Rahm Emanuel

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. The minority leader brought up two essential points which were basically, at that point, why we were here at a quarter to 1 in the morning. The first point dealt with the issues of fiscal responsibility and spending, and the second issue dealt with earmarks and the procedure or transparency and the questions that the minority had. On the first issue of fiscal responsibility, he said that they were tired of the amount of spending that was going on and how basically flagrant spending had happened under Democrats. After 6 years and $4 trillion of new debt run by a Republican President and Republican Congress and Republican Senate, I do appreciate your conversion on the road to Damascus as it relates to fiscal responsibility and spending. And I do believe that after we've seen the highest increase in the Nation's debt in the shortest period of time under a Republican Congress and a Republican President, adding $4 trillion to the Nation's debt, that you have decided enough is enough when it comes to a piece of legislation on homeland security, 5 years after the strike on 9/11. I think it's ironic that it's on this bill that you have decided the spending issue you want to debate. Now, the minority leader did offer, and he has said as recently as a couple weeks ago, when we have certain debates on the war in Iraq, protecting America, to always be conscious that people from around the world are watching this debate. So I do believe as it relates to homeland security, as we try to protect our borders, as we try to protect our ports, and as we try to protect our cargo, I'm sure the terrorists around the world are quaking in their boots on the motions to rise. You've given them nothing but fear as that issue emerges. That is your right. Announcement by the Chairman

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Chairman, and since it's often noted on the politics of what has happened in the last election, which is the issue of earmarks, as it relates to the motion to rise, you are long on process and short on policy. What does this bill actually do? And it's ironic that it's the Republican Congress that basically has enacted, for lack of a better term, a filibuster in name that prevents us from considering 3,000 new border agents. It's ironic that it is the Republicans in the minority who have dealt with, for the first time we're dealing with adding funding for nuclear material detection, you're preventing that to be voted on. It's the Republican minority who is dealing with, as it relates to our port security, adding 100 percent new equipment and radiation detection to deal with radiation coming into the port which we know from all the intelligence is an attempt by those who are trying to hurt and harm America, and there's also an increase in our cargo protection. We've increased funding for our police and fire equipment and fire departments; grants to study and make sure urban areas know how to deal with an emergency; transit grants in case terrorists try to strike our areas in major urban areas; fire grants; communications equipment for police and firefighters; port security funding; explosive detection system; air cargo explosive screening; customs and border agents, adding, as I said, 3,000 new agents for the border, 250 additional customs agents; law enforcement efforts for customs officers; fence requirements all for our border, all this to make sure that our borders, our cargo system, and our ports are secured. Anytime you want to have that discussion, as long as you want to have that discussion, we are ready to have that discussion of what it takes to secure America, but after 5 years of the strike on America, I find it somewhat poetic that this would be the bill that on procedural grounds you would decide to bring the Congress to a halt. And I do appreciate since there are no earmarks in this legislation, you seem to be making an argument about earmarks on this issue that fully funds our efforts to secure America. To the minority leader's second point on earmarks, the question is, and it's a legitimate question for us to debate, have we lived up to our rhetoric?

Mr. EMANUEL. I request an additional minute.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Madam Speaker, I rise today to commemorate the opening of the Center on Halsted, a new gay and lesbian community center at 3656 N. Halsted, in the heart of the northside of the Fifth District. This new facility will give the surrounding community a state of the art building for youth services, mental health services and community/ cultural programming and more. The Center on Halsted has actually served Chicago's gay and lesbian community for more than three decades. Unfortunately, though, they had to make do with temporary facilities for a number of years. Today, the community has a place to call home. This grand opening has been a long time in coming, with planning dating back to 2001. I am proud to have worked closely with the leadership at the Center on Halsted, Mayor Daley, Alderman Tunney, and many other local leaders to make the dream of a new center a reality. The Center on Halsted focuses their programming into three areas: mental health, youth and community outreach, and cultural programming. One of the center's goals is to provide role models for young members of the gay and lesbian community. The three-story facility is a proud home for a proud community, and the end product is almost as remarkable as the hard work of all the people who made it happen. The roof deck, computer lab, theater facilities, Whole Foods, cafe, and more will make the Center on Halsted a welcoming location for its neighbors and an engine for economic development on the northside of Chicago. Madam Speaker, I am thrilled that the Center on Halsted has opened its doors. I want to congratulate everyone involved on a job well done, and I know the center will be an important part of Chicago for a long time to come.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, at this time last year, the Jack Abramoff scandal was on the front pages of the newspaper. Today, a new guilty plea in the scandal proves it is not over. It is like deja vu all over again. The president of a major environmental group with close ties to this administration pleaded guilty to obstructing a congressional investigation and agreed to provide assistance in the ongoing Jack Abramoff scandal investigation. In little more than 4 months, Democrats and Republicans together in Congress have put an end to ``business as usual'' on Capitol Hill and passed the most sweeping ethics reform since Watergate. But our work is not done. We must continue to hold those in this institution accountable for their conduct, and reform doesn't stop at this end of Pennsylvania Avenue. The American people deserve better from their public servants. This Congress passed legislation to assure that the public trust is not lost at the expense of private interests. We are shining a bright light on the goings on at the Department of Justice, the Department of Education, the Department of the Interior, the Veterans Administration and the Student Loan Administration. With the power to hold hearings and ask questions that demand answers, this Congress is holding the administration and their officials accountable for their conduct and their oversight of the public trust. America voted for change, and we will hold both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue accountable. We will never accept business as usual in Washington and will not stop until we bring the right reforms to the goings on here in Washington.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. I would like to thank my colleague from Colorado. It is interesting she said that. I would like to speak slightly out of order from my prepared text. The last time we debated stem cell research back in November of 2006, exactly that time there was another discovery about human amniotic fluid basically giving us the fact that we don't need stem cell research. Past that, and you go back to the period of time in 2005 when we voted on this, the South Korean example was discovered exactly that same day we had that vote. I used to, growing up, I used to say paranoid people have enemies, too. It is ironic that every time we vote on this legislation, all of a sudden there is a major scientific discovery that basically says you don't have to do stem cell research. The truth is, you don't base your research on one report in a medical journal. You provide leadership. If you go back to the 1950s, we had a polio epidemic in this country that was killing thousands of people, leaving people terminally paralyzed. With funding from Washington, we found a cure for polio. Politics did not lead the way, medical research led the way, and America led its leadership there. That type of leadership needs to be provided for illnesses of Alzheimer's, Parkinson's disease and other work where we should allow the scientific research and the promise of stem cell research to move forward, rather than allow politics to dictate what we do here. This is one of those promising areas where, regardless of philosophy or ideology, rather, or party affiliation, when you look at diabetes, Parkinson's disease, Alzheimer's, it affects every family, every community, individuals across this country. There is a promise here, a right way to do it. We can provide the leadership here for our medical research, define illnesses and cures to disease that not only affect our budget, our country, but our capacity to lead in the scientific field in this area. I would like to thank my colleague, and this Nation should support this legislation. I look forward to finally getting this on the President's desk.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 1469, the Senator Paul Simon Study Abroad Foundation Act of 2007, legislation which establishes an educational foundation to increase the number of students studying overseas in developing countries and non- traditional areas. The Senator Paul Simon Study Abroad Foundation would provide a national competition for student fellowships and also provide funds directly to colleges and universities to support their study abroad programs, enabling over one million American students to study abroad annually. This program was first envisioned by my friend and mentor, the late Senator Paul Simon. Senator Simon had a bold vision for American renewal driven in part by international education. His vision included an understanding of diverse cultures, direct exposure to foreign languages, and increased interaction with the peoples of other nations as achieved through study abroad. As with his other initiatives, Senator Simon worked diligently to bring his vision of international education to life. H.R. 1469 continues this legacy of education and understanding by completing that vision. Senator Paul Simon had a life-long commitment and passion for education. As the founder and Director of the Public Policy Institute at Southern Illinois University, Senator Simon taught classes in journalism, political science, and history. As a scholar, he authored several books investigating the history and politics of Illinois. As a Senator, he was passionate about expanding educational opportunities to America's youth. I am proud to have worked for Senator Simon years ago, and I am proud that we are continuing his legacy here today. Mr. Speaker, this legislation provides excellent educational opportunities to America's students, strengthens our international relations, and promotes good will throughout the world. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting these laudable goals by voting in favor of H.R. 1469, the Senator Paul Simon Study Abroad Foundation Act of 2007.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the chairman and colleagues for this resolution. Mr. Speaker, my father is from Israel, and every summer I spent a good portion of my childhood in Israel, 2 days after the 1967 war, every summer for 5 years, 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1971 and 1973, every summer going to Israel. I remember that moment, since the bulk of my childhood was spent there. The Six Day War was obviously not only an amazing military accomplishment, a lot of people think today in retrospect that it is a pyrrhic victory, that things would have been so much easier for Israel had that victory not occurred; that David became Goliath. Mr. Speaker, there are a lot of myths that I would like to address to the chairman, and also to the leader on the Republican side. One is it was not such a peaceful time pre the 1967 war. There were a lot of attacks on Israel because of indefensible boundaries. In fact, the peace with Jordan and Egypt could not have happened if it weren't for the 1967 war. There was no possibility, given the pan-Arabism that existed under Nasser, for any peace to have happened. In fact, one has to look at the 1967 war, that it created possibilities, as did the 1973 war, for peace to occur, and every nation that has decided to make peace with Israel, Egypt and Jordan, has had peace. The war in 1967, because of the changes to the boundaries to the south, to the immediate east and to the north, redefined Israel's security. Once those nations came to terms with Israel's status, which is what the 1967 war accomplished, they accomplished and received peace, and land-for-peace has been at the premise of America's foreign policy, Israel's foreign policy, and was possible because of the outcome and the results strategically on the ground and in the environment because of 1967. People remember the military accomplishment which was unique and stands out in the 20th century, but it also created an environment that allowed peace to happen, at least with the two countries that have chosen the road of peace with Israel. I would like to pick up on my colleague from California and her comments about the next 40 years. The next 40 years needs to be a period of time where America, and this may be a little bit of a criticism here, we were always and always will be the indispensable leader in that region. The moment we walk away from that role the parties lose interest in discussing among themselves. I would hope that immediately the President would again, and I echo what my colleague from California said, nominate somebody to be a Middle East envoy, to again create a dialogue between the Israelis and Palestinians, to find what the Jordanians and Egyptians have found with the Israelis, peace, based on the premise of land for peace. But everybody should not only look at the military peace of the 1967 war, but it created an opportunity that today two countries that prior to that had fought in the 1967 war against Israel now recognize Israel and have economic, cultural and other types of trade, and that is only due to what happened in 1967. To those who think 1967 was a pyrrhic victory, wasted, we wouldn't have in fact the Israeli-Jordanian agreement or the Israeli-Egyptian agreement if it weren't for the victories that happened there. There were also other things that happened to Israel. One does hope though that as we look forward to trying to find resolution and look at the region as a whole, everybody has always described that Israel and the Arab conflict was at the heart of the Mideast. That is not at the heart. It is a problem. It needs to be resolved. But the larger problem of the greater Gulf area is not one of the Israeli-Palestinian problem, although it is a significant problem; it is the radical philosophy that is dominating the young in the Arab world that we need to help resolve, because it is leading and feeding part of the terrorism, and that is the larger conflict. The Palestinian-Israeli problem is a problem, but it is not at the heart of the conflict in that region. Mr. Speaker, I want to compliment our two leaders today, the chairman and the leader on the Republican side, for this resolution, for recognizing an historic moment that in fact without which we would not see the peace between Israel and Jordan and Israel and Egypt.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Madam Speaker, by direction of the Democratic Caucus, I offer a privileged resolution (H. Res. 441) and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. I'd like to thank the chairman, and I use that with my kids at the breakfast table. You can talk not to exceed 3 minutes. But thank you very much for that time. When the new Congress came in session, this Congress, the 110th, we banned gifts by lobbyists. We banned meals paid for by lobbyists. We changed the rules of the reports on earmarks where Members were doing things that benefited themselves at taxpayers' expense. Today we're considering the most comprehensive legislation on lobbying disclosure since the Watergate era, the most comprehensive legislation, because over the last 12 years, people saw a buildup in this people's House that gave them no confidence that their business was being done, but, in fact, the work of the special interests were done. When that gavel on the Speaker's table comes down, it's intended to open the people's House, not the auction house, and the American people lost confidence in this institution. The playing field was tilted to the special interests. This legislation, time and again, alters fundamentally the law as it relates to the abuses that we saw over the last 12 years. Now, I compliment my colleagues because in 1994 when they ran for Congress, they came to change Washington. They passed a lobbying bill, but after 12 years in power, rather than change Washington, Washington changed them. They became comfortable with power. They became comfortable and cozy with the special interests, and the American people said, enough. It beared on us and the responsibility of Democrats to change the culture here, to break that link between lobbyists and legislation. What happened at the end of the last 12 years was the special interest voices were heard at the expense of the American people. So whether it's in banning the K Street Project that rewarded companies and institutions that hired the majority party's friends, whether it became gifts, trips and the reporting of those trips, whether it became when Members were negotiating their future employment and doing the work here on the floor of their future employer even before they left, every element of that reform needed to be changed. This bill, under this chairman, does it. That will set the laws. Now it's the conduct of the Member to also understand there is a new day, there is change in the way you do things here in Washington. About 6 years ago, the Congress altered, through passing campaign finance reform, the relationship between a contributor and a candidate. This alters the relationship between a lobbyist and the legislation. Going forward, it would require a constant vigil, the attempt now is to ensure that at no point did those who represent the special interests have a capacity and an interest and an access that far outweighs the American people. That is the attempt of this legislation. Whether it's the provision that relates to Jack Abramoff, the provisions that relate to the K Street Project, the provisions that relate to rangers or pioneers, that they don't have an ability to do things for Members or individuals that far exceed what the people who vote on election day for that Member and that their interests are heard. We have to always come back and make sure that it is rules of the road to Washington don't tilt in favor of the special interests. This is a beginning, and it builds on what we did by banning on day one the gifts and meals by lobbyists, brings transparency to earmarks, and it brings transparency to the entire process as it relates to lobbyists' influence on legislators. I commend our colleague and our chairman for his leadership on this legislation.

Mr. EMANUEL. I would. I do appreciate it. As you heard what I said from my friend from California, I said you came to change Washington and to pass lobbying reform. Over 12 years you came to change Washington; Washington changed the Republican Congress. Now, to that effect, since you decided not to politicize it, but did decide to describe it, as a sham.

Mr. EMANUEL. I don't think I will use that time. Madam Chairman, as Ronald Reagan once said, facts are a stubborn thing. Let's take the section on required recusal for Members and staff in negotiation for jobs. This bill has a closure on that, and it brings disclosure on that. The bill brought up before the Republican Congress last time just sits by on that. Bans the K Street Project: This legislation only, in the last time, it said nothing on that. It was silent, except it was against the House rules. Disclosure of lobbyist contributions to charities, conferences, or similar events Members have interests in: This bill has it. Last year, it did not. The Harry and Louise disclosures, so interest groups could hide behind phony names and advertise against Members: This bill has it. Last year's did not. Public database of Members' travel and financial disclosures: This bill has it. Last year's didn't. Increased penalties: This bill has it. Didn't last. Spousal lobbying, restrictions on their spouses: This bill has it; did not before. Disclosure of lobbyist bundling will be considered in separate legislation. The goal is on comparison of the legislation. This is an improvement. Second, to my good friend from California, I am glad you passed legislation last time. The Senate has now passed this. We're going to go to conference on this bill and actually get it done. Number two, and, most importantly, I don't want to go forward looking back. My goal is to get this done, because as I said before, this is an institutional problem that requires an institutional solution, and that's what we have provided here.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, I'd like to thank my colleague from South Carolina for his leadership and, most importantly, his leadership because the Democrats promised in November that we're going to bring a new direction and new priorities to Washington. We've accomplished in 6 months what my colleagues have failed to do in 6 years and that is produce a budget that produces a surplus. Let me say what a surplus is since you've had such a recognition of not being able to produce one. Surpluses are the fact when the government puts its fiscal house in order and matches up its needs with the American people and produces a surplus, because your financial legacy is $4 trillion of new debt. When it comes to economic policy, the one thing that can be said about the Republicans' fiscal mess is that we will forever be in your debt. That is the one thing that's for sure. $4 trillion in 6-years, the largest increase in the Nation's debt in the shortest period of time is your legacy, and I don't think you've quite gotten the recognition for what you've done to America, left it nothing but red ink. This budget is not only in balance, but it's in balance with our values, our values that ensures that 8 million children who do not have health care but parents work full-time, they will get health care; in balance with our values to make sure that we're not subsidizing the financial industry by making sure that middle class parents have the financial resources to send their kids to college; making sure that when it comes to our veterans that in fact we are rewarding our veterans who have fought for this country and say the proper recognition for their service to America, that they get taken care of. And every step of the way, this budget is not only in balance fiscally but is in balance with our values. The entire legacy in 6 years of the Republican stewardship was one of $400 trillion of debt left for the Americans to clean up that mess, and we have produced in 6 months a budget that's balanced, and at the end of the process also creates a surplus. There are different and stark choices. President Kennedy once said, To govern is to choose. We've made the choices to make sure that middle class families get a tax cut, kids get health care, veterans get the respect and the resources that they need to move on with their life, and our families who know that an education and a college education in an era like this where you earn what you learn, that a middle class family does not need a second mortgage or a third job to send their kids to college. I commend my colleagues for this new direction budget, a budget that is in balance and is also in balance with our values.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Madam Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Keelin Broughan on winning the 2006 Presidential Award of Excellence in Math and Science Teaching. Ms. Broughan is a kindergarten teacher at Paul Revere Elementary School in Chicago. I often say that we need to start teaching math and science to our children as early as possible, and it doesn't get much earlier than kindergarten. Paul Revere Elementary is a Chicago Public School with a very long tradition in the community. Thanks to excellent teachers like Keelin Broughan, students from a variety of backgrounds are able to have access to an outstanding education. This week, Ms. Broughan will be presented with her award and have an opportunity to meet the President of the United States and her fellow award winners from across the country. Since 1983, over 3,700 teachers have received Presidential Awards for Excellence in Mathematics and Science Teaching. The effort and ability of these educators will help ensure that our children are ably prepared for the coming years. Madam Speaker, I hope that my colleagues will join me in congratulating Keelin Broghan on her outstanding work in the classroom, and I wish her the best of luck in her future endeavors.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Madam Speaker, like my colleagues, I too, rise in support of the full funding for the 100,000 community police officers. It has been a linchpin to a very successful anti-crime strategy. In the 1990s, we pursued a single strategy of putting more cops on the beat and getting gangs, guns and drugs off the street. It led to the longest and largest decline of violent crime in American history. After the elimination of the COPS program, community police officers, we saw a steady increase in violent crime. Cops doing community policing, an old strategy, door by door, knowing their neighbors, knowing their community, led to a dramatic drop in violent crime. Reducing those 100,000 extra police on the streets led to an increase in violent crime. Democrats came here to change Washington, to bring a new direction to our policy. Seeing an increase in violent crime in America, we went back to a basic fundamental strategy that has proven year after year to be successful, adding 100,000 cops, doing community policing, knowing their neighbors, knowing the kids that go to school, knowing where the problems are, hitting the problems before they start, leading to the most successful anti-violent crime strategy in American history. I am proud that we have brought this change to Washington.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, in 1994, when we passed the Community Policing Program that added 100,000 community police onto America's streets and also followed through with the strategy of not only getting cops on the beat, but getting gangs, guns and drugs off the street, we saw the longest and largest decline of violent crime in America's history. After that program's success of adding 120,000 community police officers to the streets across this country, when it was ended in 2002 we saw violent crime in America begin to inch up again. Community police officers walking the beat, knowing the neighborhood and knowing their community is the linchpin of a successful anti-crime strategy. I am so proud that we have a bill here representing, again, going back to a very basic approach of community policing by putting more cops on the beat, which is the success to reducing violent crime in America. We saw that rise again because this COPS Program ended. Every sheriff, police chief and mayor has asked for this program to be renewed, and I am proud we have done that to successfully once again get back to helping our communities reduce crime. In Chicago, we added 1,800 cops and we saw crime reduced in our neighborhood. I thank the chairman from Michigan and also the gentleman from New York for their leadership in getting this bill passed.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, first of all I would like to thank my colleague from Indiana who takes seriously his public service and his time and his trips to Iraq. As you comment on the installment plan we have, I don't mean to do this, but we've tried the ``blank check approach.'' You may not like this installment plan, but we have tried for 4 years an approach of being a blank check. No oversight, no accountability, no questions asked. And that has resulted here. Our men and women, and I know this is true for everybody here, we have great respect for what they have done. We asked our Armed Forces to seize a country. We asked our Armed Forces to take down an enemy's army. We asked our Armed Forces to seize the capital. We asked our Armed Forces to capture a dictator. They've done all of that. They have been unbelievably successful. So tell me why we've got the problems we have in Iraq. It is because there has never been a political strategy associated with the success of the Armed Forces' military effort. And General Petraeus is right: you can't solve this militarily. You can only solve this with a political solution. So here we are, our Armed Forces are up to 160,000 troops. We have over $600 billion that has been appropriated for this. We have lost 3,300 lives and 25,000 wounded fellow citizens. So the need for a political solution, and the Iraqi answer? We're taking the summer off. Going fishing. This bill says, no way. You have got to be accountable for your country and get off the sidelines and get onto the playing field and taking ownership of your country's future. If the men and women in our Armed Forces are supposed to give the Iraqis the political space to come together, we do not do that by taking the summer off and not finding common ground. We have plenty of differences here, but we have common ground here. It is the Iraqis that need to find the common ground, not us. We have the right approach. We have asked our folks to do everything. Just a month ago we celebrated the 4-year anniversary of ``mission accomplished.'' We know there is a lot to be done in Iraq, and what we are trying to do is provide our troops the resources they need, the equipment they need, the training they need, and when they come home, the veterans, the health care they need, and, most importantly, the policy that has been absent. The reason we never lost a single soldier in our efforts in Bosnia and in the Balkans is because the policy that a President implements is as important to the protection of those soldiers as the Kevlar vests they wear. What has been missing from this policy and what has been missing from this endeavor is a policy that is equal to the endeavor of our Armed Forces. We have a policy that has been reduced to one simple thing, more troops, more money, more time, more of the same, and you cannot continue a status quo-plus policy. It is time for a new direction, and I am proud that we have offered a new direction to our Iraqi policy.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, Johnnie Burton and Terri Shaw, two of President Bush's administration's foxes that have been guarding the henhouse, are stepping down. And now they are gone and the American people are better off. At the Interior Department, Johnnie Burton let Big Oil drill at taxpayers' expense and got away with it until Congress stepped in, costing the taxpayers billions of dollars. At the Education Department, Terri Shaw is stepping down after several scandals were uncovered in the student loan industry. On her watch, lenders and Education Department officials undermined the student loan program, which millions of students and middle-class families count on to go to college with and achieve their American Dream. Every day we see another headline and another story. Congress does its oversight job, and another Bush administration official at the center of the storm is eventually forced to step down. The White House has had an approach of letting the industry govern itself. They cut out the middleman. They are the government industry lobbyists. From our energy and production to our college loans, nothing is out of bounds. And Americans sent a clear message last November. They are tired of corruption. They want a change and an end to business as usual here in Washington. Democrats got the message, and we're restoring accountability to the American people's government.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the chairman and the ranking member for their leadership on this issue. Mr. Speaker, not one of us would be here if it wasn't for the ability to afford a college education, and although we are talking about cleaning up a mess, it is quite clear we should also remember what is happening here. For a long time, there was no oversight or any accountability in administration, and people from industry were actually in the responsibility, and their response was to govern and oversee industry they came from. So what did they do? They cut out the middleman. There is no need for a lobbyist, because the industry is the government in this case. What is most ironic in this situation on the student loan situation is industry was getting taxpayer subsidies to run a business in which the very students that were also dependent on their parents were also paying the bill. They were paying on the front end and on the back end. And it was a total rip-off of the American taxpayers. And it is on a subject, college education, that is so essential, because we know, today, in the new economy, you earn what you learn. What we are taking is people's ability to achieve the American Dream, which is so essential, a college education, that ticket to the American Dream. And rather than see what was an honorable profession, something important that could be done with good business practices, it has turned into a scandal that has affected both the schools and the administrators of those schools, public officials responsible for it, and the lenders in that industry. It was affecting everybody. Now, I hope, and from conversations with the chairman, we can rest assured this is just the first step in changing the rules of the game so industry and those in the lending industry understand and those in the regulatory side of it that there is a new way we are going to do business. And there is a new code of conduct for both the public officials and those in the lending industry, because we must fundamentally remember, a college education is a ticket to the American Dream, in a society and economy where you earn what you learn. I do want to recognize the Attorney General of New York for leading this effort, for Congress in a bipartisan fashion stepping up to the plate and taking the first step with this sunshine act. But we are not done in cleaning up the mess as it relates to the college loan industry. This is only the first step to doing that, to cleaning up this mess, because it relates to other areas. We saw it today when the individual responsible for the oil and gas leasing and royalty payment industry because of congressional oversight is now stepping down because it is clear taxpayers were not given their fair shake. We are doing the right job, and I commend both parties in the committee for holding these oversight hearings and producing this legislation and hope that we continue, as we did in the Six in '06, we voted, first of all, to cut the interest rates on student loans; we take this sunshine act, we come back with the higher education bill. We come with the FASA reform. We constantly make sure that we are reforming higher education and the access to higher education, so we serve the people who are doing right, working hard, paying taxes and raising their kids with the right sense of values to do right. This is an industry that needs a whole top-to-bottom cleaning and washing. Thank you for your leadership, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Speaker, for the past 6 years, the public has had to watch as scandal after scandal fell on deaf Republican ears. How times have changed. Today, Democrats are demanding accountability and ending business as usual. We've put the spotlight on the rampant corruption in the Bush administration and the scandals that used to be shoved under the rug are now being exposed. And the new Democratic Congress is getting results for the American people. The latest corruption scandal involves lenders, schools and public officials and has undermined a vital student loan program that millions of students depend on. On Monday the New York Times reported that over 4 years ago a researcher at the Education Department tried to warn his supervisors that student lending companies were improperly collecting hundreds of millions in overpayments. Big companies were getting millions from the very taxpayers who were getting the bill on the other side. So what did the Bush administration do? Nothing. Top officials at the Department of Education's Student Aid Office made millions when they sold stock they held in lending companies. What did the Department do when confronted with this obvious conflict of interest? Nothing. It wasn't until the media and this Congress began in oversight demanding accountability that these officials were put on leave. And yesterday, the head of Federal Student Aid abruptly announced her resignation. Additionally, the Attorney General of New York uncovered a number of improper relationships between lenders and schools, where colleges received payments in exchange for steering loan volume to particular lenders. It is time to clean up this mess and bring transparency to the system. The legislation before us will do just that and help ensure this sort of scandal never occurs again. Madam Speaker, students and families have been the victims of corporate greed, bribery and corruption in the Bush administration. Now, it's time to put an end to these scandals and pass real reform. I urge all of my colleagues to support this legislation.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, when it comes to hate and discrimination, America speaks with one voice, ``no.'' Zero tolerance. You cannot be a beacon of freedom around the world and fail that test here at home. President Kennedy was moved on the civil rights movement because he understood, in the battle of the Cold War, you could not be a beacon for freedom against intolerance around the world if we weren't free here at home. You could not. And as we talk, all our colleagues always say, as we battle on the issues on the war in Iraq, Islamic fascism, the whole world will watch what we say here in Congress. People will watch this vote and understand, most importantly, whether America remains true to its principles on freedom or not. People will watch this vote. And I would hope my colleagues will remember, as we do this today, that every time America widens the circle of democracy to protect more of its citizens who sit in the shadows, it is true to its principles. I would hope people will vote ``yes'' on this legislation.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Madam Speaker, the list of Republicans under investigation or resigning in this administration in disgrace keeps growing. This morning, The Washington Post reported Julie A. MacDonald, the deputy assistant Secretary of the Interior Department, resigned, just as she was being investigated for changing scientific reports to protect the interests of oil and gas companies and real estate developers, all the people she was supposed to be actually holding accountable. I wish this was an isolated case in the Bush administration. This morning, The New York Times reported the Department of Commerce Inspector General faces three separate investigations in conduct of his office. Scott Block, the special counsel of the Justice Department, is being investigated for the management of his office. Lucita Doan at the GSA is being investigated for politicization of the office. Monica Goodling of the Justice Department resigned. Sue Ellen Wooldridge at Justice stepped down. Matteo Fontana at the Department of Education has stepped aside. David Safavian at OMB has been prosecuted. Stephen Giles at the Interior Department had to step down. All have had their conduct scrutinized while in their professional office. It is time, in fact, and justifies why this Congress is doing its job of oversight and accountability, and bringing people's professional conduct in order.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. I thank my colleague from Miami. I can think of no other city if Chicago didn't have it than Miami. And also my colleague from New Jersey. You know, both of you have mentioned something about Chicago's physical beauty. The reason we are so proud, those of us from Chicago, of hosting the Olympics is not only our physical beauty, but I think you will see the character of our people in this greater part of Chicago, not just the city, but the suburbs, the entire metropolitan community, come together and host this Olympics and be the representation for the United States as we go forward in 2009 and try to win for Chicago and the greater Chicago area the ability to host these Olympics. We do have a physically beautiful city. Its architecture is world renowned; its lakefront is known to everybody. In fact, Chicago is known as the third coast between both the Pacific on the west side and the Atlantic on the east side. It is known as the third coast in America, sitting on Lake Michigan and part of the Great Lakes. It has a great physical beauty, but its strength comes from the character of the people. And I cannot think of anything better for city that hosts, any time you go to one of its public schools we have across the city 50 some odd languages being spoken, Chinese being spoken in the school, Arabic being taught in the school. Different languages from all over the world. People come to Chicago. It is the quintessential American city. There is no better place for us to have as our standard bearer for the United States than Chicago for 2016 to host the Olympics. And it is my hope, and great hope, that it would become the city and be the nominee in 2016 in the selection by the Olympic Committee. You know, Carl Sandburg, the great poet, once said about Chicago, ``Stormy, husky, brawling. We are the city of big shoulders.'' That is Chicago. We have a great mayor, who is a great mayor of a great city with great people. And you can see it in the pride that everybody felt that we were selected by our colleagues from around the country to be the city to host the 2016 Olympics. Our sports teams, known as the Chicago Cubs, Bulls, Bears, the White Sox, Blackhawks, and the Sky and the Fire, our soccer teams. And I hope, as we go to 2009, that we do have and will receive from the international community the nod to represent the Olympics and show to the rest of the world what all of us know in Chicago and all of those who come to our city know, that we are a great city, with a great mayor, with a great people that will do right by the world in hosting the Olympics. I want to thank my colleagues for letting me offer this resolution.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 1678, the Torture Victims Relief Reauthorization Act of 2007, legislation which provides grants for medical centers that administer therapeutic treatment for victims of torture. Currently, there are approximately 400,000 victims of torture who reside in the United States, all of whom live with painful memories of their trauma. America's torture treatment centers provide crucial recuperative services to these individuals who have suffered both physically and mentally, often while serving our country. Victims of torture are in a unique position, requiring ongoing psychiatric counseling as well as physical therapy. These individuals carry the scars of their torture on their bodies and minds, and require years of support to overcome these wounds. In my district and home-town of Chicago, the Marjorie Kovler Center for the Treatment of Survivors of Torture provides comprehensive, community-based services in which survivors of governmental or political torture work together with specialists to identify individual needs and overcome barriers to healing. At the Marjorie Kovler Center, patients find a welcoming and accepting environment which nurtures the body and mind, allowing individuals to successfully transition back into healthy social relationships. This crucial organization generously provides all of its services free of charge to its patients, and centers like it across the country utilize the funding provided in this legislation to deliver services and care to countless victims of torture. Madam Speaker, I am proud to co-sponsor and support H.R. 1678. This legislation bolsters the therapeutic network for torture victims who have suffered tremendously, and are in great need of care. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the organizations that serve the men and women who are living with the mental and physical scars of torture by voting for H.R. 1678, the Torture Victims Relief Reauthorization Act of 2007.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, according to our military leaders, the status quo is not working in Iraq. Major General Batiste said, ``The administration got it terribly wrong and I applaud Congress for stepping up.'' Lieutenant General Odom said our bill ``gives the President a chance to pull back from a disastrous course, reorient U.S. strategy to achieve regional stability, and win help from many other countries, the only way peace will eventually be achieved.'' Our military has done everything the President and the Congress and American people have asked it. The President asked our men and women in uniform to invade a country, and they did. The President asked them to go to war against a nation's army, and they did. The President asked them to seize a capital, and they did. The President asked the men and women in uniform to depose a dictator, and they did. The President asked the men and women in uniform to capture that dictator, and they did. Given all these military achievements by our Armed Forces, why do we have today the worst national security crisis in over a generation? There is not now, nor has there ever been, a political plan that matches the military leadership that we have seen from our Armed Forces. But this administration has offered no real plan for success, and our troops have been asked to back the Iraqi Government that has yet to stand up for itself. The entire plan over the last 4 years offered by the President and the Republican Congress has been more troops, more time, more money, and more of the same, even though we know that the challenges we face today require more than the status quo. The President's policy has come down to the status quo plus. Secretary of Defense Gates had it right: ``Any solution in Iraq is not purely military but also political.'' Our plan holds the Iraqi people accountable for their own nation. It requires the Iraqi people to meet the benchmarks for success, the same benchmarks that the President outlined on January 10 before he turned against his own benchmarks. We will give our troops and commanders the resources and freedom to do their job. But we will do the one thing that a Republican Congress has refused to do over the years: demand accountability from the Iraqis. I urge my colleagues to support the rule and to support this legislation.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Madam Speaker, I rise today to commemorate Earth Day, which we will celebrate April 22, 2007. On the very first Earth Day in 1970, 20 million Americans stood together for the environment. They filled our country's streets, parks, and auditoriums to announce their dedication to protecting the earth, and they asked their government to stand with them. What began 37 years ago as a grassroots movement in the United States has now spread to 175 countries, and is observed each year by 500 million people worldwide. The importance of Earth Day is underscored by the threat of global climate change. As the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change concluded with near certainty this February, people are a large part of the problem, but we are also capable of coming up with solutions. I am proud that the new House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming met this week for the first time. I commend the Speaker for making this issue a priority, and I commend the new panel's members for their efforts in moving us towards solutions to the problem of global climate change. The City of Chicago is leading the way in transitioning to a ``green- friendly'' world and is now a model for other cities across the country. Chicago is among the largest users of green energy in the country, and the city has set a goal of using renewable energy for roughly a quarter of city operations. As part of the process, Chicago has attracted two solar panel manufacturers to the city. Additionally, Chicago has planted or negotiated the construction of over 2 million square feet of rooftop gardens, more than all other U.S. cities combined. Madam Speaker, I recognize that as a member of Congress and a father, we have a duty to preserve our Nation's environmental treasures for generations to come. This Earth Day, I hope that we can build on the momentum of my hometown and work together to improve the outlook for our planet and make this a better place for our children. I ask my colleagues to join me in celebrating this Earth Day, and many more to come.