Steny Hoyer

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. It would fail on suspension.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. I thank the distinguished Speaker for recognizing me for this delightful opportunity. Madam Speaker, you will appreciate this as much as anybody in this House. I was elected in a special election on January of 1981, actually May of 1981. The Maryland delegation had eight members. Fifty percent of the members of the Maryland House were women, Mrs. Holt, a Republican, Mrs. Spellman, my predecessor who had a cardiac arrest and her seat was declared vacant, Mrs. Byron, a distinguished wife and daughter-in-law of two Members of Congress, and actually there were four Byrons that served in the Congress of the United States, and Barbara Mikulski, were all members of the Maryland delegation. It was a wonderful delegation. One by one, those women left for one reason or another. Senator Mikulski, of course, became the first woman elected to the United States Senate without a relative preceding her. One by one, they were replaced by a male. Those were good males, I want you to know. But our delegation became an all-male delegation. It was, to that extent, not fully representative of the people of our State. We have been advantaged now, not only because Marylanders have elected an extraordinary individual to serve them. She is a highly educated individual. She traveled throughout the world. Her father served in the Air Force. She is well educated. She didn't go to the University of Maryland, which was a lamentable fact, but she went to a great school, Wake Forest University. She got her law degree in New Hampshire. She has served the community well and has served citizens' organizations well. So in a very real sense, she has been a representative for a very long period of time. This day, however, she begins her career as a representative elected by the constituents of the Fourth Congressional District. Madam Speaker, I know that I speak on behalf of yourself, on behalf of all the Members of the House and certainly on behalf, Donna, of the Maryland delegation, we are extraordinarily proud that you have joined us. Our delegation will be stronger, better and more representative because of that. And this institution will be stronger for the strong advocacy that you will bring on behalf not just of the people of the Fourth Congressional District, but the people of this Nation. Ladies and gentlemen, I am deeply honored to introduce to you a young woman to whom some years ago I gave an appointment to the United States Air Force Academy. She determined that she was going to go to Wake Forest. But she has been my friend for a long time. Ladies and gentlemen, the newest Member of this body, Donna Edwards from the Fourth Congressional District. She is a mother, lawyer, and long-time community activist and organizer. Born in Yanterville, North Carolina, she moved frequently as a child. Her father was in the Air Force, and she traveled throughout the country and world. She graduated from Wake Forest University and later the Franklin Pierce Law Center (in New Hampshire). Before attending law school, she worked as a contractor for Lockheed Corporation at Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt. After law school, she clerked for a superior court judge in Washington, co-founded the National Network To End Domestic Violence, and became executive director of the Arca Foundation, which gives grants to civic groups, organizations that study the media, and public policy groups. She helped lead the fight to pass the Violence Against Women Act, providing comprehensive funding to shelter and offer services to victims of domestic violence and their children. The Washington Post has called her ``bright'' and ``tough-minded'' and recently said: ``Poised, persistent and principled, she would make a fine representative for the fourth district'' of Maryland.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. I thank the chairman for yielding, and I thank him for his work on this bill. I thank Mrs. Maloney as well. Ladies and gentlemen of the House, I would hope we would defeat this motion. Again, this is a motion to recommit promptly. If in fact the motion maker wanted to change the substance and offer an amendment that would go into effect, he would have offered a motion to amend and report back forthwith. The effect of this motion, as we all know, is to delay for some period of time the passage of this bill. My friend from Georgia will get up and ask the rhetorical question that we all know the answer to, does it kill it? It does not kill it. But, my friends, we have 5 legislative days to go in this session before we break. We ought to pass this bill now. We ought to pass this bill and tell the Federal employees of this country, who work for all of us, all 300 million of us, some 2 million civilian Federal employees, that we honor their service. But, more importantly, this is not just about those who will get leave. It is, as I said in my statement, much more about the children, who will have better nurturing and a sense of self-confidence in their early months of life. Scientist after scientist, educator after educator, tell us that if that occurs, if that bonding occurs in the early months, children are much better off, and if those children are better off, our communities and our society and our families are better off. I would ask all my colleagues to oppose this motion. Pass this bill. Say to the children who are perhaps yet to be born and have just been born, we want to ensure the best start we can for you in life in America.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the gentlewoman from Maryland, the Honorable Donna Edwards, be permitted to take the oath of office today. Her certificate of election has not arrived, but there is no contest and no question has been raised with regard to her election.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. I thank the chairman for yielding. I want to thank the chairman. No one has worked harder to get us to this point in time in a bill that can be signed by the President and passed by the Senate. No one has worked harder than David Obey has on that objective, and he spent months at it. His staff has worked extraordinarily hard. I also want to thank my counterpart, the minority leader Mr. Boehner who just spoke, and thank him for his efforts. This agreement would not have been reached without his leadership and his cooperation, and I appreciate that. I also want to thank Mr. Lewis for his work on this effort as well. Mr. Speaker, this supplemental appropriations legislation is the result, as has been said, of a bipartisan compromise that addresses critical needs of the American people. Will every Member be happy with the substance of the two amendments that we are going to consider? The answer to that question is no. Will every Member here get what he or she wants? Again, the answer is no. That is, after all, the legislative process. However, our Nation is at war. We have 150,000 men and women in harm's way in Iraq and Afghanistan. Catastrophic floods continue to wreak havoc in Iowa and other States in the Midwest. And millions of our workers are struggling to make ends meet because they've lost their jobs through no fault of their own. These two amendments that we will consider address these needs, as well as others. The first amendment will provide funding for our troops on the battlefield in Iraq and Afghanistan. Each Member will decide how they should vote, and their vote should not be questioned on that particular amendment. It is also important to note that the second amendment includes important policy provisions regarding the war in Iraq. First, it prohibits military construction funds from being used to establish permanent bases in Iraq. We have addressed that previously in this House and overwhelmingly supported that proposition. Secondly, it requires reconstruction aid for Iraq to be matched dollar-for-dollar by the Iraqi Government. With the price of oil being what it is, having been told by the administration that the oil in Iraq would pay for all reconstruction, that is a reasonable and appropriate requirement. Additionally, the second amendment includes major legislative items that the White House has agreed to accept. That is a good sign that there is an opportunity to work together when the interests of the American people are at stake. We don't always do that. The American public is concerned about that and disappointed by that. But this night, we have come to such an agreement, and the American public can be pleased by that. Among other things, this amendment expands the education benefits that veterans receive under the GI Bill to restore the promise of a full, 4-year college education, and allowing servicemembers to transfer educational benefits to their spouses and dependents. That was a bipartisan agreement. It's something that we can be pleased about as a country. It's something that we do, in fact, owe our veterans, and we will redeem that promise this night. Thus, this legislation supports our troops not only when they're abroad but when they return home as well. We know from our experience with the original GI Bill that this legislation will foster an educated workforce and a vibrant economy. The greatest generation, after all, not only defeated fascism--Charlie Rangel, at a later time, fought for our country in the field--but they also came home, that greatest generation, and built the greatest economy the world has seen. This bill will help in many ways redeem the promise for this generation of men and women who are asked to defend our country and its freedom. It is the right thing to do. We will do it this night. The President initially indicated his opposition to an extension of unemployment insurance. But this second amendment includes a 13-week extension for workers in every State who have exhausted their benefits. Again, the right thing to do. The administration also had placed a moratorium on seven Medicaid regulations, the result of which would cut services for seniors, families, and those with disabilities. The administration, after conversation with both sides, has decided and agreed to a moratorium on six of the seven regulations. That's good for the States, but more importantly, it's good for those whom these dollars will help in a time of trouble. This provision has overwhelmingly been supported in this House previously, both sides of the aisle, who voted for protecting the Medicaid safety net by a vote of 349-62. I am pleased the administration has joined us in the support of this effort. The second amendment also includes critical disaster assistance in the wake of devastating tornadoes and floods, which all of us have seen on TV over the last few days, as well as funding to strengthen New Orleans' levees, as requested by the President, and housing vouchers for those left homeless by Hurricane Katrina. I want to again commend Chairman Obey and Chairman Rangel. Chairman Rangel played a key role in getting us to this agreement, and I thank him for that. I also again want to thank Minority Leader Boehner and Ranking Member Lewis for their leadership on this legislation. Some will say this legislation is not perfect. To that extent, they can apply that to any piece of legislation that we consider, but this legislation is a good piece of legislation. It will provide for our troops in the field, while addressing critical priorities here at home. It will have my support, and I urge the support of this body for such amendment as they believe to be appropriate in the best interests of our country.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize an important milestone in child safety: Safe Kids USA's inspection of more than one million car seats. Since 1996, Safe Kids USA, a member of Safe Kids Worldwide, has partnered with General Motors to address one of the Nation's most significant public health issues: Motor vehicle crashes are the leading cause of death for children ages 2 to 14 and the leading cause of injury-related death for children under age 2. Together with GM, Safe Kids USA has redefined how parents and caregivers learn about child passenger safety in order to prevent these injuries and deaths from happening in the first place. We know that when installed and used correctly, child safety seats and safety belts can prevent injury and save lives. Their initiative, Safe Kids Buckle Up, sponsors car seat checkup events, which are essential to show families the intricacies of how to properly use and install child safety seats. At these events, trained child passenger safety technicians teach families how to safely transport their children and help to make sure everyone in a vehicle is buckled up correctly on every ride. On average, technicians spend about 30 minutes with each child. Most of these events are open to the public and are conducted by Safe Kids coalitions in central locations like Chevrolet and other GM dealerships, hospitals, community centers and shopping centers. Families who need child safety seats, but cannot afford them, are never turned away and children who are being transported in potentially dangerous, recalled car seats are given safe replacements. Parents and caregivers can have the peace of mind that their child will be safer for the simple fact that they participated in a Safe Kids Buckle Up event. In addition, through the generosity of General Motors, Safe Kids coalitions have access to Mobile Car Seat Checkup Vans which serve communities across the Nation. The vans are specially designed, self- contained units that can turn any parking lot into a full-service car seat safety event site. The fleet was launched in 1999 with 51 vans; today there are 125 on the road with another 12 being added through 2008. There are also more than 400 permanent car seat inspection stations operated by Safe Kids coalitions in order for families to take advantage of trained technicians whenever they are needed. To date, Safe Kids Buckle Up has reached more than 15 million people and there have been more than 45,000 events that bring much needed car seat inspection services and educational messages to families across the country. The program has also donated 365,000 seats to families in need. On June 12th, the one millionth car seat was inspected at an event in Los Angeles and it personally gratifies me to see the evolution of this outstanding program that serves children and their families. While crash protection is the backbone of Safe Kids Buckle Up, the program has evolved to offer vehicle safety programs beyond car seats and booster seats. Children can be injured or killed by heat exposure in parked cars, by suffocation when they get stuck in a trunk or when struck in a non-traffic setting such as a driveway or a parking lot. Safe Kids Buckle Up has responded to these risks by introducing three new components to their programming efforts--Spot the Tot, Never Leave Your Child Alone and Preventing Trunk Entrapment--in order to help prevent children from being left alone in or around a vehicle. I applaud Safe Kids Buckle Up for moving beyond crash protection and for addressing children's safety needs in all types of motor vehicle situations. I was part of the launch of the Safe Kids--General Motors partnership in 1996 and I have been proud to lend my support over the years to Safe Kids in their efforts to raise public awareness of the serious problem of motor vehicle crashes. We have made considerable progress in child passenger safety but our work is not done. Every American must understand that there are proven ways to keep children safer in vehicles and we can prevent many injuries and deaths through proper safety precautions. I encourage all of my colleagues to participate in a Safe Kids Buckle Up event in their districts to see firsthand how these safety precautions can make a difference in a child's life. Please join me in celebrating the achievements of Safe Kids USA, their remarkable 310+ coalition network and General Motors, whose combined efforts ensure that every child that visits a car seat safety event leaves safer than when he/she entered.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank Mr. Davis from Illinois for yielding. I particularly want to thank my good friend, Carolyn Maloney, the distinguished Representative from New York, who has been such a giant on behalf of this issue and family issues generally. Mr. Speaker, every Member of this body, from the most conservative to the most liberal, shares the conviction that the surest way to improve the quality of life in our Nation is to strengthen our families. Strong families enhance well-being, improve children's self-esteem, and significantly increase the odds that children will succeed in school and grow up to be good parents themselves. Study after study shows that a strong predictor of child well-being is the degree to which a parent and child bond in the first months of a child's birth. The more constant and nurturing that bond is in the early months of life, the better off the child will be down the road. That is why this is such an incredibly important piece of legislation. The Federal Government, in many ways, as an employer, has been a leader, not a follower, a leader in efforts to ensure positive employee policies. In fact, the private sector has adopted many of these same policies. We all know that the 1993 Family and Medical Leave Act has been an outstanding success in helping to promote healthy families. So this is not so much about the mother or the father, it is about the child, and the sense of well-being and groundedness that the child has. Unfortunately, all too often people who have availed themselves of the law to take care of their newborns, or care for ailing parents, have had to make economic sacrifices because the Family and Medical Leave Act does not entitle anyone to receive an income. Now, very frankly, it's all good and well for most of us, or all of us that serve in this body to say, well, we could take off 6 weeks without pay. Most of us could do that. Certainly my good friend Mr. Issa could do that. I could do it. But very frankly, I have three daughters, and they may be able to rely on Dad to help them do it, but if Dad were not able to do it, they would not be able to do it. They've all had the opportunity to spend time with my three grandchildren as those grandchildren were born in early years, and that was not only beneficial to my grandchildren, it was beneficial to the community in which they will live. Currently, the Federal Government does not provide paid parental leave to its employees. Employees must use accrued annual and sick leave if they want to maintain an income stream while they're out. By providing 4 weeks of paid leave to Federal employees, which, by the way, most Members of Congress already do, for their employees for the birth and adoption of a child, H.R. 5781 recognizes that economic security is a critical ingredient in ensuring that parental leave succeeds. Mr. Speaker, the Federal Government is the Nation's largest employer. It should set a strong, positive example for how the needs of the workplace and the needs of the employees can be balanced, and indeed, the needs of the children can be met. H.R. 5781 is an important step in doing just that. Again, I congratulate Carolyn Maloney, who has been a real leader on this effort for her entire career in the Congress of the United States. I'm so pleased to be her ally in this effort. I also want to turn to my friend, Tom Davis, who himself has been a giant, along with Frank Wolf, and a partner of mine, in promoting the well-being and appropriate benefits for our Federal employees, on whom this country relies in so many ways to give them a government that is a partner with our private sector in maintaining the greatest country on the face of the earth. And I thank Mr. Davis for his leadership. I'm sorry Mr. Davis will be leaving us at the end of the year and will not be serving in the next Congress. And I will say, I am sure, many times, how beneficial his service has been to Federal employees, and how beneficial his service has been to the Washington metropolitan region and, indeed, to the country. And I thank him for his leadership on this particular effort.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. I thank my friend, the distinguished representative from the State of Texas and a leader in our caucus and in our Congress. I want to say how very proud I am to be associated with my good friend, Sam Johnson, an American hero not only to this body, but to veterans who have served in every one of our wars, and certainly the Korean War in particular. I thank him for his cosponsorship of this resolution with me. Madam Speaker, I strongly support this legislation granting the Korean War Veterans Association a Federal charter. It will enable them to expand its mission and further its charitable and benevolent causes. The Association, comprised exclusively of Korean War members, has more than 23,000 members and is one of the few such organizations of its size without a Federal charter. More than 50 years have passed since the war-weary men and women who served in Korea returned home. History has revealed that the sacrifices made by these brave soldiers was instrumental in stopping the expansion of communism, and that their sacrifice effectively contributed to a more peaceful world. Can one imagine if North Korea were in charge of all of Korea, what a dangerous world this would be? Granting this Federal charter is a small expression of our appreciation for the extraordinary courage of our forces who were deployed to the Korean Peninsula. This bipartisan legislation is an opportunity to express our gratitude and respect for our military, past and present, and to give Korean War veterans the long-awaited recognition that they so deserve so that the so-called ``forgotten war'' is and should be forgotten no more. I want to thank, as I have done earlier, my colleague, Representative Sam Johnson, a decorated Korean and Vietnam veteran, for cosponsoring this legislation with me in the House. He honors our House by his service, as he honored this House and this country by his service in Korea and in Vietnam. I know that the Korean War veterans, his colleagues who stood the battle in Korea, are extraordinarily honored by his cosponsorship of this resolution. I want to thank my good friend, Senator Ben Cardin of Maryland, for his work on this issue in the Senate. This is an appropriate step for us to take. This recognition for our Nation's Korean War veterans is long overdue, but it is never too late to do the right thing. And I am pleased, Madam Speaker, to rise and urge my colleagues to unanimously support this resolution, and again thank the distinguished soldier who serves with us and served his country so well in battle.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Madam Speaker, this Friday an esteemed member of the Washington press corps--our friend, Steve Barr--will conclude his service as the author of the Washington Post's Federal Diary. For 29 years, Steve has served our region as a reporter with the Washington Post, and for the last 8 years he has written the Post's Federal Diary column, covering workplace issues within the three branches of the Federal government. As someone who represents 58,000 Federal workers, I am especially grateful for Steve's work to make the Federal Diary a highly-valuable resource on the issues of greatest importance to our nation's civil service employees. For those of us monitoring the daily developments affecting our federal workforce, Steve's column has been required reading. Madam Speaker, as we are well aware, our federal workforce is one of the best in the world, and in Steve, we could not have asked for anyone who recognizes that more. The quality of his work is a mark of the great pride and pleasure he so clearly possesses in his service to our public service workers. So while Steve's departure marks the end of an era at the Post's Federal Diary, I assure you that his contributions will long be remembered. I wish him the best in his future endeavors.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the business in order under the Calendar Wednesday rule be dispensed with on Wednesday next.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. I thank my friend for yielding. My friend mentioned the Outer Continental Shelf, and I agree with him. But the facts I have are this. Four times more natural gas is available in areas already open to drilling. Let me reiterate that. In areas already approved and open for drilling, four times more natural gas is available than in OCS waters protected by the moratorium. In other words, that which is protected has only 25 percent perceived to be available than does the already approved available Outer Continental Shelf areas. So if we started vigorously pursuing exploration and drilling in those areas, we'd get 75 percent more than we get now. In fact, the figure is that we are using only 18 percent of the 7,740 active leases currently available on the Outer Continental Shelf, only 1,655 are in production; so that when we talk about the problem is that the Democrats are not allowing us to drill and explore and to recover resources that are in our Outer Continental Shelf or on our lower 48, that is not, I think, accurate. I think it's not accurate because of the extraordinarily high percentage of currently approved leaseholds that are not being utilized in this very day. Now, I'm sure that the oil companies, very frankly, want to increase supply and see prices come down. I say that somewhat with tongue in cheek. If perhaps we were finding more supply, utilizing those leaseholds, perhaps the price would not be quite as high and the profits wouldn't be either. But I will tell you that Americans are, at $4 a gallon, seeing the companies that are selling them oil receiving extraordinarily high profits. God bless them for getting profits. They have invested, they've worked hard. They put their capital at risk. I'm for that. But at the same time, when they are failing to use leaseholds that would bring more supply, that would presumably then bring down the price, I think the American public have a right to ask, why are we only using 18 percent of the currently available leaseholds on the Outer Continental Shelf and about one-quarter or a little less than one- quarter of what's available on the mainland? I yield back to my friend.

Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for yielding. As I said last week, with respect to more drilling in various parts of the country, whether it is in Alaska, in the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge or on the Outer Continental Shelf, I would like to reiterate the information I referred to last week, but before I do that let me say that we are very supportive of any legislation that will lead this country towards energy independence within the framework of what we think is necessary and needed. Now I say it in this context. I support and I think we support on this side a diversified clean energy portfolio. We think that is critically important for our country. In the area of supporting energy supply, I hope the Senate will return the tax extender bill which invests in alternative energy sources which can be put online so we can be more energy independent and not dependent upon the producers of petroleum, many of whom are not friendly to us, and others of whom are not as reliable as we would like. I have listened for some period of time in the last few weeks that all we need to do to solve this problem is more drilling. We don't believe that is the case. In fact, as I said to the gentleman last week, we have nearly a whole refinery's worth of capacity idle right now. What I mean by that, Mr. Whip, is that our refineries were operating, at the end of last week, at 89 percent capacity. That is the lowest operational capacity of refineries in our country in the last 10 years at this time of year. So our refineries still have another 8 to 9 percent capacity. 8 to 9 percent is a very significant portion. Now, we've introduced two bills today to make oil companies use their existing leases. Before we go to new leases, before we go to the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge or the Outer Continental Shelf, which is very controversial on both sides of the aisle, we believe that oil and gas companies should use the present leases they have. They hold nearly 68 million acres of Federal land and waters on which they are not producing oil and gas. These 68 million acres of leased but currently inactive land and waters could produce, I tell my friend, an additional 4.8 million barrels of oil and 44.7 billion cubic feet of natural gas each day. So that when we talk about looking for new spots to drill, we first ought to look at those spots. Vast acreage, millions of acres have already been authorized. If we took those actions, I tell my friend, the information I have is that it would nearly double total U.S. oil production and increase domestic national gas production by 75 percent. That is on existing leaseholds. It would also cut U.S. oil imports by more than a third, if all we did was use existing leaseholds. It would be more than six times the estimated peak production from the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. In other words, using existing leases that have already been authorized, would produce six times what the projections are, and the most optimistic projections are for the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge. Let me say that we also introduced two bills today to look at and study the investments in oil futures, in petroleum futures. We're very concerned that that is having an impact on price, not because of supply and demand, but because of speculation. Mr. Dingell and Mr. Barton, as you know, have cosponsored legislation, and I've cosponsored it myself with them. So I'm hopeful that we will move ahead vigorously, as I know the gentleman from Missouri wants to do, to see what can be done to make our country more energy efficient, to utilize the energy sources which are already authorized. I would say one additional thing in terms of refineries. There's been some discussion about refineries. There's been one application for a new refinery in the last 30 years. One application. It was approved. That refinery has not been built, notwithstanding the fact that the application was approved. And obviously, with refinery capacity not being at the capacity it's been at in the last 10 years, it would seem that a new refinery was not built because the oil companies made a determination that it was not needed because, at this critical time when demand is so high, they're not operating at peak performance. So let me just reiterate that we all want to work together to try to have our country be energy independent. We think that's important for our national security, our economic security. And indeed, we think that going to alternative energies is critically important for the health of our global climate. I yield back.

Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for yielding. As the gentleman will recall, we had a bill on this House to make those funds available. It did not pass. It did not pass as you recall because many of your Members voted present. I think they would have supported it, and many of our Members did not support that funding. They want to see the policies changed. I agree with them on the policies. The fact is that we now have that funding passed from the Senate in the supplemental to us and we are trying to resolve as you know the differences. But there is a desire to get that bill done in a timely fashion so that the problems that you portray, which I believe are accurate, do not occur.

Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for yielding. He observes that I said we hope to have it on the floor. I want to reiterate that I hoped each one of those weeks that we would have it on the floor, and I hope that we will have it on the floor next week. I would say to my friend that I hope we have a bill on the floor next week, pass it through the House and pass it through the Senate and that the President will sign that bill. Obviously, one of the reasons that we have not gotten the bill on the floor as quickly as I had hoped is that there have been very, very substantial discussions between the House and the Senate, between the House and the White House, and the Senate and the White House about what their thoughts are with respect to various aspects of the supplemental bill and what they would or would not consider a signable bill. So I think there have been extensive discussions on that. I am hopeful that when we finally pass something to the President he will sign it and we will have that bill done. As the gentleman indicated, we are aware of the fact that it is timely that we pass this bill certainly within the next 2 weeks. And when I say pass it, not just pass it but have it signed by the President so we have a law in effect that gives the President and the Department of Defense the funds they need to continue the deployment that currently exists. That does not adopt the policy of the appropriateness of that, but it does recognize the reality of the fact that we have men and women in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Mr. HOYER. I thank the Republican whip for yielding. On Monday, the House is not in session. On Tuesday, the House will meet at 12:30 p.m. for morning hour and 2 p.m. for legislative business with votes postponed until 6:30 p.m. On Wednesday and Thursday, the House will meet at 10 a.m. for legislative business. On Friday, the House will meet at 9 a.m. for legislative business. We will consider several bills under suspension of the rules. The final list of suspension bills will be announced by the close of business tomorrow. We will take any pending votes on H.R. 6063, the NASA Authorization Act of 2008, which we will debate later today after this colloquy; and we will consider H.R. 5781, the Federal Employees Paid Parental Leave Act of 2008. We will also consider H.R. 5876, Stop Child Abuse in Residential Programs for Teens Act of 2008; and we hope to consider and I expect to consider the Iraq-Afghanistan supplemental appropriations bill. I yield back.

Mr. HOYER. My friend, at the beginning of his last comments, said ``on public lands.'' I want to make it very clear that the implication, perhaps that we're not allowing that on public lands, there are, as I said, 80 percent of the already authorized spots on public land not being utilized today; so that this is not a question of where we have not authorized drilling. We're for that. We want to find more product. What we are saying is that we have now got the majority of authorized spots being unutilized. Now, why that is so, when the product is getting the highest price it's ever gotten, which ought to be incentive, in and of itself, to look for new product and to explore and to drill and to get new product to the market, which would then bring the price down. I hope that nobody is controlling supply simply to escalate price. We know that when demand goes up and supply is constrained, that prices inevitably rise. The American public is paying the price for that. Great profits are being made. But it is adversely affecting our economy and our families. And we share your view that we want to address this problem. But I want to say, we talk about today. Unfortunately, for too long, I'm old enough to have experienced the gas lines of the late seventies where you waited hours to get gasoline in your car. Hopefully that won't reoccur. But had we, Democrats and Republicans, Americans all, focused in a disciplined way on looking for, developing more efficient automobiles, more efficient refrigerators and other electric utilities, focused on conservation, focused on alternative sources of energy, we would be far ahead of the game. In the final analysis, we cannot get distracted, in my opinion. We need to go down both paths, making sure today we have the most efficient process possible but that tomorrow we're energy independent, because in the final analysis, that will be the only way in which we will continue to keep our economy moving, our national security intact, and our environment clean and healthy.

Mr. HOYER. I have an automobile.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that when the House adjourns today, it adjourn to meet at 10 a.m. tomorrow; and further, that when the House adjourns on that day, it adjourn to meet at 12:30 p.m. on Tuesday, June 17, for morning-hour debate.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Davis) for yielding. I note that my good friend, Frank Wolf, is on the floor as well. I don't know that there is any Member of this body with whom I have worked more closely on an objective than Frank Wolf and I worked, particularly during the 1980s and early 1990s on this America's subway. I am glad that he is on the floor, and I thank Mr. Davis for his leadership and Mr. Van Hollen, Mr. Moran. We have all worked very hard on that. Mr. Oberstar, we thank you as well for your assistance. Bill Lehman was from Florida. Bill Lehman was chairman of the Transportation Subcommittee of the Appropriations Committee, and Bill Lehman used to call this America's subway. I tell the gentlelady from North Carolina, I don't know whether she has left, and I appreciate her remarks, but it is America's subway. It's in the Nation's Capital, yet 18 million to 22 million Americans from outside this region ride it as they visit their Nation's Capital. The employees who come into this city work for our Nation, not for the State of Virginia and the State of Maryland or even for the District of Columbia but for our Nation and all of our taxpayers. That's why it's America's subway, and that's why we invested significantly in its construction. That's why it is necessary and appropriate for us to invest in its maintenance and continuing quality. I would urge my colleagues to support this legislation. I have a statement that I will put in the Record without going through all of the specifics that have been discussed. I want to say also to the gentlelady, yes, this is an amendment, but, unlike most amendments, this amendment has already gotten the imprimatur of the overwhelming numbers in this House and passed on suspension when Mr. Davis offered it, when the now minority, but the then Republican majority, was in charge of the Congress, with Democrats strongly supporting Mr. Davis' bill. I think Democrats will strongly support Mr. Davis' bill. I would hope Republicans would strongly support Mr. Davis' bill to accommodate their taxpayers, their workers and their Nation's Capital. I want to again thank Mr. Davis for his leadership on this issue. I want to thank Mr. Wolf for his partnership for me for now into our third decade of working on this issue. We can be proud of this Metro system. It is one of the best in the world, not just in our country. Every American can be proud of their subway. I urge very strong support across the aisle. This is not a partisan issue. As I say, Mr. Wolf and I worked in lockstep for over a decade in ensuring that this subway was completed. Mr. Moran joined us some time later, and that was working at the local level as the mayor of his city. Mr. Davis, as county executive of his county, we worked together. I want to also thank the ranking member very much for his leadership and his facilitating this amendment coming forward on the floor. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Davis-Van Hollen-Hoyer amendment to the Amtrak reauthorization. This critical amendment will help ensure that the ``Nation's subway'' continues to operate in a safe, reliable and effective manner. The Washington Metro Area Transit Authority--which was established in 1967--has been faced with a severely aging infrastructure. In recent years, it has led to widespread maintenance problems, increased delays, and threats to passenger safety. In fact, Metro officials recently estimated that the system needs approximately $489 million in urgent and outstanding infrastructure repair work. This amendment--which is based on legislation which overwhelmingly passed the House of Representatives in the last Congress--would authorize $1.5 billion in Federal funding for capital repairs and maintenance in the Metro System. This funding would be collectively matched by dedicated funds from Maryland, DC, and Virginia. I have heard some of my colleagues question the appropriateness of a Federal investment in this system. In my view, this perspective is shortsighted and does not take into consideration the Federal Government's long history in the development of and reliance upon the Metro. In 1960, the Congress passed and President Eisenhower signed into law the legislation to provide for the development of a regional rail system for the Nation's Capital. Congress has since passed Metro authorization bills in 1965, 1969, 1979, and 1990. The Federal Government provided $6.2 billion of the approximately $10 billion needed to construct the original 103-mile system. Metro is critical to the Federal Government's evacuation plans of the Nation's Capital and we experienced Metro's essential role during the city's evacuation on September 11th, 2001. Nearly half of Metro's riders during peak ridership are Federal employees and more than 50 Federal agencies are located adjacent to Metro stations. Millions of tourists from across the country visit our Nation's Capital each year and many of these visitors use the Metro system to traverse the city while visiting our Nation's museums, monuments and historic landmarks. Clearly, the Federal Government and the American people depend on Metro and there is a clear Federal interest in ensuring that the system is able to operate efficiently and effectively. Unfortunately, just this week we were reminded of Metro's importance and its deteriorating infrastructure when an orange line train derailed in Northern Virginia. This mishap, where thankfully no one was injured, delayed the evening commute for many Federal employees and reinforced the need for this legislation. Mr. Chairman, we must act now to preserve this critical national asset and ensure that the Nation's capital continues to have a safe, reliable, and effective transit system for the Federal workforce and its visitors. I urge my colleagues to join with me in voting for this important amendment.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to congratulate the University of Maryland's Deborah A. Yow on her selection as the next President of the Division 1A Athletic Directors' Association. Ms. Yow is the first woman to fill this national leadership role, responsible for coordinating the efforts of collegiate athletic directors at 1,600 colleges and universities across the United States and Canada. The Association's Executive Director, Dutch Baughman, praised Ms. Yow as ``an extremely capable and effective leader.'' He added that ``She has not only influenced the lives of over 450 athletics administrators over the past seven years, but she has been evaluated by those [fellow administrators] as the best.'' After 14 years of success at the University of Maryland, her national role is well-earned. Overseeing 27 sports and more than 700 student- athletes, Debbie Yow has built a reputation as one of America's most accomplished athletic leaders. Under her leadership, Maryland teams have won 17 national championships, while maintaining balanced budgets and a high graduation rate of 85 percent. In fact, last year's graduation rate was the highest in the history of Maryland athletics and the best of any public institution in the Atlantic Coast Conference. Ms. Yow has excelled as an educator, an administrator, and a fundraiser, and has repeatedly been ranked among the 20 most influential people in collegiate athletics. At the same time, she has served in public life as an advocate for women's sports and the protection of Title IX. Her new position is the capstone on a career dedicated to the highest purposes of college athletics: Debbie Yow's work shows that ``student- athlete'' is far from an empty expression. I thank her for all that she has done for our State, its flagship university, and its students. And I wish her the best of luck, both in her continuing duties as University of Maryland Athletic Director and as a voice for athletic directors throughout North America.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. I thank my friend from Washington State for yielding. Mr. Speaker, for the last 7\1/2\ years, the President and members of his administration have claimed that the American economy is doing just fine. And in December, President Bush said, ``The economy is pretty good. There are definitely some storm clouds and concerns, but the underpinning is good.'' But the reality, of course, that we have seen is far different, particularly for American workers. Just last Friday, the Labor Department reported that the unemployment rate jumped one-half of 1 percent, from 5 percent to 5.5 percent. Now to some of us, perhaps that is simply a statistic. For some families, it is a crisis. This is the largest 1-month increase in unemployment in 22 years, or said a different way, until the 6th year of the Reagan administration. Our economy has actually lost jobs each of the last 5 months, a loss of some 325,000 jobs since the first of the year. In fact, this administration has created about 3.6 million jobs over the last 7\1/2\ years, as opposed to 20 million plus jobs under the Clinton administration, or under Clinton, an average of 236,000 new jobs per month, and under this administration approximately 40,000 new jobs per month. And you need 100,000 to stay even. That is why this bill is on the floor today. Over the last 12 months, the number of unemployed Americans has increased by 1.6 million, from nearly 6.9 million in May of 2007 to nearly 8.5 million in May of this year. That is 8.5 million of our fellow citizens who don't have a job, who are not sure how they are going to pay for their housing, their rent, their food, their medicine and the clothing for their children. That is what we are talking about today. We are talking about those 8.5 million people who are our constituents, Americans who need our help. And that is what this vote is today at this point in time. In fact, Mr. Speaker, 1.5 million of those workers are what we call euphemistically ``long-term unemployed,'' which means they have been jobless for more than 6 months. I don't know how many of you have had the opportunity to see ``Pursuit of Happyness,'' spelled h-a-p-p-y. It is a wonderful movie about a now very successful African American and his little boy who found themselves homeless with no money. And they went to the homeless shelter, and they couldn't get in. Those are the people we are talking about. That is what we are voting on this day, as to whether or not we are going to reach out to those people and try to lift them up and give them a helping hand, not a handout, but a helping hand. These are people who were employed, who were working, and through no fault of their own, they lost their jobs. Because if it is the fault of their own, by the way, they don't get unemployment. All the while, working Americans have been confronted with decreasing household incomes, exploding gas and food prices and escalating health care costs. Why then, given this squeeze on hardworking middle-class American families, does the President threaten to veto a common-sense, compassionate response, the temporary extension of unemployment benefits? Here is the kicker. Listen to me. There are 200,000 more long-term jobless Americans today, right now, as we debate this bill, 200,000 more Americans who are on long-term jobless status than when President Bush last signed an extension of unemployment benefits into law. In other words, the status today in America is that there are 200,000 more people who need our help than when President Bush last signed an extension of long-term unemployment. How can we then say it is not time to act today, to reach out our hand today, to say that the Congress of the United States feels your pain, hears your cry, and responds? There is no justification for the President's threatened veto on this much-needed legislation, Mr. Speaker. This bill is not only a sign of compassion and a demonstration of our values, but it is also a fast-acting form of economic stimulus. Who says so? Conservative economists say so. It will help lift up our floundering economy. It will simply provide up to 13 weeks of extended unemployment benefits in every State to workers exhausting regular unemployment compensation. And in States with higher levels of unemployment, an additional 13 weeks is available on top. Mr. Speaker, this legislation is vital. It is vital for workers and their families who are struggling to make ends meet in this poorly performing economy. It is not charity. It is our obligation and responsibility. It is a recognition that under the administration, the American worker has been forced to contend with job loss, decreasing incomes, exploding gas costs, food and health care costs, and unprecedented foreclosure rates. Mr. Speaker, this legislation is the right thing to do at the right time, at the right place. I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, this is not a Republican or Democratic issue, this is not a liberal or conservative issue. This is an issue of saying, there are people in trouble. We hear their cry. We respond to help. Ladies and gentlemen of the House of Representatives, we call this the people's House. Help the people this day.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. I am pleased to be here with all of you young people. About, well, 45 years ago I was about 5 years older than you are now and I started working on this Hill for a Member of Congress. His office was on the sixth floor of the Longworth Building. You know enough about our offices to know that he was a junior Member, being placed on the sixth floor of the Longworth Building, those spacious offices that you have visited with various different items from time to time. I had an opportunity, not as intimately as you have had because I did not have access to the floor as somebody working in an office, but I did have the opportunity to see the Members, to talk to some of the Members, to see what they were doing. You have had an opportunity that very, very few Americans will ever have. I presume most of you are 16 years of age. Maybe some have reached 17. Maybe some are late 15. In any event, you average 16 years of age. As Mr. Kildee pointed out, you have seen firsthand the best and the not-so-very best. To that extent, hopefully you have said, you know, they are a lot like us. Sometimes we are really good, and then sometimes not quite as good as we would like to be. Because you have had this special window on your democracy, we call this the people's House. It is the people's House because every 2 years we have to go back to the people and get their imprimatur. We call it a vote. We have to be rehired. The Founding Fathers established that so we would stay in close touch with the people and reflect their hopes, their aspirations, yes, even their fears, their angst and sometimes their prejudices. But we are a representative body. And there are too many people frankly around the country who don't have a lot of faith in this body and who don't think it works very well, and they see us on television largely in confrontation. You have seen us more at work and cooperation than sometimes happens on this floor. So, on behalf of both my friend Mr. Boehner and myself and Speaker Pelosi, I would urge you to go home to your respective schools, your respective communities, your respective families, and talk to your peers about your experience. Some of it will be perhaps not quite as positive as some of us would like. But my experience has been, as President of the Senate when I was in charge of the Page Program in the Maryland State Senate and here, that the overwhelming majority of you will go from this place with a very positive view of how our people work, the passion they bring to their commitment to representing their community, and the integrity they have with respect to the issues that they argue on behalf of. Do they all believe the same? No. Any more than all of you believe the same. I know there have been no debates in the dorms. I know that all of you have said, yes, we agree 100 percent. And if I thought that, I would think you were a strange group of people indeed. You have been here at an historic time. Young women, you must be extraordinarily proud of the fact that for the first time in history we have a woman leading this body. Now, we have a woman presiding officer right now, she is from Florida, Ms. Castor, but we have a Speaker of the House who is a woman. And African Americans, you must be extraordinarily proud that for the first time in history we have an African American who is the nominee, presumptive, but is going to be the nominee of one of the major parties. And you can also be proud of the fact that we have a gentleman, John McCain, who served his country in war, and served as a prisoner of war for 5 years experiencing very substantial physical abuse, and came back to America as a young man and rose now to be his party's presumptive nominee for President of the United States. What an historic time for you to have served here in the House. And I say served, because, frankly, the work of this House was facilitated by everything you have done. Sometimes the tasks may have seemed simple, but they were important to us accomplishing the people's business. And so on behalf of Mr. Boehner and myself and Mr. Blunt and Mr. Clyburn and Speaker Pelosi, I thank all of you for the work you have done, for the kindnesses that you have shown us; and I hope you in turn feel that you have received from us the courtesy and respect you deserve as outstanding representatives of your generation that may in time be referred to as well as one of the greatest generations. Thank you for your service. God bless and good luck.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the business in order under the calendar Wednesday rule be dispensed with on Wednesday next.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Yes.

Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for yielding and I thank the gentleman for his observation and question. While I don't have a date, I do believe that we are making very significant progress. You have heard me quoted as saying that on the floor. I think that has been true for the last, frankly, 4 to 5 weeks, and I really think that everybody who has been addressing has been working in a very forthright, open and conscientious way to get us to a place where we can have legislation on the floor which will accomplish the objective the gentleman seeks. I think we are making good progress, and I am therefore hopeful that this will be sooner rather than later. I don't want to set a date. I wanted to do it by Memorial Day. We didn't get there. But we are working very hard, and I am hopeful in the near future we will get there.