Alcee Hastings

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. I urge my colleagues in the House to vote ``no'' on the previous question. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commemorate the 60th anniversary of the end of the Holocaust. This year's anniversary is particularly compelling not only because it marks six decades since the liberation of the Jewish people from history's darkest hour, but also because our world has failed to heed the universal message of the Holocaust. Crimes against humanity anywhere are an affront to all people everywhere. Indeed, I would be doing a disservice to the Holocaust survivors throughout South Florida if I do not address that most unconscionable crime of genocide. Sixty years ago the world failed to aid the victims of the Nazi regime. We conveniently dodged our duty by claiming unsubstantiated evidence, a lack of effective resources to respond, and the existence of more pressing concerns elsewhere in the world. Today, we are remembering the Holocaust while again evading taking the necessary steps to end the genocide in the Darfur region of the Sudan. Hundreds of thousands of people have been killed and millions displaced from their homes by a bloodthirsty militia backed by the Sudanese military and government. Yet we insist that our resources are spread too thin, that events elsewhere in the world command our attention, and that deciding upon the strict definition of these crimes should determine whether we respond forcefully or not. Mr. Speaker, shame on us for using the same old excuses. Elected officials often speak about spreading freedom, establishing democracies, and ensuring minority rights around the world. These are noble endeavors indeed, Mr. Speaker. But what about spreading the saving of human lives? The sacred Jewish text the Talmud reminds us that to save one life is to save the whole world. How many worlds are dying every day in Darfur? I am sure that the Holocaust survivors here in the Capitol Building today can tell us because they witnessed firsthand the cataclysmic annihilation of their families, their neighbors, their friends, and their people. Their memories are still fresh, their thoughts still lucid, and their commitment to educating the world about the Holocaust is more than admirable. Sixty years ago, without rhyme or reason, an entire nation of people were murdered, wrenched from the Earth by an unholy evil. This malevolence persists today in the form of bigotry and intolerance, torture and genocide. Every instance that we ignore and every crime that we brush off feeds the incipient hatred that compels the concentration camp, the slave labor force, the disdain for human life, and the ease with which it is taken. Mr. Speaker, we owe it to those whose names have since been lost to refuse to condemn the genocide in Darfur with only our words. We have come too far in 60 years to slide back again. If we have learned anything from the Holocaust it is that it must not be allowed to happen again. Today is Holocaust Commemoration Day, but it is not enough for us to simply remember. We must also never forget.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commend the outstanding life of Dr. Kenneth B. Clark who passed away on May 1, 2005 at his home in Hastings-on-the-Hudson, NY. Dr. Clark was 90 years old. Dr. Clark was a social scientist best known for his pivotal research used during the Brown v. Board of Education case in 1954. Along with his wife, Mamie Phipps Clark, the two documented studies of the damaging affect on black school children from the separate-but-equal doctrine. As an attorney, Thurgood Marshall successfully used this research in his argument against racial segregation in public schools. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled the practice of racial segregation as unconstitutional because it violated the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Dr. Clark was born in the Panama Canal Zone on July 14, 1914. His mother is credited as his model of perseverance and struggle through social issues. Over the objection of his father, Dr. Clark's mother insisted on returning to the United States. She made the solo trip back to New York City with Clark and his sister Beulah, in 1919. As a seamstress at a sweatshop in the garment district, Dr. Clark's mother supported her children and became one of the first stewards for the women's garment union. ``Somehow she communicated to me the excitement of people doing things together to help themselves,'' Dr. Clark once said. In addition to his work in psychology, Dr. Clark had many of his own groundbreaking achievements as an educator and leader. In 1940, he became the first African-American to earn a doctoral degree at Columbia University in New York. His wife later became the second African American to earn a doctoral degree there. Dr. Clark served as the American Psychological Association president, and in 1960, he was the first tenured African-American professor at the City College of New York. The State Department hired him as a personnel division consultant from 1961-62. By 1966, Dr. Clark was a member of the New York State Board of Regents where he remained for 20 years. After retiring from the Board of Regents, Dr. Clark set up a consulting company that specialized in equal employment opportunity and affirmative action. Dr. Clark is survived by his daughter, Kate Harris, his son, Hilton B. Clark, three grandchildren and five great-grandchildren. Mamie Clark died in 1983. Dr. Clark's work as an educator and researcher remains a lasting legacy for civil rights issues. He was motivated by belief that a ``racist system inevitably destroys and damages human beings; it brutalizes and dehumanizes them, black and white alike.'' Mr. Speaker, Dr. Clark was an eminent scholar whose legacy will be cherished and remembered. He was a mighty influence who brought people together across racial lines. His spirit and insight were instrumental in establishing equality in education and beyond. The impact of Dr. Clark's work helped to raise the dignity and worth of all Americans.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to have my name removed as a cosponsor of H.J. Res. 23.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce legislation that addresses an important issue I have pursued through several Congresses. This bill forms a commission to examine how we, the people, may be best served by our representational democracy. This commission would analyze the current size of the membership of the House of Representatives and examine alternatives to the current method of electing Representatives. Mr. Speaker, this legislation encapsulates an important idea whose time has come. We are one of the most underrepresentative democracies in the world. As a country that holds itself up as the standard bearer for the democratic process, we must continue to ensure our democracy gives all citizens an equal and meaningful voice in our government. As events of the past few years have made clear, we are facing an electoral crisis. Voter turnout continues to fall as people lose more and more faith in the democratic process. We owe it to our constituents and each American citizen to closely examine all available options for ensuring maximum participation in this great democracy of ours. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this legislation. As Members of Congress, we have all taken an oath to protect and defend the Constitution. Part of our duty is to keep the promise of a true representational democracy as envisioned by our forefathers. This legislation furthers that goal. That is why I look forward to working with my colleagues and moving this legislation forward.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I thank my good friend, the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Slaughter), for yielding me this time; and before the chairman of the Committee on Education and the Workforce leaves, when he says that his committee is being asked to play a large role, the amount of that large role over the next 6 years is $12.7 billion. Now, that has to come out of the education budget somewhere. I cannot identify where it may come from, but the fact of the matter is it is going to be a cut. Expressing their concern that the other body is not in session next week, our colleagues on the other side are forcing Members to consider a budget that was just filed at 2:45 this afternoon. I am curious how my colleagues expect the Members to educate themselves on this budget, and do not tell me, well, it has been in conference, because all of us know the mishmash that takes place there. Are they supposed to educate themselves by reading the titles and the tables of contents? If that is how I lived my life, then I would still think that J.D. Salinger's ``Catcher in the Rye'' is about a baseball player who loves to eat deli. The truth of the matter is, our colleagues may not want us to know all that is in this particular budget. Typically, the Committee on Rules reports a closed rule for conference reports, but the House and Senate Republicans have settled on a $2.6 trillion budget that increases the deficit, includes spending cuts that fall the hardest on those with the least in our society, and provides for more tax cuts that this country cannot afford. I do not know what part of not having guns and butter all of us do not understand in this body. Regarding the deficit, the fiscal year 2006 Republican budget makes no attempt to rein in the nearly $400 billion projected deficit for this year. I maintain that the deficit is exactingly the largest problem that this Nation has and is the most difficult for Republicans and Democrats, liberals and conservatives, to explain to the American people. But without PAYGO in this budget, without some consideration being given in a serious way to the deficit, we can all expect that there are going to be real problems. I believe this budget neglects America's children, neglects our seniors and veterans. I believe it underfunds our domestic priorities by billions, including veterans benefits; our education system; and perhaps most importantly during this dangerous time in history, homeland security. Finally, the process by which we are bringing this to the floor is skewered in favor of Members not having sufficient time. America's budget problems are not going to go away, no matter how quickly we ram budgets through here in the House of Representatives.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall 144, H.R. 748, final passage, I mistakenly voted ``yes.'' I request the Record reflect I intended to vote ``no.''

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer an amendment of critical importance to the health and well-being of minority, low-income, and other underserved communities. It was barely 20 years ago when our Nation first became concerned with minority communities and the disproportionate impact pollution has on their health. Over the years, we have sought, and many have done good things to combat, these environmental injustices across community lines. Following the lead of former President George H.W. Bush, who established the Office of Environmental Justice at EPA in 1994, then President Clinton signed Executive Order 12898, titled Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low Income Populations. This order required that all appropriate Federal agencies collect data on the health and environmental impact of their programs and activities in minority and low-income populations, and then develop policies to achieve environmental justice. The order also required Federal agencies and their funding recipients to conduct their programs and implementing policies in a nondiscriminatory manner. Despite the order, Federal efforts to achieve environmental justice have been minimal at best. In fact, in 2002, the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights concluded, ``There is inconsistency and unevenness in the degree to which agencies achieve integration of the environmental justice into their core mission.'' When I asked, just last week, about the future of environmental justice at EPA, an official stated, and I quote, ``What are we going to do for 2005?'' We do not know. The amendment that I am offering today codifies Executive Order 12898. My amendment establishes offices of environmental justice in appropriate agencies and reestablishes the Interagency Federal Working Group on Environmental Justice. Perhaps, most importantly, the amendment represents the first time ever that Congress has attempted to define the term ``environmental justice.'' Mr. Chairman, more than 70 percent of African Americans and Latinos, compared to only 58 percent of the majority community, live in counties which regularly fail to meet current clean air standards. In these areas, a disproportionate number of citizens are suffering from cancer, asthma, toxic poisoning and lung-related deaths. In my own district, there are continuing problems in this area throughout the district and specifically in Ft. Lauderdale. People are literally dying from pollution in their own back yards. It is not by coincidence that the majority of power plants and refineries in the United States are built in low-incomes areas. The land is cheap, the political influence of the neighborhood is virtually nonexistent, and in the bill we are considering this week, such siting is actually encouraged. This amendment does nothing to change existing policy, nor does it amend any provision in the bill. All that it does is ensure that avenues which currently exist will always exist for underserved communities wishing to seek recourse when poor energy and environmental policies adversely affect their health and well being. I implore my colleagues to support this amendment. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I yield my remaining 30 seconds to my good friend and colleague, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Solis).

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote, and pending that, I make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman, but sometimes enough is enough and Members want to go home.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of naming the 4960 West Washington Boulevard, Los Angeles, California post office after one of America's greatest musical artists, Ray Charles. As an international icon who mastered many styles from blues and jazz to rock `n' roll and gospel, Ray Charles deserves this recognition Born Ray Charles Robinson in Albany, Georgia on September 23, 1930, he would later shorten his name to Ray Charles to avoid confusion with boxer Sugar Ray Robinson. Ray's inspirational life story is well known but deserves retelling. Blind since childhood and orphaned as a teenager, Ray Charles lived a life that traveled from despair to fame to redemption. He had been playing piano since he was three years old. In 1937, he entered the St. Augustine School for the Deaf and Blind as a charity student, studied classical piano and clarinet, and learned to read and write music in Braille. Both his parents died by the time Ray turned 15. At that age, Ray Charles left school and joined dance bands in Florida, then moved to Seattle, where a talent content appearance led to work playing at the Elks Club. He formed the McSon Trio with two other musicians--a group modeled on the Nat King Cole jazz group--and they soon moved to Los Angeles where they recorded their first single ``Confession Blues,'' which Charles wrote. Throughout his life, Ray Charles overcame racial prejudice, drug addiction and other setbacks to forge a singular life in music and popular culture, and as a media celebrity. Charles' intense renditions of classic songs earned him the nickname ``The Genius.'' Charles' litany of awards is numerous. He was an original inductee into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. He is also a member of the Blues Foundation Hall of Fame, the Blues Hall of Fame, the Songwriters' Hall of Fame, the Grammy Hall of Fame, the Jazz Hall of Fame, the Florida Artists Hall of Fame, and the Georgia Music Hall of Fame to name some. His definitive version of Hoagy Carmichael's 1930 classic ``Georgia on My Mind'' (1960) became the official state song of Georgia. Ray said once, ``Music's been around a long time, and there's going to be music long after Ray Charles is dead. I just want to make my mark, leave something musically good behind. If it's a big record, that's the frosting on the cake, but music's the main meal.'' Mr. Speaker, we all can dine on his wide assortment of musical treats. Ray Charles' American legacy is well served by the naming of a public building after him. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commend the outstanding life of Dr. Samuel P. Massie, who passed away at the age of 85 on April 10, 2005. Dr. Massie, a chemistry professor, was the first African American to teach at the U.S. Naval Academy in Annapolis, Maryland. As a young graduate student, Dr. Massie worked on the Manhattan Project where he and other scientists made liquid compounds of Uranium for the making of an atomic bomb. He also conducted pioneering silicon chemistry research and investigated antibacterial agents. Dr. Massie held the patent for chemical agents effective in battling gonorrhea. Additionally, he received awards for research in combating malaria and meningitis, worked on drugs to fight herpes and cancer and developed protective foams against nerve gases. Dr. Massie was a former professor at several historically black colleges including my alma mater, Fisk University. Dr. Massie was instrumental in encouraging African American and other minority students to pursue science careers. Samuel Proctor Massie Jr. was born in North Little Rock, Arkansas, the son of two schoolteachers. It is purported that he could read at a third grade level by the time he entered the first grade. He graduated high school at the age of 13 and went on to graduate Summa Cum Laude in chemistry from Arkansas Agricultural, Mechanical and Normal College (now the University of Arkansas at Pine Bluff) in 1936. He then received a Master's degree in Chemistry from Fisk University in 1940. I met Dr. Massie when I was a student at Fisk University, where he was teaching physical chemistry. It was an extremely difficult class and as a boy who had received an education in the rural, segregated south, all of this was unfamiliar territory. I was failing his class and Dr. Massie came to me and said, ``Young man, you're going to fail this class, sign this card and drop the class.'' I did, and Dr. Massie credits himself as the reason I became a lawyer. Dr. Massie was a remarkable chemist, academician, and friend. His accomplishments are too many to mention and the lives he's impacted too numerous to count. He will forever be remembered for his character and his extraordinary work.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to my friend, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee).

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 seconds to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney) for the purpose of making a unanimous consent request.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to oppose this closed rule and S. 256. Once again, the majority has squelched debate on a controversial piece of legislation for no legitimate reason. More than 35 Democratic amendments were offered in the Rules Committee yesterday. Yet none have been made in order. Why? There is no reason for limiting the debate in this manner. The House came into session on Tuesday and Members will leave town later this afternoon after just 2 days of work. Even more, there was only one other bill of substance before the House this week. The time to debate this bill and its offered amendments is available. The willingness to conduct meaningful business, however, is the missing ingredient. A 1-hour debate on legislation containing such sweeping reforms is not the way to conduct the people's business. The argument will be made that this has been 9 years in the making. But a lot of this measure has been overcome by time, and that will be discussed by others later. I am particularly disappointed that an amendment I offered is not being allowed to come before this body for consideration. My amendment seeks to prevent the very bankruptcies that are causing this Congress so much consternation and is germane to the discussion. It requires credit card companies to preserve a customer's interest rate prior to incurring medical expenses if the customer is unable to pay off the full medical expenses on time. It also prohibits hospitals from reporting delinquent patients for 5 years, provided that the patient is paying 20 percent of his or her monthly mandated medical expenses. All the information we have available suggests that medical bills are the second leading cause of personal bankruptcy in the United States. It is, in my opinion, hypocritical to prevent debate on an amendment that could ameliorate some of the issues facing this bankruptcy reform legislation. Is not the whole point of this bill to make bankruptcy less frequent? If Members of Congress have ideas about how to accomplish that, should they not be heard? Many other Members sought to introduce amendments, but have also been denied their opportunity to be heard. These amendments could have improved this legislation. For example, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott) offered an amendment to exempt from the means test provision of debtors who have business losses incurred by a spouse who has died or deserted the debtor. The gentleman from California (Mr. Filner) offered an amendment that would exempt victims of identity theft. And the ranking member of the Rules Committee, the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Slaughter), offered an amendment that imposes restrictions on issuing credit cards to college students. But none of those amendments, or the 31 others, will be debated today because the rule on this bill is closed. At this point, Mr. Speaker, I will insert a list of all 35 amendments which the Republican majority has blocked from being considered in the Congressional Record. Amendments Submitted to the Rules Committee for S. 256 and Denied Consideration by the Rule (H. Res. 211) 1) Emanuel/Delahunt/Dingell--prevents debtors from shielding their funds from bankruptcy liquidation through so- called ``asset protection trusts;'' 2) Filner--exempts disabled veterans from the bill's means test; 3) Filner--exempts from the bill's means test consumers who are victimized by identity theft; 4) Inslee--exempts from the bill's means test consumers whose debts are the result of serious medical problems; 5) Delahunt--requires debtor corporations to file for bankruptcy where their principal place of business is located; 6) Sanders--establishes a ``usury rate'' for credit card companies, above which credit card companies cannot charge consumers; 7) Sanders--caps fees credit card companies can impose on consumers at $15; 8) Sanders--prohibits credit card companies from changing interest rates based on changes in consumers' credit information; 9) Sanders--prohibits credit card companies from raising interest rates based on consumer credit reports; 10) Ruppersberger--requires credit card solicitations to be accompanied by a brochure explaining the consequences of the irresponsible use of credit; 11) Schiff--exempts from the bill's means test consumers who are victimized by identity theft, if at least 51% of the creditor claims against them are due to identity theft; 12) Lofgren--exempts from the bill's means test 1) families facing bankruptcy due to a serious medical hardship that drains at least 50% of their yearly income, and 2) families who lose at least one month of needed pay or alimony due to illness; 13) Lofgren--exempt from the bill's means test a single parent who failed to receive child or spousal support totaling more than 50% of her or his household income; 14) Scott (VA)--exempts from the bill's means test provisions: 1) debtors who have business losses incurred by a spouse who has died or deserted the debtor 2) debtors who have had serious illness in their family and 3) debtors who have been laid off; 15) Scott (VA)--exempts from the bill's means test provisions debtors who have business losses incurred by a spouse who has died or deserted the debtor; 16) Scott (VA)--exempts from the bill's means test provisions debtors who have had serious illness in their family; 17) Scott (VA)--exempts from the bill's means test provisions debtors who have been laid off from their jobs through no fault of their own; 18) Nadler--sunsets the bill after 2 years; 19) Watt--prohibits annual credit card rates higher than 75%; 20) Watt--includes the costs of college in the calculation of debtor's monthly expense; 21) Ruppersberger--exempts from the bill's means test debtors who have declared bankruptcy due to high medical expenses; 22) Hastings (FL)--prevents credit card companies from increasing rates on consumers who use their credit cards to pay for extraordinary medical expenses; also prevents hospitals from generating negative credit information on consumers who are paying their bills in good faith; 23) Meehan--Exempts from the means test disabled veterans whose indebtedness occurred primarily as a result of an injury or disability resulting from active duty or homeland defense activities; closes a loophole in S. 256, which exempts only disabled veterans whose indebtedness occurs primarily while on active duty while failing to exempt disabled veterans whose indebtedness occurs after they have left active duty; 24) Jackson Lee--makes debts arising out of state sex offenses non-dischargeable in bankruptcy proceedings; 25) Jackson Lee--clarifies Congress' intent that nuclear liabilities be covered by the Price-Anderson Act, and not by bankruptcy laws; 26) Jackson Lee--makes debts arising out of penalties imposed on businesses for false tobacco claims non- dischargeable; 27) Jackson Lee--strikes the bill's means test provision; 28) Woolsey--requires credit counseling agencies to provide free services to recent veterans of the military who served in combat zones; 29) Slaughter--requires credit card companies to determine, before they approve a credit card, whether a student applicant has the financial means to pay off a credit card balance; it restricts the credit limit to minimum balances if the student has no independent income; and it requires parental approval for credit limit increases in the event that a parent cosigns the account; 30) Slaughter--applies the highest median income of any county or Metropolitan Statistical Area in the state to all residents of the state petitioning for bankruptcy protection; 31) Millender-McDonald--provides the bankruptcy courts a higher percentage of the fees collected when a debtor files for bankruptcy; 32) Maloney--ensures that debtors emerging from bankruptcy make child credit payments first, before payments on credit card debt. The current version of the bill does not ensure that child support payments will have priority over the other types of unsecured debts, such as credit card debt; 33) Meehan and Berman--provides a modest homestead exemption for people who have suffered a major illness or injury; 34) Jackson Lee--provides additional protections to debtors who are the victims of identity theft; 35) Jackson Lee--increases the means test limit on parochial school tuition expenses from $1,500 to $3,000, so that families Chapter 13 bankruptcy can keep their children in schools that conform to their deeply held religious beliefs. Mr. Speaker, the House has adopted a new modus operandi. We saw it earlier this year with the class action bill, and we are seeing it again today. It seems that if the Republican leadership deems legislation important, and that is their prerogative, it is willing to push through the other body's version without the opportunity for debate here in the people's House on any amendments. This new method does a great disservice to the people of this Nation. Even more, it stops Members, Democrats and Republican, from serving as thoughtful, effective legislators. The House of Representatives is the people's House. The Founding Fathers envisioned a forum for lively debate on the issues of the day, not the controlled steering of selected legislation with no opportunity for meaningful change. What also concerns me is the unworkable means test contained in this legislation. I am greatly disturbed, as I know all the residents of south Florida will be, that this means test includes disaster assistance as a source of revenue. People forced into dire financial circumstances through natural disasters should find bankruptcy a source of relief. Considering disaster assistance as a source of revenue adds insult to injury and contradicts the government's efforts to help people get back on their feet. This legislation, masquerading as protection against bankruptcy abuse, is really a protection for credit card companies and their predatory lending practices. This legislation does not protect the American people. This legislation protects the credit industry at the expense of the American people. Increasingly, credit card companies market their product to riskier consumers, and now they want the Congress to protect them from the losses that are the foreseeable result of this ill-sighted business strategy. Why are we not debating legislation that would address those practices, instead of eviscerating a crucial safety net that Americans rely on when all else fails? Mr. Speaker, should it pass, this bill will severely curtail the ability of Americans to obtain relief from bankruptcy without solving any of its underlying causes. Medical bills, unemployment, and predatory lending practices are at the root of this problem. In the long run, the net effect of this legislation will drive more Americans deeper into financial crisis and weaken our social structure and the Nation's economy. I will not, and cannot, support such an attack on American consumers. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this closed rule and ``no'' on S. 256. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield for a unanimous consent request to my good friend, the gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. Kilpatrick). (Ms. KILPATRICK of Michigan asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Owens), my good friend, for a unanimous consent request. (Mr. OWENS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from San Diego, California (Mrs. Davis) for a unanimous consent request. (Mrs. DAVIS of California asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield to my good friend, the gentlewoman from Ohio (Mrs. Jones), for a unanimous consent request. (Mrs. JONES of Ohio asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. McDermott) for a unanimous consent request. (Mr. McDERMOTT asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, just previous to the unanimous consent request, I was told by way of the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey) that we had 4\1/2\ minutes.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I am privileged to yield for a unanimous consent request to my good friend, the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Meehan). (Mr. MEEHAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield for a unanimous consent request to my good friend, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters). (Ms. WATERS asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)