Paul Hodes

Mr. HODES

Mr. HODES. That's not pork either. It provides $1.1 billion more for needed military housing. Does that sound like pork?

Mr. HODES. The bill honors our returning veterans by providing $2.1 billion more for military health care than the President requested, including $900 million for post traumatic stress disorder and traumatic brain injury care and research, and $661 million to prevent health care fee increases for our troops. Because what they are now facing under this President's policies is getting sent off to war to fight for their country and coming home to find that their health insurance costs more, that the military health system is too overloaded to take care of them, and that the veterans' system has been overloaded beyond capacity. Now, if the President vetoes these increases for the veterans and wounded warriors that his policies have created, it will be something that I don't understand and I don't think the American people are going to understand. And so he has a challenge in front of him. He has a challenge and a choice to make. And maybe between now and when this bill hits his desk, he will have one of those moments on the road to Damascus and decide that he will face the reality and do right by our troops, do right by the American people, do right by this country and set a new direction in Iraq. I will kick it back to you, Mr. Murphy.

Mr. HODES. Well, as I said at the beginning of the hour, Mr. Murphy and Mr. Altmire, I'm on the ``something'' side of 30, but I am glad to be with you because I am hoping that we, together, have brought an energy to this Congress that really has set a new tone and will help us set a new direction for this country, not just on the war on Iraq, but on health care, on energy, on education and all the policies that the American people want us to get to work on and we've been working hard on. Before we go, I do want to say that Speaker Pelosi's 30-Something Working Group can be e-mailed at 30somethingdems@mail.house.gov. The 30-Somethings, whom I am now a proud guest, being on the something side, can be visited, and here is the Web site address on this chart, www.speaker.gov/30something/index.html. So I invite everybody who has been working tonight to visit the 30- Something Web site for information on what the agenda for America is that Democrats have been working on. And I thank you for the opportunity to be with you.

Mr. HODES

Mr. HODES. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Minnesota (Mr. Ellison) for yielding. Mr. Speaker and distinguished colleagues, I am glad to be with you tonight to talk about where we have been in the 110th Congress, where we are, and where we are going, because this Congress really has changed the direction of America. If you think back to where we were over the past 6 years, this country was frustrated. Frustrated because of the squeeze on the middle class with fiscal policies that weren't working. They weren't working for the middle class and those trying to get into the middle class. They may have been working for those at the very, very tippy top of the financial scale, but not for anybody else. A frustrated middle class and an America which has come together because of a foreign policy which has made us weaker, which has ruined our reputation in the world, which has mired our brave soldiers in a civil war. They asked for change in November. And in the past 3 months we have delivered substantial change. So tonight we are going to talk about the Accountability Congress. We have changed the Congress of the United States from a Rubber Stamp Congress that didn't hold anybody accountable for anything, but simply rubber stamped what the administration wanted to do without question. They held no hearings, held no accountability over agencies, and we have replaced it with an accountability Congress that holds the administration accountable, that holds agencies accountable, and is accountable to the American people for making real progress. So I am very proud to be with you tonight. And I look forward to the next hour when we get to talk about what we've done, where we are and where we're going. I yield back.

Mr. HODES. I am glad you asked. Because in the campaign, as we went around, we all heard about the squeeze that our families were in all over this country, complaining about the cost of higher education and the difficulty they were having in paying for the loans that folks have to take out in order to pay for an education. Of course in order to be competitive in a global economy, we need more kids going to college, we need more opportunities for more people in this country. In my home State of New Hampshire, we actually carry the highest debt-per-student in terms of student loans of any State in the country. So it has been really important at home in New Hampshire and around the country for this Democratic Congress and the new majority to take action. Now, Mr. Ellison already talked about one of the things that was done in terms of making college more affordable by voting to cut student loan interest rates in half. We've talked about what we have done to restore pay-as-you-go rules, because once you've got fiscal responsibility, once we've restored fiscal responsibility that was absent from the 6 years that the Republicans were borrowing and spending us into a black hole of a deficit, we can start acting with a social conscience and help our college kids. So one of the things we have done, as this chart shows, is we passed a budget, a Democratic budget that restores fiscal balance, it cuts the deficit, balances the budget over 5 years. And what it does for our kids in college is, first, we propose an increase of the maximum Pell Grant to at least $4,600, significant increase. Our budget, the Democratic budget, the responsible budget, the pay-as-you-go, balance- the-budget-in-5-years budget rejects all of the President's irresponsible proposed cuts to higher education, including that he wants to eliminate the Perkins loan program, Federal supplemental opportunities grants, and leveraging education assistance partnerships. The President's budget actually wants to take opportunities away from our kids going to college and families who are trying to send their kids to college. We have turned that around. We are going to make it easier and more affordable for kids to go to college

Mr. HODES. I thank you, Mr. Ellison. You know, I couldn't help when I was listening to Patrick Murphy, a brave veteran who served his country and came to Congress and is serving again, continuing his service, to think about how touched I was when he talked about his new baby. Because, really, what we are talking about here is a vision for this country and a vision for the world that is going to take us on into the 21st century, because we face challenging new times. Things have changed in this country, and the American people know it. And in many ways they are far ahead of the politicians, they are far ahead of many of us. They understand that things have changed in this country. The conflicts we face are different kinds of conflicts. It is no longer nation against nation. We face threats from a shadowy network of people, terrorists who would do us harm. And we have to be strong to be able to fight terrorism. But what does being strong mean in the 21st century? The American people have demanded a new direction. They have demanded a new way to defend our country. They want us to fight terrorism, and we intend to fight terrorism; but we intend to do it with a greater focus on those who attacked us on 9/11, with a greater focus on homeland security, on making sure that we are keeping nuclear weapons out of the hands of terrorists. Perhaps the greatest threat we face, which went by the boards because of this administration's preoccupation with fighting the wrong war in Iraq which has diverted us from really focusing on the concentrated effort we need from law enforcement, from intelligence, from military, from diplomacy, from the soft power that America, has been extending our cultural ideals and principles out into the world to show people that we are not merely going to bully people with weapons, but we are also going to stand on our ideals and principles. So defending our country and staying strong means making sure that we have a responsible strategy to disengage from Iraq so we can deal with Afghanistan, and Pakistan, where Osama bin Laden is still hiding out, still directing al Qaeda; so that we can do what we need to do to go back and finish the job that this administration left unfinished. That is what defending our country means, because this war in Iraq, as everybody in this country is seeing, has left us weaker. It has caused more terrorism, more death, more disdain for the United States. I am sorry for that. We want to see us return to the place in the world where people care about us because of our values and our principles, and that is one of the most important things that we are going to do in this 110th Congress. We are going to improve our military readiness by making sure that we are going to rebuild a 21st century force, capable of projecting power and our ideals to protect our country and our interests, and that means new thinking. It means new thinking about how we deal with the conflicts we are in, how we deal with the conflicts in the future. It means part of the reason that we hope the President takes his cue from the American people and faces the reality of the mess that he has made and changes direction is so that we can rebuild our military to make sure that we can face the conflicts of the future. We are going to demand accountability, and we are going to end the rubber-stamp approach to congressional oversight of the war in Iraq and we have started to do that. We are going to continue to do that. We are going to fight the war on terrorism, and we are going to hold our own government accountable for failed policies. We are going to respond to the American people who want a new direction, and we are going to deliver on homeland security. That is the first way. That is the first thing on our agenda. It is a new vision of what it means to be strong. It is a new vision of what it means to defend our country. We can have all the military might in the world and we do. We spend more in our budget than all the rest of the world combined spends on defense, and I ask, you has it made us safer? Have the policies of this administration made us safer? The answer is no. We see there has got to be a new direction. We see there has got to be a new vision, and that is what Democrats are bringing to this 110th Congress when it comes to defending our country and keeping us strong. There is a new definition of national security, and that is what we are all about.

Mr. HODES. I appreciate the opportunity to be with you all tonight and talk about where we have been, where we are and we are going to take this country. We are going to defend our country and we are going to grow our economy, care for our children and families. We are going to protect our planet with a 21st century energy policy. We are going to deal with energy independence and global climate change. We have restored accountability, and we are going to keep on restoring accountability because in this 21st century we are in a global economy. The Democrats and the new majority here in Congress are committed to growing our economy in a way that really spreads opportunities to everybody. It means fair trade policies that incorporate fair environmental and labor standards so that every American worker can operate on the same playing field. We are going to grow the economy. We are going to invest in research and development. We are going to make sure that we are moving this country forward. So it has been a great time to be with you tonight.

Mr. HODES

Mr. HODES. I thank the chairman. I thank the gentlewoman for yielding her time. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 1361, the RECOVER Act. This bill provided a much-needed overhaul to the Small Business Administration and its disaster aid program. After a disaster, the SBA issues loans to help individuals and small businesses rebuild their lives, often shattered by storms and other natural disasters. After Hurricane Katrina, the average time for the SBA to process a loan, not including closing, was 74 days, far above the agency's goal of 21 days. This is absolutely unacceptable. As I speak here today, people all across my home State of New Hampshire are dealing with the aftermath of a recent powerful nor'easter. On April 15, 2007, New Hampshire experienced a severe storm that dropped almost 6 inches of water in a matter of hours. The State as a whole has experienced sustained power and communications outages, and there are currently over 100 local communities that are reporting significant damage to local infrastructure. Our Governor has declared a state of emergency. More than 60 percent of the businesses in New Hampshire are small businesses. This program is absolutely vital to my constituents now more than ever. We owe it to our small businesses nationwide to have access to critical relief services. I encourage my colleagues in the House to support this overhaul of SBA disaster aid, and reject proposed amendments.

Mr. HODES

Mr. HODES. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for being here with us tonight. I am delighted to be a new Member in the House of Representatives, the people's House, sent by my constituents to help restore the fabric of our democracy, which, during the past 6 years, has really been torn and undermined by a rubber-stamp Congress which refused to ask questions of an administration conducting its policies largely in secret, taking the American people down a path with counterfeit leadership, a leadership that used fear and intimidation to lead, instead of real leadership which helps people face reality, come together and seek common ground and solutions. And for many people, when they think of the United States House of Representatives, they think of Congress as a body which raises revenue and figures out how to spend it. It sets taxes and sets a budget. And that is how a lot of folks think about Congress, and sure we spend a lot of our time doing that. But there is another very important function of the United States Congress in our constitutional scheme, and it is completely independent of what party is in the White House, what party is in the majority in Congress, what party is in the majority in the Senate. It is the way that, in the wisdom of the Founding Fathers, they set up this great government of ours so that there would be checks and balances, there would be controls. And the accountability and oversight function of Congress is what we have restored with this Democratic majority. There have been great leaders who have recognized that important feature and that important job of Congress. And I have got a chart here, a little board and a quote that is really important and talks a lot about what it means for Congress to exercise its function of accountability. President Woodrow Wilson said, ``It is the proper duty of a representative body to look diligently into every affair of government and to talk much about what it sees. It is meant to be the eyes and the voice and to embody the wisdom and will of its constituents. The informing function of Congress should be preferred, even to its legislative function.'' So here is President Wilson, some years ago, recognizing that the oversight and accountability function of Congress is perhaps even more important than the legislative function. So for this Congress, while the last Congress might have been called ``the rubber-stamp Congress'' or the last Congress might have been called ``the Katrina Congress'' because they presided over such a disaster for us, I bet that this Congress, under Democratic majority, is going to be ``the accountability Congress.'' Now, one thing that is interesting, I want to take us back for a moment as we sort of set the tone for tonight to talk about something that happened in ancient times. It has been said that the ancient Romans had a tradition. Whenever one of their engineers constructed an arch, at the capstone was hoisted into place, the engineer assumed accountability for his work in the most profound way possible, he stood under the arch. In the President's war on terror, the capstone he chose is Iraq, but it is everyday Americans, and especially our veterans, returning soldiers who are wounded and our veterans who stood under the arch as it crumbled. Over the past few weeks, we have sustained blow after blow as the President's plan fell apart. But it is not the President who will pay the billions necessary to stabilize Iraq, it is not the President who slept in molding infested rooms at Walter Reed Hospital, it is not the President who lost his job because of a political decision. But maybe it ought to be. The confluence of events of recent weeks, the Valerie Plame scandal, the Walter Reed scandal, the politically motivated firing of U.S. Attorneys, is the result of an administration that went too far for too long without any meaningful oversight, without any meaningful accountability, without a Congress to hold it accountable. It has been said that absolute power corrupts absolutely. And for years, absolute power is what our Republican colleagues, who were in control until November of 2006, gave to this administration. Tonight, I come to the floor with my colleagues to talk about restoring accountability to government because the arch has fallen on us, and we are going to repair it.

Mr. HODES. Madam Speaker, I was thinking about what our colleague Mr. Welch talked about in terms of the investigation into the way in which the administration may have interfered for political purposes with the administration of justice by the United States Attorneys, causing the firing of United States Attorneys for political purposes. And it is interesting to me. I come from New Hampshire, a small State. And probably many of the folks who may be listening tonight and many people in this Chamber, although there aren't too many, have heard of the name Daniel Webster. And Daniel Webster said a very important thing. He said: ``There is nothing so powerful as the truth.'' And, really, that is what we are talking about. Our colleague Mr. Ellison talked about trust, and what we are really talking about is bringing truth to government, bringing integrity to government, bringing openness, bringing transparency, authentic honesty back into the Halls of Congress and wherever oversight and accountability take us. And in terms of what is happening with the United States Attorney scandal, if we have learned one thing about this administration, it is how it responds to its critics. When someone says something they don't like, they get rid of them. The current U.S. Attorney scandal is really just the latest example. And now folks are probably seeing that there is a conflict. The White House doesn't want people from the White House to come to Capitol Hill in the open light of day under oath to tell the truth to committees in Congress and committees in the Senate. And the question you have got to ask is, what is there to hide? Why not come, take an oath, tell the truth, and deal with the issues? I started my legal career in New Hampshire as a prosecutor. I was hired by a good Republican, a man named David Souter, who is now sitting on the United States Supreme Court. And what I learned as a prosecutor from David Souter was that the critical thing about the prosecutor's role was that the prosecutor serves the people. My job was to stand up and serve the people of my State. The job of the U.S. Attorney is to stand up and represent the people of the United States. U.S. Attorneys don't represent the President. They don't represent any particular politician. They represent all of the people. And so their judgment has to be independent judgment in order to see that justice is done because what we are after is justice, not political retribution. So you can imagine what happens in our great system of justice if instead of thinking about truth and justice, the United States Attorney is motivated by political influence. It perverts the system of justice. It means no justice can be had. So the investigations that are going on now, the accountability and oversight over the administration having the folks come down and talk to our committees is absolutely critical. It is fundamental to the preservation of the democratic fabric of this country, because if an administration, if White House officials can exert pressure on the United States Attorneys and remove their independence, then the people can't depend upon our system of justice. So this may be one of the most important of the investigations and the new accountability that we are seeing in Congress. And, frankly, what I have said to folks back home is we are not going to let this go by without getting the answers. So when folks see the battle over the subpoenas, when they see the White House resisting having its people come down, folks are asking why. What are you afraid of? Let the truth come out. Let's find out what happened. Now, that is accountability. That is oversight, and that is why the American people sent us here.

Mr. HODES. Absolutely.

Mr. HODES. Absolutely, sir.

Mr. HODES. Mr. Ellison, that is called a Siberian express. That is not just a chilling effect. That is ice cubes in your shoes. That puts the fear in the prosecutor. Now, prosecutors are brave people, and these U.S. Attorneys were brave people standing up to do their job. But it has to have a chilling effect, and it is exactly what we are talking about. The independence of our United States Attorneys is the hallmark, the foundation of the Federal system of justice, and it has to be preserved. And that is why it doesn't matter whether the White House is Republican or Democrat. If this was a Democratic administration that was doing this, we would be doing the same thing if we were following Woodrow Wilson's advice and doing our job here in the Congress.

Mr. HODES. You know, I can give you a perspective on that. I won't take too long to do that. My experience, and I had many years as a prosecutor and also many years as an attorney in court, is that the oath that you take to tell the truth is a powerful thing. It is a meaningful thing, and it is an important thing, because when a person swears to tell the truth, it has the effect of opening one's eyes to the importance and the majesty of the process that is involved in coming before a body, whatever body that is, and holding up your right hand and swearing to tell the truth. What happens then is, frankly, the person who is going to tell the truth and swears to tell the truth is subjected to a host of requirements and possible penalties if they don't tell the truth. That also turns out to be a powerful motivator. In this country we have trial by jury where witnesses come to tell the truth. We have investigations by Congress where witnesses come to tell the truth. And that really has proven to be the best, clearest, most open way in an open, transparent democratic government, like the one that we want to have and want to preserve, to get to the truth. That is all we are asking. We are not intending to ask folks to say or do anything they didn't do or to tell us something that isn't so. We just want to get to the truth. So a deal that has people behind closed doors without a transcript of the proceedings, with no way to review what has been said and no ability to do anything if they don't tell the truth, just doesn't cut it.

Mr. HODES. Thank you, Mr. Klein. It has been a pleasure to be with you here tonight and have this conversation with the people of this country about what oversight and accountability brings to government. I started my remarks this evening with a quotation from former President Woodrow Wilson. And I want to go back further in time to end my remarks with a quote from John Stuart Mill who said: ``The proper office of a representative assembly is to watch and control the government, to throw the light of publicity of its acts, to compel a full exposition and justification of all of them which anyone considers questionable.'' And it is that light of publicity, the light that we shine with accountability that helps preserve this government and leads to an open and transparent government. I am privileged to serve on the Information Subcommittee of the Government Oversight and Reform Committee. One of the things that we did which is essential in terms of the accountability of government, we brought to the floor and passed in this Congress in a bipartisan way much-needed reforms to the Freedom of Information Act. It is an act which every citizen can take advantage of to gain information about the government, to hold the government accountable, find documents and information that is the citizens' right to have. What we did was we restored the Freedom of Information Act to its rightful place where there is now once again a presumption in this government that the government should be open and disclose to its citizens what is going on, what it has for information and documents unless those documents fit into certain narrow exemptions. This has been a critical thing that we have done in this Congress. I am proud to be a new Member and working hard for accountability. And when the American people see that they truly have an accountability Congress working for them to eliminate waste, fraud, abuse and corruption, to save taxpayer money, they will once again regain trust in their elected officials and in the people's House.

Mr. HODES

Mr. HODES. Madam Speaker, we have entered the fifth year of the war in Iraq, and thousands of soldiers have returned home wounded and in need of serious medical care. The situation at Walter Reed made it clear that changes must be made to ensure that our wounded troops receive timely comprehensive care that extends through the length of their condition. To provide these crucial services, more is needed for defense health care than the President requested. The status quo is simply not acceptable for our troops who are injured while serving our country. We owe them our real support. The emergency supplemental proposed by this Democratic Congress nearly doubles the amount of funding requested by the President for military health care. These additional funds will enhance medical services for active duty forces, mobilized personnel and their families, including: post-traumatic stress disorder counseling, traumatic brain injury care and burn treatment. The funds will also help prevent health care fee increases for troops and address the problems found at Walter Reed. Madam Speaker, passage of this bill supports our troops and will ensure that they receive the quality care they deserve.

Mr. HODES

Mr. HODES. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Democratic Caucus, I offer a privileged resolution (H. Res. 253) and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. HODES

Mr. HODES. Mr. Speaker, I come to the floor today to congratulate Manchester West High School in Manchester, New Hampshire, and Region 14 Applied Technology Center team from Peterborough, New Hampshire, on their victory at the regional FIRST Robotics Competition this past week in Manchester. FIRST is an acronym for For Inspiration and Recognition of Science and Technology. This remarkable program was developed in New Hampshire and has now spread to 1,500 high schools nationwide. It encourages young people to become actively involved with engineering and technology. FIRST brings innovative companies together with kids, teaching and inspiring them to pursue careers in advanced science. The brilliant students who participate actually build robots and then enter the robots in a series of competitions against the creations of other teams. I salute the creativity and technological savvy of the winning teams. Congratulations to Manchester West and the Region 14 team and to FIRST on its aspirational mission. FIRST is helping inspire the next generation of technology innovators which our country depends on to remain competitive in our global economy.

Mr. HODES

Mr. HODES. Mr. Speaker, when President Bush sent American troops to war in Iraq, he had an obligation to ensure they were cared for if they came home wounded. Unlike in past wars, medical technology and protective gears have advanced to the point that soldiers who would have died in the past are now surviving devastating combat injuries. Their survival, of course, is a great development. Unfortunately, as the case at Walter Reed shows, many of our injured soldiers are not receiving the treatment they need and deserve when they return home. We should all be outraged at what is happening at our military hospitals. Fortunately, this Congress is taking action. At the end of this week, House committees will have held four hearings on the inadequate treatment our wounded soldiers are receiving at Walter Reed. We are now learning that this is more widespread than Walter Reed, and we must explore major reform options that fix this problem immediately. Inadequate oversight of the Bush administration by past Congresses allowed these conditions to develop. The new Democratic Congress is going to hold those responsible accountable and ensure that our soldiers receive the help they have more than earned.

Mr. HODES

Mr. HODES. Mr. Speaker, as a member of the House Oversight and Reform Committee, we recently traveled to Walter Reed Army Hospital, where, as a panel, we heard graphic testimony from numbers of witnesses. Witnesses included Staff Sergeant Shannon, who testified, wearing an eye patch, suffering from a traumatic brain injury, about the kind of treatment he had received at Walter Reed Army hospital. The testimony was striking. He told us, Mr. Speaker, that after a few days of inpatient treatment, he was transferred into a limbo of outpatient treatment in which he couldn't find his way around the grounds and didn't have help for that; in which the assistance he needed wasn't there. And he is still in that limbo. We heard graphic testimony from Mrs. McLoed, whose husband had suffered a traumatic brain injury and who also hasn't received treatment as an outpatient at Walter Reed of the kind that we would expect. And we heard from Specialist Duncan, also testified with an eye patch on, that he had been living in intolerable living conditions in what is now the infamous building 18 at Walter Reed Army Hospital. The testimony was gut wrenching. Nobody who was in the room could have not been affected at hearing how our soldiers, our brave troops who had been injured in combat and come home, to be sent to intolerable living conditions, with mold, peeling wallpaper, cockroaches and rats in their living quarters, and no way to work through a system that was a Byzantine bureaucracy, seemingly designed to deny care, instead of provide care for those who both need it and deserve it most. It was with a heavy heart that I heard the testimony of the generals who were in charge of this system. The Surgeon General, General Kiley, who said that it wasn't his job to inspect the barracks at building 18; he had people to do that. And the gentleman next to him, General Weitman, whose command recently was relieved, the person he essentially pointed to, the man who had been there for 6 months. But General Kiley had been there from 2002 to 2004. He was the fellow in charge of the whole operation. General Weitman had been preceded by General Farmer. These conditions were known. And, in fact, General Kiley had been told on numerous occasions of the graphic problems with the system he was overseeing, and nothing had happened. It is now time to fix these problems, Mr. Speaker. It is time for this Congress to hold the system accountable. It is time for the Armed Forces medical system to step up with the kind of accountability and oversight and fix that our soldiers deserve. I look forward to participating in the fix of that system as a member of the House Oversight and Reform Committee. I look forward to hearing from the generals how they are going to fix things for our soldiers. Our soldiers need it. They deserve it. And especially at a time when the President proposes to send more troops to Iraq, I ask the question, how can he do it at a time when the medical system of the Armed Services is incapable of handling the inevitable casualties that will result? There is a disconnect, Mr. Speaker, and it is time that we change that.

Mr. HODES

Mr. HODES. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to join in reading the names of our American heroes: Private First Class George R. Roehl Jr.; Lance Corporal Robert L. Moscillo; Private First Class Matthew L. Bertolino; Specialist Anthony Chad Owens; Specialist Walter B. Howard II; Private First Class Scott A. Messer; First Lieutenant Simon T. Cox Jr.; Sergeant First Class Lance S. Cornett; Specialist Jesse M. Zamora; Sergeant Jeremiah Boehmer; Staff Sergeant Christopher R. Morningstar; Specialist William S. Hayes III; Specialist Sergio A. Mercedes Saez; Specialist Jacob E. Melson; Major Stuart M. Anderson; Major Michael R. Martinez; First Lieuentant Joseph D. DeMoors; Sergeant Nathan R. Field; Chief Warrant Officer Rex C. Kenyon; Specialist Clinton R. Upchurch; Staff Sergeatt Metodio A. Bandonill; Sergeant First Class Richard J. Herrema; Lance Corporal Michael L. Ford; First Sergeant Bobby Mendez; Sergeant Matthew A. Webber; Captain Shane Mahaffee; Private First Class Grant Allen Dampier; Staff Sergeant Marion Flint Jr.; Staff Sergeant Santiago M. Halsel; Petty Officer Third Class Lee Hamilton Deal; First Lieutenant Robert Seidel III; Sergeant Lonnie Calvin Allen Jr.; Private First Class Nicholas Cournoyer; Lieutenant Colonel Daniel E. Holland.

Mr. HODES. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. Specialist Justin Rollins from New Hampshire. From Georgia: Petty Officer First Class Michael Anthony Jordan; Civilian Darren D. Braswell; Staff Sergeant Rickey Scott; Lance Corporal Joshua A. Scott; Sergeant First Class Amos C. Edwards Jr.; Lance Corporal Kun Y. Kim; Specialist David S. Collins; Lance Corporal Samuel W. Large Jr.; Staff Sergeant Clinton T. Newman; Sergeant Chad A. Gonsalves; Sergeant Alberto D. Montrond; Lance Corporal Matthew Ron Barnes; Captain Anthony R. Garcia; First Lieutenant Brandon R. Dronet; Sergeant Donnie Leo F. Levens; Lance Corporal Nicholas J. Sovie; Senior Airman Alecia S. Good; Staff Sergeant Luis M. Melendez Sanchez; Sergeant Charles E. Matheny IV; Corporal Matthew D. Conley; Private Brian M. Moquin Jr.; Staff Sergeant Dale James Kelly Jr.; Lance Corporal Leon Deraps; Corporal Cory L. Palmer; Staff Sergeant Emmanuel L. Legaspi; Petty Officer First Class Gary Rovinski; Specialist Issac S. Lawson; Corporal Derek A. Stanley; Sergeant Travis A. Van Zoest; Specialist Curtis R. Mehrer; Sergeant Daniel Gionet.

Mr. HODES. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Illinois. From Minnesota: Corporal Andrew J. Kemple; Sergeant First Class Randall L. Lamberson; Specialist James W. ``Will'' Gardner; Private First Class James F. Costello III; Specialist Scott M. Bandhold; Specialist Andrew K. Waits; Lance Corporal Stephen Joseph Perez; Lance Corporal Darin T. Settle; Lance Corporal Derrick J. Cothran; Private First Class Ryan G. Winslow; Lance Corporal Justin D. Sims; Master Sergeant Clinton W. Cubert; Captain Ian P. Weikel; Private First Class Robert J. Settle; Private First Class Patrick A. Tinnell; Corporal Christopher D. Leon; Sergeant Jason J. Buzzard; Lance Corporal Nicholas J. Whyte; Sergeant Sirlou C. Cuaresma; Sergeant First Class Jared C. Monti; Staff Sergeant Patrick L. Lybert; Private First Class Brian J. Bradbury; Staff Sergeant Heathe N. Craig; Corporal Riley E. Baker; Private First Class Paul A. Beyer; Staff Sergeant Mario J. Bievre; Corporal Ryan J. Buckley; Private First Class Devon J. Gibbons; Specialist Channing G. Singletary; Sergeant Justin Dean Norton; Sergeant Benjamin J. Laymon; Staff Sergeant Virrueta A. Sanchez; Master Sergeant Thomas D. Maholic; and Staff Sergeant Joseph F. Fuerst III.

Mr. HODES. Thank you, Congressman Emanuel. I am honored to read the names of soldiers from California, who are all American heroes. Corporal Carlos Arrelano; Private Robbie M. Mariano; Lance Corporal Raul Mercado; Major Douglas A. LaBouff; Lance Corporal Brandon Christopher Dewey; Lance Corporal Hugo R. Lopez; Sergeant David L. Herrera; Private First Class Caesar S. Viglienzone; Specialist Roberto L. Martinez Salazar; Private First Class Javier Chavez, Jr.; Lance Corporal Michael S. Probst; Specialist Clay P. Farr; Corporal Adam O. Zanutto; Lance Corporal Bunny Long; Private First Class Angelo A. Zawaydeh; Sergeant Dale G. Brehm; Staff Sergeant Ricardo Barraza; Hospitalman Geovani Padilla Aleman; Lance Corporal Felipe D. Sandoval- Flores; Captain Brian S. Letendre; Sergeant Joseph E. Proctor; Staff Sergeant Gavin B. Reinke; and Specialist Bryan L. Quinton. Sergeant Elisha R. Parker; Private First Class Caleb A. Lufkin; Lance Corporal Adam Lucas; Corporal Richard A. Bennett; Captain Nathanael J. Doring; Corporal J. Adan Garcia; Captain James A. Funkhouser.

Mr. HODES

Mr. HODES. Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to be here today with other Members of the class of 2006, the caucus of the new Democratic Members of the House of Representatives, the majority makers, to talk today about the Employee Free Choice Act which we passed in this Chamber just a short time ago. I want to congratulate my colleagues on supporting H.R. 800, the Employee Free Choice Act, because it is an act that helps set a new direction for our country. If we can see final passage of H.R. 800, it will have a profound impact on working people in our country. I would like to start with an example of why the protection H.R. 800 offers is so desperately needed. Last week I was home for a work week in my district in New Hampshire and I had the opportunity to meet one of my constituents, Emily, a nurse from Concord, New Hampshire. She was interested in improving working conditions at the nursing home where she worked and where she had worked for a long time. So on January 12 of this year, she reached out to a local union to talk about organizing the employees, the other nurses, who were working in her nursing home. Seventeen days later, despite an impeccable history of service and excellent reviews, never had a bad review, no problems with her personnel file, she was fired for what the home called ``insubordination.'' Now, Emily works long hours in an industry that desperately needs qualified people like her. There is a nursing shortage. She loves her job and she cares about her patients and cares about the people she attends to, and the folks that she is working with are also my constituents. They are people who care about the rights of the people who are taking care of them and working with them. Emily deserves to have an advocate for safe and healthy working conditions, and she deserves to have a voice in her workplace. It is people like Emily who need the Employee Free Choice Act. It would make what happened to her illegal, as it should be. It would also penalize employers who intimidate and harass workers who want to join together to negotiate their contracts. It is important to note that there are thousands of responsible employers in our country who are already complying with the Act on a voluntary basis, and that is a good thing. When a majority of their employees sign up to join a union, they recognize it. They do not discriminate against those who are interested in joining together to exercise what ought to be the rights of every worker in this country to collectively bargain. This law that we have passed, that we are hoping to see final passage of, simply brings the rest of America's employers into line with the many who already acknowledge that their employees deserve a voice in their workplace. This is a bill that honors the integrity of work and promotes effective dialogue, dialogue between employers and the employees who are working with them. Now, opponents of this bill, many of the people on the other side of this aisle, point to record corporate profits and soaring executive payouts as proof that we do not need the Employee Free Choice Act. Well, they are right about one thing. The rich in this country sure are getting richer, and in fact, while executive pay has rocketed to 350 times what the average worker makes in a company, real wages for working people have remained stagnant. I have got a chart here today, and it is a wonderful thing because, as you know, this is one of the first sessions that we have had as the new Members in the Democratic majority, the new majority makers, doing what the 30-something Working Group has done so often on the floor over the past few years, educating the American people and our colleagues and each other about what is going on. They have pioneered the use of these kinds of charts, and I just want to point out what this chart shows. This chart shows the value of CEO pay and average worker production pay from 1990 to 2005. That is over a period of 15 years, and what it really shows is what would have happened to the pay of workers if their pay had kept up with what has happened to the pay of CEOs in America. You can see down here, right down to my far right where we start, we start together at the zero point, and this top line shows what would have happened to worker pay and where it would be now if it had risen at the same rate as CEO pay has risen. The bottom line shows what the actual worker pay, what has happened to actual worker pay. It has risen in this bottom red line very, very little. If it had kept pace with the CEO pay at this point, instead of an average actual worker pay, as shown here, of $28,315, and I want you to think about what it means to raise a family on $28,315 and pay for the kinds of things we have got to pay for today in this country in terms of gas, transportation, health care, schools, food and everything else. The average worker pay would be at $108,138. Clearly, this gap is something that we all ought to be concerned about.