Donna Edwards

Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland

Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland. Mr. Speaker, I rise today because we're on the verge of groundbreaking health care reform legislation that will benefit generations to come and signal to the world and all of America that we are no longer a Nation that tolerates 46 million uninsured and many millions of workers, people who work every day, uninsured and facing huge out-of-pocket costs. Now, today, I want to emphasize the importance of including a robust public health insurance option, with an established Medicare provider network, in the final health care reform bill. An established network will allow the public plan to give Americans a real choice among insurance plans and doctors from the start, from the beginning. A public provider network will place the public plan on a level playing field with private plans establishing real competition, real reform, and lowering costs for Americans. Look, we have one chance to do health care reform, and it's today. And we have to ensure that we establish the strongest infrastructure to give success for the American people and to give them coverage and care and lower costs. Further, the Congressional Budget Office says that a robust plan will save $91 billion for our country. We know the system is broken, and now we have a chance for a truly American solution to health care reform.

Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland

Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland. I thank the gentleman for yielding. You know, each time Mr. Hall has spoken, he reminds me of something else, and I have to tell you, I, too, left my appendix in Spain in a clinic, but I didn't get a bill. Now, that is not what we're doing here, but we are doing something really important for the American people. And I believe that the strongest health care reform that we can pass out of this Congress also embraces a robust public plan option that gives people choice, that's competitive in the marketplace, a bill that makes certain that we don't have exclusions for preexisting conditions like domestic violence or any other so-called preexisting condition. And so I think that, in order to meet the test for real reform, we have to have a system in which patients choose their doctor, doctors and patients choose their care, and insurers and government bureaucrats alike stay out of those decisions. And so I say to the American public, we're ready to cast a vote for real reform, and so let's bring on the choice, let's bring on the competition, and let's bring on the care for patients.

Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland. I thank the gentleman. I was listening to my colleagues, Mr. Hall and Mr. Johnson, and I want to say particularly something about that the critics charge that we don't want government running health care and government is going to choose your doctor. I grew up in the United States Air Force. My father was in the military. So when we were young children and had to get health care coverage, we called, made an appointment, got the tonsils checked, got whatever medication was needed and went home. We saw primary care physicians. It's a government-provided system. My father on his retirement was in the VA system, got excellent coverage through the VA system. My brother retired from the United States Air Force, excellent service and care through the VA system. Those are government-provided systems. Medicare. Medicare is one of the most efficient health care systems that we have. And so what are we talking about here? The critics can say what they want, but they know that when it's Medicare or veterans' coverage or coverage through these systems that people get quality care, that it's low cost, that it's a very efficient system. Now, do we need to make some changes and tweaks? Absolutely. And you know what? In this bill that we are going to be voting on, those tweaks and changes are made to Medicare, to reform it so that it actually saves taxpayers money. So I just thank my colleagues for pointing out that while government can provide the mechanisms for health care, you still get to choose your doctor. Under a private system, you choose your doctor. Under the public system, you will choose your doctor, and then you can decide what works best for you. And that's the beauty of this. For people who believe in the marketplace, they need to believe in a public plan option because the public plan option is all about making the marketplace work for the American people, making it work for health care. So I thank my colleagues because I think that we are going to do something very special for and with the American people, and at the end of the day, we will celebrate because all of us will have quality, affordable, and accessible health care. And as I close, I want to say to the gentleman, as well, that quality and affordable and accessible health care can't be just for that top 1 percent. It has to be for the other 99 percent. And the same choice that I get here in the United States Congress for my health care where I can look at an array of plans and make a choice we want to deliver to all of the American people.

Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland. Well, you know, I don't like this mix of money and politics. And what it says to me is that somebody with that skin in that game stands a lot to lose, and so that means that the detractors out there know that if the cost of doing business for them is to spend that $1.2 million or $3 million every day to fight against health care reform because they know that without reform they get to make billions of dollars off the backs of the American people. And so no more to that. The American people are pretty smart about this. I know the people out in my congressional district, the Fourth Congressional District in Maryland, understand health care. Many of them work and they have health care coverage. But they know that they're being burdened by increased premiums and deductibles. They know that there are insurance companies and bean counters and people on a telephone who stand between them and their doctor and good medical care. They know that they have family members, young people like my son, getting ready to come out of college, will lose his health care coverage that's covered by his parents and will be on his own. Those young people need to have health care coverage. We know that they don't believe that they're ever going to get sick or injured. But that's not true. And so we have an opportunity here to fight all of those interests. And you know what I say? Stop advertising. You know, we don't need to advertise for good health care reform. We don't need to advertise for pharmaceuticals that benefit us if that's a decision that our doctors make. And yet billions of dollars are spent in that industry. Millions and millions of dollars spent in lobbying against reform. And so that is a clear message to the American people that those detractors do not stand on the side of health care reform.

Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland. Well, I thank the gentleman. And I've heard the rhetoric before. But I tell you, it rings hollow on somebody who has not had health care and who's also had really good health care coverage. And so, you know, I think the detractors, we know who they are. They're all the vested interests who are making a boatload of money off of the American people while they don't have health care. And so we have to just stop that. It's really a pretty simple formula. I think the American people really get that. I think the American people understand that. And we want quality care, and we want to lower cost for everyone, and we want to make sure that we engage in the social responsibility that we have for all of those who, at some time or another, might find themselves uninsured or underinsured. And so the detractors actually don't have anything good to say, and so they want to try to kill our opportunity, and a meaningful opportunity for the American people for health care reform. And I think that those of us who know what the problem is, who understand what the solution is, who believe that we have to have a public option that competes with the private insurers, we know that that kind of competition in the marketplace will lower cost. And so we've got to, you know, zone out the detractors and focus on delivering health care reform for the American people.

Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland. Thank you for yielding. Good evening, Mr. Ellison. It is good to be here with you this evening. And I just want to say a few words because I don't have a lot of time, and I know you're really holding the fort here talking about the importance of health care to all Americans, the importance of a public plan option that really covers all Americans, gives them a choice of their doctors and what do they want for their services. I just want to say the U.S. health care system is really one of the most expensive systems in the world. We know that. We spend about $2.2 trillion each year on health care services and products. At the same time, 46 million Americans are uninsured, and a whole bunch of others, 80 percent who have insurance, are actually from working families. They have insurance, but it is not enough, and it is not the right kind of coverage, and premiums are going up, and deductibles are going up. And it has become really an unaffordable system for American families. Almost half of all personal bankruptcies are attributed to medical debt. I had that experience myself. I almost went bankrupt because I had a huge health care bill. I couldn't pay it. I got very, very sick, and I needed a choice. Fortunately, I was able to pay that off and then end up getting good insurance. But the reality is that when that happens, it can almost cripple a family. I don't want any other family to have to face the kind of choices I did about whether to take care of myself and my son or to pay for health care coverage. And, at the same time, we also know that sometimes people make the choices. Do I buy my medications? Do I go see my doctor when I'm sick, or do I wait till I'm really sick? Those are choices that are unacceptable. And let's look at the practices of our insurers. I mean, you know what happens. An insurer will say to you something like, well, you know, you've been a victim of domestic violence, and so we're not going to cover that and the cost of that because it's a pre-existing illness. I bet a lot of people across the country don't know that there are health insurers that deny coverage because of a circumstance of domestic violence. It's hard to believe that, and yet it's true, because it's considered a pre-existing condition. And so we need not just a public option, we need one that's robust. We need one that says to insurance companies, here are the dos and the don'ts. Let's take care of the American people, and let's give them some choices. Eighty percent of Americans have health insurance, and so that means that most people that you run into in your schools, your communities, your neighborhoods, your workplaces have health insurance. But for so many people, it's completely inadequate to do the task. I think again about another situation of an insurer where my son actually had a little bit of an accident. He went up, he came down on his head. He needed to have an MRI. We talked to the insurance company. And what did they say to us? You couldn't go to the 24-hour MRI center; you had to wait and get that coverage in an emergency room. And it turns out that the emergency room was more expensive than getting the same examination that was a critical examination ordered by a doctor in an MRI facility. And so these choices don't make sense for the American public. And as I said, Mr. Ellison, you know, premiums are going up. Premiums have gone up 114 percent from 1999 to 2007. And that's greatly outpacing incomes in this country. And so the high costs, what are they doing? They're crippling the American middle class. They're crippling working families, they're crippling businesses. Most of the small business people I know actually want to be able to provide health care coverage, good health care coverage for their employees. But I'll tell you, if you're trying to provide health care coverage and you're suffering the cost of $10,000 and $20,000 per employee for health care, you can't stay in business like that. And so we want to give small business, all business, a helping hand with making sure that they can provide affordable and low-cost coverage to their employees. We want to make sure that people who are unemployed and maybe uninsured or underinsured have coverage. We want to make sure that there's a standard set of benefits that everyone should enjoy so you get the advantage of preventive care, diagnostic treatments ordered by your physician. We want the patient and the doctor to have control of their coverage, not the patient and the insurer, not the doctor and the insurer, nobody in between, not the government or anybody else in between, but the doctor and the patient. And then we want to make sure that doctors are paid so that they can make a viable practice, so that they can engage in the kind of primary and preventive care that we think is most important to preserving and protecting our health and our quality of health over a long time. And so I'm excited, actually, about where we are right now. I mean, I am so heartened because I think we've learned a lot over the years. And this time the American people aren't just going to get a promise, they are going to get the kind of health care they deserve. And so we should all be both excited and proud to prepare to cast a vote for the American people, for small businesses, for working families, for the uninsured, for the underinsured, for all Americans. It is the most that we can do for the American public. And I'll have to tell you, I cannot wait to cast my vote for a public plan option that is robust, that covers all Americans, that ensures what I call the three C's. You know, we want lower costs, we want quality care, and we want continuity of care. It shouldn't matter whether you have this job or that job or another job. You keep your health care coverage. And when we cast that vote for the American people, they're going to stand with us because it's the right thing to do. And so it's so good to be here this evening in this House, in the People's House, saying that at last, on health care, we are going to do what's right by the American people. And I yield back.

Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland

Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland. Mr. Chair, with all due respect to the gentleman from Arizona--and I definitely understand his purpose--the fact of the matter is, this is a great project not just for the State of Maryland but for this country. It's important for us to look specifically at what a project will accomplish, how many jobs it's going to create in our State of Maryland and the value of that. I agree. I'm not going to pick and choose winners and losers among businesses in my congressional district, but I will pick and chose for the growth of small business in our community and stand behind those choices. I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to this amendment. This amendment would prohibit funding for a project that will have a tremendously positive economic impact not only to Montgomery County but to the entire State of Maryland. This Green Business Incubator is expected to house 20 to 25 new businesses that will create an estimated 460 green jobs in our State. This project is both unique and innovative, and it's timely. This is a transformational time for American entrepreneurs, creators and innovators; and we have an opportunity not to do the work as government but to facilitate it, to jump-start it and to get out of the way of smart green entrepreneurs. This is not the type of project that should be cut. Instead, this project should be used as a model for local areas around the Nation. The project is an example of how local communities can spark economic growth within a region, not with the help of giant outside corporations, but with small local businesses that are most closely connected to the people and their communities. Now aside from providing economic growth, this Green Business Incubator and others like it around the country is a way to invest in our environment and new environmental technologies, 21st century technologies. The project will use both critical environmental investments and technologies that have resulted in new energy and climate policies and that have accelerated demand for green technologies. This particular area of Maryland is a technology hub. Montgomery County intends to use the linkage locally with some of our strongest Federal laboratories, NIST, NOAA, NASA and the Department of Energy to develop new technologies that are environmentally sound. It is going to take a continuum of technologies to meet our global, environmental and energy needs in the 21st century. We have a strong track record in Montgomery County with these Federal research to commercialization models. In FY09, Montgomery County had 135 companies in incubators with a fiscal impact of $465,000 to county coffers. This Green Business Incubator will contain the 21st century labs and communications facilities that fledgling green businesses need to grow, flourish, employ hundreds of workers and generate thousands of dollars in private market capital. I would like to thank Chairman Serrano and Ranking Member Emerson for seeing the importance of this project for this century and for seeing its potential to spur environmentally sound economic growth for small business in Maryland. I urge a ``no'' vote on this amendment. I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland

Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland. Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong favor and support of the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009. I am going to tell you, I was a reluctant comer, but I really commend Chairman Markey and Chairman Waxman on their leadership and dedication to this bill. This is a big step toward ensuring that our children live in a cleaner and better environment and that we preserve and protect our planet for future generations. The Earth is warming and glaciers are melting, and some may question the science, but I am not one of them. By the time a child born today, in 2009, reaches first grade, we will reach peak carbon. And without a doubt, we must use every tool attainable to respond to this crisis. This bill is one of those tools, and perhaps our strongest yet. It is my hope as we continue forward we will increase our investment in renewables, that we will ensure that we preserve and protect our planet and reverse the warming of our Earth. I want to again thank the chairman. And despite my concerns, I support this bill strongly. I urge my colleagues to join me. And the statements made earlier today questioning global warming underscores the importance of this legislation today.

Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland

Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland. Mr. Speaker, the United States has the most expensive health care in the world, which is a tremendous burden on the American family and businesses and threatens our economic future. The status quo is unsustainable and unacceptable, and I applaud all of the committees for their hard work on the draft proposal released last week. It is an important step forward to ensure that every American has access to quality, affordable health care. But I believe if we are to meet the stated goals of reform, it is also critical that a robust public plan option be linked with the strengths of Medicare. It is a system that we know and, in particular, has an existing health provider network so that a public plan can truly compete in the private market and lower costs for all Americans. Mr. Speaker, health care must be accessible. And in order to be accessible to Americans living in both rural and urban areas, it has to be accepted by providers. It has to have doctors. I am concerned that the initial version does not provide the provider infrastructure already in place for Medicare. We know it and we can use it, and this is a serious oversight that needs to be revisited. Mr. Speaker, I know we can meet the challenges for health care for all Americans, a uniquely American plan unparalleled in quality, low cost and real choice. Let's do it.

Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland

Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak about the urgent need for health care reform. Comprehensive health care reform is about addressing what I call the three C's; care, cost and continuity. Americans deserve affordable, high-quality and portable care. Some of our parents may have worked one job and had the same insurance plan for 40 years, but that is not how we lead our lives now. We may have 7 to 10 jobs over the course of our lifetime, and health care reform has to reflect the way that people lead their lives. People shouldn't feel trapped in a job because they are afraid to lose health care coverage for themselves or their child, and no life decision should hinge on whether you have health insurance. Health care reform is about expanding coverage, creating competition and meaningful choice. And right here in Congress we are working to create a uniquely American system of health care that provides for affordable, high-quality care to all Americans. You have seen firsthand why we need reform of the health care system, and you know that we have to lower costs and cover all Americans. The cost of this Congress doing nothing to reform the current health care system is catastrophic, and the status quo is unsustainable. I cannot stress enough the urgent need for health care reform.

Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland

Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland. I rise to engage in a colloquy with you, Mr. Chairman, regarding the Commerce, Justice, Science and related agencies programs. Mr. Chairman, as a long-time advocate for prevention of violence against women, I know that Federal funding is really essential to ensuring that victims of violence, especially in rural or underserved areas, have access to life-saving programs and resources. There are several programs that assist victims of domestic violence in need of funding, including programs aimed at curtailing abuse in public and assisted housing, establishing privacy for victims, and providing outreach to underserved populations. According to the National Network to End Domestic Violence, poverty and lack of education contribute to the economic dependency that keeps many women dependent on their abusers for financial support. Especially in these challenging economic times, though, as you recognize, domestic violence doesn't discriminate on the basis of race, ethnicity, economic status, or party identification. In 2005, Mr. Chairman, there were 34 domestic violence-related homicides in your home State of West Virginia. And in my State of Maryland, in my congressional district, in fact, in just 1 year, from July 1, 2007 until June 30, 2008, there were 11 domestic violence- related homicides just outside of the District of Columbia in Prince George's and Montgomery County, totaling 16 domestic violence homicides in my congressional district in that short time. Our communities need this increased funding in order to save lives, and financial support for the programs really is a matter of life and death. And so, Chairman Mollohan, I appreciate the funding increase already provided in the bill, and I urge you to maintain this funding and to possibly increase it because of the need. Ending domestic violence really requires, as you know, a collective commitment for law enforcement, prosecution, training, outreach, education, and of course shelters and programs as you have provided for in this legislation. And so I would appreciate increased funding for these programs as we work together in the future.

Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland

Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of House Resolution 529. Mr. Speaker, it's with great sadness that I rise today to honor the life and memory of Stephen Tyrone Johns, the security officer who courageously gave his life protecting the lives of others during yesterday's shooting at the Holocaust Memorial Museum. Officer Johns' quick action and sacrifice may indeed have saved the lives of people at the Holocaust Memorial Museum yesterday and certainly enabled his fellow officers to secure the museum. The armed assailant, who had connections with the white supremacist organizations and a long history of anti-Semitic and racist activities, walked into the Holocaust museum and opened fire, resulting in the tragic murder of Officer Stephen Tyrone Johns. This was a murder based on hate and malice, and took the life of a good man. A security officer for 6 years at the Holocaust Memorial Museum and resident of Temple Hills, Maryland, which is the district which I represent, Officer Johns was beloved by his family and friends. Colleagues called Officer Johns ``Big John.'' He was known as a gentle giant, and remembered for his friendliness, soft-spoken nature and gentle demeanor. This morning, I had the opportunity to speak to Officer Johns' mother and stepfather. The entire family is grieving this senseless loss. Above all, the family wanted America to know that Stephen was dedicated to his job and his family. His mother said he loved his job, and he took his duty at the Holocaust Memorial Museum very seriously, so seriously that he ended up paying the ultimate sacrifice. As we join Officer Johns' family in struggling to find answers, the truth is that this was a senseless act and a senseless murder that has resulted in a great loss. Officer Johns' sacrifice is a stark reminder of the threat of hate and intolerance to our humanity. I want the family of Officer Johns to know that I, along with my colleagues here in Congress, am grieving with them, and America is grieving with them. In addition to his family and friends, Officer Johns leaves an 11- year-old son, Stephen Tyrone Johns, Jr., to mourn his loss. So it is with a heavy and sad heart that I offer my sincere condolences to the family of Officer Stephen Tyrone Johns. He will always be remembered as a dedicated and beloved hero.

Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland

Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland. Mr. Speaker, our current health care system is unsustainable. Working people go every day without care or struggle to pay increasingly higher premiums and deductibles. In my home State of Maryland, 76.7 percent of the uninsured are from working families. Now, if a single-payer plan is not adopted by this Congress, which I support strongly, then we must have a robust public plan option like Medicare to be enacted to reduce costs for small businesses and individuals, provide true competition, and give patients the choice they deserve. A public plan option has to be available to all without exclusions. It must retain patient choice and implement reforms that promote quality care, prevention, primary care, and chronic health care management. And importantly, a public plan option must address health care disparities in underrepresented communities. Mr. Speaker, this Congress and President will be judged by our ability to construct a health care system that covers all Americans, lowers costs for everyone, and provides real and competitive choice for health care. The time for reform is now, and we can't delay.

Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland

Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland. This will also help employee morale, and it will allow the Federal Government to attract and to retain young and talented employees in our aging workforce. Madam Chair, as a Representative of the Fourth Congressional District of Maryland--proudly the home to at least 70,000 Federal employees--for my neighbors, for my friends, for the people who work hard every day, this important legislation will advance family-friendly policies. It will allow new parents the time necessary to care for their children, and it will set a standard for the Federal Government and for the private workforce. There are times when it is simply the right thing to do, and this is one of those times. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland. Madam Chair, I rise today in support of H.R. 626, the Federal Employees Paid Parental Leave Act of 2009. I would like to thank the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney) for her long-time leadership on this legislation and for her ongoing efforts to ensure family-friendly workplaces. That must begin at least with the Federal Government. It is so tiresome and tedious to stand on this floor every day and to listen to the demagoging of Federal employees. They are the people who get up every single day and inspect our food. They make sure that we have clean water. They process Social Security checks. They do all of the business of this government, and it is so sad that, even when offering a simple parental leave act, we have to demagogue Federal employees in the process. The legislation provides 4 weeks of paid parental leave for new mothers and fathers for the birth, adoption or fostering of a child. America's 1.8 million Federal employees will benefit from this time to learn how to care for and to bond with their new additions to their families. It's what many in the private sector already do, and it's what we strive for. The Federal Government needs to set an example.

Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland

Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to the underlying supplemental appropriations bill. Frankly, I am undecided on the rule. I returned from Afghanistan just a couple of days ago, and I could see firsthand the passion and commitment of our servicemen and -women, our diplomats and other civilians. But I want them to know that this debate that we are having here today is not about them. It is about the direction that we need to proceed. I saw the commitment and courage of Afghan women to build a future for their country. But this supplemental appropriations bill will not get us there. Let me quote, ``Given its terrain, poverty, neighborhood and tragic history, Afghanistan in many ways poses an even more complex and difficult long-term challenge than Iraq, one that, despite a large international effort, will require a significant U.S. military and economic commitment for some time.'' Those are the words of Secretary Robert Gates, and not my own. And yet here we are today prepared to commit our servicemen and - women to a war without end, placing them in harm's way without a plan for being there and a strategy for leaving Afghanistan. I understand that we want to give our President an opportunity to work out a mess that he inherited but did not create. Unfortunately, this Congress and this President have to be honest with the American people----

Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland. We have to be honest with the American people that this is not an in-and-out military operation. Winning requires a long-term, sustained commitment to turn 90 percent illiteracy to literacy, grow food products instead of producing heroin and opium, build a civil society and rule of law. We need a plan while we are there and a strategy for leaving. We don't have it. And I will be voting against the supplemental.

Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland

Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland. Mr. Speaker, I just returned from Afghanistan yesterday on a delegation led by the gentlewoman from California, Susan Davis. We are all blessed by the sacrifice of our servicemen and women, our diplomats and other civilians in harm's way. We were moved by the courage of the Afghan women, in whose success rests the future of Afghanistan. Mr. Speaker, it's time for the President and this Congress to be straight about what it means to win in Afghanistan. Our spending must reflect our goal, and right now it does not. This is not a 90 percent, in-out, 2-year military operation, and everyone there knows it. Winning requires a long-term plan to return 90 percent illiteracy to literacy, to grow food crops to replace poppies, to transform a 16th century economy to the 21st century. It's a generation of change, and we have to have a plan while we are there and one for leaving. We best honor our men and women who serve and give their lives by being honest. They stand on the wall. They hold the line. They cross the wire. And the least we can do is prepare the American people to match their sacrifice with real and long-term commitment for Afghanistan and for our own national security.

Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland

Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of Chairman Frank's manager's amendment, and I want to thank the chairman, with whom I worked diligently to modify the preemption language in section 208 in a way that would allow the preservation of State laws that provide for ``additional remedies against any assignee, securitizer, or securitization vehicle,'' which is the case in my home State of Maryland. My home State of Maryland has been very aggressive at addressing the foreclosure crisis to protect consumers from fraud and predatory lenders. Maryland was one of the first States to enact an ability to repay mortgage law and has worked closely with the Department of Justice in these efforts on behalf of consumers. This important amendment would respect States like Maryland that already have stringent laws to address some of these issues. I would like to thank Chairman Frank and particularly Mr. Miller and Mr. Watt for their years of work on behalf of consumers. I urge all of my colleagues to support Chairman Frank's manager's amendment and the underlying bill. Many of these mortgage products should never have been on the market in the first place, and now we will get it right on behalf of consumers.

Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland

Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to address the staggering rate of mortgage fraud and predatory lending in this Nation. As our country reels from the continued impact of the recession, it's time to take action that will rebuild our economy in a way that's fair and consistent with our values. Mr. Speaker, this week we will consider H.R. 1728, the Mortgage Reform and Anti-Predatory Lending Act. This bill is an important step toward preventing the abusive and predatory lending practices that have contributed to the highest home foreclosure rate in 25 years. The bill will outlaw many of the egregious energy practices that mark the subprime lending boom and bust. It sets a Federal floor, enabling States like my home State of Maryland to better protect consumers. Now, as we pick up the pieces in this recession, we must learn from our mistakes, by strengthening regulations of our financial system. It means that we must ensure that all consumers are treated fairly and that the mortgage lending industry must be transparent and accountable to our seniors, minority borrowers, and all consumers. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 1728 and additional reforms to stop mortgage fraud and predatory lending.

Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland

Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the Gutierrez-Peters-Edwards amendment. I am a proud sponsor of the amendment. And thank you to Chairman Gutierrez for his leadership on this issue, and also to Representatives Frank and Maloney for their stellar work on behalf of consumers and protecting consumers. This amendment is such common sense that it almost seems unnecessary to explain, and it is supported by the White House. It would simply require credit card issuers to allocate payments in excess of the minimum payment to the portion of the remaining balance with the highest outstanding annual percentage rate. Today, most credit card companies put the high-interest charges at the bottom of your balance. So even if you are making a payment every month, none of that payment will go to the highest interest debt until your payment covers the entire balance of the low-interest debt as well. This is costing consumers thousands of dollars that could be put back into the economy. The current system makes it difficult, if not impossible, for people to pay off their debt, and it is really designed to make consumers prisoners of the credit card company, forever indebted to them because you could never pay off the highest interest debt. The practice has to be changed, and this is the vehicle to change it. Mr. Chairman, the underlying bill and this amendment are about doing the right thing for American consumers and potentially saving them thousands of dollars that can be put straight back into our economy. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment and the underlying bill.

Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland

Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the Matthew Shepard Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009, H.R. 1913. This really is about civil rights. Now, in an ideal world, I wouldn't be standing here speaking here before you now because we wouldn't need legislation like this. But this is anything but an ideal world. And sadly, violent hate crimes are still an unfortunate reality in our society. Last year there were 150 reported hate crimes in my home State of Maryland, and local law enforcement estimates that the actual numbers are higher due to reporting discrepancies. Now, recent statistics also say there were more than 9,000 reported hate crimes. So the time to do something about this is now. And as a long-time violence prevention advocate, I believe we have to do everything in our power to eradicate violence in all its forms. By passing this legislation, we're saying that acts of violence motivated by hate will simply not be tolerated, not for any person, not for any reason. Mr. Speaker, I thank you and I thank the leadership of the Matthew Shepard family for keeping us on mark about what it means to protect people.

Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland

Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland. Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the Congressional Black Caucus budget alternative, and I thank the able leadership of Chairwoman Lee and Mr. Scott for providing us an alternative budget that builds on the framework set forth by President Obama, while increasing investments in areas we in the CBC deem most critical for some of our most vulnerable communities and setting a framework for the future. Budgets are about priorities, and what has happened over this last decade has been a reframing and reshifting of the priorities, and it is time to get those straight and that is exactly what this budget does: Provides investments of $18 billion for health care reform, because the lack of health care is the single largest obstacle to a future of economic prosperity and health for all Americans. This budget provides an additional $17 billion to improve our education system, including important funding for Job Corps centers across this country to train our young people for jobs for the future. An additional $8 billion would be added to transportation and infrastructure, because we must increase mass transit capabilities and update our crumbling water and sewer infrastructure nationwide. And we have to invest in green jobs, which this budget does, for a 21st century global economy. And we make these real commitments for our veterans and military families; and we don't do it by accident; we do it by repealing the Bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003 immediately. This would result in an estimated $42.2 billion in additional revenue for fiscal 2010 alone. That's what this budget proposes. Madam Chair, we have to remember that it was the failed policies of the previous administration that left President Obama and the American people with the largest deficit in history.