John Dingell

Mr. DINGELL

Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 5613) to extend certain moratoria and impose additional moratoria on certain Medicaid regulations through April 1, 2009, as amended.

Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.

Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman).

Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from California (Ms. Harman).

Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. The distinguished gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Tim Murphy) worked very hard on this important legislation and is a cosponsor of it. Regrettably, he is detained, unfortunately, on an aircraft and is not able to be with us today to speak in favor of this bill on which he worked so hard. And I want the Record to show that the House owes the distinguished gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Tim Murphy) a real debt of thanks for his hard work here and for his remarkable leadership. Mr. Speaker, I now yield 2 minutes to my dear friend the gentleman from New York (Mr. Towns).

Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank again my colleague from Texas. He is always a gentleman. I want to note that last night the Commerce Committee dedicated a picture hung in the committee in honor of our good friend Mr. Barton. It is a fine-looking picture of a distinguished former chairman of the committee, and I would urge my colleagues, if they want to look at a distinguished Member of this body hanging on the wall in the committee and to look at a very fine piece of art, they should come over and see the excellent picture of our good friend Mr. Barton hanging there in the committee.

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

Mr. DINGELL

Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today as a proud cosponsor of H. Con. Res. 322, recognizing the 60th anniversary of the State of Israel. Israel established itself as a sovereign nation on May 14, 1948. Since that time, it has been a close friend and ally to the United States. Throughout the beginning of the 20th Century and in the aftermath of the Nazi Holocaust, millions of Jews from around the world found a home in Israel. Serving as the representative for Michigan's 15th Congressional District, my father, John D. Dingell, Sr., was an outspoken proponent for the establishment of a Jewish homeland and subsequent U.S. recognition of Israel's sovereignty. In my tenure in the House. I proudly followed his lead, encouraging close diplomatic, economic, and strategic ties with our fellow democratic nation. Since its independence, Israel, the ``keystone in the arch of peace'' in the Middle East, as my father put it, has dealt with its share of crisis and wars. The United States stood by as its partner and friend and has served over the years as the chief broker in negotiations between Israel and its neighbors. It is imperative the United States continue in these efforts and continue to foster a close friendship with Israel, as a nation that shares our ideals and values. I urge my colleagues to support this resolution today, and honor the 60th anniversary of Israel's independence.

Mr. DINGELL

Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Chairman, today I rise in support of H. Con. Res. 312, the House Budget Resolution for fiscal year 2009. There are a number of reasons why the President's budget was considered ``dead on arrival'' by Members of this House. I can think of five off of the top of my head--(1) $200 billion in cut funding over 5 years from Medicare and Medicaid; (2) $570 million in cut funding from the Low Income Home Heating Assistance Program; (3) $800 million cut from the Federal-Aid Highways Administration; (4) $85 million from the Manufacturing Extension Partnership and 5) $59 million cut from the Migration and Refugee Assistance. The icing on the cake--the President proposed freezing spending for the Consumer Product Safety Commission and the National Institutes of Health. If this is not a sign that this President is out of tune with the American people, then I would advise this President that he spend more time reading the mail that comes to his office and less time on his ranch in Crawford. With today's budget resolution, the House is holding true to its commitment to the American people and the priorities of our families. Frankly, there is no excuse to continue to neglect the families that need help from their government. Recently the Congressional Budget Office projected that under the current policies of this administration the budget deficit will reach $396 billion in 2008 and $342 billion in 2009. These are the second and fourth largest deficits ever. I would remind my colleagues that when this administration took office we were fortunate to have a projected $5.6 trillion 10-year surplus. For a President who continues to advocate for fiscal responsibility, it appears to me that he has not followed his own advice. Currently, 80 cents of every dollar of new debt since 2001 is owed to foreign investors. This is not a trend that we will let continue. Unlike the Bush administration, the Democratic Budget will be balanced by 2012 and will remain in balance in 2013. Furthermore, we will reduce the deficits over the next 5 years while continuing to follow pay-as- you-go. The Democratic Budget also holds true to its commitment to our veterans by increasing funding for 2009 by $3.6 billion above the current level. At the same time that the administration is demanding more and more from our troops, they have also shamefully proposed $18 billion over 5 years in new fees for veterans and military retirees. Our troops have served in Iraq and Afghanistan honorably and dutifully and they deserve to come home to quality health care and strong education benefits. This budget will allow the VA to treat 5.8 million patients in 2009, 333,275 of which are Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans. On January 20, the Commission on the Guard and Reserve issued a report announcing that the military is not ready for a catastrophic attack on the country. More worrisome is the conclusion that the National Guard is ill-trained and ill-equipped to handle the job. The Democratic budget addresses this issue by focusing on improving military readiness and enhancing the pay and benefits for our troops in order to improve their quality of life. In the last 7 years, this Administration has failed to support our first responder programs, firefighter assistance grants and the Community Oriented Policing Services. The Democratic budget proposes to reverse this trend by placing a high priority on restoring funding. It is imperative that while we are assisting those abroad with their security needs, that we are also supporting our own domestic security needs. I am proud to say that this budget proposal will also follow through on our commitment to expand children's health insurance coverage by providing a $50 billion increase to the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) so that we can provide healthcare to millions more children who otherwise would go uninsured. As we all witnessed last year, the President vetoed legislation expanding SCHIP on two occasions. In my home state of Michigan we have seen the number of uninsured increase to 10.7 percent of Michigan's population. Rather than making healthcare coverage less accessible, Congress must be doing everything it can to ensure that every individual who wants healthcare coverage has the means to get it. The Democratic budget also rejects the proposed $500 billion in cuts to Medicare and Medicaid. There is no doubt that this President does not place the health of our families on the top of his priority list, however, his budget did ensure that his fat cat friends in the insurance industry would still receive the overpayments to private managed care plans. I am pleased to say that the House has proposed $1.9 trillion in mandatory spending programs, including Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. As we have seen college costs and tuitions skyrocket, this President has proposed freezing funding to the Department of Education. The President has again failed to provide funding for No Child Left Behind (NCLB), providing only $24.6 billion for 2009, making the cumulative shortfall for NCLB $85.6 billion. On top of this, the President has proposed cutting Teacher Quality State Grants by $100 million. At a time when we are asking our teachers and schools to meet rigorous standards of NCLB, how can we cut funding from a program designed to assist with professional development? The Democratic budget rejects these cuts by providing $7.1 billion for education and job training above the President's proposal. If we want to turn our economy around we must have workers that are well- trained and equipped to compete in the global market. However, to do so we must address rising college costs. In the last year the average tuition and fees to attend a four-year in-state public college increased 6.6 percent to $6,185, and for a four-year private college families are facing a bill of $23,712. This budget resolution will help parents and students pay for college raising the maximum Pell grant and continuing Perkins Loans and Supplemental Opportunity Grants. The Democratic budget provides funding that is crucial for job creation. As we have seen here at home, our economy is heading towards a recession. From 2001-2006 alone, Michigan lost 235,000 jobs, many of them high-paying manufacturing jobs. With the rising unemployment rate, it is clear that we need to invest in our workers and new industries that would promote job creation here at home. This budget provides critical funding for the America COMPETES Act increasing funding for math and science education and research. The Manufacturing Extension Partnership, which was drastically cut under the President's budget, will receive continued funding which will help to retain 37,000 jobs. It also supports the trade adjustment assistance program, which would provide 130,000 workers with both income support and access to training. In the past year we have witnessed the danger of our neglected infrastructure in the tragedy of the Minneapolis bridge collapse. Until the next surface transportation bill, we must ensure that our roads and bridges are receiving the funding and support needed to be safe and secure for our communities. We must also address the negative effects of the rising costs in fuel. Congestion on our roads has resulted in 26 gallons of wasted fuel per person, costing our constituents $78 billion annually. Over the years we have heard time and again from the President that we must decrease our dependence on foreign oil, yet he has proposed cutting funding for our highway and transit programs, mass transit expansions and Amtrak by $2 billion below authorized levels. The Democrats will not stand for this and instead propose increasing the investment in transportation infrastructure by $41.2 billion for highway programs, $10.3 billion for transit, $1.3 billion for highway safety and $3.9 billion in airport improvement grants. This will save our constituents delays on the roads and in the airports and reduce pollution and fuel needs. Just this week it was announced that Michigan is sixth in the nation for foreclosures; nationally almost 2.8 million homeowners are at risk of losing their homes to foreclosures. Last year the House passed legislation that would create an affordable housing fund, which is currently awaiting Senate consideration. This budget takes a step forward by providing needed funding for the $2.8 billion shortfall for the project-based rental assistance program at the Department of Housing and Urban Development and provides funding for tenant-based rental assistance. The Democratic budget would also help those that are struggling with home heating costs by rejecting the President's cut to the Low-Income Home Energy Assistant Program. Since 2001, home heating costs have gone up by 80 percent. There is no reason our families should be choosing between groceries and heat during the tough winter months. While the President can propose cutting funding, Congress will continue to provide funding for bipartisan programs such as our water and natural resources programs. This budget rejects the proposed $2.9 billion in cuts and instead invests in water infrastructure that will promote and protect our clean and safe drinking water supplies. The Democratic budget provides tax relief for the middle class families that need it most. The Democratic budget will continue the tax cuts for the middle class, while also preventing 20 million families from being subject to the alternative minimum tax. Finally, earlier this year, I wrote a letter to Chairman Spratt requesting that he keep in mind the plight of the millions of Iraqi refugees and internally displaced persons when preparing the budget priorities for this year. I am happy that he was able to include language in the Committee Report accompanying the budget document recognizing this humanitarian crisis. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to say that not only have we received the last budget proposal from this Administration, but it is also the last budget of empty promises. I look forward to passing the Democratic budget resolution proving Congress's commitment to our American families. More importantly, I look forward to working next year with my colleagues and the next Administration to develop a fiscally responsible budget that will finally put the needs of our country first.

Mr. DINGELL

Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, I voted against the original Patriot Act, I voted against the reauthorization of the Patriot Act in 2005, I voted against the President's Protect America Act that was signed into law last August, and I remain prepared to vote against any legislation that does not adequately protect our constitutionally guaranteed civil rights. I have some concerns about this legislation. I don't believe it is perfect. However, I am prepared to vote in support of it today as a sign that we in the House are prepared to negotiate a bipartisan solution that will end the deadlock on this issue. I note that the President has already rejected this overture, and once again insisted that he will veto any bill that does not grant blanket amnesty to the telecommunications companies that are alleged to have assisted the Bush Administration in conducting illegal warrantless wiretap programs. It is unfortunate that the President has taken this position, but I can assure him that there are those of us who will not be moved by his intransigence. I have repeatedly asked the Bush Administration to provide me with a briefing about the warrantless wiretap programs that took place without Congressional authorization so I could determine for myself whether amnesty is justified, and these requests have been repeatedly denied. After seven years of lies and obfuscation, I refuse to take the President at his word that amnesty for telecommunications companies is in the best interest of the American people, and I refuse to vote for amnesty until I am given the opportunity to review the evidence supporting it.

Mr. DINGELL

Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, I would ask that the following letters of support for H.R. 1424, the Paul WeIIstone Mental Health and Addiction Equity Act of 2008, be submitted for the record on the floor debate on this bill. National Association of State Mental Health Program Directors, Alexandria, VA, February 29, 2008. Hon. Patrick J. Kennedy, Hon. Jim Ramstad, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Dear Representatives Kennedy and Ramstad: On behalf of the National Association of State Mental Health Program Directors (NASMHPD). I am writing to offer our strong support for H.R. 1424, the Paul Wellstone Mental Health and Addiction Equity Act of 2007. NASMHPD represents state and territorial mental health commissioners/directors and their agencies that provide public mental health services to over 6 million people annually. Our members manage community-based systems of care as well as inpatient care in state psychiatric hospitals for individuals with serious mental illness. It has been over ten years since the Congress passed the Mental Health Parity Act, which prohibited annual and lifetime dollar limits for mental health care. This small but symbolically important first step left much work to be done; it is now the time to fill remaining gaps by prohibiting treatment limitations and eliminating inequitable financial requirements. An ever-growing body of research, advanced especially during and since the 1990-2000 Decade of the Brain, demonstrates that mental and behavioral disorders are brain disorders and benefit in the same way as other physical disorders from advances in science. Scientific knowledge of mental illness has removed all justification for the wide- spread difference in insurance coverage for mental health benefits. An October 2006 NASMHPD study describes an alarming finding that people with mental illness experience twenty-five years of lost life. This is an unconscionable situation that demands immediate action, for all adults and children with mental illness who now face such terrible odds against living a long and healthy life. The harsh reality of poor health for those with mental illness requires new approaches to integrate mental health and general health. Enacting a strong mental health parity law has the potential to measurably improve the health status of individuals with mental illness who suffer other dire health consequences. The states' mental health directors commend you for your leadership on this critical national priority. We are pleased to add our voice to the growing chorus of support that was so clearly demonstrated during your highly successful ``Equity Campaign Tour'' along with the 273 co-sponsors of H.R. 1424. Sincerely, Robert W. Glover, Executive Director. American Psychiatric Association, Arlington, VA, March 5, 2008. Dear Representative: I am writing on behalf of the American Psychiatric Association (APA), the medical specialty representing more than 38,000 psychiatric physicians nationwide, and particularly on behalf of our patients and their families, to urge you to vote for passage of mental health ``parity'' legislation (H.R. 1424) on March 5, and to oppose any weakening amendments and/or motions to recommit. Mental illnesses have a devastating impact on millions of Americans every day. The good news is that treatment works, but too many insurance plans impose discriminatory cost- sharing and treatment limits on mental health care that are not required for treatment of any other illnesses. For nearly a decade, the Federal Employees Benefits program has required insurers to provide parity coverage for mental health care. Research has shown that the parity requirement has not led to any significant cost increase for federal employees (including Members of Congress and their staff). Surely the public at large deserves the same coverage? Opponents of the House bill are circulating outrageous and false claims about what the House bill does. I am attaching a brief fact sheet that sets the record straight. Please feel free to share this with your House colleagues. The members of the APA have been pleased to work with the House Blue Dogs over the years, and look forward to a productive relationship in the years ahead. Please reject the blatant disinformation being circulated by parity opponents and vote for passage of H.R. 1424. It is long past time for Congress to act. Thank you for your support. Sincerely, Carolyn B. Robinowitz, President. American Psychiatric Association Response to Controversy About DSM-IV and Mental Health Parity--March 2008 Business and insurance opposition to passage of H.R. 1424 in part involves opposition to the use of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV) to define those conditions that must be covered by health plans under the terms of the bill. Let's look at a few of these claims: DSM-IV obligates employers to cover jet lag, caffeine intoxication, and similar conditions: Fact: This is nonsense. These claims typically refer to so- called ``V Codes.'' These are not DSM diagnoses, The V Codes are developed by the World Health Organization for the International Classification of Diseases (or ICD), not by the APA for the DSM. They are listed in DSM as a courtesy to facilitate coding and cross-walking between DSM and the ICD, and they are intended to allow clinicians to identify the types of non-diagnostic problems that are brought to their attention. Because it is ``so broad,'' using DSM to set baseline coverage will force insurers and employers to pay for treatments for the most minor of conditions. Fact: This argument is based on the false premise that diagnosis and treatment are one and the same. This is absolutely false. Simply because a diagnosis is made does not obligate insurers to pay for treatment, and nothing in H.R. 1424 changes that fact. Treatment would still be subject to the same medical necessity decision-making and utilization review that is in effect today. The appropriate treatment for jet lag would almost certainly be ``get some sleep.'' Members of the House should demand that employers who argue about jet lag and caffeine intoxication provide data showing they have incurred any appreciable costs because they have been forced to pay for treatment. DSM-IV will codify a treatment mandate. Fact: False. This claim confuses diagnosis with treatment. Once again, DSM-IV is not a treatment mandate, it is a diagnostic tool. In fact, employers and insurers don't want you to know that they use DSM every day to limit and in some cases deny treatment under terms of medical necessity. The American Psychiatric Association has a vested interest in having DSM-IV written into federal law, creating an improper conflict of interest. Fact: DSM-IV is widely recognized as the leading and internationally authoritative text for the diagnosis of mental illness. It is the product of exhaustive research and deliberation over a six-year period involving more than 1,000 individuals and numerous professional organizations, as well as agencies of the Federal Government. As a result, DSM-IV is referenced and has legal standing in more than 900 federal and state laws and regulations. The major legal reason why states and the Federal Government have used DSM-IV instead of ICD-9-CM is to insist on a higher and more precise standard for defining a mental disorder. Are employers and insurers proposing to ban any references to CPT-Codes in federal law, or use of ICD-9-CM codes for billing purposes? Of course not. Why is DSM-IV any different? The House of Representatives is poised to take a truly historic step toward ending insurance discrimination against Americans seeking help for mental illnesses, including substance-related disorders. Please do not allow the deliberate distortions and outright falsehoods about DSM-IV asserted by business and insurance groups to influence your vote. The 38,000 psychiatric physician members of the American Psychiatric Association urge you vote for passage of

Mr. DINGELL

Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, I have a number of concerns about the resolution before us today. First, I am concerned that granting the power and authority to investigate Members of Congress to an independent, outside entity cedes away too much of the power granted to the legislative branch by the Constitution of the United States. We need to be clear about what it is we are doing today; we are altering the scheme created by Framers of the Constitution in a way that weakens this body. The Constitution grants Members of Congress important protections that allow us to carry out our official duties free from the threat of investigation by an outside entity. Among other things, the immunity provided by the speech and debate clause allows us too vigorously pursue our oversight responsibilities without fear of retribution. Rather than allow some outside body to decide the standards that should be used to judge whether a Member of Congress is capable and responsible enough to carry out his or her duties, the Constitution vests that power in the voters, and with Congress itself. I understand the problem that this resolution is attempting to address: People in this country are losing faith in the institutions of government. I believe that delegating the authority for investigating Members of Congress to an outside entity only confirms these fears. I believe that rather than giving into the skepticism and cynicism inherent in this view, we need to show people that government is responsible and that it can work. If the Committee on Standards and Conduct is no longer capable of carrying out this responsibility, by all means we should find a way to reform it, empower it, and give it the tools it needs to uphold the integrity of this body. However, it seems to me that it would be unwise and unnecessary for us to tell the American people that we are no longer capable of policing our own. Regardless of what we do here today, it will remain up to the voters to decide who represents them in this body. As the dean of the House, I have had the privilege to serve in this body and represent the people of my District for many years. During my time in the House I have witnessed politicians be indicted, be forced to resign because of public pressure, and be investigated and reprimanded by the House. I have also seen politicians accused of wrongdoing, or tarnished by the mere appearance of wrongdoing, who have been given the opportunity to make their case before the voters and return to this body. In today's world, where the Internet and 24 hour cable news amplify and repeat almost any charge, regardless of its veracity, it seems unlikely that many Members of Congress will be able to avoid public scrutiny if they commit illegal or unethical acts. The question before us is not whether we want those who commit such acts to go unpunished, but what is the best way to ensure that they are held accountable. While I respect the views of those who believe an independent office is necessary, I cannot bring myself to agree. Ultimately, I will place my faith in the voters and in this body to ensure that the House of Representatives remains a strong and honorable institution.

Mr. DINGELL

Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, today we are voting on the passage of H.R. 1424, the ``Paul Wellstone Mental Health and Addiction Equity Act of 2007'', which will permanently reauthorize and improve the Mental Health Parity Act of 1996. I commend my distinguished colleagues, Representatives Kennedy and Ramstad, for their efforts in crafting this important piece of legislation. H.R. 1424 will create true parity of coverage for mental health and substance abuse disorders. It will ensure that healthcare plans that provide mental health coverage do not charge higher co-payments, coinsurance, or deductibles for mental health or substance abuse care. It will also ensure that care for mental health and addiction disorders is no more restrictive than medical or surgical care. Mental illness and addiction disorders have long been recognized by the healthcare community as actual and legitimate health afflictions which may have a significant affect on an individual's life and well- being. It has long been accepted that these afflictions deserve treatment by professionally trained healthcare providers. As I think of all of the different diseases and afflictions recognized by our scientific and healthcare communities, I struggle to find a reason why someone who has healthcare coverage should confront discriminatory barriers to treatment simply because of the nature of the disease. Mental health and addiction disorders can be just as painful and debilitating as medical and surgical disorders. The strains of these illnesses affect individuals, families, and society as a whole. I urge my colleagues to vote to pass H.R. 1424 to achieve comprehensive mental health and substance abuse parity.

Mr. DINGELL

Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 5351, the Renewable Energy and Energy Conservation Tax Act of 2008. With this legislation, we take another step forward in the fight to combat global warming and achieve energy independence. It is critical to our Nation's future that we invest in the energy sources of the 21st century. H.R. 5351 does this by reforming the Tax Code to reflect America's energy priorities. The bill includes, extends, and expands tax incentives for biodiesel production, solar energy and fuel cell investment and energy efficiency improvements to existing homes. The bill also provides new incentives for plug-in hybrid vehicles and cellulosic ethanol production. These investments will help us achieve my goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 60-80 percent by 2050 in order to limit the effects of global warming. In the interest of fiscal responsibility, H.R. 5351 pays for these investments in the energy resources of the future by cutting subsidies for industries that clearly need no help. The bill saves $18 billion by ending tax loopholes and subsidies for multinational oil and gas companies which are already reaping huge, record profits. No longer will oil and gas companies be able to game the Tax Code by understating their income from foreign oil and gas extraction. These long overdue reforms send a clear message that oil and gas companies will no longer get privileged treatment while Americans pay higher fuel prices and home heating costs. H.R. 5351 also demonstrates that clean energy investments can create new jobs in addition to benefiting the environment. By extending the renewable energy production tax credit for wind, biomass, geothermal, and other renewable energy sources, the bill provides new opportunities for job growth in these areas. With its stellar research institutions and wealth of experts on engine design, Michigan has the potential to reap significant benefits from this legislation. Governor Jennifer Granholm has made clear her commitment to creating green-collar jobs through a renewable energy mandate and other reforms. I look forward to building on the progress made in this bill. With future reforms we can continue to reduce greenhouse emissions, secure our energy independence, and create new green industry jobs for Michigan and America.

Mr. DINGELL

Mr. DINGELL. Madam Speaker, last week I, with my colleagues Representatives Frank Pallone and Peter King, introduced H.R. 5268, legislation that would provide immediate fiscal relief to States through Medicaid. The States of our Nation and the healthcare safety net are simultaneously facing a crisis. This is not the time for the Federal Government to turn its back. In addition to the broader economic stimulus package that we have approved, it is urgent that we provide States with resources to meet growing healthcare demands. In 2003, during the last economic downturn, the Federal Government provided fiscal relief to States by increasing Federal Medicaid payments during five quarters. The increased Federal Medicaid payments helped States meet increased demand for Medicaid coverage and successfully fought off many additional and more extensive reductions in healthcare for poor children, the disabled, pregnant women and the elderly who depend on Medicaid health coverage. If the economic downturn continues, States will once again be forced to deny people Medicaid coverage and or reduce Medicaid payments to healthcare providers unless some relief is provided. If we do not act, the decreased ability to provide health care could mean even more job losses, further exacerbating the economy. According to a 2005 study, for every $1 million of State funds invested in Medicaid, 33 new jobs and $1.23 million in new wages are generated in a year. In 2003, a Republican Congress and President agreed to the temporary increase in Medicaid payments. It was enacted through a number of bipartisan votes. We must once again come together to deliver as we did before. We need to move quickly to strengthen Medicaid, before the effects of a slowing economy cause people who need health care to he turned away.

Mr. DINGELL

Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Chairman, today I rise in support of H.R. 4137, the College Opportunity and Affordability Act. As a proud father and grandfather, I know too well that the costs of a college education can be prohibitive. This legislation, in combination with the College Cost Reduction Act passed in September, makes great strides to reform our higher education system to increase access to all students and families who desire to attend college. I know many of you have heard me talk about the tough times my great State of Michigan is facing. I know many of you have heard that Michigan has the highest unemployment rate in the Nation at 7.5 percent, Michigan has one of the highest foreclosure rates, while at the same time our median household income has decreased by 11.9 percent and over 240,000 manufacturing jobs have left our State. These statistics are worth repeating because they emphasize the need and the importance for providing our future workforce with the tools they need to be successful. One tool that is vitally important to many students is Federal aid; in fact, in past years almost 9 million students have received Federal aid. Yet the process to apply for Federal aid can be confusing and overwhelming for many students and their families. H.R. 4137 proposes to streamline the Free Application for Federal Student Aid, FAFSA, in order to make it easier for students to navigate. This will be done by reducing the number of questions on the FAFSA form and allowing applicants to save their information rather than re-filing a new form each year. It will also allow students and their families to determine their expected family contribution and their Federal student aid package prior to college so that families can plan accordingly. H.R. 4137 will also demand more accountability from student loan lenders, ensuring that the best interests of our students come first. This legislation will do this by requiring higher education institutions and lenders to adopt strict codes of conduct and ban all gifts and revenue sharing agreements between institutions and lenders. Students will now also be provided with full and fair information about their loans before entering into loan agreements, as well as be informed by the lenders of all borrowing options available to them when taking out and repaying loans. Another focus of this legislation is the need to address rising college prices so that more students and families will be able to attend college in the first place. We have seen in tuition at 4-year public colleges increase 30.5 percent since 1999 to $7,164 per year. That is an increase of $1,675 over 6 years. When families are making less, every increase makes it harder and harder for students to afford college. To address this, H.R. 4137 will also establish an online net price calculator that will assist students and their families estimate the cost based on income and family situations at individual schools. This will allow families to be able to properly calculate what the cost of a 4-year education will be. Families will now also have access to a list published by the Department of Education that will provide consumers with information on tuition and fees, average price after grant aid, recent price increases, and change in per-student spending. I am also pleased that this legislation will increase college aid to our veterans and military personnel. Many college campuses have seen an increase in enrollment of veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan; however, some of these schools do not have enough resources to give the veterans the support they need. With over a million troops having served in Iraq and Afghanistan, it is our duty to ensure that when they return they have access to a college education. This legislation establishes a scholarship program that could award up to $5,000 for veterans, their spouses, or their children enrolled in college. It will also create support centers on college campuses designed to coordinate services and assist veterans with enrollment and completion of their degrees. More importantly, H.R. 4137 will ensure that veterans are not penalized by their financial contributions to their GI benefits in the financial aid process. Mr. Chairman, I have heard over the years from my constituents, many from some of the great universities in my district, about the increasing amount of debt taken on to complete a college degree. Many have been forced to take out private loans, others have taken on additional hours at work, and unfortunately, some have had to take a leave of absence from school to pay the bills. This is a pattern that cannot continue. Education is not a luxury, it is a tool needed to succeed in today's economy. Investing in education and Federal aid programs is investing in our workforce and the success of our constituents. Today I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this legislation, reaffirming the commitment the Democratic Congress has made to improving higher education and strengthening our workforce.

Mr. DINGELL

Mr. DINGELL. Madam Speaker, today we are voting to extend for 1 year, through 2008, the 1996 Mental Health Parity Act. This act bars the use of arbitrary annual and lifetime caps on mental health services if they are not also used on other medical benefits. We need to extend this first good step taken by Congress more than a decade ago, but there is still work to be done to reach true parity in the treatment of mental illnesses and substance abuse disorders. When the Mental Health Parity Act of 1996 passed Congress, it provided only partial parity for mental illness and excluded addiction benefits from the equitable treatment other mental health services received under the bill. Left untouched were other important and potentially costly parts of an insurance policy such as limits on inpatient days and outpatient visits and other out- of-pocket expenses such as copays, coinsurance, and deductibles. These limits result in denying millions of Americans needed treatment and/or incurring huge out-of-pocket costs. The U.S. Government Accountability Office found in a May 2000 report that 87 percent of employers complying with the act merely substituted other restrictive limits on things already mentioned for the annual and lifetime limits prohibited under the 1996 act. Today we must not only extend the Mental Health Parity Act of 1996 but also continue to work on building this act to achieve true parity by passing H.R. 1424, the Paul Wellstone Mental Health and Addiction Equity Act of 2007. The legisiation has been favorably approved by all three committees of jurisdiction in the House. Mental illness and alcohol and drug addiction are painful and private struggles with staggering public costs, not to mention the toll these conditions take on families and communities. Representatives Kennedy and Ramstad have been faithful champions of the Mental Health Parity Act of 1996 and speak courageously of their own triumphs. I urge my colleagues to vote to extend the authorization of the current protections already in place and to continue to work for more comprehensive parity.

Mr. DINGELL

Mr. DINGELL. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of S. 781, the ``Do-Not-Call Registry Fee Extension Act,'' and I urge its swift adoption by the House. This bill is identical to H.R. 2601, which the House passed on December 11, 2007, to extend the authority of the Federal Trade Commission to collect fees to administer and enforce the provisions of law relating to the ever-popular national Do-Not-Call registry. The registry was established by Congress to enable citizens to place their personal phone numbers on a list that prohibits unwanted commercial solicitations over that number. By any measure, this program has been wildly successful--more than 145 million telephone numbers have been placed on the list, pesky phone calls from telemarketers have declined, and the FTC's enforcement has been vigorous--but the agency's ability to collect fees to fund this operation expired after September 2007. Therefore, we need to act. By agreement with the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Commerce, we are sending the later Senate-passed bill to the President. At this time, I want to commend Representative Stearns, the sponsor of the House-passed bill and then Ranking Subcommittee Member, for his leadership on this important consumer protection issue. I also commend Representative Rush, a cosponsor of the House bill and Chairman of the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection, for expeditiously bringing that bill, of which I am the lead Democratic sponsor, to the House floor last year. We would not be here today without their efforts. I would note to the House that, as part of the agreement, the Senate today will take up and pass H.R. 3541, legislation also passed by the House on December 11, 2007, to eliminate the automatic removal of telephone numbers from the registry, thus clearing the bill for the President's signature. Current rules provide that telephone numbers be removed from the list after 5 years, thus requiring consumers to reregister their numbers in order to fend off telemarketing calls. Most consumers are unaware of this requirement. This places a particular burden on the elderly, the group most often victimized by telemarketing frauds. The House-passed bill contains common sense exceptions as well as requirements to ensure the accuracy of the list. I thank the Federal Trade Commission and the Direct Marketing Association for their improvements to the bill, and I commend Representatives Doyle and Pickering for their strong bipartisan leadership on this legislation. This strong package of bipartisan consumer protection bills will serve the American public well, and will stand as a testament to what bipartisanship and good will across the Capitol can accomplish.

Mr. DINGELL

Mr. DINGELL. Madam Speaker, I rise today in cautious support of the stimulus measure before us. This is an important first step. However, it is the first step; it cannot be the last. I am particularly concerned that increases in Medicaid funding, food stamps and an extension in unemployment benefits are not a part of the package to be considered by Congress today. It is important to note that an extension of unemployment insurance is a tried and true mechanism for not only helping out families in need, but also for infusing much needed cash into the economy. The Department of Labor, which administers the program, has the administrative framework and the know-how to get benefits to people quickly and efficiently. The IRS, on the other hand, does not have the same know-how. Moreover, the IRS will be otherwise occupied; after all, it is tax season. All of this said, I am hopeful that negotiations continue on next steps to strengthen our economy and to provide relief to working families and would like to see the following items considered and ultimately included in any further measures brought before the House. Given the decrease in nationwide job creation and the growth of state unemployment rates an emergency extension of unemployment compensation is critically important. We also need a uniform increase in the Federal Medical Assistance Percentage, similar to that approved by Congress in 2003. An increase of this nature is one of the simplest, fastest, and best ways to provide stimulus to states. Making legislation similar to the National Affordable Housing Trust Fund part of the stimulus package would provide much needed assistance to communities, of which there are many in Michigan, that have been hardest hit by the housing crisis. In addition, swift action is needed to assist the over 2 million homeowners who, as a result of the housing crisis, are predicted to face foreclosure over the next year. We need increased investment in schools, roads, water and sewer projects, and other public infrastructure projects that are ready to go, which will put people to work and build or repair needed capital assets while pumping up the economy. In addition to stimulating the economy, we must have a strategy to create good paying jobs and prepare a workforce in transition. As such, some of the top priorities for Congress should be: To promote both health information technology and increased availability of generic pharmaceuticals, both of which have the potential to streamline the U.S. healthcare system, reducing overall healthcare costs. In addition, the tax code should be amended to allow the Federal government to pay for a portion of catastrophic healthcare costs. Congress should support the development and production of advanced technologies. Such technologies also would aid in weaning our country from its dependence on foreign oil and are key to the American manufacturing industry's ability to compete globally. The House approved a complete overhaul of the Trade Adjustment Assistance program last fall. We must expand the program to cover more workers. We must create a more level playing field for U.S. businesses and workers by enforcing trade agreements, ending the unfair trading practices of other nations, including currency manipulation, and knocking down unfair trade barriers that discriminate against U.S. goods in foreign markets. Again, I commend leadership for acting quickly and decisively in a bipartisan manner to bring this package to the floor. It is my hope we can continue to work together in an effort to stimulate the economy in a manner which will benefit middle-class families and create a 21st century workforce.

Mr. DINGELL

Mr. DINGELL. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on the matter under consideration.

Mr. DINGELL. Madam Speaker, at this time, I yield myself 3 minutes. Madam Speaker, stock markets around the world are plummeting. Home foreclosures are ballooning. States, without exception, are facing budget crises. Employers are cutting jobs. Gas and heating oil prices are draining household budgets. The vote of my colleagues today can stop tomorrow's headline from saying American children are losing health care. This vote to override the President's veto of the Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2007 will not only bring health care to 10 million children, it will protect children and families who may lose their jobs and no longer have health insurance. This is not lip service. This is health coverage. The bill includes mental health services on a par with medical services. It requires dental services be afforded our children. It protects school-based health services and rehabilitation and case management services for those with disabilities. It provides outreach and enrollment grants and new funding for obesity program. We know from a recent 2005 study that investing $1 million in State funds in Medicaid will generate 33 new jobs and $1.23 million in new wages in a year. This bill strengthens that safety net by allocating the funds that States need to protect and cover more low-income children. It should be noted that every complaint that the administration has set forth about this legislation has been met. The bill passed with the support of 265 Members, including 43 of our good Republican colleagues. It passed the Senate with 64 Members, including 17 of our Republican colleagues. I urge my colleagues to vote to override the President's veto. Vote to secure health care for our children. It is right, it is decent, and it is necessary. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DINGELL. Madam Speaker, at this time, I yield to the distinguished gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone), the chairman of the Health Subcommittee, 2 minutes.

Mr. DINGELL. Madam Speaker, at this time I yield to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Wynn), who has been a great leader of health care on this, my distinguished friend, 2 minutes.

Mr. DINGELL. Madam Speaker, at this time, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentlewoman from New Hampshire (Ms. Shea-Porter).

Mr. DINGELL

Mr. DINGELL. Madam Speaker, for purposes of debate only, I yield 30 minutes to my good friend, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Barton). Madam Speaker, I yield, also, 15 minutes of my time to the distinguished gentleman from New York, my good friend, Mr. Rangel, and ask unanimous consent that he be allowed to control that time.