Rosa DeLauro

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, Head Start works. It has for 38 years. Providing comprehensive child development, literacy, family services to more than 18 million preschoolers. One million children and their families are served every single year, unquestionably, the most effective early childhood development program ever developed. Why do we want to change it? What is the reason for it? The bill that underlies this amendment tonight, it would shift the responsibility of the program to the States. In essence, what we would see, we are going to pave the way for what the founder of Head Start, Dr. Edward Zigler, has called 50 Head Start programs run by 50 governors. It is going to these States untested and unproven. They lack the high standards, the accountability that is already found in the Head Start program. And the sole problem with this program is that only three out of five eligible preschoolers and only 3 percent of eligible infants and toddlers can participate in Head Start because of the funding constraints. Farming the program out to cash-strapped States will not improve matters. Do not deny our children opportunity. Do not deny them success. Support the Miller amendment and let us do something right for the youngsters of this country.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 2210, which in essence really will dismantle the Head Start Program, which has proven its effectiveness, and has provided youngsters an opportunity to realize their potential to grow, to become productive members of our society. It would be contrary to the role that we have in this institution to turn our backs on a program that has been so effective in making a difference in the lives of children and families. We should not do it.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, in my 13 years in Congress, no issue has made such a deep impression on my constituents than the rising price of prescription drugs. This is an issue for seniors, but high health care prices are eroding the living standards of middle-class families across this country. We all have a stake in driving drug prices down. Last week, the Congress of the United States abrogated its responsibility to address the problem of soaring drug prices. It did worse than nothing, barring the government from negotiating lower prices for seniors. We can strike a blow for lower prices with a simple step, giving ordinary Americans the choice they are taking on their own out of desperation. It should be legal to reimport drugs from some countries. This alone would save Americans $600 billion in the next decade, savings passed directly on to the consumer. We know that this is a safe option. In 2001, U.S. drug companies reimported $14.7 billion worth of brand name medications from their overseas plants. This legislation guarantees safety. It not only requires that drugs reimported from other countries are FDA-approved, but that the facilities they are manufactured in are rigorously inspected and approved by the FDA as well. Add to that the requirement that all prescription drugs use counterfeit-resistant packaging, which means every drug purchased here in the United States, reimported or otherwise, will be safer than the drugs that are available today. The FDA's opposition is one more instance of a regulatory agency becoming captive of the industries they are supposed to regulate. There is no safety issue here. This bill would only allow the importation of FDA-approved drugs manufactured in FDA-approved facilities from 26 designated countries, clearly, a superior system to what we have today in the area of food and drug safety both. The issue is not safety, I say to my colleagues. The issue is price. It is time that this Congress stop acting as a wholly owned subsidiary of the pharmaceutical companies and step up to its responsibility to help the consumers of this Nation. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support for the McGovern-Skelton amendment to transfer $75 million in military aid for Colombia to programs that combat HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria, and other infectious diseases. I have serious concerns with our policy in Colombia and, in particular, with the ongoing human rights abuses. The number of people who have disappeared or been killed has risen from 14 to 20 per day in the last 2 years. Those newly displaced by political violence increased by 412,000 in 2002, and Colombia has the second largest population of internally displaced people in the world, trailing only the Sudan. More than 1,000 people are forced to leave their homes every single day. What are we doing to hold the Colombian government accountable for these abuses? There is no evidence to show that Colombia's military officers involved in human rights abuses are being suspended for their actions. According to Human Rights Watch, they continue to remain on active duty and in command of their troops, and Colombian Army collaboration with paramilitaries raises serious questions about whether our involvement is making any difference at all and perhaps even enabling these abuses to continue. It deeply worries me to see our expanding involvement in Colombia. At a time when we have forces in Iraq and Afghanistan, can we really afford to become enmeshed in another large scale conflict? Of course not. Yet just recently, Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz said that the United States was considering transferring some military capabilities from Iraq to Colombia. We are moving in a dangerous direction. Congress changed the law last year to allow U.S. counterdrug aid to support a ``unified campaign'' against drugs and against Colombia's guerrilla and paramilitary groups. Our mission has actually expanded. The number of U.S. military personnel on the ground in Colombia has tripled in the last 3 years, and the Colombia Government announced only a week ago that within four months it will unveil ``Plan Colombia Phase II,'' counterinsurgency aid that will help wipe out more than 35,000 insurgents. Mr. Chairman, this is precisely the same mission the Reagan administration adopted in El Salvador 20 years ago. It did not work then; it will not work now. And Colombia's over fifty times larger than El Salvador. We cannot fight Colombia's war and we should not. Instead of funding a troubling conflict that we ought not to be so heavily involved with, we should focus those resources on fighting wars that we can win with the proper resources. The United Nations Joint Program on HIV/AIDS estimates that last year 2.4 million Africans died of AIDS-related illnesses, while nearly 30 million continue to live with the disease. Heavily affected countries in sub-Saharan Africa are struggling to provide care and treatment for over a third of their populations. In the Caribbean, an estimated 440,000 people are infected with HIV/AIDS, a number that is continuing to climb. By focusing our resources in these areas, we can make a real difference in the fight to combat these diseases. That is where we should be redoubling our efforts, not in the murky forests of Colombia. This is a modest amendment in financial terms but not in what it could achieve. I ask my colleagues to please support the McGovern-Skelton amendment.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this bill. This bill appropriates $17.1 billion for foreign aid and export assistance, $1.8 billion less than the President requested and $6.5 billion less than what we provided last year. And while I am disappointed that we fall short of the $3 billion that the President promised for combating global AIDS and HIV, I commend the committee for taking the first steps by appropriating $2 billion in fiscal year 2004. Last year 2.4 million Africans died of AIDS-related illnesses while nearly 30 million continue to live with the disease, irrevocably changing the lives of millions of women and children. I have spent a lot of time in South Africa. I have seen how this devastated this land, and we cannot only take the opportunity to go on trips and take photographs and believe that we are addressing the problems of Africa. Just as we have an opportunity with this bill to make a difference in those lives, to change those lives for the better and to offer some small measure of hope, we have an opportunity to make a real difference in the lives of millions of women and children in this country by extending the child tax credit to them. Six and one half million families, 12 million children were left out of the child tax credit expansion, almost 4 million single mothers, 56 percent of all single parents. Women are experiencing the very worst of the economic slowdown. Average annual earnings of low-income single mothers in decline for 3 years running, the unemployment rate of low-income single mothers rising twice as fast as the overall rate. Single and married women both are less likely than men to receive unemployment benefits to help them through their period of joblessness, and we are nearing a crisis level for these women and their families. Tax relief is supposed to be about lifting these families up and out of such circumstances. If we extend the child tax credit to these families, they will on average receive $276 in this year alone. To some it might not seem like a lot of money, but $276 can mean all the difference. Health insurance for the 9 million children in this country without health care, clothes on their backs, school supplies. Two hundred thousand military families, 900,000 Head Start families, 42,000 families of those teaching in Head Start were left out. Just as playing a role in the battle against global HIV/AIDS, it is a matter of values, morals, something that we ought to be committed to doing. So is assisting women and the 12 million children in this country who need our help the most. So we want to call on the President to use his moral leadership to urge this House to accept the other body's bill and bring justice to these families. They deserve it. Let us give them that. Mr. Chairman, as my colleagues know, we went to conference on the child tax legislation on June 12. It is now July 23. The conference committee has never met. In light of the fact that 6.5 million American families, including our military families fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, will not receive their child tax credits when they are mailed out on Friday, I move that the Committee do now rise.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I would say to the gentleman that that is right, it did not pass, because some people who did vote for it were persuaded by one reason or another, and I will not comment on the nature of the persuasion, but they were persuaded to vote otherwise. Their first instinct was to vote what they believed was the right thing to do. Subsequently it has become a different issue, especially when the majority leader said, ``Ain't nothing gonna happen.''

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time, and I rise in strong support of this motion. I want to thank my colleague from New York, as well as my other colleagues who are here this evening. I think the test of this issue is the staying power on the issue, and I have been here most nights for the last week and a half. I might say that the preponderance of the discourse and the preponderance of the effort to address the issue of the child tax credit has come from the Democratic side of the aisle. We are committed to making sure that those hard-working, albeit low-wage income people, people who make between $15,500 a year and $26,625 a year, that these folks in fact do get the benefit of a child tax credit, a benefit that was in the tax bill and yanked out in the middle of the night in order to provide a dividend tax cut to 184,000 millionaires, providing them with a $93,000 tax break. If my colleague from Missouri was so enthusiastic about making sure this was $1,000, we could have done it in the first go-round of this effort. But that $350 billion piece had to be held inviolate because the Senate would not accept anything else, so these vulnerable people were yanked out in the middle of the night. And, in fact, it was not much, 1 percent. One percent is what we were talking about, $3.5 billion to people who were making $93,000 a year in a tax cut. My colleagues could have done it then but decided not to. So what did you do? You came up with this construct for $82 billion because you knew the Senate was not going to accept it, and it was the majority leader of this House who said, ``Ain't nothing gonna get done on this issue.'' And it was the Wall Street Journal who had an editorial that commended the majority leader and said, Amen, you did the right thing by making sure that this issue would go nowhere, because the Senate would not accept $82 billion. The other body voted 94 to 2 to address this issue, to redress it, and to say we made a mistake, let us address it and make sure that when those checks go out on this Friday that this group of people, these 6.5 million families, these 12 million children get the benefit of a child tax credit. Because as much as the other side of the aisle would like to say that they do not pay taxes, they pay property taxes, they pay sales taxes, they pay payroll taxes, and they work and live paycheck to paycheck. They know what it is to pay taxes. We should walk in their shoes. Mr. Speaker, we ought to be able to say that they are entitled to a child tax credit the way 25 million other people are, and 184,000 millionaires who are going to get $93,000 a year. In that group of people excluded, I might add, are 200,000 military families, 42,000 families where there are Head Start teachers, 900,000 kids who are in Head Start programs. These are the people who are being excluded from the child tax credit. It is wrong. We ought to do the right thing and provide this kind of assistance to people. I would just say that in fact we voted on this motion to instruct on June 12, 205 to 201 on a bipartisan vote. We voted to do this, to take up what the other body had done. It was the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means the other night who said it was not a binding resolution; we do not have to worry about it. It does not make any difference what the majority did in this body. All we are asking for is that we have a chance to take up what the other body did. We are talking about not a lot of money for people, on average $276. That means potentially health insurance, it means school supplies, it means clothes for kids going back to school. These people deserve it. This is an issue of values. It is an issue of morals. And I say to the President of the United States, who wanted to get this done, who said let us take up what the Senate did, that since his leadership in the House and the Senate have abdicated their leadership responsibilities, take on this issue, use your moral authority and do what is right by hard-working American families. Bring justice to these families. They deserve it. Let us give them that. Mr. Speaker, we will continue on this floor every night on this issue.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this motion, and I wanted just to say thank you to my colleague from Maryland for his outstanding leadership on the issue and for offering this motion today. Our colleague on the other side of the aisle asked a question: We passed our bill over here, why would we want to deal with the Senate bill? I think that therein lies the issue. It is probably very cynical what the thoughts on the other side of the aisle have expressed about the child tax credit; and keeping that in mind, the child tax credit to working families who work hard, pay their taxes and they are not going to get the benefit of this tax break where the millionaires, about 184,000 of them, are going to get $93,000 in a tax break come next week. The cynicism lies here, that, in fact, the majority leader on the Republican side of the aisle said about this child tax credit, that ain't nothing going to happen. As a matter of fact, the editorial page in the Wall Street Journal just a couple of weeks ago commended the majority leader for his action which in fact would be that the bill that passed here in the House would never be accepted by the United States Senate, the other body, and, therefore, nothing would happen, it would die. So what they did here was a political ploy to do nothing. That is what is so sad about this. Further, the majority leader here, the majority leader in the Senate said, We don't have time to do this. We don't have time to do this and it's not that important. And then the other night when we debated this motion on the floor and it was because this motion, as my colleague from Maryland pointed out passed, this very motion passed on June 12 with a bipartisan majority, 205-201, that meant that Democrats and Republicans together voted to do what the other body had done. And the chairman of the House Committee on Ways and Means said, Well, that's not a binding resolution. We don't have to do anything about that, so that the will of the majority is thwarted once again. That is what is so sad about this. Let me just say, it has been 7 weeks. We have discussed how the extension of the child tax credit was stolen from 6.5 million families, 12 million children, a million of whom are in military and veterans families. We have discussed how these low-wage-earning families pay more in taxes than Enron, a multibillion dollar company who paid no taxes in the last 4 or 5 years. It is incredible. But this injustice has affected women disproportionately. Two-thirds of the parents who will not be receiving this tax cut are women. Fifty- six percent of single parents will receive no tax assistance from the tax cut passed in May, including almost 4 million single mothers representing 54 percent of all families that have been left out. Stay- at-home moms fare little better. More than a million married couples with a stay-at-home mom, 55 percent of all married-couple families, were left out. They have been left out by this Republican majority. On average, the families of these women would have received $276 in this year alone had the tax credit been extended to them. As I said the other night when we were discussing how families in the military and Head Start and teaching in Head Start were left out of this tax cut, that might not sound like a lot of money to some, particularly those millionaires who are going to get $93,000, what do they care about $276, but it can be a difference between a child going to school with or without school supplies, it helps the families of the 9 million children in this country without health insurance pay for the health care services that they need. Assisting these families, these 12 million children, is a moral issue. It is a matter of values. The President said a month ago that he wants this House to act on this, to accept the other body's bill, bring justice to 6.5 million families. Let us give them that. I would just say, I call on the President, because his leadership here in the House has seen it and left the field. They do not want to do anything about this. So I call on the President, use your moral authority, do something about those 6.5 million working families. Yes, they pay taxes, sales taxes, property taxes, payroll taxes. They deserve to get that child tax credit as well as those millions of others who next Friday are going to get their check. And why is it because they make $10,500 a year up to $26,000 a year that they are not deserving? It is wrong. We should pass this motion to instruct.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas for yielding me this time, and I thank him for his leadership and my other colleagues who are here this evening. I think it speaks loud and clear of the kind of commitment that our side of the aisle has to the issue of the child tax credit, and I think it is important to put into perspective the facts. These families were and are eligible for this child tax credit. Those families who make between $10,500 and $26,625 a year, tax-paying people, hard-working people, they were in this package. In the middle of the night, our colleagues on the other side of the aisle decided that in their $350 billion tax package that they put together, they could not find room for these folks. They could not find room for the 200,000 military families, or the 900,000 families of Head Start kids who are in this category, and they yanked them out. All we are saying is put them back. I think it is also important to note that on June 12 this body voted, we voted for something exactly like this motion to instruct, 205 to 201. It was a bipartisan vote and we succeeded. Yet I think one more time it is important to note for the record and for their constituents to know that there are a number of our Republican colleagues who, in fact, now have decided that they are going to change their vote. They do not think that these families are worthy any longer of a child tax credit, and, in fact, what we ought to do is to make sure that those 184,000 millionaires get their $88,000 a year in a tax break. But we cannot find anything to do it. So those folks who voted one way on June 12 and now have switched their votes in the last few days, I think it is important to let them know who they are: The gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Gillmor), the gentleman from New Hampshire (Mr. Bass), the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter), the gentleman from New York (Mr. Boehlert), the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Burr), the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Johnson), the gentleman from New York (Mr. McHugh), the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Smith), and just tonight the gentlewoman from West Virginia (Mrs. Capito) turned her back on these 6.5 million families and these 12 million children. We will continue to let the folks of this country know who was with them and who is not with them.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Inslee amendment. Passage of this amendment is critical because our pristine wilderness, which I have been to, I have been to the public lands, particularly our national forests, face an imminent threat. In June, the Bush administration announced a revision to the National Roadless Area Conservation Rule to exclude those crown jewels of the national forest system, the Tongass and the Chugach, where I have been, which constitutes a quarter of the lands covered in this roadless rule. In addition, the administration gives State Governors the authority to opt out of the rule. This decision was made despite over 2.2 million comments and 600 public meetings and hearings on the roadless policy, 95 percent in support of protecting the Tongass and the Chugach. Weakening landmark environmental protection was the most blatant example to date of this administration choosing special interests over the health and the safety of citizens and our environment. It is not enough that the administration refuses to recognize the dangers of global warming; not enough that they want to weaken the Clean Air Act. Now they want to decimate the world's last remaining old-growth temperate rain forest under the guise of preventing forest fires. When it comes to the stewardship of our precious forestlands, it is abundantly clear that the administration's priorities have nothing to do with taxpayers or the environment. It is apparent that they have more concern for the timber industry than for the wilderness lands, the wildlands, and our national forests. And in this language, there is opportunity for fire apparatus to get through. My colleague who preceded me was wrong. I am the author of the Alaska Rain Forest Conservation Act, with 115 bipartisan cosponsors. It would protect the Tongass and the Chugach by codifying previous policy from the administration. I believe it is time to permanently safeguard these areas of unparalleled ecological value. We cannot let these lands be exploited. They are something that we should hold dear for years to come. They are our national legacy. Support the Inslee amendment.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Slaughter- Dicks amendment to provide increased funding for the National Endowment for the Arts and the National Endowment for the Humanities. These agencies are charged with bringing the history, the beauty, the creative genius of our culture to the lives of all Americans--young and old, rich and poor, urban and rural. These agencies make sure that the vast wealth that is our national heritage is accessible to all Americans, and that is a goal worthy of our support. Many years ago, I chaired the Greater New Haven Arts Council in Connecticut. I know first hand that the arts enrich lives, and they also contribute to the economic growth of the community. It is important to note that our small federal contribution to these agencies is only a tiny percentage of the overall public-private investment that flows into the non-profit arts every year. But these are the most important dollars--the ones that leverage billions of dollars in state, local and private funding and fuel what is a vital non-profit arts industry. This industry creates jobs, increases travel and tourism, and generates billions of dollars in economic activity every year. That means nearly 5 million jobs nationally and more than $24 billion in revenues, more than half of which goes to states and localities. In my state, more than 30,000 Connecticut jobs are connected to the non-profit arts. In addition, the NEA is an important partner in bringing innovative arts education programs to more American students. Arts education is critical in planting seeds of arts appreciation and in cultivating the talent that may have yet to be discovered in these young minds. The Endowment, in partnership with state arts agencies, provides millions of dollars in annual support for kindergarten through 12th grade arts education projects in communities across the country. It also funds professional development programs for arts specialists, classroom teachers, and artists. Study after study has shown that the arts have real value in restoring civility to our society and providing our children and communities real alternatives to substance abuse and delinquency. A study published in Business Week 3 years ago cited strong business support for government funding for the arts using empirical data that demonstrated students who participate in arts programs gain self- esteem, learn to cooperate as a team--they show an improved ability to finish tasks, and a more positive attitude toward school. Business understands the value of these programs. We know that the arts build our economy, enrich our culture, and feed the minds of adults and children alike. The NEA and NEH need this increase to fulfill their missions, and it is time we gave them this support. Vote for this amendment. Preserve our heritage and make it accessible to all.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 5 minutes. Mr. Speaker, it has now been 47 days, nearly 7 weeks, since President Bush signed into law tax legislation that denied the extension of a $1,000 child tax credit to the families of 12 million children. In 10 days' time, 25 million other families will begin receiving their checks in the mail but not the 6.5 million families who need it the most, hard-working, tax-paying families who earn between $10,500 and $26,625 a year. Who will not receive this child tax credit? The families of nearly every child enrolled in Head Start, 912,000; families of incomes at or below the poverty line and are struggling to stay afloat in this economy. Forty-two thousand Head Start teachers will not qualify for this tax credit either. Why? Because they earn less than $26,625 per year. Even though these dedicated, committed, educated give their all every day, they pass up other more lucrative professional opportunities so that they can help our children get a good start in life, their own families are left out of this tax credit. One million children of military and veterans families, men and women who have served this country with honor, will also go without in this tax cut. One only need to open the paper to realize that many of these men and women are still fighting a war, risking their lives and dying in Iraq and Afghanistan. Yet this bill does nothing for them or their families. On average, these families would have had an additional $151 per child had the tax credit been extended to them. It may not sound like a lot of money to some, but it is the difference between a child going to school with or without new school supplies. It helps families of the 9 million children in this country without health insurance pay for the healthcare services that they need. What is particularly egregious is that while decent, hard-working Americans are being denied their rightfully earned tax relief, companies are still permitted to go overseas to avoid paying U.S. taxes, taking American jobs with them, and I might add that that is about $70 billion out of the revenue stream of this country because these folks have gone offshore not to pay their taxes. It is not right that every last one of these families pays more taxes than Enron did for the 4 out of the last 5 years. Think about that for a moment. Every minimum-wage-earning family in America paid more taxes than a multibillion corporation. What kind of a message does this send to our families and our children? What kind of values does this represent? All of these families work hard every day to put food on the table, clothes on their children's back; and, contrary to the claims by some on the other side of the aisle, they do pay taxes, payroll taxes, sales taxes, excise taxes, property taxes. They have done nothing to deserve being held hostage by this majority. This Republican majority would only extend the credit to these families on the condition that wealthy taxpayers get yet more tax cuts. Less than 2 weeks after passing a bill that gave every millionaire a $93,000 tax cut, that made sure that every corporation had the right to avoid paying taxes by relocating overseas and taking American jobs with it, this majority could not put partisan politics aside. They could not simply restore to these families the tax relief that they rightfully earned. This body passed a motion identical to the one that we are debating tonight that instructed conferees to provide those 6.5 million families with the same tax credit entitled to other families. It would have extended that tax credit to families of military personnel serving in Iraq and Afghanistan; and it would have paid for that tax cut so as not to add further to our ballooning deficit which, by the way, today the White House announced a record $455 billion. I might also add that Chairman Greenspan today in the Committee on Financial Services said, yes, indeed, we should do something about the child tax credit because it would, in fact, help to stimulate the economy. The motion passed in this body, I might add, on June 12 on a bipartisan basis by a vote of 205 to 201. More than a month has passed, and yet the conferees have not taken action to resolve this issue, and I will tell the Members why. The majority leader said that helping those families was not important to them. The majority whip said he did not know if the House would act after the body's bill. Then, after the House was dragged kicking and screaming to address this issue, the Committee on Ways and Means chairman and the majority leader said that Medicare reform was on the table until the July 4 recess and that, in any case, they did not know when they could even begin to conference on the child tax credit, in essence, stonewalling this evident. So, quite frankly, what we want to do is to call on the President of the United States. We asked the President to please use his moral authority to move this conference, to break the logjam, to provide this child tax credit to these 12 million children; and today we offered the same motion that was offered in July because enough is enough. The time for action is now. Six and a half million families have waited long enough. The other body has proven long ago that it can be done simply without increasing the deficit. The time has come for conferees to report out a bill that extends the full $1,000 tax credit to these families. Let us do right by every family who works hard day in and day out to give their children the opportunities for success. Parents define themselves in their children. They want to see their children succeed. That is what this tax credit is all about. We urge again the President to break this logjam, and I urge my colleagues to support this motion. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. This body did pass a motion identical to the one that we are debating tonight. It instructed the conferees to provide the 6.5 million families with the same tax credit given to other families, extending that tax credit to families of military personnel serving in Iraq. It was an overwhelming vote, a bipartisan vote, 205 to 201. But I guess what the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means said is right, the Republican majority does not care about the will of the majority of this House and what we are talking about. The House GOP bill contains bad news for the children of 200,000 men and women who currently serve in Iraq and other combat zones. What we would do with this motion to instruct tonight is to help these military families, while what they had passed originally does not help those families. Want to talk about playing politics? They passed what they did here because they knew there were no votes in the Senate and they would try to kill this piece of legislation, that they would not want to do something for those 12 million children who are not going to get the benefit of the child tax credit. That is playing politics. When they say that in fact they will do nothing, that we do not have time for a conference, well, we could call that conference, as has been said here earlier tonight, in a heartbeat. We could vote on it tomorrow. We could do what the President of the United States has said we ought to do. We could do what the Senate has done and what he believes is the right thing to do, a good thing to do. And he wants to sign it. I ask the President of the United States to please call on his leadership in the House of Representatives and in the United States Senate to come together in a conference. He should use his moral authority, use the bully pulpit to do something for 12 million children whose families work hard every single day to allow for their success.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from Ohio (Mrs. Jones), a member of the Committee on Ways and Means. (Mrs. JONES of Ohio asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer).

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Emanuel).

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, how much time remains?

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Rodriguez), the chairman of the Hispanic Caucus.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Solis).