today I rise in strong support of H.R. 6081, the Heroes Earnings Assistance and Relief Tax (HEART) Act of 2008. This bill provides tax relief to America's heroic servicemembers. As a veteran of the Korean war, it is imperative that we assist the brave men and women who put their lives at risk in defending our Nation in any way we can. H.R. 6081 will improve tax benefits to members of the armed services. For example, today's legislation permanently extends the Earned Income Tax Credit for combat pay, allows for penalty-free withdrawal from servicemember pension plans, allows access for funds in Flexible Savings Accounts, and lets military death benefits to roll over into a Roth IRA or Education Savings Account. Given the crisis in the housing market, I am particularly heartened that H.R. 6081 permanently establishes mortgage bonds used to finance home purchases by veterans. Mr. Speaker, this bill also extends the Economic Stimulus rebates that are being delivered as we speak today. H.R. 6081 humanely permits servicemembers who are married to foreigners to receive the full value of their rebate. Lastly, the bill will restrict government contractors who move offshore to avoid paying Social Security and Medicare benefits. It is shocking that government contractors receive millions, or even billions, of taxpayer dollars and then try to avoid paying their fair share of taxes. We have put our Nation's finest men and women in a senseless war without an end. The least we can do is allow their families to enjoy the same benefits as their neighbors. Mr. Speaker, this is a commonsense bill and I urge my colleagues to support it. Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commend the Committee on Ways and Means for passing this important legislation, the Heroes Earnings Assistance and Tax Relief Act. This legislation brings necessary tax relief to members of our armed services, veterans and their families and it also contains important technical corrections to a law that provides tax relief to volunteer emergency first responders. Like our men and women in the armed services, volunteer emergency first responders provide a crucial service to our communities. They are in the front lines in the case of fire, natural disaster or other emergency. The majority of these brave men and women are volunteers and give up their time out of a sense of obligation to their communities. We owe them a debt of gratitude for their service. This technical correction clarifies that property tax rebates and other benefits that are made to volunteer emergency first responders and are excluded from gross income are not subject to Social Security tax or unemployment tax. This was the intent of the original legislation and I appreciate the opportunity to clarify this through HR. 6081, the Heroes Earnings Assistance and Tax Relief Act.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Madam Speaker, I rise to voice my strong support for H.R. 5554, the ``Justin Bailey Veterans Substance Use Disorders Prevention and Treatment Act of 2008.'' This legislation grants to our veterans access to a comprehensive continuum of substance abuse treatment services provided by Department of Veterans Affairs medical centers. The bill also requires the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to inform veterans of Operations Enduring Freedom or Iraqi Freedom about the availability of such care. Madam Speaker, we have sent thousands of otherwise healthy young men and women to Iraq and Afghanistan to fight. Many of those who were lucky enough to escape unscathed physically, are suffering agonizing symptoms emotionally. Depression, anxiety, and symptoms of post- traumatic stress disorder plague countless veterans returning from the battlefield. Without proper treatment, our veterans turn to self- medicating these psychiatric symptoms by abusing alcohol and other substances. It would be negligent, if not hypocritical, of us not to offer comprehensive substance abuse treatment for all returning veterans. This legislation ensures that a ``continuum'' of services, including screening for substance use disorders, detoxification and stabilization services, intensive outpatient services, relapse prevention services, counseling services, and other necessary services, are offered to our returning veterans. Of course, these services require funding. H.R. 5554 ensures that funding for a full continuum of substance abuse treatment is made available to veterans seeking such care. Although H.R. 5554 authorizes a pilot program for Internet-based substance use disorder treatment, let us not sell our veterans short by cutting corners on care. More funding is needed to ensure that enough psychiatrists, nurses, psychologists, and social workers are available to care for our returning veterans. As well, more research funding is required in order to better understand and treat disorders of substance abuse and dependence which plague our veterans. Madam Speaker, I find it appalling that we ask our young men and women in the Armed Forces to sacrifice life and limb overseas in Iraq and Afghanistan, yet when those very soldiers return home, we deny them vital mental health and substance abuse treatment services. Let us begin to right this wrong by supporting H.R. 5554, and improve substance abuse treatment services available to our veterans.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Madam Speaker, I rise today to bring to the attention of the Congress and to the American people the plight the western hemisphere's second oldest republic, Haiti. The Haitian people are being negatively affected by market forces out of their control that have driven food prices up drastically. Haiti, where about 4 out of 5 people live at or below poverty, is an island nation that consists of approximately 8.7 million people. To put this in perspective, imagine the city of New York; now imagine that same city with 80 percent of its citizens in poverty. The American people and Congress have already assisted Haiti with the HOPE and HOPE II (Haitian Hemispheric Opportunity through Partnership Encouragement) Acts. HOPE was the tip of the iceberg. It provided jobs to allow Haitians to overcome poverty. HOPE II will create even more gainful employment and more sustainable jobs for Haitians and create a self-sustaining infrastructure. These acts will provide jobs needed to help more Haitian citizens emerge from poverty and gain employment which will lead to a more prosperous Haiti. However, there is much more work to be done Madam Speaker. Right now the World Food Program is in need of $755 million to meet immediate demands and USAID also needs an additional $240 million. Increases in these programs will ensure that school food programs in the developing world are not eliminated due to current food price inflation. The food price escalation is also affecting the region as a whole. Due to escalating market prices, in rural El Salvador, with the same amount of money today, people can purchase 50 percent less food than they did 18 months ago. This means that, in principle, their nutritional intake, on an already poor diet, is being cut by half. In Nicaragua the price of tortilla went up 54 percent between January 2007 and January 2008. We cannot let our neighbors suffer due to circumstances out of their control. We have taken small steps but now the government of the United States must be an active agent in the development of the third world. We must follow the lead of our philanthropic and non-profit sectors. Too often those in government see aid to developing nations as a waste of money, throwing taxpayers dollars down a well. India is a great example of the benefits of foreign aid. In the 1960s American dollars funded fertilizer subsidies and high yield seed varieties led India out of poverty and famine into self-subsistence. India is now entering the developing world, so much so that their demand for processed foods is now decreasing the supply of food aid available to countries such as Haiti. This can happen in Haiti if the United States focuses on delivering basic goods to the hemisphere's poorest people. By increasing vaccines, textbooks, water pipes, and medical care we will not make countries dependent, we will be giving Haitians the basic inputs they need to improve their lives. We must invest in high-yield, proven, and scalable strategies to empower the Haitian people and those suffering throughout the world.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to oppose this most recent war funding appropriation brought before the Congress. While I cannot in good conscience provide the President with any additional funds that would continue this disastrous war well into the next president's administration, I do support Amendment #2, which attaches conditions to the war funding and would hold the President accountable. I also support Amendment #3, which would honor our veterans and provide desperately needed humanitarian funds to people both here and abroad. As I have said before, the American people sent a clear message to the Congress on November 7, 2006: We must end the war in Iraq. In the ensuing months, the calls for withdrawal have only increased. A recent ABC News/Washington Post poll shows that 57 percent of Americans believe that the United States should withdraw its military forces from Iraq to avoid further U.S. military casualties, even if it means that civil order is not restored there. Unfortunately, we stand here today, no closer to responding to the demands of the American people. This development frustrates me to no end and I know it frustrates the American people. Yet, it also strengthens my resolve to press harder for the outcome this country needs. The ultimate, unequivocal authority of the Congress is the power of the purse. We must use it. The only way to truly support our troops is take them out of harm's way. The American people understand that marching ahead blindly into oblivion is anything but supporting our troops. The longer this war drags on, the more its effects are felt in our communities and homes. Last year, the citizens of Detroit spent $231.3 million to fund the war in Iraq. With those same funds, the Congress could have provided healthcare for 172,984 children. Even when faced with historically high food prices, a crumbling infrastructure, and the subprime mortgage crisis, the Administration continues to demand that the American people continue to pour billions of their taxpayer dollars into an unwinnable war. The priorities of this Administration could not be any more misplaced. Of course, appeals to reason fall on deaf ears with this President. In an interview this week, President Bush was asked about the worst that could happen if the U.S. were to pull out of Iraq next year. The President responded: ``The doomsday scenario of course is that extremists throughout the Middle East would be emboldened, which would eventually lead to another attack on the United States.'' The President's overreliance on the tired rhetoric of fear, unchanged after five years of bloody occupation, exemplifies how intellectually bankrupt the justifications for his war policies have become. Mr. Speaker, this lame duck President cannot scare the Congress and the American people into continuing his war. We know that it is the presence of our troops on the street corners of Basra and Fallujah that lures extremists to Iraq. We know that it is the unintentional desecration of holy sites, like the Golden Dome of Samarra, that inspires outrage in the hearts of young men throughout the Middle East and makes America more susceptible to another terrorist attack. There is only one sensible way forward in Iraq. If the Congress acts this day to cut off funding for the war or to impose a timetable for withdrawal, we can begin the immediate phased drawdown of American troops and conclude it within 18 months. Such redeployment does not constitute ``cutting and running.'' Instead, it offers the only hope for a diplomatic solution to the civil war raging inside of Iraq. With 160,000 troops in Iraq, Washington lacks the leverage on its own to push the Maliki government to take meaningful steps to accommodate Sunni concerns and thereby empower Sunni moderates. Similarly, the U.S. presence in Iraq allows the rest of the world to avoid responsibility for stability in and around Iraq, even as everyone realizes the stakes involved. Only a plan to draw down U.S. forces, coupled with a robust diplomatic surge, will prompt Middle Eastern states, European governments, and the United Nations to be more constructive and proactive in working to salvage stability in the Persian Gulf. I came to Washington 43 years ago on a platform of Jobs, Justice, and Peace. Because it is my firm belief that we will never achieve peace in Iraq as long as this war continues, I cannot support a supplemental funding bill that allows a politically unaccountable President to continue an unwinnable conflict. Enough is enough.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise to voice my strong support for H. Res. 1134, supporting the goals and ideals of Mental Health Month. This legislation applauds the hard work of practitioners and national and community organizations in promoting mental health awareness, and supports improving the overall quality of life for those with mental illness. H. Res. 1134 also supports the findings of the President's Commission on Mental Health that the nation's failure to prioritize mental health is a national tragedy. Mr. Speaker, mental health is no less important than physical health. In fact, as science is proving, mental health and physical health are intertwined in complex ways that are only beginning to be understood. The relationship between depression and heart disease is just one example of the inherent symbiosis of psychiatric and somatic illnesses. Just as the heart is the organ upon which heart disease preys, the brain is the organ plagued by diseases of the mind. Likewise, death as a result of suicide is no less tragic than death secondary to a heart attack. Those suffering from severe psychiatric illness should not be held to a lesser standard of care than those suffering from physical illnesses. Ensuring access to appropriate services is central to improving the quality of life for those with mental illness. The issue of mental health insurance parity, in my opinion, is a civil rights issue. Inequity of coverage with regard to mental health and substance abuse treatment benefits is tantamount to discrimination against the mentally ill, and it reinforces the strategy of insurance companies to deny care rather than provide care. The mental health community scored a victory for its patients earlier this year when the House voted to pass H.R. 1424, the ``Paul Wellstone Mental Health and Addiction Equity Act of 2007.'' It has taken courage on the part of Congressmen like my colleague Patrick Kennedy to stand up to special interests and ``do the right thing'' when it comes to ending discrimination against the mentally ill and standing up to health insurance companies. There is still work to be done before a mental health insurance parity bill is signed into law. Hopefully, the bill will soon be reconciled into a form which will benefit psychiatric patients and end discrimination against the mentally ill. Mr. Speaker, let us applaud the tireless work and unending determination of those fighting to improve the lives of the mentally ill. Let us also be reminded that there is much work to be done before the stigma associated with mental illness is ended, and the lives of those suffering from mental illness are valued as much as those suffering from other medical illnesses.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, section 12017 of H.R. 2419, the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008, amends the Federal Crop Insurance Act. Among other things, the changes provide that, during periodic renegotiations with USDA's Federal Crop Insurance Corporation regarding the standard reinsurance agreement for the FCIC's crop insurance program, approved insurance companies may consult with each other, and collectively with the FCIC. As chairman of the Judiciary Committee, I would like to provide a bit of background, and to sound a cautionary note. For a number of years, insurance companies participating in providing reinsurance to the FCIC--that is, providing back-up insurance to the insurance being provided by the FCIC--did indeed consult with each other, and collectively with the FCIC. This occurred most recently in the 1997 renegotiation. In fact, the insurers apparently used a common agent to negotiate the terms of the agreement on their behalf. I understand that that experience may have led USDA's Risk Management Administration, which runs the FCIC, to begin reconsidering whether joint discussions were a good idea from a competitive standpoint, in achieving the best result with the taxpayers' dollars that the FCIC was spending in the reinsurance marketplace. In any event, the RMA evidently discussed the matter at some length with the Justice Department's Antitrust Division, and came away with the clear conviction that joint negotiations are anticompetitive--as experience under the antitrust laws confirms time and time again. As a result of its new understanding, the RMA restricted the kinds of collaborative consultations it would permit during the 2004 renegotiation. Some may believe that the RMA either went further than it needed to in 2004, or that it may go further in future renegotiations, prohibiting consultation even on aspects of the renegotiation that not only are not competitively sensitive, but where the antitrust laws recognize that cost-saving efficiencies can be gained without harm to competition. To the extent that that has been a concern, the new language being added to the Federal Crop Insurance Act may help clear the way for that kind of competitively benign consultation. I wish to emphasize, however, that the new language does not create an antitrust exemption, or alter the antitrust laws in any way. The Supreme Court has aptly referred to the antitrust laws as the Magna Carta of our free enterprise system, and has said repeatedly that exceptions to those laws are not to be lightly inferred. Therefore, any insurer wishing to engage in consultations pursuant to this new authorization should be careful to do so in compliance with the antitrust laws. Some observers have raised the question whether some of the conduct that could be at issue here might be covered under the McCarran- Ferguson Act's antitrust exemption for the business of insurance, to the extent that such business is regulated by State law. It is far from clear, however, that reinsurance being provided to the USDA's FCIC for its federally administered crop insurance program is in fact regulated by State law. And even if it were, the McCarran-Ferguson Act does not apply to the antitrust prohibitions against boycott, which can all-too- easily be implicated when competing firms start coordinating their negotiation-related activities and strategies. These are serious violations of the law, and those who would seek to avoid the pitfalls here would be well advised to seek appropriate antitrust guidance.