Rush Holt

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Health Insurance Industry Fair Competition Act, H.R. 4626, legislation that would remove the health insurance industry's antitrust exemption. As a cosponsor of this important legislation, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this bill to expand competition, improve the affordability of health insurance, and give families more choices. I have heard from many hard-working New Jerseyans, who are struggling under the current insurance system. The system is too expensive and leaves too many people without good, secure coverage. Families are paying higher and higher premiums for less coverage. Our businesses are struggling to afford health care for their employees and find themselves at a competitive disadvantage compared to companies in other countries. Those problems have not gone away and must be addressed. The legislation we are considering today would lower costs and provide new insurance options for families by repealing the insurance special exemption to antitrust law. This exemption was created by the 1945 McCarran-Ferguson Act with the intention of helping new small insurance companies by allowing them to access historical insurance data for setting their premiums and left all antitrust regulation to the states. Instead of encouraging new small insurance companies, this antitrust exemption has stifled competition. A single insurance company controls more than half the insurance market in 16 states, while in New Jersey the top two companies control almost 60 percent of the market. Lack of competition has led to growing insurer profits, increased costs and reduced coverage for patients, and an epidemic of deceptive and fraudulent conduct. By repealing the special antitrust exemption for health insurance companies, health insurers would be held accountable for fixing prices, dividing up market territories, using predatory pricing, or rigging bids. This bill makes the federal government a partner with states who lack the resources to go after insurance companies that have violated the law. This bill is one part of reform needed to improve the health care that all Americans receive by holding health insurance companies to the same good-competition rules that other industries face. I encourage my colleagues to vote in favor of this bill to lower costs and provide new options for patients.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. We will miss Jack Murtha. Strong-willed plain spoken, fearless, dedicated, patriotic, honorable, and remarkably generous with his time, his wisdom, and his advice. We will not see the like of him. The descendant of veterans of the American war of independence and the Civil War, he was the champion of the marine, the soldier, the sailor, the flyer. And to me personally he was magnanimous. When the Speaker created the Select Intelligence Oversight panel as part of the Appropriations Committee and asked me to take the chair, Jack Murtha embraced the panel and gave it strength, even though it might have appeared to lessen his authority. Of course, nothing ever diminished the authority of Jack Murtha. He embodied authority. More than magnanimous, he was kind and sharing. We express our sympathy to the family, friends, and all of those who Jack Murtha championed who don't know what he did for them and what he did for America. What a loss.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, we hear the question, should Congress be dealing with job creation or with health care, as if these are unrelated. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, passed this past year, is already funding around this country an expansion of community health centers. It is funding already implementation and use of information technology in the health care fields. This is doctors' offices and hospitals, and in training the workers to use it. This provides, yes, jobs, as well as better health care for Americans. In the health care legislation that is taking shape, based on the common principles of the House-passed and Senate-passed legislation, that too will lead to economic growth and jobs. In particular, not only will there be medical innovation, but it will assist small businesses and large with these large expenses they have in covering the health care of their employees. And less money will be wasted in exorbitant salaries and profits, and will actually go to providing health care.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Madam Speaker, I rise today to discuss our national debt. Let's look at the facts of how we got here. Just 10 years ago, the National Debt clock was turned off and we were having serious conversations about what would happen after we paid down the debt. Our nation was running a budget surplus in 1998, starting a stretch of surpluses that lasted through 2001. Our nation's fiscal house was in order. How then, have we gone from surpluses to significant deficits? Some would have us believe that the national debt suddenly appeared in the past year. If only it was that easy. The national debt level we see today is the result of 8 years of poor decisions. Earlier this decade, the Republican-controlled Congress voted to slash taxes for the wealthy and charge it to the national debt. The same party voted to create a prescription drug benefit and charge the entire cost to the national debt. I voted against both of these laws because they were fiscally irresponsible. The previous President decided to pursue two wars on borrowed money and charge it to the national debt. In contrast, the policies that we have adopted this Congress to pull our economy out of the recession are responsible for less than 16 percent of this and last years' deficit. Because of the irresponsible decisions of the recent past, we entered this recession with our fiscal house not in order. With our economy nearing collapse, our government had a choice to make. Facing the worst economic crisis in 75 years, we could have done nothing. Yet, this was not a responsible option. During times of great hardship, our government cannot shrink away from helping our citizens and helping our economy recover. This required federal investment. Leading economists have made clear that these investments were vital and that the best way to reduce the deficit in the long-term is through a strong economy. One major reason for the debt we see today is because President Bush and the Republican-controlled Congress allowed the ``pay-as-you-go'' law to expire. Every family understands this principle--you must pay for what buy. I am saddened that Congress forgot this simple lesson earlier this decade. This is only one tool, but it is a strong one to return our nation back to fiscal stability. It forces Congress to identify inefficient or ineffective programs whose funding can be cut to fund higher priorities, such as health care, education, and clean energy. The bill we consider today restores this budgetary safeguard and makes the ``pay-as-you-go'' principle law. In the 1990s, the last time that ``pay-as-you-go'' was the law, we turned the massive deficits of the 1980s into record surpluses. In 2007, I was pleased that the House of Representatives restored this principle in the House rules when Democrats regained control of the House. While this rule was a good first step, today's legislation goes further by applying automatically to legislation and will cut spending if Congress does not do so. In addition, this bill would require the Government Accountability Office, GAO, to review all programs and initiatives to find any duplicative or wasteful programs. The GAO would report what they find to Congress so that we can eliminate the wasteful programs and merge any duplicative ones. I will continue to work to ensure taxpayer money is well spent. I helped write the Student Aid and Fiscal Responsibility Act, which will reduce our debt by $10 billion by eliminating wasteful subsidies for banks to offer student loans. I am pleased that many other major bills being considered, including health reform and climate legislation, have been paid for and would reduce the debt as well. I have fought every year to cut billions from the flawed missile defense program, which never produced a reliable technology; I have supported reducing agricultural subsidies that too often go to the wealthiest producers instead of small family farmers; and I have advocated for eliminating subsidies to private insurance companies for providing the same services that Medicare already provides to seniors. These are all common-sense steps to reduce wasteful government spending. This legislation sends a message to the American people that the government is committed to putting the country back on stable economic footing. I will vote for this bill and will work for our government to regain its fiscal discipline.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express the compassionate concern of Congress to those affected by the recent earthquake in Haiti, including thousands of American families of those missing and injured. My thoughts are especially with the Gianacaci family of Hopewell, New Jersey, at this time from the appropriately named town of Hopewell. Their daughter, Christine, a student of Lynn University, was doing service work in Haiti when the quake struck. I have assured the Gianacaci family that we will not rest until Christine and so many others are accounted for and returned to their loved ones. I pay a special tribute to the Fairfax County Search and Rescue Team which, like others, have been at the Hotel Montana site continuously for more than 2 weeks looking for Christine and other Americans believed to be at the hotel. Also, thanks must go to the Department of State and the many people in the 82nd Airborne, the Marine Expeditionary Group, the DOT, HHS, and other government personnel who reflect and carry out the compassionate concern of the American people who again demonstrate their core generosity.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Madam Speaker, I thank the chairman for bringing this resolution forward, and I rise in support of the resolution and to offer my condolences to the families, friends, and colleagues of the seven clandestine service officers who were killed by a suicide bomber in Khost, Afghanistan, a couple of weeks ago, and to offer support and appreciation and best wishes for those recovering from their injuries. As Chair of the Select Intelligence Oversight Panel and a member of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, I am well aware, as we all are here, of the risk to forward-deployed clandestine service employees, a risk they face on a daily basis. These seven employees gave their lives in the line of duty, and our thoughts and prayers remain with their loved ones. May they find comfort in part in the knowledge of the high service these people have given to their country. Let me also take a moment to express my wishes for a full and speedy recovery to those wounded in the bombing and my appreciation to all Americans, civilian and military, who are serving our Nation in Afghanistan. We look forward to the day when their presence in Afghanistan will no longer be needed and that they will return home safely to their families. I thank Chairman Reyes for offering this resolution, and I urge my colleagues to support it.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Madam Speaker, I rise to commemorate the 225th anniversary of the city of Trenton's tenure as the capital of the United States. Students of American history are familiar with the Compromise of 1790. James Madison and Thomas Jefferson won permanent residence for Congress on the Potomac in exchange for the Federal Government's assumption of State debts from the Revolution--a priority of Alexander Hamilton. What followed was the Residence Act, which established what we now know as the District of Columbia. What is less understood is the capital's journey through eight other towns, the abandoned proposals and the near-misses before Congress settled here on the Potomac. During the Revolutionary War, Congress moved frequently to avoid British troops--meeting famously in Philadelphia then in Baltimore, York, and Lancaster. Upon ratification of the Articles of Confederation, Congress returned to Independence Hall only to be removed abruptly in the summer of 1783. That June, approximately 500 mutinous Pennsylvania militiamen demanding back pay from their service during the Revolution, encircled Independence Hall and refused to let Members of Congress leave the building unless their demands were met. Uncertain of their safety and the integrity of Congress, the delegates fled across the Delaware to Princeton, New Jersey. In Princeton, Congress redoubled its efforts to select a permanent seat of government. To settle regional animosity, Congress agreed on two permanent capitals on the Delaware and Potomac, while designating Annapolis and Trenton as interim capitals. On November 1, 1784, Congress convened in Trenton. Travel-weary legislators reluctantly trickled into Trenton--then a town of roughly 500 people--and it began official business at the French Arms Tavern on the corner of Warren and State Streets. When Congress finally reached a quorum on November 29 it considered matters of foreign affairs and finance, appointing ministers to Britain and France and selecting commissioners to the Board of Treasury. The highlight of Trenton's time as the capital was a visit by the Marquis de Lafayette. During his visit he petitioned Congress to take official leave to France and addressed a joint session of the New Jersey State Legislature. In honor of Lafayette, one of George Washington's most trusted generals, Congress drafted a letter to the King of France praising Lafayette's service and passed a resolution commending Lafayette for his bravery during the siege of Yorktown. As the session concluded before Christmas, Congress scrapped the plan for two capitals and took up a resolution to establish a permanent capital in Trenton. Unfortunately for Trenton, debate stalled, and on Christmas Eve Congress agreed to meet in New York City after the New Year. The rest as they say is history. The bustling, city life of New York was more appealing to Members of Congress than the calm of small-town Trenton. They quickly forgot their plans and continued to meet in New York until 1790. Still, Congress's brief visit to Trenton offers a fascinating glimpse into the early history of the United States and should remind us that the remarkable Capitol building in which we conduct the people's business should not be taken for granted. I commend the Crossroads of the American Revolution National Heritage Area, the Trenton Historical Society, and the other organizations that make up Trenton 1784--The Nation's Capital Committee, for their excellent work, schedule event and lectures and preparing exhibits and online resources to bring to life this fascinating yet fleeting moment in American history. Trenton was then and is today a town with great appeal.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of this important bill. To help support our troops and their families, this bill provides a much-deserved 3.4 percent military pay increase, as well as $472.4 million for Family Advocacy programs and full funding for Family Support and Yellow Ribbon to provide support to military families, including quality child care, job training for spouses, and expanded counseling and outreach to families experiencing the separation and stress of war. Additionally, H.R. 3326 provides $29.2 billion ($3 billion above the 2009 level) for the Defense Health Program to provide quality medical care for servicemembers and their including $120 million for Traumatic Brain Injury and Psychological Health Research. Regarding the Defense Department's operations, I'm pleased that the bill provides $5 billion to allow defense personnel, not contractors, to perform critical department functions. The Department estimates that every position that is converted from contract to federal civilian saves on average $44,000 per year. Additionally, the bill reduces contracted advisory and assistance services by $51 million, and includes general provisions to stop further conversions by the Department of Defense from government functions to contractors. The bill also contains important policy provisions I support, including a bar on the establishment of permanent bases in Iraq or Afghanistan, and the continuation of a general requirement prohibiting the torture of detainees held in U.S. custody. I am disappointed that we were forced to include in this bill a 60 day extension of three expiring Patriot Act authorities. The very good Patriot Act reform bill reported out of the Judiciary Committee eliminates over-broad surveillance authorities, tightens requirements for the issuance of national security letters, and contains important oversight requirements that will help us protect our people from both potential terrorists and an out-of-control executive branch. That bill should be passed by the House in January 2010 and the Senate should adopt it. Some non-defense policy items are also attached to this bill, including expanded unemployment benefits, including increased payouts and longer duration of benefits, through February 28, 2010. The bill also extends from nine to 15 months (to February 28, 2010) the 65 percent COBRA health insurance subsidy for individuals who have lost their jobs. The COBRA subsidy extension would help New Jersey families between jobs immediately, as without this subsidy the average New Jersey family would pay $1,156 a month for COBRA coverage, which would consume over two-thirds of their unemployment benefits. Overall, this bill meets important national security and domestic policy needs, and I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this bill.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Madam Speaker, I rise today to vote against allowing the United States to default on its debt, although not otherwise in favor of increasing the debt ceiling. As my colleagues know, this is the fourth time we've done that since enactment of the Housing and Economic Recovery Act in July 2008, just as the economic crisis was exploding upon us. Although a comprehensive and expeditious response was necessary, each such increase has represented hundreds of billions of dollars in additional debt. In July 2008 Congress increased the debt ceiling by $800 billion. A mere three months later, in October 2008, the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act increased the debt ceiling by another $700 billion all because of President Bush's decision to pursue two wars on borrowed money Fours months after that, in February 2009, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act increased the debt ceiling yet again by $789 billion because of the continued decline of the economy and efforts to deal with it. And today, we increase it by $290 billion more, to bring the ceiling to a staggering $12,394,000,000,000. The fact that the current increase is much smaller than the previous increases is no consolation, since the Treasury Department has indicated that it will only cover obligations due until February 11, 2010--a mere two months from now. Not to mention the fact that the entire debt ceiling was only about that much--$300 billion--during World War II. These increases don't come for free--we're mortgaging our future on them. We have voted to accelerate inflation and increase our long-term fiscal challenges. Before next February arrives, we must all give intensive thought to how to return this country to the surplus conditions in enjoyed in the late 1990s. Between fiscal years 1998 and 2001, the federal government ran at a surplus and the debt ceiling only increased by $450 billion. The surplus vanished after fiscal year 2001, and the debt ceiling has increased by more than ten times that amount ($44.66 trillion) since then. This deficit spending has provided much-needed economic stimulus in a time of crippling economic recession, and there is no dispute that we urgently needed to implement such stimulus measures over the course of the past year. But we are now in recovery, and it is time to get this economic train back on the right track. I support this increase with no pleasure, and I look forward to working with all my colleagues to bring down the debt ceiling as soon as possible.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2847, the Jobs for Main Street Act. This legislation would provide jobs for tens of thousands of Americans, preserve thousands more jobs, and continue essential benefits to aid the unemployed without increasing the national debt. We have taken important steps to bring our economy back from the worst economic crisis in three-quarters of a century. We've made important investments in our infrastructure, clean energy jobs, science research, and the next generation of workers. There are clear signs that the economy is improving. Instead of shrinking by 6.4 percent a quarter, the economy has grown by 2.8 percent. Instead of losing 741,000 jobs a month, as the economy did a year ago, last month the economy shed 11,000 jobs. These are encouraging signs. Yet, I'm not going to sit on my hands and wait for job creation. Families in New Jersey, who have lost a job or had their hours or paychecks cut, are still hurting. And we know employers have cut jobs more sharply and are more hesitant to replace them than in previous downturns. The government can and should work together to increase employment opportunities in the short-term, mid-term, and long-term. Economists, business leaders, financial experts, among others, have argued that the Federal Government, and only the Federal Government, can inject into the economy a stimulus of sufficient size to make up for the frozen, collapsing economy. The package we are considering today will build on our previous investment, creating needed jobs and helping those who continue to be unemployed. The Jobs for Main Street Act would redirect $48.3 billion to put Americans to work rebuilding our Nation's crumbling roads and bridges, modernizing public buildings, and improving air and water quality. Specifically it would invest $27.5 billion in highway infrastructure improvements, $8.4 billion for transit improvements, and $800 million to improve Amtrak. It is estimated that this investment will create over 750,000 new jobs. Additionally, H.R. 2847 would invest $2.8 billion in clean water infrastructure, aquatic ecosystem restoration, and flood mitigation; creating another 50,000 jobs. It also will put contractors back to work by providing states with $4.1 billion for school construction, rehabilitation, and renovations. The $270 million that this legislation would invest in improving and protecting Federal, State, and local public lands would support approximately 14,000 short-term jobs, improving service to visitors, reducing the large backlog in facilities and habitat restoration needs, and reducing hazardous fuels that lead to damaging and expensive wildfires. These investments will do more than create jobs in the short term, they will provide long term benefits to all Americans. Over the past year, I have held a number of events focused on jobs. Two months ago, I brought 50 central Jersey small business owners to Washington to hear their concerns and help them access helpful programs. Two weeks ago, I hosted a jobs forum in central New Jersey. At both events, I heard from small business owners struggling to get the credit and loans they need. The Jobs for Main Street Act would help those small businesses by eliminating fees on Small Business Administration loans and by providing a strong guarantee for Small Business Administration loans to encourage more banks to lend to small businesses. Small businesses are the engine that drives our economy, and during rough economic times they are also the engine that drives job creation. This is one step that Congress is taking to help our small businesses, who generate jobs and develop the innovative products of the future. I especially am pleased this bill provides funding to ensure that states can keep police officers, firefighters, teachers, and other State and local employees on the job. Without this funding, States would be forced to make the difficult decision between cutting jobs and services or increasing taxes. That is a choice that no state should have to make, especially in difficult economic times. The Jobs for Main Street Act includes $1.18 billion to help put more than 5,500 law enforcement officers on the beat throughout the United States, and $500 million to retain, rehire, and hire firefighters across the United States. According to the International Association of Firefighters, nearly 6,000 firefighters have been laid off or are subject to layoffs. An additional 6,000 positions have been lost through attrition. The bill would provide $18.9 billion to school districts and public institutions of higher education to retain or create 250,000 teaching jobs. The recession has hit those between the ages of 16 and 25 particularly hard, and the unemployment rate is especially high for this group. The Jobs for Main Street Act would provide much needed job training and temporary public service positions to get these individuals back to work. The bill would provide $200 million to hire an additional 25,000 AmeriCorps Members, this funding would enable those individuals to serve their communities while earning an education award to further their education or pay off student loans. With the teenage unemployment rate at its highest rate in history, 27.8 percent, this legislation would invest $500 million to create 250,000 summer jobs for disadvantaged youth. H.R. 2847 would help up to 250,000 students stay in school by investing $300 million in the College Work Study program, which supports low- and moderate-income undergraduate and graduate students who work while attending college. Additionally, this legislation would provide $750 million for competitive grants to support job training for approximately 150,000 individuals in high growth and emerging industry sectors, particularly in the health care and green industries that are adding jobs despite difficult economic conditions. For those workers struggling to maintain their health insurance while in between jobs, this bill would extend the COBRA subsidy established in the Recovery Act, which has already benefited approximately 7 million Americans. This expanded COBRA subsidy would help workers for 15 months with their COBRA health insurance premiums and help more Americans access this benefit. Job losses also have caused State Medicaid rolls to swell. This bill temporarily would increase the Federal Government's contribution to Medicaid to ensure States are able to provide health coverage to these workers. This two-prong approach will help ensure millions of unemployed workers are able to maintain health coverage for their families. When we talk about jobs, we are not just talking about the economy. We are talking about the dignity that comes from holding a steady job that supports your family. The Jobs for Main Street Act recognizes this, and would help our families in real ways. I urge my colleagues to support it.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Madam Speaker, today Members received another classified briefing on our policy in Afghanistan, a briefing that raised a number of questions that need answers before our country commits further troops and resources to that conflict. These are not loaded questions or simply rhetorical, they are real questions--and just some of the real questions--that people in central New Jersey are asking. Would this proposed troop increase bring us closer to capturing or killing those responsible for the 9/11 attacks? If the al Qaeda remnant Americans are seeking to capture or kill is on the Pakistani side of the border, or in Yemen or East Africa, how will sending more troops to, say, southern Helmand Province in Afghanistan help us to get those terrorists who attacked us on September 11 or might attack us in the future? Should we send troops to where al Qaeda isn't? Should we expand our aerial strikes? Would an escalation in air attacks do more harm than good? Is our intelligence apparatus structured and capable of giving our military and political leaders the intelligence they need to wage this war? Given our lack of foreign language capabilities, can we really know what's going on in the towns and farms and villages? Does the deterioration in the military and political situation in recent years in Afghanistan result from actions Americans have taken or failed to take? If so, how do we avoid those problems in a surged military action? What constitutes victory or success in this conflict? What is it that we hope to leave behind once we exit Afghanistan? What can we reasonably hope to leave behind? Is the Afghan Government a viable partner? Is it viewed as legitimate by the Afghan people? Does the government and do the people have the same dedication to human rights, education and public welfare that we do? If so, how will our military troops bring improvements in those areas? Do the Afghan people have the same revulsion to official corruption that Americans do? Can the Afghan security forces be expanded as quickly as claimed? Is President Karzai correct that he needs extensive military U.S. security assistance for 15 or 20 more years? Will such assistance require the use of many private security contractors? If so, what will such a reliance on contractors cost the American taxpayer? If contractors are employed extensively in Afghanistan, do the State and Defense Departments have sufficient oversight mechanisms to ensure those contractors operate more legally and ethically than they have in, for example, Iraq? What lessons from Afghanistan's history can we learn about the population's reaction to the long-term presence of foreign troops on their soil? Could Afghanistan degenerate into a civil war along ethnic and religious lines, as happened in Iraq? Is the Government of Pakistan a viable partner? Are they serious about helping us? Are elements of their military and security services still supporting the Afghan Taliban who are attacking our troops? What if President Zadari is overthrown, as has happened with previous leaders? Will our allies actually provide the troops the President is requesting? And if they commit 10,000 troops and we have 90,000 troops, will it be seen as an international effort or an American war? If European countries' troop casualties rise sharply next year, will those nations pull out of Afghanistan and leave our troops to bear the future burden? Should we pay for the war openly and up front? Or should we commit troops and consider how to pay later? How would we pay for such an escalation, including the long-term costs of caring for our wounded veterans? Is the Department of Veterans Affairs hiring enough psychological counselors to treat the number of veterans who need counseling and treatment for posttraumatic stress disorder? Do we even know how to treat PTSD of veterans who have endured two, three or more combat tours? What should we make of the fact that the estimated $100 billion we'll spend on the war each year is equal to the cost of the health reform bill each year that we are debating now? Are there alternatives to the President's approach that Congress and the Nation should explore? What is truly the best way to secure our country against future terrorist attacks? Are we putting the right emphasis on a military approach to counterterrorism policy? When extremists can transmit their ideology and recruit terrorists over the Internet and via extremist madrassas and youth groups, are we fighting on the right battlefield in Afghanistan? Are we doing enough at home to prevent future tragedies like the one that occurred at Fort Hood? Fulfilling our constitutional obligations regarding matters of war and peace requires that Congress get answers to these questions and many more, and help the American people get these answers.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this bill. Too many of our fellow citizens are suffering as a result of the biggest economic downturn in 75 years. In light of the number of Americans who continue to be unemployed or under-employed, it is essential that we focus our efforts on helping Americans find jobs. H.R. 3288 is responsible legislation which will help employ Americans, assist communities suffering from decreases in tax payments, and provide more stability to our economy. H.R. 3288 would put an estimated 1.5 million Americans back to work by investing $41.8 billion in improving our transportation infrastructure. The bill also provides 4.5 billion for commuter and passenger rail projects to help reduce congestion and provide more environmentally-friendly ways for Americans to get to work and travel. I am pleased that my colleague from Pennsylvania Patrick Murphy and I were able to get language removed from this bill preventing Amtrak from being able to offer discounted fares to commuters on the Northeast Corridor. Since it was first included in the 2006 Fiscal Year, this language prevented Amtrak from being able to offer a more than 50 percent discount off peak fares to commuters on any of its lines. This resulted in a 20 percent fare increase to my constituents. The removal of this provision recognizes the need to make public transportation more affordable and more accessible, and I expect it will result in discounted Amtrak ticket rates. Our economy nearly collapsed last year because of the combination of reckless and abusive financial services and mortgage-industry practices, and astounding regulatory failures. To help re-establish real oversight and control over our financial markets, the bill provides $1.111 billion to strengthen and enforce rules that govern investments and financial markets and to detect and prosecute fraudulent schemes, and allow the hiring of another 420 investigators, lawyers and analysts to support the mission of the Securities and Exchange Commission. The bill also provides $292 million to strengthen the Federal Trade Commission's capacity to protect consumers and combat anti-competitive behavior. Additionally, the bill allocates $118 million for the Consumer Product Safety Commission to continue implementing bipartisan consumer protection legislation enacted in 2008 in response to massive toxic product scandals, including children's toys from China. The bill also provides $1.4 billion for training and support services to workers affected by mass layoffs and plant closures, and $125 million for competitive grants to community colleges and partnership with local adult education providers to prepare workers for careers in high-demand and emerging industries. To assist affected parents in ensuring that their children get good meals and quality health care, the bill provides $7.2 billion for Head Start, an investment that will help nearly 1 million children from low-income families. To help America's students pay for a college education, this bill maintains the discretionary portion of the maximum Pell Grant at $4,860, which, combined with a mandatory supplement of $690, will support a $5,550 maximum Pell Grant in FY 2010. Since January 2007, the maximum Pell Grant has been increased by $1,500 or 37 percent--from $4,050 to $5,550. In FY 2010, more than 8 million college students will receive Pell Grants. This bill maintains investments in math and science education by providing $180 million toward the Department of Education's Mathematics and Science Partnerships. The program is the only national teacher development program available to teachers across the U.S. It is widely understood that early language education is the key to language proficiency later on. In order to start addressing the pressing needs for skilled linguists and other language professionals that currently exist, this bill maintains investments in the Foreign Language Assistance Program at $27 million, which is currently the only federal program that supports foreign language education at the elementary and secondary school level. This bill also contains provision and funding for programs to protect Americans' access to health care coverage until national health care reform is enacted. To that end, the bill provides $2.2 billion to provide primary health care to 17 million patients, of whom 40 percent are uninsured, in 7,500 service delivery sites. These centers provide high quality care in both urban and rural underserved areas across the country. The bill also seeks to increase the number of health care professionals by providing $498 million to support the training of health professionals in fields where there are shortages, such as nursing. And to help find cures for the diseases afflicting Americans, the bill provides $31 billion for NIH-funded biomedical research to improve health and reduce health care expenditures. At a time when the recession has created a fiscal crisis for state and local governments, requiring them to let go of key law enforcement and related personnel, federal support for state and local law enforcement programs has never been more important. To help keep police on the beat, the bill provides $792 million to support local law enforcement agencies with hiring, technology, training, body armor, and sex-offender enforcement management grants. This includes $298 million specifically for COPS Hiring Grants to hire or retain approximately 1,400 police officers. The bill also provides $519 million for the Byrne Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) program, which helps local law enforcement agencies engage in a broad range of activities to better fight and prevent crime. I'm pleased that this year several municipalities in my district will receive funding for projects under this program, including the Borough of Jamesburg (to modernize communications), the city of Trenton (for an anti-gang program), and the township of North Brunswick (for a video surveillance system). Meeting our obligations to America's veterans is a national trust. The bill provides over $109 billion for the operation of the Department of Veterans Affairs, with $45.1 billion allocated for medical care. In a breakthrough long sought by veterans, the bill also provides advance appropriations for the VA to ensure a stable and uninterrupted source of funding for medical care for veterans, providing $48.2 billion for FY 2011. I am very pleased that this bill reflects a strong commitment by this Congress to provide robust, secure funding for science. The bill keeps the U.S. on track to double the funding for basic research by providing over $31 billion for the National Science Foundation, the National Institute of Standards and Technology, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. An additional $31 billion will support biomedical research through the National Institutes of Health. These investments in our science and innovation infrastructure will help create jobs immediately while stimulating the discoveries and investments that will ensure sustained economic growth in the future. I am also pleased that this bill includes $17.4 million in disability access funding under the Help America Vote Act, including $12.1 million to help ensure that polling places are accessible and $5.3 million for protection and advocacy funding. The bill also includes $70 million in funding to help States meet the voting system requirements of the Help America Vote Act, and better protect and preserve the integrity of elections. This sum is much less than I requested, and it is less than the $100 million passed in the House, but it will go a long way in helping States improve the administration of elections--the foundation of our Democracy. Finally, this bill makes much needed investments in our foreign affairs institutions, including funding increases that will allow the State Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development to hire additional foreign service personnel to address the neglected staffing needs of these agencies. Key initiatives continue to receive vigorous support, including efforts to combat HIV/AIDS and other diseases, agriculture and food security programs, basic education programs, microfinance and microcredit, and the Peace Corps. I am especially pleased that the final bill recognizes the important contributions that scientists and scientific engagement can make to our international relations. Mr. Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to join me in supporting this critical funding bill.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Madam Chair, I rise in support of H.R. 4173, the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2009, and to commend Chairman Frank, Chairman Peterson, and the broad coalition of Members who have worked to craft this financial services reform legislation. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act was an important first step, but we are still in the throes of recovery from the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression, which was caused m large part by more than a decade of regulatory failures. Reckless, abusive and irresponsible practices on the part of some in the mortgage issuance and financial services industries combined to create a perfect storm, resulting in a catastrophic economic collapse. The country had fallen into recession by the end of 2007, which exploded into an economic crisis as the subprime mortgage crisis unwound, Lehman Brothers filed for bankruptcy and AIG collapsed. The impact on the American people has been profound. Household net worth dropped by more than $14 trillion from 2007 to mid-2009, the value of retirement assets dropped by 22 percent between 2006 and in mid-2008, total home equity dropped from $13 trillion in 2006 to $8.8 trillion by mid-2008, and as of today, almost one in four homeowners owes more on their mortgage than their home is worth. In addition, Americans in every income strata have simply not been protected from even the most egregious behavior. The Securities and Exchange Commission utterly failed to discover and prevent the collapse of a $65 billion Ponzi scheme, as well as several others which also resulted in billions in losses to investors. Meanwhile, millions of Americans who live paycheck to paycheck and rely on payday loans are being charged annual interest rates of 400 percent or more, totaling nearly $5 billion per year. The Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act is an aggressive and comprehensive response to the broad spectrum of problems the recent economic crisis brought to light. It creates a new Consumer Financial Protection Agency to ensure that bank loans, mortgages, payday loans, overdraft fees and credit card policies are fair, affordable, understandable, and transparent. It establishes a new Financial Services Oversight Council to monitor and respond to systemic risk, to prevent the sort of tidal wave of catastrophic interconnected developments that brought down the economy in 2008. It puts measures in place to ensure that there will never again be a company deemed ``too big to fail,'' and it establishes an industry-funded dissolution fund to ensure that taxpayers will not be asked to bail out any such company if it goes into collapse. The bill also includes legislation passed in the House earlier in the year, to regulate the type of incentive-based executive compensation that provoked some of the riskiest and most reckless behavior in the financial services markets, and to prohibit the sorts of fraudulent and abusive mortgage issuance practices that caused the subprime mortgage crisis. I am also pleased that the bill includes several strengthening amendments I offered, and I thank Chairman Frank again for his support of those amendments and for including them in the Manager's Amendment. My amendments would clarify that the newly-created Financial Services Oversight Council, rather than one dominant member thereof (the Federal Reserve Board), is the systemic risk regulator empowered under the Act. The amendments would also ensure that the Council is a broad-minded think tank staffed equitably by all of its Voting Members, rather than predominantly by one (the Department of the Treasury). The staff would remain on the payrolls of the detailing agency, pre-empting a budgetary problem for the Council. In addition, the bill includes two good government amendments I offered, which clarify that financial companies cannot be compelled by the systemic risk regulator to waive any privilege (such as attorney- client privilege) when providing data at the request of the systemic risk regulator, and that the same protection against compelled waiver of privilege applies to private funds, investment advisors and others. In times of crisis and crisis response, we must exercise heightened diligence in protecting and preserving our foundational rights and principles. The Committee has taken bold steps to confront the failures of our financial services regulatory system, and I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of legislation that will extend tax relief to millions of Americans, the Tax Extenders Act of 2009. This bill will extend 40 tax cuts which are due to expire at the end of this year, many of which are important to businesses and families in Central New Jersey.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Medicare Physician Payment Reform Act, H.R. 3961, legislation that would ensure that physicians are reimbursed fairly for treating Medicare patients. Improving this payment system is vital to improving our nation's health insurance system. There is broad consensus that the current Medicare formula for reimbursing physicians, the Sustainable Growth Rate (SGR), is fundamentally flawed. This formula would be eliminated by this bill and replaced with a better structure for Medicare physician payments. Without this necessary action, doctors' payments would be cut 21 percent in 2010, forcing many doctors to stop accepting Medicare patients and undermining the ability of millions of Medicare beneficiaries to get the care they need to stay healthy. I am pleased that this new formula would compensate physicians fairly for their services to seniors. As a U.S. Representative and the spouse of a physician, I have heard from many physicians, nurses, and other health care providers frustrated with the annual ritual of preventing major Medicare physician payment cuts. I am pleased that this legislation, a crucial part of health care reform, would stop this cycle and reset the Medicare physician payment baseline to ensure seniors continue to have access to their doctors. In addition, this bill recognizes the importance of primary care, a key component of health reform, and would provide seniors with greater access to primary care practitioners. This would help seniors with greater coordination of their medical care and promote medical care that keeps seniors healthy. In addition to stopping the Medicare physician payment cuts, the legislation also would implement the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act. This Act would require all new spending to be paid for and not increase the debt by instituting pay-as-you-go budgeting as law. I support pay-as- you-go rules because fiscal discipline must always be a hallmark of our government. In the 1990s with pay-as-you-go as the law, we turned the massive deficits of the 1980s into a record surplus under President Clinton. Pay-as-you-go is only one tool, but it is a strong one to return our nation back to fiscal stability. I voted in favor of this bill to help physicians and health care providers continue to provide excellent service to our nation's seniors.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 4152, the Permanent Estate Tax Relief for Families, Farmers, and Small Businesses Act of 2009. This is responsible legislation that would provide permanent tax relief to middle-class families and family-owned businesses, while maintaining the estate tax for only the 7,600 wealthiest individuals nationwide, according to the Committee on Ways and Means. H.R. 4152, the Permanent Estate Tax Relief for Families, Farmers, and Small Businesses Act of 2009 permanently would set the estate tax at the 2009 level. This would allow families and small businesses to have certainty about the rate of taxation on their estates and plan accordingly. Currently the estate tax exemption is set at $3.5 million for individuals and $7 million for couples and with a maximum tax rate of 45 percent. Unless the House and the Senate take action, the estate tax is scheduled to enter 1 year of full repeal in 2010 followed by a return of the estate tax in 2011 with a drastically reduced exemption level and a much higher maximum rate of taxation. If we allow the estate tax to return to a $1 million exemption at a tax rate of 55 percent, 30,000 more American small businesses, farms, and families will be subject to the estate tax in 2011. Given the high property values in New Jersey, allowing the estate tax to revert to a million dollar exemption would hit my constituents especially hard. Additionally, the legislation we are considering today would require all new spending to be paid for and not increase the debt by instituting pay-as-you-go budgeting as law. I support pay-as-you-go rules because fiscal discipline must always be a hallmark of our government. In the 1990s with pay-as-you-go as the law, we turned the massive deficits of the 1980s into a record surplus under President Clinton. Pay-as-you-go is only one tool, but it is a strong one to return our Nation back to fiscal stability. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Medicare Physician Payment Reform Act, H.R. 3961, legislation that would ensure that physicians are reimbursed fairly for treating Medicare patients. Improving this payment system is vital to improving our Nation's health insurance system.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Madam Speaker, I support our Nation's small business and the passage of the ``Small Business Financing and Investment Act,'' H.R. 3854. Small businesses play an integral role in the United States economy. Small businesses employ more than half of all workers in the private sector and generate 60 to 80 percent of new jobs in this country. The small business financing and lending programs improved by this bill would help small businesses not only survive the current downturn, but help them to expand and create new jobs. Last month, I brought more than 50 high-tech small business owners to Washington to discuss the issues facing their businesses. Many of these small business owners told me about the struggles they face in finding credit and investment funding, which they need to maintain and expand their businesses. They talked about how reluctant banks were to lend to small businesses in these difficult economic times. This bill would help those small business owners by extending key provisions from the Recovery Act passed earlier this year. First, the legislation would aid small businesses by eliminating fees on Small Business Administration, SBA, loans, in order to make these loans more affordable for small businesses. The bill further would assist these small businesses by providing a Federal guarantee of certain loans, to encourage local banks and credit unions to increase their lending to small businesses. I appreciate how the Small Business Financing and Investment Act assists high-tech businesses and entrepreneurs. Beginning in the last quarter of 2008, investments in early-stage businesses, such as these, plunged 26 percent. To address this shortage, the bill would establish a new Early-Stage Investment Program at SBA, which would pair SBA grants with private venture capital in order to target investment dollars to promising technology small business startups. The legislation makes improvements to the Renewable Energy Capital Investment program in order to increase investment in small business that are researching alternative and renewable energy technologies to meet our future energy needs. I am pleased that H.R. 3854 helps veterans interested in starting their own businesses. Our Nation was built by citizen-soldiers, yet too often, our veterans have difficulty finding well-paid, rewarding work in the Nation they served and protected. We need to do more to help our youngest veterans find gainful employment. According to the Department of Labor, veterans between the ages of 18 and 24 had an unemployment rate of 14.1 percent; nearly double the rate of those between the ages of 25 to 34, 7.3 percent. It is unacceptable that hundreds of thousands of veterans who have risked their own lives to defend our country can't find jobs, and many endure homelessness and lives of poverty after they return home. Our brave men and women in uniform have given so much for this country; it is right that the Congress help ensure that our returning soldiers have jobs when they come home. The legislation helps veterans by offering higher guarantees and lower cost loans, so they can access more affordable capital. The Small Business Financing and Investment Act builds on the investments that this Congress made through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. This bill would provide further aid to our small business and continues our efforts to put the economy back on the track to recovery. I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this bill to support our Nation's small businesses.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the emergency extension of unemployment benefit passed yesterday for States with high rates of unemployment like my home state of New Jersey. Today's passage of the Worker, Homeownership, and Business Assistance Act of 2009 is the final step before it is presented to President Obama for his signature. As I said in September when we first considered this measure, I hear all the time from central New Jersey residents who are working hard each day to find a new job. Recently, a Mercer County resident wrote me to say his wife had been out of work for 11 months. He wrote to say, ``The jobs are just not available for her to go back to work.'' This bill answers his plea and the pleas of countless other out of work New Jersey residents to extend unemployment benefits while they continue to search for employment. In tough economic times, Congress and the President have worked together to extend unemployment benefits when needed. The previous extensions of unemployment insurance during this current recession have helped many New Jersey residents keep a roof over their head and food on the table when times were tough. In this tight job market and with the economy just starting to show signs of recovery, there are still six unemployed workers for each job opening and more than 5 million people who have been unemployed for more than 6 months. The Unemployment Compensation Extension Act of 2009, H.R. 3548, would extend by 14 weeks unemployment benefits for individuals who have exhausted their current benefits in all States and by an additional 6 weeks for individuals who live in States with an unemployment rates above 8.5 percent. Our Government must help those in need as they seek new work. Morally, it is the right thing to do and the economists tell us that unemployment benefits are one of the most cost-efficient and fast- acting forms of economic stimulus. The bill does not add to the deficit, by off setting its cost with a 1 year extension of a employment tax that has been in place for 30 years. Once this bill is signed into law it is estimated that the extension of unemployment benefits will help more than 1.3 million out of work employees.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, the question so many are asking is, Can we afford this health care reform? I would say not only can we afford it, we can't afford not to pass it. Consider where we are today: Businesses, large and small, feel a heavy weight around their necks trying to afford health care for their employees. It hurts our economy. It costs jobs. Businesses and families are paying a hidden tax of over $1,000 each per year for the care of the uninsured. Costs continue to go up because our procedure-based system rewards the ordering of unnecessary and expensive tests that not only don't help the patient, they can be detrimental. Any family, even well-off families who think they have good health coverage, can find themselves in bankruptcy from a bad accident or arbitrary actions of the insurers. All of this would change under this bill. This bill would reduce costs in a number of ways: By reducing the ranks of the uninsured, whose more expensive care we all pay for; by increasing the insurance competition through the new marketplace with a large interstate risk pool; by removing the antitrust exemption; and by moving toward more efficient record-keeping and by moving toward outcome-based, health outcome-based, patient-centered care. In addition to all this, the revenues raised by this bill exceed the expenditures, so passing this will reduce the deficit by billions of dollars below what it would be if we do not pass this tonight. We can't afford not to pass this health care reform. The bill will reduce the costs individuals, families and businesses face and reduce the government deficit.

Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the Affordable Health Care for America Act, H.R. 3962, legislation that would provide secure and stable health coverage regardless of whether one changes jobs or is between jobs, ensure Americans will never be denied care if they get sick, and extend coverage to those Americans not well served by the current health care system. This is a historic debate we are having. For the past century, since Teddy Roosevelt ran for President in 1912, our nation has been debating how to ensure that sick Americans can access the care they need. As a U.S. Representative and the husband of a primary care physician, I have heard many stories from hard-working New Jerseyans about the need for reform. Some Americans have access to excellent care, often thanks to the advanced biotechnology and pharmaceutical products created in New Jersey, while others lack even basic care. One of the goals of the health care reform is to help all Americans gain stable access to medical care and life-saving medicines. At a July roundtable in Trenton, a spouse of a cancer patient told me that when she and her husband came home from the hospital after one extensive treatment, they returned to foot-high stacks of insurance paperwork and $150,000 of out-of-pocket charges for her husband's needed care. A self-employed woman from East Brunswick wrote to me recently to let me know she pays $2,000 a month for her family's coverage and still has to pay out-of-pocket to see many of her physicians. These stories are a reminder that health care reform is about real people who are disserved by the broken health insurance system. These are not isolated stories. While in the U.S., we will spend over $8,000 per person this year for health care, 16 percent of New Jerseyans lacked insurance in 2007 and family insurance premiums are projected to rise from $14,000 in 2009 to $24,000 in 2019. In a country where we are projected to spend 18 percent of our Gross Domestic Product ($2.6 trillion) this year on health care, we can do better. The Affordable Health Care for America Act would improve the American health care system for all Americans, regardless of how they currently receive their health coverage. First, the legislation would lead to stable health costs that do not threaten family finances by establishing consumer protections for those purchasing private insurance. The bill would eliminate insurance benefit caps to ensure families do not have to worry about leaving the hospital with bills too big to pay because their benefits have run out. The bill would set an annual cap on out-of-pocket health expenses to eliminate cases where one disease forces a family into bankruptcy. Second, the bill would provide stable coverage for those between jobs or the self-employed by creating an insurance marketplace, where they could get insurance at group rates. Most of the policies in this insurance marketplace would be private insurance, while one of the plans would be a non-profit public plan. This public plan would be subject to the same requirements and regulations as the for-profit plans in the marketplace. The public option would be just that--an option in which no one would be forced to enroll. The bill also would eliminate the practice where patients with a pre-existing condition like diabetes or cancer or pregnancy cannot purchase insurance. According to a Congressional committee report, the bill would help 10,000 uninsured individuals in Central New Jersey gain access to affordable health insurance. Third, the bill would strengthen Medicare by starting to pay physicians for treating the whole patient and by encouraging doctors to coordinate a patient's medical care instead of paying for each test or procedure. The legislation would strengthen the long-term health of the Medicare trust fund by increasing the efficiency of the program, expanding its ability to fight waste, fraud, and abuse, and eliminating wasteful subsidies to private insurance companies. It is worth repeating: not only would Medicare remain intact under this legislation, it would become better. The legislation would strengthen the Medicare trust fund by increasing the efficiency of the program, expanding its ability to fight waste, fraud, and abuse, and eliminating wasteful subsidies to private insurance companies. No standard Medicare benefits would be cut. In fact, Medicare would be improved by eliminating the ``doughnut hole'' in the prescription drug benefit. Each year in Central New Jersey, 8,300 seniors face the Medicare ``doughnut hole'' and are forced to pay their full drug costs, despite paying for Part D drug coverage every month. H.R. 3962 would provide these seniors with immediate relief by cutting brand name drug costs in the ``doughnut hole'' by 50 percent and ultimately eliminating the ``doughnut hole'' altogether. Further, the legislation would help seniors by eliminating co-payments and deductibles in Medicare for preventative services to ensure that diseases would be treated at their earliest stages and to keep seniors well. The legislation creates new Medicare incentives to encourage physicians and hospitals to coordinate medical care and seek to reduce duplicate tests, x-rays, and labs. These and other provisions are why AARP, among several others, has endorsed this health care reform legislation. This bill was created from one of the most open and deliberative processes in recent memory. During the past few years, Congressional committees held more than 53 committee hearings, debated and voted on almost 240 amendments, and considered health reform for 167 hours. Many of the amendments reflected concerns raised by constituents and have improved this bill further. While there are strong humane and moral reasons to pass this health reform bill, the economic reasons are equally strong. Businesses, large and small, feel a heavy weight in trying to afford health care for their employees--hurting the economy and costing jobs. Any family, regardless of their income, can find themselves in bankruptcy from one accident or expensive illness. All of this would change under this reform bill. The bill would lower health costs for families by increasing competition across all states through a new marketplace and eliminating the antitrust exemption. It would reduce costs by promoting coordinated medical care to eliminate duplicative tests, by simplifying insurance paperwork and electronic records. The bill would decrease costs by expanding research on which treatments work best for different patients, helping physicians and nurses provide effective medical care. Long term, the legislation would limit costs by shifting to a focus on health outcomes and rewarding physicians for treating the whole patient. It would do all this without adding one penny to the debt. Instead, it will lower the debt and, according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), produce a $109 billion surplus over a decade. We cannot afford not to pass health care reform and reduce the crippling health costs facing our nation, our businesses, and our families. Sadly, there is a great deal of misinformation about the proposed health reform bill. I have heard from some the myth that Members of Congress would be exempt from health care reform. It is worth noting that Members of Congress receive their health insurance like any other of the eight million federal employees and we pay premiums just like any other worker. The health insurance reform bill includes several improvements to the overall insurance marketplace, all of which would apply to the federal employee health insurance plans. I welcome the fact that the reform legislation would apply to Members of Congress, just like employees of other large companies. Opponents of reform also claim that the House health reform bill would encourage euthanasia or insert the government into end-of-life conversations between patients and their physician. This claim is false. The truth is that the legislation would provide doctors with better payment for talking with their patients. This bi-partisan provision would provide payment for a doctor's time if a patient chooses to have a conversation about the care that the patient prefers if he or she becomes very ill, but it does not require anyone to use this benefit. These conversations would not involve any government employee, but would be solely between the patient and his or her physician. As noted by the AARP, ``[t]his measure would not only help people make the best decisions for themselves but also better ensure that their wishes are followed.'' There is no reasonable basis for concern that seniors' conversations with their doctors on personal requests for end-of-life care would do anything to promote assisted suicide, which is illegal in New Jersey and 47 other states, or euthanasia, which is illegal in all states. Discussions between the sick or the elderly and their doctors about end-of-life care have long been an accepted part of modern patient care as a way to ensure that the patient's wishes are carried out. In 2003, under the Bush administration, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality issued a report outlining a five-part process for physicians to discuss end-of-life care with their patients. Unfortunately, doctors are not paid for such discussions and thus are not encouraged to have them. According to the National Hospice and Palliative Care Organization, which supports this provision, the bill simply would allow for counseling on decisions that require time and consideration. Another myth is that health reform would provide federal benefits for undocumented aliens. Undocumented immigrants currently may not receive any federal benefits except in specific emergency medical situations. There are no provisions in the House health reform bill that would change this policy. In fact, the legislation explicitly states that federal funds for insurance would not be available to any individual who is not lawfully present in the United States. I have heard from many constituents concerned about the inclusion or exclusion of family planning services in health insurance reform. The legislation would exclude federal funding of abortion, and maintain existing federal laws protecting conscience rights in health care. In fact, the amendment adopted tonight, which I believe is in error, would go further than existing law and even prevent women from using their personal funds from purchasing coverage for family planning services. I hope the conferees will revisit this issue to ensure women have the freedom to purchase the policy that best serves their needs and conscience. I am pleased that health reform will help small businesses. According to a report issued from the Council of Economic Advisors in July 2009, the current health care system places a heavy burden on small businesses through high premiums, fixed administrative costs, adverse selection, and comparative disadvantage with larger businesses in America and with businesses in other countries. This is why small businesses pay up to 18 percent more per worker for the same health insurance plan than a large firm. The House legislation would help small business employees purchase insurance at group rates through an insurance marketplace, and by providing a tax credit to help small businesses that purchase insurance. Almost 18,000 small businesses in Central New Jersey would receive this tax credit. The bill further recognizes the constraints facing small businesses and exempts many small employers from the shared responsibility requirement to provide insurance for their employees. The Congressional Budget Office and respected Massachusetts Institute of Technology health care economist Jonathan Gruber have pointed out that for the large majority of small businesses, the reform legislation would be a great improvement and would provide real savings. For years, small businesses have asked me and other Members of Congress to allow them to get better rates by pooling their employees in large numbers, which is currently available to only larger companies. The newly-created marketplace would allow insurance plans to pool the health risks of millions of people and thus get lower rates. In addition to the marketplace for small businesses created by the House health reform bill, I worked with my colleagues Rep. Phil Hare (D-IL) and Rep. Rob Andrews (D-NJ) to include language in this legislation that would allow affiliated small businesses to join together to purchase insurance. This proposal for helping small businesses was brought to me by a small businessman in my district. I also was pleased to write a section of the bill that would create an online job training programs for health care workers, modeled after a successful program originating at Rutgers University. This program is needed to help meet the increasing need for health care workers, which was indicated by a July report by the Council on Economic Advisors. The demand for health workers soon will exceed the supply with 48 percent growth in health support occupations such as medical record, clinical laboratory, and health information technicians. My amendment, included in H.R. 3962, would provide new training opportunities to meet this additional demand for health professionals. While I support the Affordable Health Care for America Act, I look forward to working with my colleagues to improve this bill as the legislative process moves forward. I have heard from home care and hospice providers in my district and across New Jersey who are concerned about the reductions in Medicare home health payments. I have spent time with home care organizations and with individual patients at home and have gained a deep understanding of the challenges and successes that occur each day. I fear that additional cuts to home health would make it harder to do the essential job that home care and hospice workers perform each day. I also am concerned that several provisions of the bill may impede biomedical research and innovation, as this research has improved patient care and fostered a successful life sciences industry in New Jersey. While the bill we are considering is strong, I know this bill will continue to improve as we move through the legislative process. Today's vote in the House of Representatives marks an important step in this process and is the furthest we have come toward providing affordable and quality health coverage to all Americans. I look forward to working to the completion of meaningful health care reform legislation and sending it to the President for his signature. I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this bill to reform our nation's health insurance system and improve.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Worker, Homeownership, and Business Assistance Act of 2009, H.R. 3548. This emergency extension of unemployment benefits for states with high rates of unemployment is important for my home state of New Jersey and I urge this body to pass this legislation and the President to sign it expeditiously. With over 15 million Americans currently out of work it is essential that this body take action to preserve jobs by helping companies that are struggling in these uncertain economic times. More and more companies are falling into the position where their losses exceed their income. Businesses are being forced to close their doors, lay off employees and cut operating costs. As American employers continue to struggle to stay afloat in the worst economic crisis since the 1930s, Congress must fully utilize the tax code to provide timely and targeted relief for American entrepreneurs. Current tax law allows ``net operating loss carrybacks'' to help companies recoup their losses by offsetting taxable income from the two previous tax years. In the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Congress extended the period that small businesses could write off their net operating losses for 2008 and 2009 from two years to five years; enacting H.R. 3548 will extend to this all companies that have suffered losses during this recession. Extending the net operating loss provision will help businesses free up funds and prevent further job loss, which is critical for our economic security. This bill will provide essential tax relief that gives owners and entrepreneurs better means to make payroll and invest in new equipment, put people back to work, and create new jobs when they can.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Madam Speaker, I rise today to highlight the recent increase in funding for the National Endowment for the Arts and National Endowment for the Humanities. The Fiscal Year 2010 Interior Appropriations bill, which President Obama has signed into law, contains $167.5 million in funding for both agencies, an increase of $12.5 million over last year's level. This is on top of the $50 million that the NEA received in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act to preserve jobs in the arts. As a member of both the Arts and Humanities Caucuses, I want to thank Representatives Slaughter, Platts, Price (NC), and Petri, as well as Chairman Dicks, for their hard work in pushing for these funding increases. The arts and humanities play a crucial role in our society: they enhance our creativity, promote critical aspects of education, and provide Americans with the opportunity to view works of beauty and personal expression. Through exposure to the arts and humanities, our children are inspired to explore their own creativity and encouraged towards positive development in the course of their educational careers. There are also economic benefits of local arts in our communities, not just for those employed in theaters or museums, but also for tourism and economic revitalization programs. The downturn in philanthropic giving, brought on by the economic collapse, has constrained or even closed cultural institutions and, in turn, the restaurants, hotels, and construction industries that rely on their success. This is just one more reason that these funding increases are needed. I also want to recognize President Obama for understanding the important role that the arts and humanities play in enriching our lives and strengthening our economy. The President has appointed two exceptionally qualified individuals to head the NEA and NEH. Jim Leach, our former colleague, has a distinguished academic background, including his recent service as Visiting Professor of Public and International Affairs at Princeton University's Woodrow Wilson School. He brings to the NEH a first-hand understanding of the needs of educators, historians, curators, researchers, archivists and scholars. Rocco Landesman, the Director of the NEA, has a long and varied career in the performing arts, and has brought an energy and focus to the job that will help foster a vibrant artistic landscape. Again, I rise to celebrate these important funding increases, and I look forward to working with the President and my colleagues to strengthen support for the arts and humanities.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Mr. Chair, I rise today in strong support of the Expedited CARD Reform for Consumers Act of 2009, which would establish earlier effective dates for various consumer protections established by the Credit Card Accountability Responsibility and Disclosure Act, Credit CARD Act, enacted earlier this year. I commend Chairman Frank and Ms. Maloney for their leadership in bringing this bill to the floor today. To be clear, my strong support does not stem from any concern that the implementation deadlines set forth in the Credit CARD Act as enacted were ill-conceived or too lax. Indeed, I assume we all thought they were reasonable, and most of us probably still do. What was unreasonable was the punitive, abusive, and--frankly--shameful behavior of some credit card issuers in the wake of enactment of the Credit CARD Act. I have been besieged with letters from outraged constituents, and I'd like to share some of those with you: Chase Bank . . . [just increased my interest rate] from 9.99% to 16.24% a 62.5% increase. They are making it harder and harder for Americans to pay-back our loans during this economic downturn. I have never missed a payment! . . . Please help!!! I just received a letter from my Citi Bank Master Card (which my husband and I always pay on time) stating that my interest rate is being raised to 29.99%. My research shows that Citi Bank is slipping this rate increase in before the new Credit Card Act takes effect. This is an outrage to so many people like myself. Most of the major banks have hiked interest rates on customers' balances, increased penalty fees or doubled minimum payments since the bill was passed in May. . . . The banks are using this lag time before the implementation date to sneak in as many rate hikes and new fees as possible, and countless good customers who pay on time each month are suffering. I think a reality check is in order. The reality is that many credit card issuers have been abusing their customers. Had they been treating them fairly, there would have been no need for, and no call for, legislation to reign in and prohibit those abusive practices. Another reality is that many of those same credit card issuers behaved recklessly and imprudently, as a result of which they put their own survival in jeopardy and had to come to the American taxpayers hat in hand just to stay afloat. Had those financial institutions managed their own affairs responsibly, they wouldn't have had to rely on the good graces of hard working Americans to stay in business. So where does that leave us? They abused their customers, they compromised their own financial stability, they took their customers' charity to regain that stability, then they retaliated against their customers when the government stepped in told them they had to stop abusing their customers. The whole situation is just plain astounding. Even so, it is always important to tailor one's response carefully to the actual facts and circumstances. For example, not all credit card issuers abused their customers in the first place. And not all credit card issuers retaliated against them in the wake of enactment of the Credit CARD Act. And as I noted previously, the original implementation deadlines for the bill were reasonable--we would not have passed it that way if they weren't. Therefore, although I heartily support this bill and urge my colleagues to do the same, I also offered an amendment to make it stronger, and to fine-tune its application. My amendment would have given credit card issuers the ability to opt out of the expedited implementation schedule set forth in this bill, and win back the right to comply with the bill in accordance with the reasonable schedule we set forth originally, under one of two circumstances. Any creditor that could have demonstrated that it did not implement detrimental account changes against its customers on or after the date the Credit CARD Act was enacted would have been entitled to implement the bill in accordance with its original implementation schedule. This would insulate the well-behaved credit card issuers from the penalty this bill imposes, because the penalty is only being imposed in response to the bad behavior of other credit card issuers. This is not only fair, it is better for the economy. Expediting application of the implementation deadlines is going to cause disruptions in service and interruptions in the extension of credit, at precisely the same moment we go into the busiest shopping period in the annual cycle. Therefore, any credit card issuers that can justifiably be spared the requirement that they comply with the Credit CARD Act much more rapidly than originally intended, should have been spared. With respect to credit card issuers that already penalized their customers, preventing them from penalizing any others does not do anything to help the ones they already penalized. Therefore, my amendment would have allowed those institutions to ``buy back'' the right to implement the bill in accordance with its original deadlines if they could demonstrate that they reversed all of the penalties they imposed in the wake of enactment of the Credit CARD Act. Because they will have a fresh record of the interest rates, minimum payments, and penalty fees they just got through increasing, they should expeditiously have been able to reverse those and restore their customers to their pre-Credit CARD Act terms and conditions. Only an actual roll-back can help the consumers whose terms and conditions were already detrimentally changed, and only a strong incentive such as re- applying the original deadline structure would have incentivized any bank to agree to it. But to the extent they would have, this too would have been a boon to the economy, because all customers whose minimum monthly payments go back down would have that much more to spend as we go into the holiday season. My amendment simply created options. Any institution that fits one of the foregoing descriptions could have availed itself of the option. If they did, well-behaved banks would have been protected, injured consumers would have been restored to their pre-injury terms and conditions, and in each case the economy would have been stimulated. In addition, in each case, my amendment would have provided that implementing any detrimental changes to customer accounts after the exemption was awarded but before the bill is fully implemented would result in immediate revocation of the exemption. I believe the amendment would have made the bill stronger, and applied it more deftly and equitably to the circumstances. But without it, the banks will implement the bill as of December 1, and consumers will be provided the protections we enacted for them last spring that much sooner. I commend Chairman Frank and my colleague Mrs. Maloney again for offering this bill, and I urge my colleagues to support it.

Mr. HOLT

Mr. HOLT. Madam Chair, Chairman Dicks may hesitate to blow his own horn, so I will say it. This is the best Interior appropriations bill we have seen. Where do I begin praising it--$453 million for the Land and Water Conservation Fund, more than a third up from last year, doubles the State matching grants. LWCF is an issue I have worked on since I first came to Congress. This robust funding for Federal agencies and States to preserve open space is critically important. The bill's $385 million for climate change mitigation, a large increase over the last year, including $17 million for establishing a national greenhouse gas registry that my colleagues Representative Baldwin, Representative Inslee and I have advocated. It includes a good increase for our national parks to preserve these national treasures for the enjoyment of future generations. It includes a real increase for the National Endowment for the Arts and the National Endowment for the Humanities. The arts and humanities play a crucial role in our society in enhancing creativity, quality of life and, yes, improving local economies. I could go on--EPA, land management, Native Americans and more. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.