Steny Hoyer

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Madam Speaker, I take this opportunity to acknowledge the support staff that keeps the House up and running year- round and regardless of which party is in power. Specifically, I would like to pay tribute to Steve and Sharon Rusnak, a truly unique couple who will both be retired within the next few months after serving ``behind the scenes'' in the House of Representatives for a truly remarkable combined service of 70 years. Most of our colleagues, along with countless numbers of our constituents, have been on the other side of Steve's camera lens and have benefited from the skill, talent, and quiet dignity that he has brought to his work in the Office of Photography for the past 32 years. Steve joined the staff of the House in January of 1977 and has been witness to and chronicled the tremendous changes that have occurred within the Congress and the Nation for more than three decades. After attending Ohio State University, Steve began his career as a lab technician and just retired from the House as senior photographer, having also served as acting manager for the Office of Photography last year. Through his skill, hard work, and long hours Steve has made an important contribution to the archives of the House, providing a visual recorded history and account of the House's work for these many years. In addition to being on hand to photograph the annual State of the Union Address and other official events inside and outside of the House chamber, Steve has traveled the four corners of the world to record on film the work of Members of the House. And for so many years he has rushed from office to office and to the steps of the House chamber, in all kinds of weather, to photograph the visits made by our constituents and other groups to Washington. In addition to the professionalism and ability he brings to his job as an official House photographer, his kind manner and ready smile have put many people at ease and given them a visual reminder of their visit to Capitol Hill which for many is a once in a lifetime opportunity. There is no telling how many people Steve has photographed and touched in such a unique way. Steve worked long hours and missed many lunches to do his job and to do it so well, and he was supported throughout the process by a woman who is no stranger to the long hours and unique workplace that exists here in the ``people's House.'' Sharon Rusnak began her service in the House in 1967, as a summer intern to the late Congressman Carl D. Perkins, D-KY. After graduating from Berea College, she worked in his official office and went on to serve as executive assistant for him, and after his death, for his son Carl C. Perkins until 1993. In addition to maintaining a very full Hill schedule, Sharon earned a master's degree in education from George Washington University. After serving as office manager to former Representative Lynn Schenk, D-CA, Sharon joined the staff of former Congressman E ``Kika'' de la Garza, D-TX, and served as scheduler for the House Committee on Agriculture until Kika's retirement in 1996. For the next 8 years, she served as office manager for the committee's ranking minority member, former Congressman Charlie Stenholm, D-TX. Sharon is currently serving as chief administrative officer for the Agriculture Committee chaired by Congressman Collin C. Peterson, D-MN, and will remain in that position for the next few months. Despite the long hours and hectic schedules, Steve and Sharon Rusnak have enjoyed a happy and productive life away from the halls of Congress. They married in 1973 and raised two daughters, Shelley Brooke and Stacey LeeAnn, and took an active hand in helping nurture their children's educational and athletic abilities. Steve served as a youth basketball coach, youth soccer coach, and little league coach. A soccer player in her own right, Sharon also coached youth soccer, worked as a referee, and has experience as a liturgical dancer. Steve and Sharon's commitment to their children is clear. Shelley graduated from Christopher Newport University and Stacey took her first degree from Virginia Tech, subsequently earning a nursing degree from Marymount University in Arlington, VA. There is an expression that ``slow and steady wins the race.'' For more than three decades the House of Representatives has benefited from the tireless service of these very capable civil servants. You won't see their names on the election ballot every 2 years, but the work of this body would be impossible without individuals such as Steve and Sharon Rusnak. Their dedication to their jobs, their country and their family are an inspiration to us all and I would like to thank and commend them for their selfless service to this body. And I hasten to wish them a long, happy, and healthy retirement. They have certainly earned it.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Madam Speaker, today, I want to thank one of my former staffers, David Ransom, who recently left the Majority Leader's Office to join one of our Nation's premier law firms, for his 9 years of service as my principal speechwriter, as a key member of my communications team, and as a senior advisor who always offered strong recommendations based on solid reasoning. There are few people who have served on my staff who know my position on issues better than David does. At a going-away luncheon for David, I told the assembled staff that I needed them to step up as David had, and to give me their best advice and counsel--even if that meant that on occasion they might be disagreeing with me or other staff. As a good lawyer, David clearly appreciates the importance of making a compelling argument. But he also recognizes the necessity of anticipating and considering opposing points of view and policy positions. This approach not only has made David a valued member of my staff, but also has enabled me to better serve my constituents in Maryland's Fifth Congressional District, this great institution and our Nation. During his more than 9 years on my staff, David demonstrated that he is a team player and problem solver who has exceptional analytical, writing, and communication skills. Over that period, he drafted everything from short statements, to countless Floor statements, to major speeches, to substantive policy documents, to advocacy materials for members of the Democratic Caucus. While I am certainly sad to lose a trusted, valued member of my staff, I am very pleased that David has joined such a great law firm-- McDermott Will & Emery, one of the top law firms in America. There's no question that his insight into the congressional leadership and the Members who serve here will be of great value to McDermott Will & Emery's clients. I wish David and his family--his wife, Lori, and two children--all the best in the future, and again thank him for his efforts on my behalf.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Madam Speaker, I offer a privileged resolution and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Madam Speaker, there will be no votes for the balance of the day, and there will be no votes tomorrow. There will be a joint session tomorrow. We will meet for the counting and for the report of the electoral college votes of the November 4 election. There will be votes on Friday, and I will be trying to get you additional information on the calendar for Friday. Clearly there will be at least two bills on the floor--there may be others--the Pay Equity bill that already passed the House last year, and the so-called Ledbetter bill are two items that have been currently already noticed, but there may be other items that we're working in conjunction with the minority on whether or not we can move those forward. But I wanted to let Members know that there would be no further votes today that we contemplate no votes tomorrow. But there will be votes on Friday.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Madam Speaker, your committee appointed on the part of the House to join a like committee on the part of the Senate to notify the President of the United States that a quorum of each House has been assembled and is ready to receive any communication that he may be pleased to make has performed that duty.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I offer a privileged resolution and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I offer a privileged resolution and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that during the 111th Congress, the Speaker, majority leader, and minority leader be authorized to accept resignations and to make appointments authorized by law or by the House.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I offer a privileged resolution and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, for purposes of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner), or his designee, pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of the resolution, all time yielded is for purposes of debate only. Mr. Speaker, 2 years ago Democrats were elected to the majority with a pledge that under our leadership the House would dedicate itself to integrity and accountability. We believe we kept that promise. Today, gifts from lobbyists are banned, the use of corporate jets is prohibited, the earmark process is transparent, all House employees are trained in ethics, and an independent Office of Congressional Ethics has been established. But we also understand that holding this House to high standards is not simply the work of one session or one resolution or, indeed, one Congress. It is a project for all of us to renew year after year. I would like to touch on some of the most important new standards for the 111th Congress: a new rules package that will ensure that the House does the people's work ethically and efficiently. First, we understand that ``revolving door'' between the public and private sectors can compromise the independence of judgment that voters want and deserve. That is why these new rules will prevent ``lame duck'' Members from negotiating employment contracts in secret before their terms expire. Secondly, the rules will no longer set term limits for committee Chairs. I understand that our Republican colleagues once wrote term limits into the rules in an effort against the entrenched power. But it is now clear that that effort fell victim to what conservatives like to call the law of unintended consequences. With chairmanships up for grabs so frequently, fundraising ability became one of the most important for job qualification, and legislative skill was sacrificed to political considerations. Third, these rules limit the abuse of motions to recommit. We invite good-faith efforts to improve legislation. And in these hard times, we need the Republican Party to be constructive partners in policy making. We welcome it. But we all understand which motions are not offered in good faith. Those are the motions that attempt to kill bills through parliamentary tricks and waste our constituents' time on ``gotcha'' politics. Fourth, we are continuing our work to reform earmarks, removing loopholes that allow Members to make some earmarks in secret. Fifth and finally, these rules confirm our commitment to fiscal responsibility. A binge of borrowing has weakened our economy, tied our hands in a financial crisis, and saddled our children and grandchildren with $9 trillion in foreign-owned debt. That recklessness must end, and these rules will help end it. Mr. Speaker, these rules embody our vision for the House as an institution: a place that debates constructively, spends wisely, and lives in the actions of all its Members and all its staff by a standard we can be proud of. That is our vision for this House, and I urge my colleagues to adopt these rules. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the balance of my time be controlled by the chairwoman of the Rules Committee, the distinguished gentlewoman from New York, Chairwoman Slaughter.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that during the 111th Congress, all Members be permitted to extend their remarks and to include extraneous material within the permitted limit in that section of the Record entitled ``Extensions of Remarks.''

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that during the first session of the 111th Congress: (1) on legislative days of Monday when the House convenes pursuant to House Resolution 10, the House shall convene 90 minutes earlier than the time otherwise established by the resolution solely for the purpose of conducting morning-hour debate; and (2) on legislative days of Tuesday when the House convenes pursuant to House Resolution 10: (A) before May 18, 2009, the House will convene for morning-hour debate 90 minutes earlier than the time otherwise established by that resolution; and (B) after May 18, 2009, the House shall convene for morning-hour debate 1 hour earlier than the time otherwise established by that resolution; and (3) on legislative days of Monday or Tuesday, when the House convenes for morning-hour debate pursuant to an order other than House Resolution 10, the House shall resume its session 90 minutes after the time otherwise established by that order; (4) the time for morning-hour debate shall be limited to the 30 minutes allocated to each party, except that on Tuesdays after May 18, 2009, the time shall be limited to 25 minutes allocated to each party and may not continue beyond 10 minutes before the hour appointed for the resumption of the session of the House; and (5) the form of proceeding for morning-hour debate shall be as follows: (a) the prayer by the Chaplain, the approval of the Journal and the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag shall be postponed until resumption of the session of the House; (b) initial and subsequent recognitions for debate shall alternate between the parties; (c) recognition shall be conferred by the Speaker only pursuant to lists submitted by the majority leader and by the minority leader; (d) no Member may address the House for longer than 5 minutes, except the majority leader, the minority leader, or the minority whip; and (e) following morning-hour debate, the Chair shall declare a recess pursuant to clause 12(a) of rule I until the time appointed for the resumption of the session of the House.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I had the privilege of chairing a subcommittee on the Appropriations Committee many years ago, and Rob Nabors was my staff director, so I had an opportunity to work with him firsthand. And I want to echo the comments of Mr. Obey and, I know, the comments that Mr. Lewis will make. Mr. Nabors is an individual of great intellect, great integrity, and great insight. And I want to frankly express on behalf of the House our appreciation to the President-elect for having the wisdom to choose somebody who knows the House so well and I think we will be able to work with very closely, although my impression is that his relationship with Mr. Obey may be modified just slightly. Rob, congratulations to you.

Mr. HOYER. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. In this time of economic crisis--as America is challenged, as economists tell us that we are facing the worst recession since the Great Depression--I want to say to Barney Frank, the chairman of the Financial Services Committee, that nobody has worked harder over the last 12 months with Secretary Paulson, Ben Bernanke, Chris Dodd, Spencer Bachus, and with others in the Senate and in the House to try to address this issue in a responsible, effective way. There is nobody in this body, Republican or Democrat, who wants to see this economy go down further. There is nobody in this body, Republican or Democrat, who wants to see people losing jobs. There is nobody in this body who wants to see the 401(k) plans of our senior citizens who are relying on those plans for their retirement to have it eroded by further reduction in its value. Lyndon Johnson once said, ``It's not difficult to do the right thing. It's difficult to know what the right thing is.'' And that is, of course, what this debate is about, what is the right thing. I think it would be a fair statement that there will be really nobody who votes on this bill who will say this is absolutely right or this is absolutely wrong. There will be many of us who will vote, however, in a belief that this is a further effort to try to staunch the extraordinarily rapid fall that this economy has seen over the last 12 months. This bill is designed to give the automakers the time and space they need to become a competitive job-creating industry once again. Why? Because we need them. We need their industrial capacity; we need them, frankly, psychologically; and we need them in terms of the employment they give, the profits they make, and the quality of product they provide. It is designed, this bill, to do so while protecting taxpayer dollars. Does it do so absolutely? No, it does not. But it has made very substantial efforts to put us in the best position possible. Reconciling the goals of saving these companies for the welfare of our country and protecting our taxpayers has taken long negotiations and compromise on both sides, but I'm convinced we've come to a sound solution. These rescue loans are necessary--not to reward bad decision making in Detroit, but to protect 3 million American jobs, 3 million livelihoods, 3 million families who depend on the automakers; not only their direct employees, but the workers, their suppliers, the small businesses--as the gentleman from Texas referenced--that serve those workers and entire communities. Are we really willing to put those workers at risk in this deep recession? 533,000 jobs lost this year last month, 533,000 last month. Let me give you a comparison. During the last year of the last administration in 2000, we gained over 1\1/2\ million jobs. This year, we've lost over 1\1/2\ million jobs. That's a 3 million job turnaround in the two 8-year interfacing periods. That's why people in America are hurting. We cannot take the risk of having a million-month lost jobs. We're not willing to put those workers at risk in this deep recession. As John Judis put it recently in the New Republic, without public loans, ``the industry will disappear the way the American television manufacturing industry disappeared. American workers and engineers will lose their ability to compete in a major durable goods industry.'' We cannot afford to have that happen. The gentleman from Texas said that we don't want that to happen. The gentleman from Massachusetts says we don't want that to happen. We are trying to figure out how we ensure the objective that both of those gentlemen believe is appropriate. That is the motive behind the $15 billion in emergency bridge loans for the car companies. But it is equally important to ensure that those loans lead to real reform to ensure that we do not find ourselves right back in this same emergency in just a few months' time. All 435 agree that that is not an objective or a result we want to see. Congress has insisted that the automakers develop detailed plans for long-term viability. I'm pleased that we were able to work with the administration. It has been criticized, but the administration and the President, others in the administration with whom I have talked, believe that making sure that this industry has the ability to continue is critical to the welfare of this Nation--not just to this industry but of this Nation. The viability plans that we are requiring were presented to Congress on December 2, and we've examined them in detail. Now, this bill will hold the automakers to their promises. They will be accountable to Congress and the administration as well as an administration-appointed ``car czar'' who will oversee the efforts of the industry and its stakeholders to cut costs, restructure debt, and renegotiate labor contracts. They will not be running the car companies, as they should not be, but they will be overseeing and ensuring that the car companies carry out the promises that they have made to us and to the taxpayers. Just like any other lender, the Federal Government is insisting that the recipients of its loans be on a plausible path to profitability. If the automakers stick to their plans for viability, more assistance, of course, may be possible. But if the administration-appointed official finds that they have not made adequate progress on restructuring by March 31, the loans will be called, and the automakers will be a step closer to bankruptcy. The automakers and most of the people with whom I've talked, liberal economists, conservative economists, Republicans and Democrats, believe that bankruptcy is not the option. There are some who believe that's the option, but most I have talked to do not. This bill, of course, also includes safeguards for the taxpayers, as I said. It lets the American people profit if and when the value of the car companies recovers, as surely all of us hope it will. And it guarantees that taxpayer money will not fund lavish executive bonuses or golden parachutes. Mr. Speaker, if we act today, we can seize the chance for an American auto industry that is leaner, greener, and once more competitive. But ladies and gentlemen of this House, if we do nothing, we face the risk that sometime soon there will be no American auto industry. That will not be good for our national security, it will not be good for our economic security, it will not be good for the psychology of our country. So Mr. Speaker, I urge us, as I urged before when we acted to try to free up credit to prop up the financial industries--so critical to the success of every industry, of every consumer, of every household--to act not as Democrats, not as Republicans. I believe this will be a bipartisan bill. There will be Republicans who vote for this bill and Democrats who will vote for this bill. The administration has worked hard with us. We've worked hard with them to come to agreement. There may be some items that are still not in agreement. But the overwhelming objective of this bill and the result of this bill is agreed to between the administration and ourselves. This bill has the power to protect innumerable American jobs, and its strong safeguards will ensure that we are authorizing anything but a bridge loan to nowhere. Mr. Speaker, I rise on behalf of this legislation, and in closing, again thank Barney Frank, Spencer Bachus, and all of the others in the House on both sides, proponents and opponents, who have worked on this bill conscientiously to try to respond to a crisis that confronts our country and that the American public is asking us to help them solve to make their lives better, to bring our country back.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. I thank the chairman for yielding. Madam Speaker and Members of this House, I said that last Monday would be a day of consequence. It was a day of consequence. We have been criticized as a body for not deciding affirmatively on Monday. What we did decide, however, was that initial failure should not stand because the crisis confronting our country was too great. And Republicans and Democrats together, administration and Congress, chairman and ranking member, each individual Member decided that failure was not an option. On Monday, the dividing line in this House was not between parties-- it was between those who believed the dangers of doing nothing outweighed their reservation about Monday's bill and those who had yet to be convinced. Since then, I believe that the number of the convinced that this action is essential has grown. Some were convinced when a vote in the Chamber led to the evaporation of $1.2 trillion of wealth in about 120 seconds; some were convinced when they heard that America lost another 159,00 jobs last month making a total of lost jobs this year of 760,000 jobs. In a similar period 8 years ago, we had gained 1.5 million jobs-- a net turnaround of over 2.2 million jobs. Americans are in trouble. They're expecting us to act. Some were convinced by the stories like this one from a small town car dealer in Utah. He said this: ``I'm not going to be able to pay my employees next week. I can't get the kind of credit line from the bank that I have had through my entire career unless you do something.'' This bill outreaches not only to minorities but to small businesses as well. And I thank the gentlelady from California for her focus on that issue and Mr. Bachus for his focus on that issue. What happens on Wall Street is bound up with the jobs of millions on Main Street, and the retirement of millions on Main Street, and the homes of millions in hometown America, and dreams of millions of our fellow Americans. If disaster strikes those few square miles in Manhattan, it will surely spread until every one of those jobs and retirements and homes and dreams are put at great risk. This week I've heard from the Prime Ministers of Australia and Japan who are telling us that their people are bracing themselves, worried that America will not rise to the occasion. I am proud to be a Member of this House, and when challenged, I believe this House rises to its responsibilities and I believe it will do so today. We sing the praises of American leadership, and today, I think we will deserve that praise. This is the responsibility that comes with our duty as Representatives in the people's House. For all of those reasons, this bill is essential. So many of us have improved the administration's plan, Republicans and Democrats, working together, which came to us as a mere three-page bill, giving essentially a $700 billion blank check to the administration. Republicans and Democrats knew as one that that could not stand. The heart of the bill remains a plan for the government to buy up bad financial assets, restoring the flow of credit so essential to the growth and maintenance of our economy. But we fought to ensure that taxpayers will be the first to profit if and when those assets rise again in value, making the true price tag of this bill far, far less than $700 billion. In fact, Warren Buffett, one of the most successful investors in the history of America, has said this, ``If they do it right, and I think they'll do it reasonably right''--his expectation is that we will do it reasonably right--he said, if we do that, we'll make a lot of money, we being the taxpayers of America. So we have the opportunity not only to save our economy, to save those dreams of our fellow citizens, but also to make some profit. In addition, we made sure the financial community will be obligated to pay the taxpayers back for their loan. We restricted executive compensation because CEOs whose recklessness helped bring on this crisis should not receive taxpayer-subsidized golden parachutes or extraordinary salaries. We are subjecting the Treasury Secretary's decisions to strong oversight. Republicans and Democrats together agreed that that should be done. Finally, we will help homeowners renegotiate their mortgages to prevent a further flood of 2 million projected foreclosures. That's what this bill is about. That is the action we are asked to take today. On Wednesday, the Senate raised Federal insurance of bank accounts from $100,000 to $250,000, and also chose to add several tax cuts. I personally believe that raising the FDIC can be argued on both sides of the question, but certainly, it ought to stabilize our local banks. However, as all of you know, I strongly disagree with adding those tax provisions because the Senate has chosen to finance them with debt. This crisis is making it painfully clear the dangers of fiscal recklessness and that debt does indeed matter. A lesson, in my opinion, the Senate has ignored. But an emergency like this calls for the courage to compromise. On Monday, Chairman Frank said, ``If we aren't prepared to accept some of the things we don't like, we will not have the power to deliver for the people we care about.'' The chairman was absolutely right. For me, those people are families unable to take out a loan to buy an appliance or pay for college. They are Americans who have worked their whole lives only to see their retirement accounts threatened. They are the millions of workers fearing a pink slip they did nothing to earn. For their sake, for their sake, we must act. I urge all of us to pass this legislation. I urge all of us to vote for this legislation. I know there will be some who will not vote for this legislation. I want them to know that I respect their judgment. We have a difference of opinion. On Monday, America was deeply divided, and their representative body, not surprisingly, was deeply divided. In the last 4 days, Americans in small towns, on farms, in urban areas and suburban areas have reflected upon the consequences of inaction, and while they have not come to the universal thought that we ought to pass this bill, they have told us in the strongest terms we expect the people's House to act in a way that they think best to save our economy, to protect our dreams, to make America whole again.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Madam Speaker, we swore an oath to protect this country, to protect our Constitution, and protect our people. Most days in the House of Representatives, we make judgments. Those judgments are between what we think are good and better and perhaps bad. Most days are not like today. This is a day of consequence for the American people. This is a day of consequence to our country. This is a day when the Democratic leader, myself, rises to follow the Republican leader, and they speak with one voice as America faces crisis. That's what Americans want us to do. I congratulate Mr. Boehner for his courage and for his leadership. And I congratulate my good friend Roy Blunt, with whom I have worked on issue after issue to try to bring us together, not on behalf of Republicans or Democrats but on behalf of our people. Why should taxpayers lend out their own money to solve a crisis brought on by someone else's greed? Because when it comes to our economy, none of us, none of us is an island. We are all bound together in boom or bust, in growth or collapse, from the bankers on Wall Street to the smallest rural community that we represent. Imagine, my colleagues, that we do nothing. A million more homes will likely be foreclosed on. Banks would likely be unable to lend. Credit, the lifeblood of any economy, might dry up across America. That means families unable to take out a loan to buy an appliance when their washing machine or refrigerator breaks, or send a child to college. It means retirement savings devastated. It means businesses shrinking all over America unable to meet their payrolls, and jobs lost and families at risk. That's what Mr. Boehner said and that's what I say. That's what Mr. Paulson has said. That's what Mr. McCain has said. That's what Mr. Obama has said. America faces a crisis, and Americans call out for us to come together to confront that crisis on their behalf. It means workers losing their jobs on top of the more than 600,000 that we have lost this year. The meltdown would begin, it is true, in a few square miles in Manhattan. But before it was over, all of us know no city or town in America would be untouched. With this bipartisan rescue plan, I am hopeful, every one of us in this body is hopeful, the President of the United States is hopeful, and I know that every American that we have the honor and privilege of representing hopes that we will prevent the worst-case scenario. Under a plan put forward by President Bush, the government would purchase the bad assets clogging up our financial system, with the goal of restoring the flow of necessary lending and credit. The original plan gave unchecked power to the Secretary of the Treasury to spend $700 billion as he saw fit. We, who represent the American public, who will be at risk, we hope they will not lose and we think they may not, but we said, no, we cannot do that. Our responsibility is to ensure transparency and oversight so that we know how their money is being spent and can ensure to the extent possible that it is spent in as honest and as effective fashion as we can effect. We made clear that this Congress does not write blank checks. Both Chambers and both parties negotiated around the clock. I especially want to thank my colleague, as I have before, my friend Minority Whip Roy Blunt. Roy Blunt came to the table, and everybody that has been at that table has said Roy Blunt represented the American public at that table, as Barney Frank represented the American public at that table. We've made significant improvement to the President's plan. First, we fought to add provisions ensuring that if and when financial institutions helped by this rescue begin to grow again, taxpayers will be the first to share in their profits; so even though this bill authorizes a total of $700 billion, as Mr. Spratt pointed out earlier today, the Congressional Budget Office does not believe that it will be anywhere near that price tag. Some of you have heard me say that I was sworn in to the Maryland State Senate in January of 1967. On that same day in my State, Spiro T. Agnew was sworn in as Governor of the State of Maryland. And in his inaugural address, he said to all of us that the cost of failure far exceeds the price of progress. I think that is what is at stake here today, that the cost of our failure will far exceed the price of the progress we try to effect in this bill. Secondly, we added a repayment clause originally championed by Congressman Tanner. And after 5 years the administration will have to tell us the true net cost to taxpayers and submit a plan laying out how Wall Street and financial institutions will pay back the taxpayer. While the final provision we negotiated with Republicans is not as strong as either of us would have liked, it is a step in the direction that both of us sought. Thirdly, this bill restricts the compensation of executives. We ought not ask taxpayers to take a risk and advantage people who are making millions either as they work or as they leave successful or failed institutions. Fourth, the Treasury Secretary's decisions will be subject to oversight and judicial review. Finally, we will help homeowners change the terms of their mortgages to forestall the 2 million projected foreclosures that could further cripple our economy and devastate our neighborhoods. I know that it is not as good as some would like, but the alternative is nothing, and that is not acceptable. We have ensured that this bill will not reward Wall Street for bad risks. Instead, it will keep local banks open. It will protect retirement accounts. It will help families get the credit they need. It will help small businesses stay alive and hiring. But we must also reform our financial sector to safeguard against another collapse like this, and we will do so. Fiscal irresponsibility and regulatory neglect were at the core of this crisis. We must and we will investigate just how that failure occurred. And we will strengthen regulation and put economic referees back on the field. Responsible oversight must return to Wall Street. Today, though, today, we are doing our best to forestall what Secretary Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Bernanke are predicting would be a disaster. I opened by saying America was in crisis and that this was a day of consequence for our country. They have sent us here to respond. Today, this is not a Republican House or a Democratic House. It is the People's House. And the people, by an overwhelming majority, have asked us to act. They have not said act on this bill in this way because, like us, they're not sure. But what they do know is that inaction is not an option, that inaction will result in greater pain for our people and for our country. So I rise with my friend John Boehner and my friend Roy Blunt and with Speaker Pelosi and with President Bush and with John McCain and with Barak Obama and say this day of consequence, let us meet the challenge, let us act, let us confront this crisis, let us be the best of the people's House.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Madam Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to my constituent and good friend Mayor Gerald Donovan who will soon be retiring after 32 dedicated years in elected in elected office in the Town of Chesapeake Beach, MD. Gerald Donovan comes from a long line of public servants and the importance of serving one's community was instilled in him at a young age. His grandfather, Wesley Stinnett was mayor of Chesapeake Beach from 1956 to 1963. After his grandfather passed away, Donovan's father served out his term. In 1976, Gerald was elected to the town council and, after 7 years of service, Donovan followed in the footsteps of his father and grandfather and became mayor in 1983. Under Mayor Donovan's leadership, Chesapeake Beach has thrived-- becoming a vibrant small town that has witnessed an improved quality of life and an increased sense of community. Mayor Donovan has worked to make the small town a great place to stay and visit. His tenure has seen the addition of a water park, beach trolleys, new housing, and a beautification initiative, all of which have won him grateful neighbors and constituents. New development has been matched with an updated infrastructure with everything from a boardwalk and new sidewalks to a new, clean wastewater treatment system. Given the town's location on the Chesapeake Bay, it is unfortunately often in the path of potentially destructive weather events. In recent years it has been impacted by several hurricanes and a tornado. In every case, Mayor Donovan has stood ready to tackle cleanup and lend a hand to neighbors and businesses touched by disaster. Mayor Donovan has managed to carry through initiatives that have a tangible positive effect on the daily lives of his constituents, raising overall revenue for the town. He has demonstrated what is possible with ingenuity, managing to leave a town surplus of over 50 percent of the town's overall annual budget. Despite announcing his retirement, Mayor Donovan continues to look to the future, recently announcing that he is moving forward in an attempt to remove Chesapeake Beach from dependence on the grid and tap into wind and solar power as renewable, money-saving energy sources for the town. Madam Speaker, Gerald Donovan's service to the Chesapeake Beach community goes beyond his duties as its mayor. He also contributed to the development of Chesapeake Beach through charity and enterprise. With his brother Fred, Mayor Donovan co-owns the Rod 'N' Reel Restaurant, a popular meeting place and a great place to have a seafood dinner. For over 25 years, the restaurant has hosted the Celebration of Life Cancer Gala, an event created to honor the life of Gerald's father. The annual gala attracts an average of 1,500 people, raises more money for the American Cancer Society than any other event in all the State of Maryland. Not only that, but in his true devotion to the State, 60 percent of the funds raised goes to support research initiatives taking place in Maryland. Madam Speaker, Mayor Gerald Donovan has made a tremendous mark on the community of Chesapeake Beach and the State of Maryland. I ask my colleagues to join me in applauding him on his many accomplishments and wishing him the best as he ends his career as an elected official.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. I will yield one more time, and then I want to conclude.

Mr. HOYER. Is my friend aware that we don't have that bill? He talks a lot about a bill that we don't have. He talks a lot about a bill that the majority leader says in the Senate that he won't consider our bills. Is the gentleman aware that we do not have the Senate bill?

Mr. HOYER. If the gentleman will yield again, I will inform him that we do not have that bill.

Mr. HOYER. Will my friend yield on that?

Mr. HOYER. Let me just make one continuing point. So we have acted on the regulatory field; but very frankly, what has happened is this administration said they didn't believe regulation was helpful to growing the economy, and Senator McCain, their candidate for President, has said he's the biggest deregulator in town and doesn't believe in regulation. So I tell my friend that, from a regulatory standpoint, the articulation of policy by the present President and your candidate for President has been that they do not believe in keeping the referee on the field.

Mr. HOYER. I yield to my friend.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Ladies and gentlemen of the House, as for the schedule for the balance of the day, I have had discussions with the minority. Mr. Arcuri will be offering the rule on the energy extender bill. We will not vote on the rule tonight. There will be no further votes tonight. After discussion with the Republican side of the aisle, we have agreed, and we will do a unanimous consent, but we will be coming in at 8 a.m. tomorrow. The reason for coming in at 8 a.m. tomorrow, as I think all of you know, is that the Jewish holidays start at sundown tomorrow night. To accommodate, therefore, our Members getting to their homes to be with their families, it is necessary for us to complete our business by, hopefully, no later than 12:30. Therefore, we will be coming in an hour early. We haven't discussed this, but hopefully, perhaps, we could dispense with 1-minutes as well so we can get right to the business at hand if that's possible. We will try to get all Members out of here by 12:30 so that we can observe the holidays for our Jewish colleagues. I yield back the balance of my time.