Gene Green

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 411, Coal Ash Instruction, had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank my colleague from Colorado because the system does work. Even the President used economics. But that's the President's job, not the EPA. I would like to yield 2 minutes to the ranking member of the Energy and Commerce Committee, the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman).

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. I rise today in opposition to H.R. 4480, the Domestic Energy and Jobs Act. While I support pieces of H.R. 4480, unfortunately I am not able to vote for the bill because I believe it will actually create more regulatory confusion and impediments for our domestic producers. Title I, for example, requires the Secretary of Energy to develop a plan to increase domestic oil and gas leasing from onshore and offshore federal lands that are under the jurisdiction of the Departments of Agriculture, Energy, Interior, and Defense within 180 days of a release of petroleum from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. A new government bureaucracy at the Department of Energy would develop this plan, which duplicates the oil and gas leasing programs at the Departments of Interior and Agriculture. During a House Energy and Commerce Hearing on the bill, the Secretary of Energy expressed many concerns about their ability to effectively do this. I am also concerned with Title III of the bill, which would overturn the multiple-use principle established in the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976. This would undermine the basic principal which has guided the management of public lands for 35 years. I also have concerns with Section 206 of the bill, which would require the Environmental Protection Agency to consider industry costs when determining what level of air pollution is ``safe.'' By doing this we would be rolling back one of the core aspects of the Clean Air Act-- a requirement that was passed on a bipartisan basis over 40 years ago, signed into law by a Republican President and unanimously upheld by the Supreme Court in 2001. I plan to offer an amendment that would strike section 206 and I hope that my colleagues will support it. As a strong supporter of policies that encourage and support domestic energy production, my hope is that in the future, the House takes up legislation that deals with this important issue without including controversial policy riders that prevent bipartisan support in the House and movement in the Senate.

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. I yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of my amendment. I would like to vote for this bill, but it goes way too far. Mr. Chairman, I represent five large refineries and 20-plus chemical plants, so I'm very sensitive to what regulatory compliance can mean to a company's economic success. But for over 40 years, the Clean Air Act has required the Environmental Protection Agency to set the level of each ambient air quality standard based on what is necessary to protect public health. They do this because EPA's job is health, not economic impacts. Again, for over 40 years, Republicans and Democrats have agreed to this principle, which was passed on a bipartisan basis in the 1970s and signed into law by a Republican President and unanimously upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2001. This amendment would strike section 206 of the bill, which would require the EPA to consider industry costs when determining what level of air pollution is ``safe.'' But economic and compliance costs are already considered several times throughout the regulatory process, which is why section 206 is not necessary. The EPA conducts a regulatory impact analysis for a range of emission standards when they propose the standard. Then they do a second regulatory impact analysis when they choose the final standard before it is sent to the Office of Management and Budget for review. The regulatory process works. Last September, the Office of Management and Budget did not allow EPA to move forward with a revised ozone NAAQS standard because they felt that the costs of compliance would be too high for the regulated industries at this point in our economic recovery. To use a Texas saying, let's not throw out the baby with the bathwater. Section 206 is a policy rider that undermines 40 years of bipartisan agreement, and I encourage my colleagues to support my amendment that would strike it. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. I appreciate my colleague and your work on the committee, but that's why we need to remove 206. That provision actually takes away health and safety as EPA's primary responsibility. That's what it was created for in 1970. We already have a system that will work to deal with the economic problems. We go to OMB. But even more so, we can go to the States. Because once EPA and OMB approves that rule, then they go to the States to work out the compliance. And in our district, where I have a huge industrial capacity, we actually work with our State agency and EPA to make sure we can economically do that within a timeframe. That's why this amendment should be acceptable, Mr. Chairman, and I would encourage Members to vote for this amendment when it comes up for a vote tomorrow. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. I thank my colleague, the ranking member on the Rules Committee, for allowing me to speak. I'm a strong supporter and an original cosponsor or of the U.S. Call Center Worker and Consumer Protection Act. This legislation will help us protect U.S. consumers and level the playing field for American workers who have seen thousands of call center jobs needlessly sent offshore in recent years. Namely, this bill would require the call center to notify the Secretary of Labor at least 120 days before relocating outside the United States. It would require the Department of Labor to publicly list the firms that have moved call center jobs overseas and then make those very firms ineligible for any direct or indirect Federal loan for 5 years. To protect consumers, this legislation requires call center employees to notify U.S. consumers where they are located, if asked, and will require that call center to transfer calls to an American call center for questions. The U.S. Call Center Worker and Consumer Protection Act has support of both sides of the aisle, and I ask all my colleagues in the Chamber to stand with American consumers particularly, but also with these American jobs, and support this legislation and, again, support the effort to make sure we can have a vote on the House floor for that.

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to have it noted in the Congressional Record that I was not able to be in Washington on June 8, 2012 for votes because of a family emergency. If I had been here, I would have voted as follows: On the Gosar Amendment that reduces the budget for the Botanic Garden by $1,235,000 for fiscal year 2013, I would have voted ``no.'' On the Broun Amendment that reduces funding for the Congressional Research Service by $878,000 (FY 2012 Level) and transfer $878,000 to the spending reduction account, I would have voted ``no.'' On the Scalise Amendment that reduces by $1,000,000 the amount provided for the Open World Leadership Center and directs that $1,000,000 to the spending reduction account, I would voted ``aye.'' On the Moran/Welch/Pingree Amendment that prohibits the use of Styrofoam products in food service facilities in the House of Representatives, I would have voted ``no.'' On the Flake Amendment that prohibits funding for the purchase of paid online advertisements by Members, committees, and leadership offices, I would have voted ``aye.'' On the Democratic Motion to Recommit H.R. 5882 that would cut by 10 percent the official franked mail component of the Member's Representational Allowance, I would have voted ``aye.'' On Final Passage of H.R. 5882, Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 2013, I would have voted ``no.'' Finally, on the Republican Motion to Instruct Conferees on H.R. 4348, offered by Mr. Broun of Georgia, that would instruct House conferees to insist on provisions that limit funding out of the Highway Trust Fund (including the Mass Transit Account) for Federal aid highway and transit programs to amounts that do not exceed $37,500,000,000 for FY 2013, I would have voted ``no.''

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I oppose H.R. 436 but I am opposed to the Medical Device Excise Tax. I support the Affordable Care Act, but just like all bills, it was not perfect. In Texas, the medical device industry supports nearly 55,000 jobs. It is an industry at the cutting edge of technological innovation and is critical to addressing many of the health challenges we face now and will in future. I believe this industry, just like any other, should pay their fair share, but I am worried that a tax like this will chill innovation. The tax is on revenue and not profits, which will have a disproportionate effect on small and mid-sized companies. Medical devices are incredibly expensive to develop and it takes a lot of revenue to offset overhead. By taxing revenue, instead of profit, it adds additional costs. Most business taxes are calculated on the profits after expenses, but this one is not. A company near our district in Houston, Cyberonics, employs hundreds of Americans. A few years ago, I toured their facilities. I was surprised to learn that they did all of their manufacturing in-house, in Houston. This is an increasingly rare way to do business, but one we should encourage. Their company is a good example of American innovation and entrepreneurship. I am concerned that the way this tax is structured, it will negatively impact Cyberonics and companies like it. We should be taking steps to support research, design, and manufacturing job growth in our country. While I oppose this tax, I am also opposed to the way this bill pays for the repeal of the tax. We should not replace a poorly designed policy with more poorly designed policies. This bill shifts the cost on to low and middle income earners and potentially risks their health insurance coverage under ACA. We should find a better way to fix this and I want to work with my colleagues to craft a compromise that will not endanger American jobs but at the same time won't shift significant costs on to those who can least afford it.

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chair, I am concerned about the Energy and Water Appropriations bill for several reasons. One of these reasons is that while this bill increases funding for the Army Corps of Engineers over the President's request, it is not enough. The Army Corps completes critical flood control projects and also, through dredging at our port, fuels a major economic engine in Harris County, Texas and has been underfunded for years. Additionally, by cutting New Starts completely, this bill prevents funding for a vital project in Houston that will explore widening and deepening the shipping channel to the Turning Basin. This funding is critical to preparing our Port for the years ahead. The Port of Houston is the largest foreign tonnage port and the largest petrochemical port in the country. In fact, it moves the second largest amount of cargo in the country, as 8.5 percent of our nation's cargo moves through the Port of Houston. The commerce that occurs at our port is critical to our Nation's energy and chemical sectors and to our country's ability to trade and move goods throughout our country. It is a port of national significance, but has not received the attention that is necessary to answer the challenges we face in the near future. Despite the national importance of our port, it is facing a dredging crisis. In 1998, the Federal Government and the Port of Houston invested $700 million over the course of years, to deepen and widen the Ship Channel. An investment we have benefitted from tremendously. As the years have passed silt has settled and reduced the draft in the channel significantly. Today, only .4 percent of the channel is dredged to its proper depth across the entire width of the channel. That is astounding. Our Nation's investment is rapidly deteriorating. Currently, the Houston Ship Channel is dredged to a depth of 43 feet, but it should be 45 feet. The Panama Canal is expanding and when it is completed, the Port of Houston should be at a minimum of 45 feet and we could take advantage of additional depth. In the most recent President's budget request, the Administration asked for $700,000 in new dredging money and new start funding of $100,000 toward study on the widening and deepening of the Houston Ship Channel to the Turning Basin. The new start funding is particularly important, once a project gets new start money it is more likely to be funded in the future. Unfortunately, in the bill we are considering today, the funding for the new start will be eliminated. This increased funding level for dredging just over $24 million, which is maintained in the Energy and Water Appropriations bill, is welcome and I am pleased that Congress and the Administration are committing more resources to our maintenance dredging needs, particularly in a budget environment when most programs are cut. However, it's about a third of the total needed to bring our channel back to its authorized depth. The reduced draft costs our region money. As we confront the dual challenges of adopting policies that create jobs and reduce the debt, funding for dredging projects is an item that, while costly, will have more of a positive impact on our economy than a negative impact on our deficit. The Texas Transportation Institute performed a study and determined that a direct economic impact of the loss of 1 foot of draft is $373 million. The majority of this impact is lost business opportunities due to light loading of non- containerized vessels. If the dredging crisis at the port continues to worsen, this cost will quickly increase.

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Chiu Moon Chan, a fellow Texan. From a humble beginning, Mr. Chan founded Dynacq International, Inc., providing jobs and quality healthcare for thousands of people. Mr. Chan passed away on May 17th and the Houston Chronicle printed his obituary. In honor of Mr. Chan, I would like to submit the text into the Congressional Record: Chiu Moon Chan, died on Thursday, the 17th of May 2012, in Houston, at the age of 59. His life made a lasting impact on his family, on the business community, and on the people who knew him. Mr. Chan will be remembered as extremely intelligent, highly energetic, and totally devoted to his family and to the company which he founded and presided over for two decades. He was a person who visualized and actualized the American dream. Born in Hong Kong on the 30th of September 1952, Mr. Chan graduated from Wah Yan College in Hong Kong before moving to the United States in 1970 to attend college at the University of Houston. He worked through college, earning a Bachelor of Science degree in Pharmacy, and became a registered pharmacist in 1978. Mr. Chan was widely known as an entrepreneur and innovator in the healthcare field. He had been involved in that industry since 1971. During the period from May 1978 to July 1988 he was employed by various healthcare service organizations in Houston, Texas including Lifemark Corporation and M.D. Anderson Cancer Center. He started his own home infusion therapy business in 1988. From this humble beginning, he went on in 1992 to found Dynacq International, Inc., now known as Dynacq Healthcare, Inc. Dynacq became a publicly traded company, and achieved national recognition as one of the 200 fastest growing small businesses in the United States from magazines such as Forbes and FSB. Mr. Chan served as President, CEO, and Chairman of the Board of Dynacq for 20 years. During those two decades, his efforts resulted in gainful employment for hundreds of families and quality healthcare for thousands of patients in Houston, Pasadena, and Dallas, Texas, and in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Dynacq's hospital facilities in Houston and Dallas were nationally recognized as centers of healthcare excellence. Mr. Chan was a member of the Pasadena Chamber of Commerce, a supporter of the Rotary Club and the Neighborhood Centers, and an active member of the Wah Yan Alumni Chapter in Houston. He was an avid golfer and a member of Redstone Country Club and Bay Oaks Country Club. He truly enjoyed life and loved to travel, having traveled with his beloved wife to many places around the world. Mr. Chiu Moon Chan is survived by his wife Ella; sons, Dr. Eric K. Chan, and wife Michelle, and Bert K. Chan; three grandchildren; Kailee, Connor, and Emmy; brothers, sisters, and numerous nieces and nephews. It is with great respect, I honor Chiu Moon Chan for lasting impact he had on his family and community, and his many wonderful accomplishments upon his death.

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, this bill is the result of hard work by our committee. I especially want to thank Chairmen Upton and Pitts and Ranking Members Waxman and Pallone and I am proud that our committee is setting an example for bipartisan compromise and productive governing. Contained in the FDA Reform Act is the GAIN Act, a bill introduced by Congressman Gingrey and myself, which is aimed at incentivizing the development of new antibiotics that will fight the serious and life threatening infections that mankind will face in the coming years. The GAIN Act provisions of this bill represent a careful bipartisan balance that appropriately protects patient safety and responsibly offers incentives to innovative drug companies seeking the cures to our world's most deadly bacterial pathogens such as extensively drug resistant tuberculosis, MRSA, and others that we are currently ill- equipped to treat. Currently, we are unable to manage many significant public health threats posed by these pathogens. While a widespread public health threat is in our future, some people in this country are dying today as a result of drug resistance and super bugs. We hear a lot about the challenges of South East Asia, but our health professionals are confronting bacterial infections that are resistant to all currently available antibiotics. Recently, the World Health Organization Director-General said ``things as common as strep throat or a child's scratched knee could once again kill. Hip replacements, organ transplants, cancer chemotherapy and care of preterm infants would become far more difficult or even too dangerous to undertake'' due to the rising threat of super bugs. According to providers I've heard from, drug resistance is already a distinct problem in the front lines of our nation's health delivery. For example, in one instance, a 15 year old girl got her ears pierced. Her earlobes swelled and got red. She went to the emergency room and was admitted for IV antibiotics. The infection was resistant to the usual antibiotics and she became septic and died. There are many other cases in which minor injuries and simple procedures produce unexpected complications because of the emerging threat of drug resistance. Because of the nature of this threat, I urge my colleagues as this heads to the floor and hopefully to conference, that no changes are made to the GAIN provisions to further limit incentives or reduce the list of pathogens. The truth is we do not know what the specific public health threat will be and once it is on top of us it is too late. We have to be prepared and part of this preparedness is getting our drug companies to develop drugs that may not be profit blockbusters but are necessary to help protect us from public health crises. With the help of Chairman Upton and Ranking Member Waxman, we have struck a careful balance. I strongly oppose any changes to the GAIN Act in an eventual conference with the Senate. I am concerned that any changes could create lopsided incentives that lead to unnecessary drugs or, alternatively, remove incentives and result in too few, if any, drugs. I believe the GAIN Act as included in this bill, as well as the entire bill, are good policy. The FDA Reform Act deserves to be passed by the House and I strongly urge my colleagues to support it.

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise to share a few words on the vast and significant contributions Jewish Americans have made towards making America the greatest country in the world. The first Jewish Americans arrived on our shores in 1654, for the same reason millions would follow in later years, as refugees from harm, poverty, and persecution. These first Jewish Americans would settle in New Amsterdam (now New York) and eventually spread throughout our country from places as dispersed as Charleston and Philadelphia in the 18th century to nearly every corner of our country today, including a large and thriving community in my hometown of Houston. The contribution of Jewish Americans to our Nation's history, culture and development are almost too numerous to list--from the legal contributions of Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis, to the musical talents of Leonard Bernstein, to the athletic prowess of Sandy Koufax, to the unknown thousands of Jewish American men and women who struggled for equality, workers' rights, and fought and died bravely for our country against tyranny. Today, the Jewish American community, now over six million strong, continues this long and proud tradition as members of every segment of American society--from the classroom and the boardroom to the battlefield and the halls of Congress. I ask all my colleagues in this chamber to join me in celebrating May as Jewish American Heritage Month.

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the National Flood Insurance Program Extension Act. I support this bill because any extension is better than no extension. We really owe our constituents more than a 60 day extension and we must pass a long-term reauthorization the NFIP. Last year, the House completed their work on a reauthorization. I supported that bill and wish it was the one we could consider today. In our district, in Houston and East Harris County, Texas, the flood insurance program is critically important. Many of our constituents are required to carry flood insurance. The flood plain in our district covers thousands of houses and because of the topography of the land, the flood insurance program is the only way building and living here is practical. Without it, no policies could be written and no one would want to buy or live with such financial risk hanging over their heads. I also hope that when we revisit flood insurance that we include provisions that provide a five year phase-in of flood insurance premiums for low-income homeowners or renters whose primary residence is placed within a flood plain through an updating of flood insurance program maps. This language, which was in the bill we passed last July, homes can be valued at no more than 75% of the median home value for the state in which the property is located. The Harris County Flood Control District implements new flood control measures by maintaining bayous, building retention basins, and implementing drainage features, but even the best flood control can be overrun by a particularly bad storm. This language should be included in the final bill that is sent to the President. I look forward to working with my colleagues so that the next time we consider flood insurance we are reauthorizing and not extending it.

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chair, as one of the cosponsors, I rise in strong support of Amendment #108. This amendment would strike Section 3503 of the legislation, which allows the Maritime Administration to exempt itself from the Federal Acquisition Regulations, the Competition in Contracting Act and Federal Property Management laws, and thus dispose of obsolete vessels in the National Defense Reserve Fleet using less than full and open competition and a transparent process. This amendment should be adopted because it will help ensure competition in contracting for ship disposal by the Maritime Administration. If this amendment is not adopted, MARAD will be permitted to enter into contracts to dispose of their ships without competition or transparency. This puts American jobs and industry at risk. MARAD has expressed an interest in sending decommissioned ships to China to be scrapped. China wants this steel because it is stronger and better than what they produce. This will result in us buying inferior steel from China and China buying our steel at depressed rates because of no competition. Our firms have to be able to compete on an equal playing field and our own government should be encouraging it. We should be encouraging the recycling of superior American made steel to be used here. Instead, Section 3503 stacks the deck against competition and against domestic firms. Why should we give China superior products in a sweetheart deal? If they want better steel they can pay fair market price or make it themselves. President Obama in his memorandum for the Heads of the Executive Departments and Agencies from March 2009, on Government Contracting, said that, ``the Federal Government has an overriding obligation to American taxpayers. It should perform its function efficiently and effectively while ensuring that its actions result in the best value for taxpayers . . . Excessive reliance by agencies on sole source contracts . . . creates a risk that taxpayer funds will be spent on contracts that are wasteful, inefficient, subject to misuse or otherwise not well designed to serve the needs of the Federal Government of the interest of the American taxpayer.'' The President was right and this amendment holds MARAD to this standard.

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 4970, the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2012. The Violence Against Women Act, VAWA, has been instrumental in protecting women from domestic violence, sexual assault, dating violence, and stalking. Domestic violence often has devastating consequences for women, their families, and society as a whole. VAWA provides essential grants including educational programs for the prevention of domestic violence in schools, battered women's shelters, a national domestic violence hotline, grants to improve law enforcement and prosecution of violent crimes against women, among others. It also provides much needed services for the protection of children from maltreatment, sexual assault, and domestic violence. A manager's amendment was offered to address some immigrant protection issues with H.R. 4970, but did very little to change the original bill. H.R. 4970 would change the requirements for abused immigrant spouses of U.S. citizens and permanent residents by imposing a higher standard of proof than required for asylum applications, and by allowing government adjudicators to break confidentiality and interview an accused abuser. The revised bill would only prohibit basing decisions exclusively on the information provided by the abusive spouse. The bill would also decrease protections for immigrant victims by undermining the U visa program, which allows an immigrant victim of a serious crime to stay in the U.S. to assist law enforcement in investigating and prosecuting the crime. The manager's amendment only provides a small portion of victims the opportunity to adjust their legal status after their U visa expires. Battered immigrant spouses would be less likely to report abuse if they could still be deported and their abusive spouses would be made aware they are trying to seek help. H.R. 4970 ignores improving the safety of co-ed students on college campuses. Provisions to strengthen requirements for universities to report on how they address sexual violence on campus, were removed from the bill. If college campuses are not protected from sexual harassment, assault, or violence; students will not be able to learn and could potentially miss out on true educational opportunities. The bill would not restore Native American tribal courts' jurisdiction over crimes of domestic violence or dating violence committed on reservations and tribal lands in cases where the victim is a tribal member but the defendant is not. Those cases currently fall outside the jurisdiction of both tribal and state courts and are rarely prosecuted on the federal level. I believe it is important to provide preventative domestic violence programs as well as help those who have been affected by domestic violence with programs that can help them recover and protect them in the future. Many of the domestic violence programs that we have today would not be able to continue without the reauthorization of VAWA. H.R. 4970 mitigates VAWA's 18-year history and abandons many victims of domestic and sexual violence. As a supporter of VAWA from the beginning, I urge all my colleagues to oppose H.R. 4970 and to vote on a bill that would allow these much needed programs and services to continue so that we may work to stop domestic violence.

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Res. 568, a bipartisan resolution affirming that it is our nation's policy to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons capability and emphasize that containment is not a viable option. Iran is developing the capability to quickly produce a nuclear weapon at a time of its choosing. Iran's acquisition of such a capability would create a significant new regional danger and be an immediate threat to America's interest and allies in the Middle East. A nuclear Iran would most likely trigger an arms race in the region that could de-stabilize an already fragile peace and threaten the global economy. It is imperative that our nation continue to strengthen existing diplomatic and economic pressure on Iran and force it to change course before it is too late.

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I ride in strong opposition to the draconian cuts to health care, food stamps, and other essential programs that are being proposed by the House majority in H.R. 5652. Last summer, this Congress and the Administration agreed on a path to reduce the national deficit by over $2.1 trillion. Over half of this amount was going to come either through a bipartisan agreement by the so-called ``Super Committee'' or through sequestration. I do not like sequestration. It is an inefficient way to make spending decisions that affect millions of Americans. However, this is what was agreed to and for the House majority to go back on that agreement and not have an open and frank debate on how this chamber can agree to reduce our national deficit while preserving essential programs and services is more than just disappointing. For millions of our fellow Americans, it is a matter of survival. This legislation would result in cutting food stamps by over $33 billion dollars. Nearly 50 cents of every dollar into food stamps helps children get the food they need to grow and thrive. H.R. 5652 would gut vital health care services, including ending the Prevention and Public Health Trust Fund, which is essential for finding better ways to promote wellness, prevent disease, and protect against public health emergencies. This bill would also reduce matching state funds to Medicaid, as well as make it more difficult to qualify for the program and make devastating cuts to the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP). It would make sharp cuts to the Social Services Block Grant program, which could result in 1.7 million children losing access to protective services, 450,000 children being denied foster care, and 640,000 children losing child abuse prevention services. This legislation would also eliminate the FDIC's ability to unwind financial institutions that are ``too big to fail'' in an orderly way, eliminate the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's (CFPB) funding source, and cut pension contributions to federal workers. I stand with our nation's servicemembers and am committed to making sure that they have the tools and resources necessary to protect America from any and all threats. However, support for our nation's heroes should not and cannot come at a cost to America's most vulnerable. We can find a better way to balance our priorities, protect those in need, and honor our servicemen and women. I call on Members on both sides of the aisle to join me in finding a better way to reduce our deficit while protecting children, the needy, and America's men and women in uniform and vote against this legislation.

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Madam Chair, I want to thank my colleague for yielding me time, and I want to thank Chairman Wolf for his tireless dedication to maintaining our Nation's manned space flight capabilities. For many years, we worked together. I represent part of Houston and Pasadena, Texas, and we're proud of the Johnson Space Center. The work that is accomplished there advances our Nation in space through mission control, training, and testing. One such testing facility is arcjet. This facility ensures that the material on the outside of the vehicles reentering our atmosphere can withstand the heat that is created. It's a critical capability if we ever want to send humans in space again. The Johnson Space Center arcjet facility is being closed by NASA. I believe the decision is premature. We've received documentation indicating the experts within NASA, from their own Office of Safety and Mission Assurance, believe that the closure would negatively impact the safety and diminish NASA's in-house protection capabilities. Confronted with tough questions on this, NASA has decided to move ahead with their plans. They're unwilling to delay it, and they are even unwilling to further study it. Chairman Wolf, I'm asking for your help as we're confronted with a NASA that is pushing ahead despite our inquiries and despite their own internal disagreements. This is not just a local issue, and I'm afraid that the closure of arcjet at Johnson Space Center would forever undermine our Nation's space program, and I appreciate any assistance you could provide us.

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Madam Speaker, on rollcall No. 224, had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 4133, the United States-Israel Enhanced Security Cooperation Act. This bipartisan resolution reaffirms the American people's enduring and close relationship with the State of Israel, our partner in peace and prosperity in the Middle East. This bill performs three main functions: One, expresses the sense of Congress that the U.S. should take actions to assist the defense of Israel with advanced missile defense systems and intelligence sharing to improve counterterrorism and to protect it against Iran's growing nuclear threat. Two, requires the President to submit reports to Congress on the status of Israel's military edge in light of current trends and political instability in the region. Three, extends the Administration's authority to provide loan guarantees to Israel through FY2015. The current loan guarantee program, begun in 2003, has served both nations well. Israel has never defaulted on its loans and the Congressional Budget Office has scored this provision at no cost. Madam Speaker, I have been to Israel on many occasions, most recently last summer. Every time I have an opportunity to visit, I am reminded of the close ties between our two nations and the strong affinity and appreciation the Israeli people have towards the American people's friendship and support. My time in Israel has also served as a reminder of the dangerous world that the people of Israel face on a daily basis, from rocket attacks from Hezbollah and Hamas, to threats of nuclear attack by Iran, to suicide bombings within their own cities and neighborhoods. It is important that this Chamber say with a strong, unified voice that we stand with Israel during these difficult times. As co-chair of the Democratic Israel Working Group, I call on Members from both sides of the aisle to vote in support of this bipartisan resolution.

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of our Nation's small businesses and manufacturers, and call on this House to vote in favor of H.R. 2072, the Securing American Jobs Through Exports Act of 2011. This legislation will reauthorize the Export-Import Bank of the United States, or Ex-Im Bank, for three years and raise its lending authority to $140 billion. Founded during the Great Depression, the Ex-Im Bank, has served American businesses for nearly 80 years through its financial support of our Nation's exporters--both large and small. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has found that small businesses make up 87 percent of Ex-Im Bank transactions. In Fiscal Year 2011, the Ex-Im Bank supported 290,000 export-related American jobs by providing more than $32 billion in financing to more than 3,600 U.S. companies nationwide. Since 1934, Ex-Im Bank has provided assistance to more than $474 billion of U.S. exports. Over the past five years, the Ex-Im Bank has provided businesses in the 29th District of Texas with over $407 million in export financing alone. It is important to note that the work of the Bank is done at no cost to the taxpayer. It is self-sustaining and covers all of its operating expenses and loan loss reserves through fees the Bank charges users. In fact, the Bank normally makes a profit and has returned nearly $2 billion to the Treasury since 2008. During this time of economic uncertainty and growing international competition, it is imperative that Congress pass H.R. 2072 and reauthorize the Ex-Im Bank. To do otherwise would unnecessarily endanger tens of thousands of American jobs.