Sheila Jackson Lee

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, let me thank the gentlelady from Ohio, and I'm very glad to follow on the theme that Congresswoman Kaptur of Ohio spoke to and the note that she ended on, recognizing that we have to do more. There is pain out there, but to actually say to the American public that our President, President Obama and this administration with this Democratic Congress has created more jobs in the last 18 months than were created in the tenure of the last administration, I don't know how many times we have to say that, but allow me to say it one more time, that this administration, President Obama's administration with this Democratic Congress, has created more jobs than the last administration in their entire tenure, and that was 8 years. Let me also cite for my colleague and let me as well express my appreciation in joining the Congressional Black Caucus special hour that we have participated in and educated really the American public, and I thank you for your leadership. Chairman Bernanke spoke last week in a number of hearings--and I think it's important to note--I know that many of our colleagues are either at hearings or they see the hearings. We try to twist and turn on our questions. If we don't like the answer, we try to throw it back at the witness. But the chairman of the Federal Reserve was very, very definitive when he said: It is important to invest in the economy, and if you want to use the term ``stimulus,'' I'd like to use the word ``investment,'' is the way to go, and all of those who are concerned about deficit, all of us we want to keep a balanced budget in our own personal homes. He said: The most important thing is to keep this economy churning and to not be so concerned about deficits as opposed to investing in our economy. That investment has caused a churning of the economy, such that we see the growth of jobs. We see the private sector working, but yet we have obstacles. Those obstacles concern me, and that's why we've come to the floor of the House to let everyone know that the Congressional Black Caucus is fighting still on the cause of expanding job opportunity. It baffles me how long we had to work to get the unemployment extension to be passed by the other body. Clearly, unemployment insurance is not a handout. It is a trust that is established with a working American. When they work and they fall upon hard times, they are due an unemployment insurance to carry them over the bridge of difficulty. This bill that we passed was focused on the unemployment extension that finally got passed after constant advocacy by this caucus, after meeting with Senate leaders over a period of time by Chairwoman Barbara Lee, after calling and prompting, that bill was passed. However, the component that would have added extra jobs, the component that would have provided youth jobs or summer jobs--and what date is it today, July 26. It saddens me; it saddens me. I remember us standing in the heat of summer in the month of June, standing with the constituents of Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton, teenagers from this region, standing with us and making a simple plea, put us to work, let us work. The other body has stood as an obstruction. When I say that, let me clarify. The Senate Republicans have been very, very challenging. But what we just had a chance to pass involved providing tax relief to businesses and State and local governments to help them invest and create jobs, provide important tax cuts to put money back in the pockets of working families to help restore the flow of credit to enable small businesses to expand and hire new workers by extending the small business loan program; extending eligibility for unemployment insurance, COBRA, health care tax credits and others; and close tax loopholes for wealthy investment fund managers and foreign operations of multinationals. Work still to be done, and that kind of work will really provide for enhanced opportunities for our small businesses. Our colleague from Maryland was saying that why can't we pass this small business lending bill that would make a huge difference coming out of the summer months, getting our small businesses ready to be the backbone of America and hiring those who need it. But let me speak to the emotion of what is going on, if I may, to my friend and colleague from Ohio, and if I may, Madam Speaker, just comment a moment because it troubled me how long it took for the unemployment insurance. People actually fell off the flat Earth. They literally fell off, 2.5 million, before we were able to pass this insurance; but more importantly, can you imagine as they were counting their dollars and they were not getting any word that we had passed it, can you imagine the stress that anyone who was having to be responsible for family members and children felt, the pressure, the intensity. I don't know why anyone doubts that people are looking for work. Eight thousand people came to a job fair that I held last year; 10,000 came to another one that I held. But these are just pictures of everyday Americans around America who have been standing in line for jobs, for jobs. Does anyone have any sense that there is a need out there, that people are not serious, that we shouldn't have extended the unemployment as well as extend dollars to small businesses and provide them with lending opportunities? Does anyone not see that this is a serious issue when people are standing in the hot sun for long hours when there is a job fair? Many people will tell us that there are thousands that come out when anyone has a job fair, when anyone has it; and what I focused on was the government opportunities because in many instances we're hiring, but let me just give some numbers that are so frightening. The Houston Crisis Center is seeing a startling increase in the number of suicide-related calls this year. The economy and job losses are among the top reasons people say they need help. The Crisis Intervention Center of Houston noticed more calls were coming in, many of them related to unemployment. The executive director says they compared calls from January to June of 2010 to the same time period last year, 2009, and that it has been a 220 percent increase of suicide-related calls, 1,446 suicide-related calls this year, people saying I don't know where to turn. Unemployment insurance that we fought so hard for, that could have been passed over a month ago, the realism of them understanding that people are impacted because they don't know how they're going to pay their mortgage, their rent, their food, college education for those whose children may still be in college, or other needs that they may have, medical bills. Let me just add this: according to foreclosure crisis on July 1, online publication, the people are stressed out from layoffs, actual or feared, and underemployment with salaries being slashed. The foreclosure crisis has taken a toll on the mental health of the people in no certain way. Take the story of Deanne Ross, for example, who was working full time, and she was a counselor dealing with the unemployed and helping them address their mental health situation. She was working with the national alliance dealing with mental illness and was a field operator, but she lost her job. Since that time, Ms. Ross, who is in her early forties and suffering from bipolar disorder, is battling urges to withdraw from social contact. We found this story on a foreclosure crisis Web site. Apprehensions about becoming homeless are haunting her, anxiety is crushing down upon her. She has five children to care for. All her life she has been hardworking and managing things, even with the physical challenge that she has had, and, therefore, now she finds herself unemployed. Does anyone get it? We need to pass a jobs bill to complement the hard work that you have already seen by this Congress and this administration in creating jobs. This is a public and private partnership. The private small businesses and large corporations who now are restraining themselves need to have confidence to invest in making and creating jobs. How do they do it? With the help of the Federal Government, by focusing on what we Democrats will be leading with, making it in America, emphasizing manufacturing, and that expands to other markets to allow people to not be in foreclosure, to not be without rent money. This is the way to go. Finally, Dan McCarthy of Magellan Health Services said, for many American workers, this financial stress, uncertainty, and anxiety can be significant, and it is important that they have places to turn for guidance and support. The services focus on managing benefits related to mental health. My key point is to dispel the myth that these are people who don't care, are not looking for work, don't need any resources. These are hardworking Americans, and it is important to note that they should look for support systems. Don't go this alone. Don't be alone when you are struggling to pay bills. There are many support systems in your own community, from the faith community to United Way, to various mental health associations, to your State unemployment offices. Don't handle this alone. Don't go it alone. But while you are working to survive, we in the United States Congress should do so. Let me close, Madam Speaker, by suggesting that there is much work left for us to do: creating public job initiatives involving the Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration, the Corporation for National and Community Service, locally directed programs for youth summer jobs. To my disappointment, it is almost an embarrassment to stand on the floor of the House. This House passed it, and we cannot get the Senate that doesn't understand that the families of youth are standing in unemployment lines, and we can't pass a simple summer youth program or youth jobs of a billion dollars to put young people to work who may be providing for some extra income to these desperate families, locally directed funding, as I indicated, for our summer youth; enforcing the minority contracting requirements under the National Significance and National Corridor grants in an extension of the SAFETEA-LU; and strengthening apprentice and training programs, which I am working with in the city of Houston; expanding unemployment insurance, which we have done, and COBRA benefits; providing access to capital and technical assistance for capital for small businesses from SBA and MBDA. There is work to be done, and I would simply say that this effort tonight is important to educate our colleagues to call upon our Senate Republicans to think about people and to care about those who desperately need our help. I hope that we are inspiring our colleagues to be renewed in their vigor to fight for the jobless, and I hope that we are challenging Senate Republicans to recognize that they have a responsibility as well to the thousands and millions of individuals who are calling out to get jobs.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, it is simply the morally right thing to do. And as I listen to the bantering and the chattering and the constant obstructionist policies of my friends, Republicans in this body and the other body, I'm amazed that there is no moral compass to say that millions of Americans, those who have worked, are simply asking that they be able to survive. This is not a handout. This is a trust, a contract, that when you work you invest in unemployment insurance to a certain extent, first given by the States, and now, because the States have run out of money, our federal government, their government is extending those dollars. And we know that it's the right thing to do because those people on the other side of the aisle have allowed this obstructionism to go forward, but they couldn't fight it anymore. They couldn't fight 62 percent of the American public who said this is the right thing to do. They couldn't fight the Congressional Budget Office who said this is the most cost-effective and fast-acting infusion of dollars to help people pay their mortgage and food and car payments and to stay off the streets, and to improve the economy. And further, Mr. Speaker, Chairman Bernanke said, It's no time for the deficit hawks to raise their heads. Continuing to stimulate the economy is the right approach. What we, as Democrats, are doing, infusing dollars into the economy, is the best approach to get the economy to grow. Corporate revenues grew in the last quarter, but corporations are hoarding their money, for now. I believe we will see more job creation soon. We are creating jobs and therefore we must continue to stimulate this economy by these unemployed individuals having resources to buy into the economy and to make a difference. I thank the gentleman very much for yielding and allowing me to say that all of the economists point to the fact that we're doing the right thing. I ask the Republicans to join us today and stand as Americans and do what is right for America. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 4213, ``The American Jobs and Closing Tax Loopholes Act of 2010''. I am primarily concerned with the unemployment provision in this piece of legislation. If passed, this bill will restore unemployment aid to 2.5 million Americans who have lost their benefits and are still seeking work in this emerging economy. It will give hope to the long-term unemployed and allow them a chance to survive by extending their benefits to November 30th, 2010. Mr. Speaker, if there is a single federal program that is absolutely critical to people in communities all across this nation at this time, it would be unemployment compensation benefits. Unemployed Americans must have a means to subsist, while continuing to look for work that in many parts of the country is just not there. Families have to feed children. Unemployed workers, many of whom rely on public transportation, need to be able to get to potential employers' places of work. Utility payments must be paid. Most people use their unemployment benefits to pay for the basics. No one is getting rich from unemployment benefits, because the weekly benefit checks are solely providing for basic food, medicine, gasoline and other necessary things many individuals with no other means of income are not able to afford. Personal and family savings have been exhausted and 401(Ks) have been tapped, leaving many individuals and families desperate for some type of assistance until the economy improves and additional jobs are created. The extension of unemployment benefits for the long-term unemployed is an emergency. You do not play with people's lives when there is an emergency. We are in a crisis. Just ask someone who has been unemployed and looking for work, and they will tell you the same. With a national unemployment rate of 9.5 percent, preventing and prolonging people from receiving unemployment benefits is a national tragedy. In the city of Houston, the unemployment rate stands at 8.3 percent as almost 250,000 individuals remain unemployed. Indeed, I can not tell you how difficult it has been to explain to my constituents who are unemployed that there will be no further extension of unemployment benefits until the Congress acts. Whether the justification for inaction is the size of the debt or the need for deficit reduction, it is clear that it is more prudent to act immediately to give individuals and families looking for work a means to survive. H.R. 4213 is just the right measure at the right time. The legislation will send a message to the nation's unemployed, that this Congress is dedicated to helping those trying to help themselves. Until the economy begins to create more jobs at a much faster pace, and the various stimulus programs continue to accelerate project activity in local communities, we cannot sit idly and ignore the unemployed. As such, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 4213.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. I thank the gentlelady for her courtesy. To be able to help our small businesses is a leap forward, and I congratulate them for this innovative division that will help move these technologies forward. I hope that small businesses are listening. They now have a rapid ear under Science and Technology to listen to them in the Department of Homeland Security. I am very excited about handheld detectors for the Department of Homeland Security to do rapid detection of biological threats at ports and airports and the dual-use terrorist risks of synthetic genomics. I think it is also important that we have enhancements to unmanned aerial surveillance technology for safe and effective deployment for border and maritime missions. We had a hearing on this just recently. Many of us questioned the safety or the results-oriented work of that unmanned aerial surveillance being used at the border. We need to have those results, and I believe that this legislation will help us do so. So this is a great step forward, in addition to the authorization of $20 million for the Securing the Cities program for fiscal year 2011 and directs DNDO, in fiscal year 2012, to add at least two new cities, based on risk, to this radiation detection program in operation in New York City. We all know that the threat of nuclear attacks as a homeland security threat is evident, and radiation detection is crucial for us to be sure that we have a number of elements to assess the potential of that kind of threat. This legislation takes advantage of the concerns we all have of making sure our science and technology is an integral part of defending the homeland. I believe this legislation, H.R. 4842, takes a giant leap forward in being part of the work that we do for defending this Nation, the work that is done by this committee, led by Chairman Thompson and Ranking Member King, and of course the work of this subcommittee, Chairwoman Clarke and Ranking Member Lungren. I thank them for their work and ask my colleagues to support this legislation, H.R. 4842. H.R. 4842, the ``Homeland Security Science and Technology Authorization Act of 2010'' reauthorizes the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) Science and Technology Directorate (S&T) and Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (DNDO) through 2012, and puts these two DHS components on a path to greater effectiveness and efficiency by requiring strategic plans, milestones, and accountability systems. This bipartisan legislation was introduced by the Committee on Homeland Security's Subcommittee on Emerging Threats, Cybersecurity, Science and Technology Chairwoman Yvette Clarke and Ranking Member Dan Lungren. In advance of floor consideration, the Committees on Homeland Security and Science and Technology collaborated extensively on this legislation and worked together to deliver a bill with the bipartisan support of both committees. Since 2003, S&T has been responsible for developing technologies to address homeland security capability gaps, as identified by DHS and its operational components--Customs and Border Protection (CBP), the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG), the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), Infrastructure Protection (IP), and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). DNDO was established in 2006 to develop detection technologies for nuclear and radiological devices--a high-consequence terrorist threat. H.R. 4842 takes a two-layered approach to authorizing S&T and DNDO: an overarching approach aimed at creating more accountability and effective management of each component; and a more targeted approach focused on specific programs and activities. In response to oversight findings of the Committee on Homeland Security, the Government Accountability Office, and the DHS Inspector General, H.R. 4842 requires S&T to establish requirements for how basic and applied homeland security research is identified, prioritized, funded, tasked, and evaluated and emphasizes the need to prioritize research around risk. H.R. 4842 authorizes the establishment of a more quasi-autonomous Testing, Evaluations and Standards Division within S&T to help ensure that technology is properly evaluated. Additionally, in an effort to foster better collaboration between S&T and private sector firms--most especially small firms--with promising homeland security technologies, H.R. 4842 authorizes the Office of Public-Private Partnerships. Within this office, the Rapid Review Division is charge with establishing an accessible, streamlined system to conduct timely reviews of unsolicited technology proposals in order to more effectively harness the ingenuity of the American private sector, an area where DHS continues to struggle. With respect to specific programs, H.R. 4842 directs S&T to work towards giving DHS new tools to address the threat of terrorism and enhance homeland security by conducting researching and development regarding: Mobile biometric technologies for deployment at the border (Sec. 807), technology to enhance detection of border tunnels (Sec.804), and utilization of global positioning satellite systems for detection of unauthorized border crossings (Sec. 806); Hand-held detectors for DHS to do rapid detection of biological threats at ports and airports (Sec. 411) and the dual-use terrorist risks of synthetic genomics (Sec. 407); Maritime domain awareness enhancements (Sec. 410), technologies to improve the security of underwater public transportation tunnels against explosives (Sec. 408), and technologies to mitigate the threat of small vessel attack (Sec. 419); Cyber compromises to federally-owned networks and devices that are essential to the reliable operation of critical infrastructure (Sec. 406); Enhancements to unmanned aerial surveillance technology for safe and effective deployment for border and maritime missions (Sec. 803); and Technologies to strengthen document security and authentication (Sec. 805). H.R. 4842 requires S&T to give particular attention to the border security mission. Specifically, the Homeland Security Science and Technology Authorization Act of 2010 authorizes S&T, in coordination with CBP, to pursue research and development to improve effective control of the international land borders of the United States within 5 years (Sec. 409). In addition to the S&T directorate, H.R. 4842 reauthorizes the DNDO. Important provisions regarding this vital agency include: Language to codify in statute the movement of basic and transformational nuclear and radiological research and development activities to S&T; Requirements for strategic planning, milestones, and accountability in place at DNDO that are parallel to the requirements for S&T; Authorization of $20 million for the Securing the Cities program for fiscal year 2011 and directs DNDO, in fiscal year 2012, to add at least two new cities, based on risk, to this radiation detection program in operation in New York City. (The House approved H.R. 2611, which authorized the Securing the Cities program on January 20, 2010.) Authorization of Appropriations S&T--$1.12 billion for fiscal year 2011 ($12 million over the President's request to restore funding for the University Programs) and $1.15 billion for fiscal year 2012 (3% increase over the 2011 level). DNDO--$305.8 million for fiscal year 2011 (President's request) and $315 million for fiscal year 2012 (3% increase over 2011 level).

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. I thank the gentlelady who chairs the Subcommittee on Cybersecurity and has done an excellent job. I thank the ranking member that shares that responsibility with her, Mr. Lungren. I rise today to congratulate these members for the Homeland Security Science and Technology Authorization Act of 2010 and to make the point that under Chairman Thompson we have, in actuality, passed more authorization bills on our committee, and particularly those that relate to subcommittees. The Committee on Transportation Security has passed H.R. 2200 and is waiting for action in the Senate. I join my friend from California and indicate that homeland security is not a partisan issue; it is a bipartisan issue, as he has indicated. And I join him in wondering when we can adhere to the 9/11 Commission report and get a more single-focused review of homeland security in the Homeland Security Committee. I hope that maybe we will have the opportunity to work in a bipartisan manner, to work with the other body, and to really accomplish the idea of maintaining homeland security issues in the Homeland Security committees, both in the House and the Senate. This legislation shows what our committee can do under the leadership of Chairwoman Clarke and Ranking Member Lungren to be able to establish a roadmap for Science and Technology. After listening to the oversight findings of the Committee on Homeland Security, the GAO, and the DHS Inspector General, H.R. 4842 requires Science and Technology to establish requirements for how basic and applied homeland security research is identified, prioritized, funded, passed, and evaluated, and emphasizes the need to prioritize research around risk. We all know that Science and Technology really is the backbone of our homeland security efforts. It is to keep us ahead of the terrorists who want to do us harm. H.R. 4852 authorizes the establishment of a more quasi-autonomous Testing, Evaluations and Standards Division within S&T to help ensure that technology is properly evaluated. Additionally, in an effort to foster better collaboration between S&T and the private sector firms--most especially small firms--with promising homeland security technologies, H.R. 4842 authorizes the Office of Public-Private Partnerships. I want to congratulate the chairwoman and the ranking member on this issue. Before my committee, the Subcommittee on Transportation Security, many times small businesses will come before us and really act in angst about the fact that their new technology is languishing at the Department of Homeland Security. Now we have, because of this legislation, the Rapid Review Division that is in charge of establishing an accessible, streamlined system to conduct timely reviews of unsolicited technology proposals in order to more effectively harness the ingenuity of the American private sector in an area where DHS continues to struggle. It is important that we do that.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, the supplemental that this leadership passed was to create jobs, and I hope that the bill that comes from the Senate will embrace the need for American jobs. In Ohio, the home of our minority leader, there is a 10.5 percent unemployment. Can anyone explain to me why the Republicans continue to obstruct the extension of unemployment benefits, benefits that will benefit those who work and who have worked and who need to pay their mortgages and provide food on the table? We need to extend unemployment benefits for unemployed Americans now. Again, we have another story. Here is a story of privatizing Social Security or extending the age before receiving Social Security. I remember the fight. I was here on the floor of the House when seniors were calling our phone lines and saying don't privatize Social Security. Thank goodness for the wisdom of our seniors. If we had privatized Social Security, it would have collapsed in the abysmal disgrace of Wall Street--no money. But Social Security has been paying on a faithful basis now for decades. We know that 72 percent of the American public don't want us to raise the age to be eligible for Social Security, but yet the minority leader wants to raise it so he can pay for the Iraq and Afghan war. Bring the soldiers home. Recognize that 36 million families are in need of Social Security. Seniors are in need of Social Security. Keep our Social Security the way it is--strong and solvent.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to be with you this evening, and I thank you for your leadership as we discuss with our colleagues a very important crisis that is now approaching to which, I hope, our message tonight really provides the stopgap, the finger in the dike, if you will, that is about to overrun itself, which is the numbers of Americans who are crying out to this Congress to do the right thing. I thank the gentlelady from Ohio for her persistent leadership and for her timeliness, because this is a very, very important need that needs action, and it needs action now. I guess I would like to add to this definition of what ``unemployment benefits'' are and what it means to extend them and the numbers of Americans who are now waiting, between 2 and 15 million Americans who are now waiting for those benefits to be extended, and the extension is simply adding to the 26 weeks that are now expiring. You mentioned that it was not a gift, and I'd like to suggest something even more. I wonder if we have read recently the story of the good samaritan. That story has traveled with me throughout my public life. In fact, I believe that we on this floor and we in this body are really public servants. We work for the people, and we are to do the right thing-- their bidding--as relates to the enhancement of the quality of life that they have been promised under our Constitution. In fact, the Declaration of Independence really says that we are created with the inalienable rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That pursuit of happiness has a lot to do with prosperity and with the ability to provide for one's family. So, in this instance, the good samaritan is the Federal Government, but it is not in a position of handing out something. As the story goes, the good samaritan helps those who have been violated by others, and they could not help themselves. It's not that they purposely were laying alongside the road. They had been violated by others. In this instance, the individuals who are on unemployment now and who are looking for an unemployment benefit extension did not create the atmosphere in which they were not working. The very fact that they have ownership to unemployment benefits is the fact that they worked and that they created a trust with the Federal Government. They put their money in a trust while they were working. In addition, they made a contract. ``I will work, and under the present laws, you will help me when I am out of work'' when there is evidence, of course, that there is no work for these individuals to secure at this time. We have made great strides. Under the Bush administration, we were losing 750,000 jobs a month. We have gained jobs because of the stimulus package that the Democratic leadership and Members had voted for, and I am grateful that we took the risk under much accusations and criticism. In that process, we have elevated some to work, but, even with that effort, we find ourselves struggling because there are more people out of work than there are jobs at this time. So what we are asking the obstructionists to not do is to not block the bridge that these unemployed Americans need. Do not dissolve the trust. Do not breach the contract that we have made with Americans who have invested in their trust funds or in unemployment benefits by their taxes so that, if they were unemployed through no fault of their own, they could secure resources for what all the many stories of Americans will tell you. These are not resources for vacations. These are not resources for recreation. These are not resources just to stay home and to have an easy day. These people are taking these dollars to keep roofs over their heads, to pay their next mortgage payments, their health care bills, and their utility bills in the heat of the summer. We're having one of the hottest summers that you could ever imagine--high utility bills. For some families who have children with asthma or respiratory illnesses, they need air conditioning. Their bills are high. Certainly, they simply need to provide food on the table for children, who are innocent, for seniors who may be living with families, who are innocent, for single parent heads of households, who are innocent, who literally have worked. A story I heard today at a hearing in Memphis on foreclosure about a woman with a number of children who worked as hard as she could, but the industry that she was in, furniture sales, obviously, home sales are down, furniture sales are down, she finds herself upon hard times. She needs unemployment insurance to make sure that she doesn't lose the small condominium that she has. These are painful stories. Sixty-two percent of Americans agree that we should extend the unemployment benefits. The Congressional Budget Office policies that could be implemented relatively quickly are targeted toward people whose consumption tends to be restricted by their income, such as reducing payroll taxes for firms that increase payroll or increasing aid to the unemployed, would have the largest effects on output and employment per dollar of budgetary cost; meaning that extending unemployment benefits is one of the most cost-effective ways of churning the economy but preventing people from collapsing under the weight and the burden of having nothing. It also speaks to the mental state of people who are struggling. They need to know that there is an out; there's a way that they can be provided for. And so, we, the Democrats, would provide for up to 99 weekly unemployment checks, averaging about $300, to people whose 26 weeks of State-paid benefits have run out. The benefits would be extended toward the end of November. What can I say? It's a simple request. I ask the Senate Republicans to stop now from blocking hardworking Americans from being able to provide for their families. I ask you to accept the Democratic proposal of extending these benefits for 99 weeks, up to 99 weeks, and to do what we did in this House. I'm appreciative of the gentlelady's leadership and grateful that our leadership came to the floor tonight. Majority Leader Steny Hoyer wanted our colleagues to know that the leadership stands firmly behind doing the right thing. As I close, I want to remind our colleagues of some stories that we heard early on. We were discussing another issue. Some may not be aware that some of our young soldiers have had to be on food stamps in the past. Democrats, of course, have corrected some of that by increasing their wages. But never let it be said that we are here making tomfoolery out of the budget of this Nation. We're here standing for people who are truly in need. And tomorrow will be the SOS day, the emergency day, the call day for action. And I hope that colleagues will remember the story of the Good Samaritan and provide and reinforce the trust and the contract made with the American people, that if you work, you invest, that when you need the rainy day umbrella of unemployment benefits extended, we will be there for you. I yield back to the gentlelady.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. As you can see, there are untold stories of valor on the front lines of war around the world. We can be very proud as Americans of the resilience of our men and women in the United States military and those valiant animals who stand by them and the support that families have given to them. I stand here as a proud American not out of arrogance, but simply out of recognition that we are the front-liners for peace and democracy. I had the privilege of spending the last week in Afghanistan, not closed in in a small room, but traveling throughout the country, visiting with our commander on the ground, visiting with the international allied forces, being briefed and seeing in action the Afghan National Security Forces, meeting the leadership of the Afghan Government in Kabul, going down to Kandahar and being out on a command post and a check site that was engaged with Afghans on the highway. I got a sense of a country--of which I chair the Afghan Caucus in this Congress. And I want what is best for people who are striving for democracy and freedom. I want to say to my colleagues that I stand here asking us to do what we did not do in Vietnam, which was to recognize the valiant and outstanding service of our men and women, and to understand victory had been achieved. Today we have two Vietnams side by side, North and South, exchanging and working. We may not agree with all that North Vietnam is doing, but they are living in peace. I would look for a better human rights record for North Vietnam, but they are living side by side because that was a civil war. And because the leadership of this Nation did not listen to the mothers and fathers who bore the burden of 58,000 dead and did not declare victory, the mounting deaths, the violence continued going up and up. Rather than understanding the political nature of the war in Vietnam, we did not listen to those families. So we mourned. But I say today they were valiant heroes, proud of them, although fallen, and proud of those who lived. As I look back on Afghanistan and the past week, I will say to you that it is time not out of defeat, but it is time in victory to return home. Our soldiers can come home in victory, for not one more treasure should be cast in this war that is a civil war. Al Qaeda is not present in Afghanistan. And we have the opportunity to cast over to the Afghan civilian government, which is now working to build up the Afghanistan National Security Forces, which we expect to be some 300,000 strong over the next couple of months, national police, and national army, trained by the brilliance of our young men and women. We understand the military says the job is yet not done, conditions on the ground. Conditions are movable. They are always changing. What you have to look at is whether you have a government that has the resolve to lead itself. President Karzai must stand against corruption, he must fight to eradicate the poppy crop, he must stop the bribery so that farmers can get their products to market. That is a civilian challenge. That is a challenge of the Afghan people. He must get electricity with the money that has been given to him down in the south. But to go into the NATO hospital, or to go into a hospital in Germany, to see the brutality of the IED injuries, to see the lost limbs--we have claimed victory. We have provided an opportunity for President Karzai to lead. And so I'm a proud American; again, not standing here in arrogance, but for the sacrifice of the reservists and others who have come and the full-time military willing to stay as long as the civilian leadership of this country demands that they stay. And so I say to the moms and dads and families who've sacrificed their loved ones both in terms of those who now serve us and those who have fallen in battle, we cannot thank you enough. And none of us can mourn as you're mourning if you have lost a loved one. But we can say ``thank you'' by bringing our troops home with a hero's welcome, something we have not done probably since World War II. It is time to bring our troops home, to declare victory, and to thank them for being heroes, not only of America but for this world, in the name of peace and freedom.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of H.R. 5114, ``the Flood Insurance Reform Priorities Act of 2010.'' I want to thank Chairwoman Waters and Chairman Frank for their hard work on H.R. 5114. This bill will provide enhanced security, better organization, increased participation, and a clear and improved direction for the future of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). By addressing the financial and administrative issues regarding NFIP, this bill will help protect millions of Americans from the potentially devastating economic effects created by a flood. Communities like mine in Houston rely heavily on NFIP to provide security against the risk of flood. Without this national flood insurance program, many communities across the U.S. would cease to exist because it is virtually impossible to buy flood insurance in the private market. The importance of this insurance program has grown significantly over the last decade as more and more communities have increased their dependence on the NFIP. As a direct result of certain natural disasters, including the 2005 hurricanes, and increased annual rain and flooding, NFIP has reached its highest participation rate in its 42-year history. Today, over 5 million homes and businesses rely on NFIP for flood coverage security. It is of extreme importance that this program continues to grow and develop to serve this population. Mr. Chair, as you know, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has authority to issue, renew, or increase coverage of flood insurance policies under the NFIP; and this authority will again lapse on September 30, 2010. H.R. 5114 will extend these authorities to fiscal year 2015 and continue this program in a renewed and revitalized direction. This bill represents a great opportunity to improve and redefine NFIP and to provide greater security to the American people. Not only will this bill clean up the NFIP requirements and expand coverage with ``phase-ins'' of actuarial rates to more properties and in newly mapped high flood risk areas; this bill will also address outreach issues, risk analysis, and economic effects. It will initiate studies to report the impact, effectiveness, and feasibility of NFIP policies as well as potential methods, practices, and incentives that would increase participation by low-income families owning residential properties located within special flood risk areas. The bill will also create an office to oversee and better manage all of the responsibilities of NFIP and provide assistance to communities, businesses, and homeowners with all flood insurance issues. Furthermore, this bill will require a comprehensive strategy assessing the goals of NFIP to ensure that the program has a clear plan to pay off its debt and ensure itself a healthy future. This not only benefits the recipients of the flood insurance coverage, it also benefits the program, the U.S. budget, and the American people. I submitted several amendments to complement the goals of this legislation. One would have required a study to analyze important data regarding the damages resulting from floods. The amendment would have directed the Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency to conduct a study on the impacts of excessive rainwater on residences located in areas at high risk for flooding from bayous and highways. The results of this study would have been reported to Congress no later than 5 years after the enactment of this bill. Through this study, my amendment would have provided vital information necessary to assess the dangers of an at-risk area and better prepare communities to protect themselves from flood. Mr. Chair, the only way to achieve the maximum security and preparedness for at-risk communities is to understand these risks with updated, relevant data and analysis. In the Houston area, there is already an on-going study, analyzing the effects of the bayou and rainfall, as flooding and its detrimental consequences are often a concern for the Houston area. The White Oak Bayou Federal Flood Damage Reduction Project is an existing project in Houston which is a partnership project between the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (the Corps) and the Harris County Flood Control District (the District). In developing a flood damage reduction project for White Oak Bayou, the Harris County Flood Control District has performed extensive data collection and analysis. The District has held public meetings within the community several times over the course of developing the project to determine the community's interests and flood damage reduction needs. Using this information, the District developed the flood damage reduction project for White Oak Bayou. In 1998, the District began a feasibility study for the White Oak Bayou Federal Flood Damage Reduction Project. This investigation has involved an extensive study of the White Oak Bayou watershed. Components to address flooding were analyzed and evaluated in great detail, which generated several alternatives for consideration as part of the project. Some of the components are already being implemented. Unfortunately, there are many other areas in Houston/Harris County, Texas and other communities throughout this country that experience an inordinate amount of flooding. In Houston, these areas that are frequently flooded from excessive rainwater include the Buffalo Bayou, the Greens Bayou, and the Halls Bayou. These areas could greatly benefit from a study and analysis to determine the impact of excessive rainwater on residences located in areas at high risk for flooding from bayous and highways. Such a study would allow for investigators to better determine the amount of flood damage and create and implement measures to prevent such future damage. Another amendment I offered would have stated that it is the sense of Congress that it is important to provide resources to address the devastating effects of flooding; that homeowners are particularly negatively affected by flooding; that excessive rainfall often leads to unsafe and hazardous living conditions; that flooding presents unexpected destruction and damage; and that it is necessary to provide consumers the opportunity to buy flood insurance. This amendment declares to the American people in a loud voice, that Congress understands the seriousness of flooding and the importance of flood insurance. It is important that we candidly illustrate our reasoning for the issuance of this legislation. Mr. Chair, it is clear that we have not been taking this issue as seriously as we should. We have had three lapses of authority this year alone with the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). We must not continue to simply extend this program for 30 days at a time. We must not continue to play with the security of the American people when it pertains to an issue so serious and potentially devastating as floods. The people who own homes in these areas and the businesses who own property deserve better. The communities and the many potential homeowners, who cannot purchase homes without access to flood insurance, deserve better. We must take the first step by making it perfectly clear that we as a Congress will no longer play and toil with this issue. We must affirm that we are very serious about protecting our constituents and securing our nation from the devastating consequences of floods. Finally, I also offered a well crafted amendment that would have effectively prohibited states and local governments from misusing new federal flood insurance program requirements to disadvantaged businesses and homeowners in any way. Unfortunately, federal law is often misinterpreted by state and local officials, resulting in unintended consequences in many communities across this country. My amendment was a practical and reasonable response to a previously enacted Houston ordinance that had just such unintended consequences. This ordinance prohibited property construction on vacant land or substantially damaged property located in major floodways and bayous and almost resulted in the wrongful taking of property from innocent homeowners, merely because their property was located in the wrong place. In 2006, I began meeting with hundreds of homeowners in Houston from areas such as Shady Acres, a 100-year-old neighborhood, as a result of the implementation of changes to Chapter 19, the City of Houston's floodplain ordinance. Listening to their testimonies and frustration made the impact of this bill very relevant. Just think, in my home district an ordinance was passed that resulted in the massive reduction in property values for almost 10,000 developed and vacant properties, including 2,400 single family homes. The ordinance took advantage of the fact that FEMA would be expected to decrease flood insurance premiums by 5 percent for those areas. Although the communities could pay less for flood insurance, the difference was minimal compared to the losses to their property values. Many owners were afraid that they would have to sell their homes because of the dramatic drop in value. By firmly stating that state and local governments should not misinterpret these flood insurance laws to put property owners at a disadvantage, I believe we could have sent a strong message that Congress will protect the property rights and interests of American citizens and the people this bill is intended to aid. It is important to make it known that the use of any unforeseen circumstances to treat flood insurance program requirements as a proxy for the wrongful taking of property is utterly unacceptable. I truly believe my amendments would have complemented H.R. 5114. However, I still believe the bill is a proactive measure that has been long overdue to address the urgent needs of Americans throughout this country, many of whom experience damage and losses to their homes, property and businesses from flooding. For these reasons, I urge my colleagues to pass this important bill.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, thank you for your leadership; and, as well, I appreciate very much the debate that this House had just a few minutes ago about H.R. 5114, the Flood Insurance Reform Priorities Act of 2010. I rise to support that legislation and, specifically, to discuss an issue that really impacts all Americans. An amendment that I crafted, a very effective amendment, would have prohibited States and local governments from misusing new Federal flood insurance program requirements to disadvantage businesses and homeowners in any way, meaning, to take their property away because they have misinterpreted the Federal laws as to whether or not your home is in a floodplain or in a floodway. Those of us from the gulf understand that very well. Unfortunately, under Federal law, it is often misinterpreted by State and local officials, resulting in unintended consequences in many communities across this country. For example, in the White Oak community, 2,400 homes were being violated because a local government was misinterpreting whether or not these particular individuals could stay in their homes. Their values plummeted. I am going to continue to work on this legislation going forward to ensure this language gets in the bill and that we fight to protect homeowners once and for all.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3976, an act that seeks to amend the National Great Black Americans Commemoration Act of 2004 to authorize more appropriations through the fiscal year of 2015. I also want to thank my colleague, Representative Elijah E. Cummings, for introducing this important legislation. Today we acknowledge the success and importance of the Great Blacks in Wax Museum, Inc., and seek to provide it with appropriations. This bill will amend the National Great Black Americans Commemoration Act of 2004 to extend the authorization of appropriations for grants to the Great Blacks in Wax Museum, Inc., in Baltimore, Maryland, through 2015. This bill will also carry out programs related to civil rights and juvenile justice through the National Great Blacks in Wax Museum and Justice Learning Center. The National Great Black Americans Commemoration Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-238, 118 Stat. 670-672) directs the Attorney General to make a grant to the Great Blacks in Wax Museum, Inc., in Baltimore, Maryland, to be used only for carrying out programs relating to civil rights and juvenile justice through the National Great Blacks in Wax Museum and Justice Learning Center. To receive a grant, the Great Blacks in Wax Museum, Inc., shall submit to the Attorney General a proposal for the use of the grant, which shall include detailed plans for such programs. The founders of the museum outlined four specific areas that they meant for the museum to cover. First, according to a mission statement they wrote, the founders of the museum wanted the Great Blacks in Wax Museum to stimulate an interest in African-American history by revealing the little-known, often-neglected facts of history. Second, the museum was intended to use great leaders as role models to motivate youth to achieve. Third, the museum should improve race relations by dispelling myths of racial inferiority and superiority. Lastly, the museum supports and works in conjunction with other nonprofit, charitable organizations to seek to improve the social and economic status of African Americans. The museum's goals are important to achieve in our society. It is important that we cherish and appreciate our history while looking to the future. In the process of this remembrance, we can work for a brighter future. For the foregoing reasons, I stand with Representative Elijah E. Cummings in support of this act. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 4438, the ``San Antonio Missions National Historical Park Leasing and Boundary Expansion Act of 2010,'' as introduced by my fellow member of the Texas delegation, the distinguished Ciro Rodriguez. This bill will expand the boundaries of the San Antonio Missions National Historical Park, adding an additional 150 acres of land to the site that preserves important pieces of Texas history. In the early 18th Century, the five missions in San Antonio were the largest concentration of Catholic missions in North America. Built primarily to expand Spanish New World influence northward from Mexico, the missions also served to introduce native inhabitants into Spanish society. All five thrived through the middle of the 18th Century, and then slowly declined towards the end of the 1700s, through disease, inadequate military support, and increased hostility from Comanches and Apaches. The Alamo, the most famous of the missions, is well known to all, as a shrine of Texas history. The other four missions--San Jose, San Juan, Concepcion, and Espada--have been in active operation as houses of worship since the 1800s, and are still important to the history of Texas. In 1978, the San Antonio Missions National Historical Park was authorized by the National Park Service. At that time, the San Antonio River, which runs through much of the Park's area, was somewhat polluted. It was always planned and expected that, as the river was cleaned up, the Park would expand to take advantage of the unpolluted riverside areas. Now, that time has come. H.R. 4438 will direct the Secretary of the Interior to study lands within Bexar and Wilson Counties in Texas, to identify lands that would be suitable for inclusion. It will also authorize the leasing of office space for a headquarters and support building, and allow the construction of an education and research center. It is only fitting that, as Mission Concepcion has recently been restored, and Mission San Jose is about to be restored, that the Park they are a part of is expanded to what it was originally imagined to be. Therefore, I strongly support this legislation, and urge my colleagues to join me.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate the NAACP, which is holding their 101st convention, or celebrating 101 years, a century of service. I also want to affirm their First Amendment right to make statements on the policies of groups who advocate for causes that sometimes are colored in race. The NAACP is a fighter for justice for all people, and I was glad to be there this weekend speaking about issues dealing with the environment, civil justice and the economy. It is also important to note, Mr. Speaker, that corporations are now showing one of the best quarterly returns that they have ever had. Businesses create jobs, and we have created an economic opportunity for them to do so. But all of the economists are saying they are sitting on their money. They are hoarding their money. It is time now for us to stand up as Americans and work together to create jobs, just as this government has stimulated the economy by providing stimulus dollars to create thousands and thousands of jobs. Work together, not divide. That is how we will move this economy forward. Congratulations, NAACP.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Would the gentleman yield just for a quick comment? That very product, T-shirts, hats, and there may be many others, just fits right in with small- and medium-sized businesses, the very businesses that make jobs. I would yield to the gentleman for a response on that. Isn't this the kind of products that fit right into that?

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. I am very glad to join multiple friends from a number of our great States in America. But more importantly, I am glad to be part of the team, working with the Congresswoman, our leadership, of course, and the President that focuses on creating jobs for Americans. That's an exciting message for all of us. And I am very delighted to sort of dash the misstatements that have been going on about what we have accomplished here, and if I might just be redundant and cite the fact that the private sector has created 83,000 jobs in June. But I would like to add something else, Congresswoman. I think you have seen this number as well, that this has been one of the best quarters for corporations in terms of profits. It is well known, and of course many of us encourage individuals to save money and to invest. But I think it's particularly important for the American public to know that our corporations have money. We've created the right economic atmosphere for them to grow, but they've decided to not create all of the jobs they could. And I would just like this evening to congratulate them for the profits that they've made, but I want them to be inspired to create jobs for the American people because the government has worked very hard to create a banking system for them to feel comfortable with as we pass the Wall Street reform so that they can create jobs, hire people. There were 9,000 manufacturing jobs created in June, and I think that is extremely important, but 136,000 jobs since December. We have good news for the American public. We have heard you, and we believe in buying America and making it in America. Therefore, we're going to be looking, over the next couple of months, to craft an agenda where you will see jobs being created by the message of this Democratic leadership. We can tell you that we mean business because we can show you the facts. For the 11th consecutive month, the manufacturing sector has expanded. They have heard our call. They have heard our creed. The Purchasing Managers Index registered at 56.2 in June. Of the 18 industries surveyed, 13 reported growth. Look at, if you will, the gigantic change that we have seen in the automobile manufacturing sector where our companies are coming back. Many people complain about the approach we utilize, but we can look at the bottom line. Ford never took the money. GM has paid the money back. But what we want them to do is to manufacture smartly, hire people and create jobs. We have created--this Democratic leadership, this President has created the atmosphere for these companies to grow, and we want them to grow more. Let me just add these one or two points. Consumers who have been feeling the pinch--we know there's unemployment, and right now, today, we're fighting to extend unemployment for those hardworking Americans who have seen their jobs go but need to support their families. And let me make it very clear. Unemployment insurance is not a handout. It is a gift coming back, or it is an acknowledgment of your hard work, and we want to keep you over a bridge. We want to give you a bridge until you get another job. But disposable personal income grew by 0.5 percent in May. It grew by .6 percent in April, and it grew by .4 percent in May. So you can see that it's steadily going up. It's steadily going up, and this is making a difference. As I cite these last points, Congresswoman, to emphasize how we, on this side of the aisle, the Democrats, have a positive attitude about knowing that America's going to make it as we make products and as manufacturing grows, I'm disappointed that some of my friends who are on the other side of the aisle are thinking differently. One of the things that they don't like to say is that when President Obama first came into office he inherited an economy that was losing an average of 750,000 jobs in 1 month. Now, I'm not the kind of personality that wants to look back and blame the last administration. But we know for a fact that there were no jobs created in the last 8 years. And so let me conclude on remarks that have been made by a good friend. The minority whip asked the question, stimulus dollars have not produced jobs. This is what the minority whip said while hosting a job fair in Virginia. And I would only like to say that to help the American people, it would be grand for us to work and march in step, in a bipartisan step, and that is the only thing we're concerned about, no matter what region we come from, is creating jobs. Many of you know that we are being hit in the Gulf in many different ways by the BP oil spill. My good friend is being hit for tourism. I just had one of her mayors before my committee, and they said they're not being listened to about tourism. I'm being hit because of fishermen and shrimpers and oysters, but also I'm being hit by the hardworking people who work in the energy industry who are innocent who may be losing jobs who cannot work offshore. But our good friend, Mr. Cantor, rather than working together to produce jobs, has said this: He hasn't seen any evidence of jobs being created. Well, according to the Council of Economic Advisers, the Recovery Act created or saved more than 48,000 jobs in Virginia in 2009. In May, the Congressional Budget Office reported that in the first quarter of 2010 the Recovery Act was responsible for an increase in the number of people employed by 1.2 million, and 2.8 million. This is stunning. And the job fair that Mr. Cantor had, and I congratulate him for having a job fair. I congratulate the companies for coming, and I'm very glad that the companies that were in the room had gotten $52 million in Recovery Act funds to create jobs. Can you imagine? This is not a partisan commitment to America. Wherever you are and you need a job, our stimulus dollars have been there. And so I hope that we can end our criticism of the Recovery Act, because we know we can point out infrastructure projects and jobs created in all of our home districts, and we can point to the Democratic leadership where their message is jobs, jobs, jobs. We have nothing to be ashamed of, but we must stay steady. We must stay consistent. We must make sure that the unemployment insurance goes out to our constituents. We're going to fight to the end to make sure that that goes where it needs to go, and that is to the people who need it. And finally, I'm excited about the manufacturing spurt, surge that we're going to continue when we take the message of buy America and make it in America, we are creating jobs. And this Democratic leadership believes that America is standing tall, and we will be a country that recovers in a very, very special way. And I'm delighted to be able to join with my friends who understand that there is an American economic recovery. We know it, we see it, and we're working on it. I yield back.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. I yield to the gentleman.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Reclaiming my time, what I'm aware of is that this language is supported by at least 40 school districts that support the money being able to come directly to them or not being used if it is not used for education. Additionally, this language only includes education funding not stimulus dollars. So it will not artificially increase any costs to the taxpayers. The school districts will benefit from the Governor having to use federal education dollars for education.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. I thank the gentleman. And let me publicly apologize to the gentleman. I was rushing. I wanted to make sure I mentioned NASA. But let me say that, yes, I am aware, and I am enthusiastic about that language. And I thank the leadership for it because, in fact, it is celebrated and supported by 40-plus school districts in Texas to prevent the Governor of the State of Texas from misusing education dollars, as they have been misused before. This is money that will be effectively used for the schoolchildren of the State of Texas. And I thank the gentleman.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to come before you today in support of H. Res. 1500, a rule providing for H.R. 4899, the ``Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2010.''--a bill that will help create jobs for Americans and provide assistance in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Haiti. I want to thank Chairman Obey and Ranking Member Lewis for their leadership on this timely legislation. Clearly, this is an important bill and must be only amended with items that are essential to provide the necessary assistance this country so greatly needs. H.R. 4899 will provide funding for the needs of the American people, from national security, housing, employment, health, to education. I fully support these efforts and want to stress that we must continue to provide policies and funding that ensure that the United States remains a global leader in science and technology, including space exploration, which not only results in knowledge-building, but also in hundreds of thousands of jobs throughout the nation. Mr. Speaker, this supplemental appropriation is quite different from any other supplemental appropriation that members of this body will ever consider. This supplemental appropriations bill provides over $37.47 billion to support our troops, over $24 billion to keep teachers, firefighters and law enforcement personnel on the job while states continue to recover from the recession; over $13 billion for Vietnam veterans and survivors exposed to Agent Orange; $5.7 billion for PELL; $2.8 billion for Haiti; $677 million border security; $275 million for the Gulf Coast oil spill including unemployment benefits program and unemployment assistance related to the oil spill and an oil spill relief employment program that are underway for the self-employed businessman and women who were greatly impacted by the Gulf Coast oil spill. No price is too great to pay, Mr. Speaker, when it comes to doing what is necessary to aid our country. This bill must only be amended with key items that are critical to adequately address this nation's needs. I am therefore, offering several amendments to H.R. 4899.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I hope that we will have an opportunity to do something we have not been able to do, and that is to debate the Afghan war and the direction that this war is taking and the impact on our men and women on the front lines. I particularly want to say to the families how much we appreciate the sacrifice that you've made as these men and women stand on the front lines of Afghanistan. But I think we're long overdue for a major debate that has to do with that direction. I support this underlying rule for the purpose of allowing us to have this debate, but also that it provides, on the domestic spending, crucial issues. Pell Grants will be provided for in $4.95 billion; border security that impacts the northern and southern border so that we can stand as we do comprehensive immigration reform and assure the American people that we will secure our boarders. In the most catastrophic oil spill from the region that I come, the tsunami of oil spills, we are taking care of the people by providing $304 million for the gulf coast oil spill, including moneys for unemployment assistance. Then, coming from the region I belong to, as well, we had a tragedy at Fort Hood, and we are now rebuilding the Fort Hood processing center that saw a terrible loss of life because of terrorism. FEMA disaster. This is the most vigorous season that you could have ever imagined that is to be expected in hurricanes, and we know, among other disasters, we'll have the money here. But we're also going to say to the youth of America when we vote on this, we're providing money for summer youth jobs, $1 billion in youth jobs that we in the Congressional Black Caucus--and many Members joined us--are fighting for. This is a crucial step forward. We're providing for black farmers who have been discriminated against over the years. And then, as I have indicated, we will have an opportunity to question not the men and women in Afghanistan or Iraq, but to question whether or not it is wise to focus on insurgents versus terrorists so that we send men and women into harm's way without a discerning goal.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. I thank the gentleman. I will tell you, ladies and gentlemen, when you begin to fight those who are classified as your neighbors--and I don't use that term loosely. The Taliban live in Afghanistan. And whenever you determine to fight those individuals, it makes it very difficult to win this war.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, among the many challenges of this Nation is the ongoing oil spillage in the gulf, a region that I come from. I also happen to come from the city of Houston and represent a number our large energy companies, along with wind and solar and natural gas. We truly need a seamless energy policy, but our consuming responsibility is to stop this oil spillage and to stop it now. And I believe it is important that we do it with an understanding of a long- range strategy to address this crisis. Right now, as I speak, Hurricane Alex has made its way along the gulf. And during this hurricane season, we don't know how many other hurricanes will come and disrupt the clean-up actions that are going on. So today I've introduced H.R. 5676, the Right to Equitable Means of Ensuring Damages for Injuries are Efficiently Secured Act of 2010, or the REMEDIES Act. And I rise today to introduce this to address the many issues created by the recent disaster in the Gulf of Mexico. For over 2 months the blown-out wellhead beneath the wreckage of the Deepwater Horizon platform has spewed tens of thousands of barrels of crude oil into the Gulf of Mexico and the gulf coast communities on a daily basis. The initial explosion killed 11 people, seriously injured 17 others, and destroyed a multi-million dollar platform. But the extent of the damage done is far, far greater. The disaster and its aftermath have wrecked local industries and polluted or outright destroyed precious natural resources, and people are unable to work and to earn the money to pay for food, mortgages and other basic expenses. And in my visits to the gulf region, these people were unattended to; oystermen, fishermen, shrimpers, restaurants not having any way to access a quick and immediate response. Oh, yes, you see now a claims system in place. You see that there is now an established $20 billion fund that I am grateful to our President for establishing. But look how long it took because there was no structure in place. It is obvious that the existing body of law is antiquated and, therefore, inadequate to cope with the current situation. The liability caps under the current law will allow the responsible parties to pay just a mere fraction of the damages they have inflicted on the people of the gulf. Legislation enacted in the early part of the last century does not properly cover all the workers in the contemporary industry, and BP and other oil industry entities need to be able to address this question. My bill would establish a tiered liability system so that we would provide a structure to provide coverage, yet protect the smaller and independent operators. The REMEDIES Act will also make some needed changes to 1920-era laws such as the Jones Act and the Death on the High Seas Act, to ensure that family members can recover, such as mothers and sisters, brothers and wives, which is not the case at this point. The language suggests that it will be a personal representative. In addition, my bill would cause the end of lax permitting of the Minerals Management Service and the Department of the Interior and would require that if you had five safety violations, you would immediately put a moratorium and shut-down of the deepwater drilling. My bill would also increase the oil spill liability trust fund from $1.6 billion to $10 billion. The money would be standing there now. In addition, the Federal Water Pollution Act would be amended, as I said earlier, permitting, requiring that any permit would require you to establish a vetted recovery plan, so that if your BOP did not work, you had a back up plan that had been vetted and assessed as workable. In addition, as I mentioned, if you had any violations, as these companies have been known to have, but, in particular, this company, you would immediately be shut down. When I asked one of the new members of the MMS why BP wasn't shut down with the enormous list of violations that it had, the question was, not to the fault of the person who answered the question, but it was, We just haven't looked at that now. My amendment, or my legislation, will call for the Secretary of Homeland Security to establish a separate claims process under their jurisdiction. This legislation will ask the President to establish an emergency spill coordination team led by the commandant of the Coast Guard, along with the EPA, and the Secretary of Energy. My amendment would also establish a research and development fund funded by the industry up to $1 billion to be able to design the most sophisticated technology for recovery, research, and remediation in an oil spill. And my amendment would require immediate post-traumatic stress disorder counseling for all of the people who we are not even addressing the pain or the mental distress that is being caused. I ask my colleagues to review H.R. 5676, the REMEDIES Act, so that we can go forward and establish a pathway to solve this problem and not have it happen again. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce a far reaching, comprehensive piece of legislation to help address some of the many issues created by the recent disaster in the Gulf of Mexico, the ``Right to Equitable Means of Ensuring Damages for Injuries are Efficiently Secured'' Act of 2010. For over two months, the blown out wellhead beneath the wreckage of the Deepwater Horizon platform has spewed tens of thousands of barrels of crude oil into the Gulf of Mexico and Gulf Coast communities on a daily basis. The initial explosion killed eleven people, seriously injured seventeen others, and destroyed a multi-million dollar platform, but the extent of the damage done is far, far greater. The disaster and its aftermath have wrecked local industries and polluted or outright destroyed precious natural resources, and people are unable to work and to earn the money to pay for food, mortgages, and other basic expenses. It is obvious that the existing body of law is antiquated and therefore inadequate to cope with the current situation. The liability caps under current law will allow the responsible parties to pay a mere fraction of the damages they have inflicted on the people of the Gulf, legislation enacted in the early part of the last century does not properly cover all the workers in the contemporary industry, and BP is nickel and diming the people its recklessness has put out of work. Damage from the oil spill in the Gulf region will almost certainly total in the billions of dollars, but current law caps liability for damages at $75 million. While that seems like a huge number, it is less than 20 percent of the cost of the platform itself. My bill would establish a tiered liability system, so that the oil industry pays all the costs for cleanup and damages caused by the spills it creates, while still allowing independent operators to stay in business. This provision would be retroactive. The REMEDIES Act will also make some needed changes to two 1920's era laws regarding injuries or death at sea. It will change the Jones Act so that the engineers and others who were killed or injured on the Deepwater Horizon, but who were not technically ``seamen,'' will be covered, and allow actions against anyone whose acts or omissions were a cause of those deaths or injuries. My bill will also amend the Death on the High Seas Act, so that victims or their survivors will be able to receive compensation for their suffering, or the loss of their loved ones' companionship, rather than just the economic damages allowed under current law. It will also allow for punitive damages in cases involving gross negligence. Of course, part of the cause of the explosion was the lax permitting processes. In 2008, the Minerals Management Service, MMS, and Department of the Interior changed regulations so that BP was not required to file a detailed blowout plan, and simply accepted BP's assertion that it was ``unlikely that an accidental surface or subsurface oil spill would occur from the proposed activities,'' and allowed the project to go forward. The REMEDIES bill will change that, requiring that operators file detailed spill mitigation and recovery plans, and detail their backup plans as well. Those plans would have to be vetted by impartial experts instead of simply rubber-stamped by industry insiders. Under my bill the MMS will be allowed to suspend permits and cease operations when specific operators' safety records show that they are so focused on production that they risk the safety of their workers as well as the environment. Since 2007, BP had over 872 serious safety violations--a staggering 97 percent of the serious violations in the entire industry--at just two of their refineries. BP is currently facing a criminal investigation for possible similar violations on the Deepwater Horizon platform, and new information strongly suggests that BP consistently made decisions that increased risk in order to save time or costs. While nobody wants to shut down such an important sector of our economy, it is important to make sure that the penalties for blatant disregard of our safety laws and regulations are strong enough to be taken seriously, rather than just paid as the cost of doing business. Making the continuation of production contingent on good safety records should be something BP and others commit to wholeheartedly. My bill imposes such requirements. While there is now a $20 billion escrow account for third party claims against BP, administered by an independent third party, that took months to establish. Before that, the process BP had set up for the people of the Gulf Coast communities was a disgrace. BP's claims department engaged in a process in which people who are out of work because of the disaster on the Gulf Coast received some compensation, but by BP's own estimates, roughly twenty thousand of the forty thousand claims that have been filed had not been paid. The $5000 payment that most claimants have received was barely a drop in the bucket against the payments on loans for boats and other necessary equipment, and small business owners had frequently been given the runaround as to what exactly a ``legitimate'' claim was under BP's standards. Under my bill, the Secretary of Homeland Security will have the power to require businesses responsible for claims for oil spills to set up a more streamlined process, with guidelines for the proof necessary, so that legitimate claims are no longer delayed or denied. In addition to the various provisions already identified, my bill will prevent unnecessary delays in the legal process for claims arising from this disaster. Under current class action law, BP and other defendants are allowed to have lawsuits brought against them by the states and municipalities it has harmed removed to Federal courts. While our federal judicial system is more than competent to handle these claims, it is also overloaded. By having cases filed in state courts removed to Federal court, defendants would be able to greatly and unfairly delay every step of the process, prolonging the damage their recklessness has caused and possibly pushing many to settle for less than they are fully entitled to. The REMEDIES Act will create a carve-out for cases brought by states and their subdivisions on behalf of their citizens, allowing them to remain in state courts and acted on quickly. There has been overwhelming legislative action surrounding the oil spill by various Committees of this House with jurisdiction over this issue, including the Judiciary Committee of which I am a Member. I am an original co-sponsor of H.R. 5503, ``the Securing Protections for the Injured from Limitations on Liability Act,'' introduced by our distinguished Chairman John Conyers, and supported by Representative Charlie Melancon. My bill adds a new dimension to the debate and to the evolving legislative process. In this regard, I plan to work closely with Members from both sides of the aisle to forge an effective legal response to address this crisis and to prevent similar disasters in the future, and ask my colleagues to join me in my efforts.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Thank you very much, Chairman Conyers. We owe you a debt of gratitude. We are very pleased that we have answered the call of the pain of people like Michelle, and if you can read this language, it says ``When Michelle tells her boys about their dad, she's not going to show them a pay stub. She will tell them how much their father loved them.'' That means, of course, that we are stranded on an island with laws that do not understand the crisis that these families are facing. These are the pictures of families who have lost loved ones and pictures of their loved ones who we are now standing on the floor of the House to say that any horrific tragedy such as the BP oil spill on April 20, 2010, will not go unanswered, and these families will not remain and be alone. This bill is assuring these families that they will not be alone; that the person or the entity that harmed them will not be able to escape the full extent of the cost of their actions that are inflicted on the people and the communities. It amends the Jones Act, an old law, and brings it in line with the needs of the 21st century, meaning that if you were an engineer on that Deepwater Horizon drill, you are not covered by the present laws; or, for example, the law that was used that was passed in the 1800s where they limited the amount of liability such that one of the actors in this went to court in Houston and wanted to limit their liability to $23,000. Under the Act in its current form, the family members left behind by seamen killed on the job can only recover economic losses. But it also does not cover those who are not classified as seamen. This bill amends DOHSA and, of course, it provides some very, very important changes that will make the lives of these loved ones left behind better. Without their loved ones, they are not good. But this will make them better. To the industry, and let me say one that I come from--and I am from the gulf region--and I believe what we are doing today is going to help the shrimpers, the oystermen, the fishermen, and we must continue to do that. We're changing the laws to respond to the current crisis, and we will not leave them alone. I look forward today to, as well, introducing the Remedies Act of 2010 that will further expand on the rights of families, will invest in R&D to improve what's going on in the gulf. But I want to thank the Judiciary Committee for being first and a leader to help these families. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 5503, the ``Securing Protections for the Injured from Limitations on Liability Act,'' introduced by Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers. I commend Chairman Conyers for shepherding this bill through the Judiciary Committee, and am proud to have worked with him on the Manager's Amendment. This bill makes great steps in reforming aspects of our laws that have grown outdated, and in assuring that those responsible for a variety of harms are not able to escape liability for the full extent of the costs their actions inflict on the people of the communities around them. It amends the Jones Act, a law enacted in 1920, and brings it in line with the needs of the 21st century. Under the Act in its current form, the family members left behind by a seaman killed on the job can only recover for economic losses, sometimes only the expenses of a funeral. There is no provision for damages for the emotional loss of a loved one, the loss of that person's care, comfort, and companionship. H.R. 5503 amends that restriction. H.R. 5503 also changes another outdated maritime law, the Death on the High Seas Act of 1920. The changes Chairman Conyers' bill makes to DOHSA will allow those same claims for loss of care, comfort and companionship. This bill will also allow claims under DOHSA to be brought before a court of law, rather than admiralty, and allow a jury to decide the relevant facts. It will allow recovery for the pain and suffering a decedent experiences before his death, and expand the geographic reach of DOHSA. H.R. 5503 makes other crucial changes. It eliminates certain limits on the liability of ship owners, remnants from a time when communications were much slower and owners might not be aware of their crews' actions on the other side of the ocean, or the other side of the globe. H.R. 5503 changes our bankruptcy laws, and prevents responsible parties from escaping their liability through misuse of bankruptcy proceedings. Finally, it amends the Class Action Fairness Act to prevent suits brought by the States, on behalf of their citizens, from being removed to languish in Federal courts. These are all very, very important changes, and I want to state again how glad I am to have been able to work with Chairman Conyers on these issues. However, there are other harms that the disaster in the Gulf has inflicted, harms that are not addresses in this bill. Last month, I spent time at the United Command Center in Hammond, Louisiana and flew over the impacted areas to assess the devastating damage to the Gulf region and visited Plaquemarins Parish, Pointe a La Hache (Hash), Louisiana to meet with local oystermen and other individuals affected by the oil spill. My experience left my heart wrenched and even more determined to work with my colleagues to develop an aggressive proactive strategy to assist the victims of the oil spill and to develop measures to prevent it from happening again. We need a claims process on the Gulf coast to remedy the harm caused by the oil spill before it is compounded by delay and we need to ensure that claims are evaluated and paid through an expedited equitable and transparent process. There are numerous accounts of concerns of claimants that have underscored the importance of the need for the Federal Government to require that a totally independent claims process is set up to process claims related to the BP oil spill, and that structures are set up to process claims without delay. We know that victims are seeking assistance, but have experienced complicated claims procedures to follow, and have not been able to obtain relief or compensation from BP but rather, a hard way to go and the never-ending claims requirements to satisfy the claims they have brought against BP. Take the story of Byron Encalade. Mr. Encalade, as owner of his own fishery company, and as President of the Louisiana Oysters Association, has sought to file claims with BP to recover damages suffered as a result of the Gulf oil spill. Unfortunately, Mr. Encalade has had a horrible experience with the ever-changing claims process. Though Mr. Encalade came with the paperwork he was originally told to provide BP claims adjusters, he was told that he needed to provide his tax statements in order to be compensated for his loss. When inquiring about a second $5,000 check he was supposed to receive from BP, he was told that the check was in the mail. He has yet to receive the check. He was also informed that his claim would be based upon his net receipts and not his gross receipts. This policy puts Mr. Encalade and many others in a situation where they cannot recover the full value of their losses due to investments that were made to fishing boats that were lost in Hurricane Katrina. As such, this policy will prevent many fishers and shrimpers from recovering the full value of their loss. I can also tell you the story of the owner of a small seafood restaurant in Houston, Texas, who I have known for years and have supported. She is in trouble at this very moment, wondering whether her business will remain open to long-time customers like me. Whether she, as a small business owner and woman, can afford to pay the bills and continue to earn a livelihood. Although she is hundreds of miles away from the actual site of the oil spill, she too is a victim. Her restaurant relies on a variety of suppliers of Gulf seafood, and she bills her establishment as one which prides itself on seafood from Louisiana, a part of the Gulf region. So, now she confronts two issues that could prove fatal to her business. One, if the seafood is from the Gulf region or Louisiana in particular, perhaps it is tainted by the oil. Two, the prices of seafood from the Gulf continues to rise, making it impossible for the restaurant to carry certain items. Many items on the menu her patrons can no longer afford. It is the classic Catch-22 situation, and what is clear to me is that unless this Congress acts and acts quickly restaurants like hers will be history. We need to make sure that victims like her, and like Mr. Encalade, are able to receive compensation for the harms inflicted on them, without the years of litigation that civil suits frequently entail. We need to establish independent claims systems, with established categories that treat fishermen, shrimpers, and other categories of indirect victims appropriately, and with clear and consistent guidelines for what types of proof claimants need, to avoid unnecessary delay. We need to update the liability cap under the Oil Protection Act, so that responsible parties cannot escape with paying a mere fraction of the damages they inflict. We also need to change the permitting process, so that entities drilling offshore must demonstrate they have a workable Plan B when their Plan A fails; and to establish a requirement that those disaster and spill mitigation plans be reviewed and approved by independent, disinterested experts. There are additional changes to both the Jones Act and DOHSA we should make. Both laws currently allow only one ``personal representative'' of a decedent to file claims, and there may be cases where that personal representative does not act in the interest of the parents, children, or other family members who face this terrible loss; we should allow those family members to make claims on their own behalf. We need to amend the Jones Act so that it covers all those injured on our ships, even those who may not meet the technical definition of seaman. Further, we should allow punitive damages under those laws in cases of gross negligence. As important as it is that we make the victims of this disaster whole, it is equally important to take steps to prevent the next spill of this magnitude. Therefore, we must establish a clear framework for response, so that there is never again a question of who is in charge. The United States is the world leader in science and technology, and it is in our best interest to direct some of our energy towards research and development of technologies that will better enable us to deal with leaks deep below the surface of the ocean, and provide access to those technologies to the appropriate agencies. Nonetheless, for all that remains to be done, H.R. 5503 is an important step, a necessary step, towards repairing the harm the disaster in the Gulf has done. Chairman Conyers has crafted a piece of legislation that I am proud to be associated with, and I urge my colleagues to join with me in supporting it.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 4173, ``the Restoring American Financial Stability Act of 2010'', also known as ``the Dodd-Frank Act.'' This historic bill will go a long way to address a variety of defects and shortcomings currently seen in our financial services system. It is a major step towards meaningful ``measured'' government regulation to protect the interests of consumers, investors and everyday working Americans. After years of consumer mistreatment, fraud, and abuse, this bill represents the first principled effort to bring financial fairness to all Americans and to ensure that financial transactions be both honest and transparent. One of the strongest provisions designed to protect the consumer in this legislation is the formation of an independent Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, CFPB, empowered to write rules for most consumer financial transactions. Existing consumer-protection authority is currently scattered and largely ignored by existing financial regulators. This Act will consolidate these authorities in the CFPB, and give the bureau teeth in exerting its power to enforce these protections. With this newly defined power, the creation of the CFPB will usher in a new era of oversight. I urge Congress to stand tall and create a society where unfair practices are stopped before they become pervasive, where the average consumer is protected from fraud and abuse, and where big bank bailouts are prevented before they come at the expense of taxpayers. Another major provision in this bill is the establishment of broad statutory protections against abusive mortgages. These provisions include; requiring lenders to evaluate borrowers' ability to repay loans before and after teaser rates have expired; banning prepayment penalties that lock borrowers into high-cost loans; prohibiting incentives to steer borrowers into higher-cost loans that they don't even qualify for; limiting total fees for most loans; and banning mandatory arbitration clauses for mortgages. In addition to these key provisions, this bill will also create a $1 billion emergency loan fund to help families at risk of losing their homes due to unemployment or illness. Because unemployment--9.7 percent is partly a direct result of the reckless lending and collapse of the housing and financial markets, this fund is especially important in reversing these negative economic effects and providing assistance to those who have been hurt by unfair practices. A recent Center for Responsible Lending, CRL, report found that, unfortunately, the foreclosure crisis is far from over. Foreclosures are likely to continue to climb and losses will continue to increase, further burdening our economy and financial services system, unless the government decides to intervene by passing this Act. The bill also addresses bank interchange fees, the fees charged on debit card transactions. Under the bill, such fees would be reduced. While the banks and credit unions opposed any reduction in fees as embraced by the Durbin amendment, the arguments advanced by the retailers won the day. While I support credit unions, which are the backbone of many communities and have traditionally served the special needs of teachers, public service employees and the average government worker, about the use of the fees to cover many bad transactions related to their debit card business, the fees generated by the debit card transactions represent a major profit making activity for the banking industry. These fees are generally passed onto the consumer in the form of higher retail prices. Interchange fees also tend to fall disproportionately on minority and low-income consumers by making them pay higher prices. Another issue the bill addresses is the underrepresentation of minorities and women in the financial services industry. The bill requires each of the federal financial services regulatory entities to establish Offices of Minority and Women Inclusion. These Offices will facilitate the participation of minority and women-owned business in nontraditional types of financial activities, something long overdue. In addition, the bill requires expanded efforts to recruit and to retain minority and women financial services professionals, traditionally excluded from the upper ranks of management in most of the federal financial services regulatory entities. The bill preserves the role of community banks, recognized for their positive lending habits to small business and other major community stakeholders. These banks can always be counted on to lend for nontraditional purposes, while maintaining flexible lending standards based on risk assessment as it relates to a person's background and ties to the community. Many of these banks continued to lend during the liquidity crises, making it possible for small businesses to make payroll and for people to continue to pay their mortgages. Community banks remain pillars of strong communities and neighborhoods throughout this Nation, and this bill acknowledges their important role in the economy. Further, the bill brings much needed sanity to the derivatives markets by requiring more rigorous standards related to over-the counter derivatives; provides new rules related to transparency and accountability and our nation's credit agencies; institutes new mechanisms to avoid bank bailouts of financial firms that threaten the economy; and reforms the Federal Reserve by requiring greater oversight and transparency in its transactions. Mr. Speaker, this Act is of extreme importance to the consumer, the investor, to the average American, and to the Nation's economy as a whole. It is time to end the Wall Street ``joy ride'' and give the American people the protections and information they need to be better informed consumers and investors in this highly technologically driven economy. The way the average consumer, borrower, and home-owner have been targeted by many of our Nation's financial institutions and lenders makes this legislation all the more important. These practices must end. H.R. 4172 will stop many of them. For these reasons, I urge my Colleagues to make the changes in our laws to protect the American people and to help strengthen the U.S. financial system.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. I rise strongly to support the Barbara Lee amendment, of which I am a cosponsor. And this is allowing the orderly withdrawal of our troops, one thing that we did not do in the Vietnam war, when we lost 58,000 of our young men and women, who we treasure and thank them for their service. Now today we have the opportunity to do what Congress should do. It's not to give an unending mandate to a war that is not a constitutionally declared war, which this is not. So I would say that if we are looking for the terrorists, al Qaeda is not there. Our intelligence authorities, and General Petraeus have indicated that there are less than a hundred al Qaeda terrorists in Afghanistan. There are insurgents who are the Taliban. It is well known that if you give to the Taliban the mountains and valleys that have been given by General McChrystal, and concentrate your war efforts in the cities, you still will lose this war. The Taliban will never surrender the mountains and will continue to attack. A thousand-plus have died; $37 billion is in this bill. We must do what we did not do in Vietnam, and not cry after the fact when we saw the 58,000 body bags come home. Yes, we salute the young men and women who are on the front lines. We thank them for their service and the sacrifice of their families. I have been to Afghanistan many times, and I believe we have a better way. Now is the time to invest in the Afghan people, and the government to make a difference, not continue to lose the precious treasure of America. Stand against this war and have an orderly withdrawal for the sake of the American people and bring our troops home with honor. America has not lost the war. America has created a roadmap for Afghanistan to follow and to build its country up. Our stated, limited military mission was precisely to hold back Talibon momentum--i.e., to ``stalemate'' it--while economics development and good governance took hold and we enabled Afghan security forces to replace ours. Instead, our military assistance has dwarfed our development and government efforts--which are still stumbling--and no independent analyst seriously thinks the Afghan army and police will be able to take over the nation's security for years. Military's momentum has taken over. We have changed the Afghan equation, but for the worse. The U.S. troop surge illustrates a lesson we learned in Vietnam. Large-scale insertion of foreign troops into a domestic insurgency--whatever its initial cause--dramatically transforms the hostilities from an internal dispute into one focused on driving out ``foreign invaders,'' as Afghanistan has done repeatedly throughout its history. Even if, contrary to fact, a Taliban takeover threatened our security, the Administration's strategy would make no sense. There is a basic contradiction between, on the one hand, the claim that defeating the Taliban is vital to our safety and, on the other hand, the claim that our commitment is short term and of limited extent. The two efforts to square that inconsistency have already proven unrealistic. The Pentagon told us that successful campaigns in Taliban strongholds like Helmand and Kandahar Provinces would break the back of Taliban efforts to control the country and bring them to the bargaining table. The Pentagon told us that successful campaigns in Taliban strongholds like Helmand and Kandahar Provinces would break the back of Taliban efforts to control the country and bring them to the bargaining table. But it now is very unlikely that our military will be holding a decisive upper hand after the Kandahar and similar campaigns. The Helmand campaign remains, at best, a ``work in progress,'' with dubious results thus far. The supposedly decision campaign to ``win Kandahar province'' has been heavily diluted and downgraded, even before getting fully underway. The new focus on nighttime raids and air strikes continues to kill civilians, badly undercutting U.S. strategy to ``win over'' the Afghan people. June was the deadliest month of the nine-year-long Afghanistan war. Should the U.S. get out of Afghanistan? Why or why not? Frank Askin, professor of law at Rutgers University, said: There is no use throwing good money (and good bodies) after bad. There can be no successful outcome to this war, unless we are prepared to stay in Afghanistan forever. We need the money back home, Let's just declare victory and get out! Paul Kawika Martin, policy and political director of Peace Action, said: Yes, the U.S. should get the military out of Afghanistan. Today, Representatives in the house will have the opportunity to vote against $33 Billion dollars ``emergency'' supplemental funding for the failed escalation in Afghanistan. They will also have the opportunity to vote for a MdGovern/Obey amendment that will among other things require the president to present Congress with: (1) a new National Intelligence Estimate on Afghanistan by January 31, 2011. 2) a plan by April 4, 2011 on the safe, orderly and expeditious redeployment of U.S. troops from Afghanistan, including a timeframe for the completion of the redeployment. The amendment also requires Congress to vote if the president wants to change his announce plan to begin to drawdown troops by July 2011 and expands oversight of private contractors in Afghanistan to deal more effectively with corruption, waste, fraud and abuse. A large coalition of 20 organization representing nearly 13 million people support this amendment because the enormous costs in blood and treasure is not necessarily making Americans safer. Instead, focusing on regional political solutions and investing in Afghan-led aid and development that brings people out of poverty has a far better chance of success at a fraction of the cost. Let's not forget that we are funding this war by borrowing from China and as Admiral Mike Mullen, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, said last week: debt is the number one threat to America's National Security. It is time to bring our troops home with honor. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total Non- WIA not deaths KIA hostile WIA RTD** RTD** ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Cardoza, I thank you for sharing with us what is not a funny anecdotal story or cartoon. I think from your words you are saying to the American people that their predicament is not a cartoon. And it is interesting when one of my colleagues comes to the floor of the House and poses a question, What do we say to the unemployed mother or what do we say to the person who is trying to manage themselves and pay their mortgage? Or what do you say to the caller that called in I believe from Florida this morning on C-SPAN and said he's laid off from a furniture store that closed and he is looking for work. And if I might paraphrase him, he said something about getting off our rears here in Congress and helping him. Why are we blocking his unemployment insurance? Now, I can quote a lot of statistics, and somebody said something about numbers of individuals who are unemployed. There are double-digit communities with high unemployment, 13 percent, 15 percent, 16 percent, high numbers among our youth in their twenties, recent college graduates, individuals who are likewise looking for work as those who have been employed and are now unemployed. Ladies and gentlemen, unemployment insurance is the prerogative, it is the owned by the worker who has worked. Unemployment insurance is what this is called. Why do the Republicans want to block it, why do the Republicans in the other body stand against unemployment insurance, this is an outrage. There is no explanation for it. For the people who can get unemployment insurance, they are paying their mortgage. It churns back into the economy. They are buying groceries. They're paying car payments. Maybe they will have an opportunity to keep a young person in a community college by putting their pennies together. But here we stand today having to go back again because the Republicans had the audacity to vote against unemployment insurance coverage. So to the man who is saying, I'm going out looking for a job every day, to the mother who is saying, I am looking for a job every day, no hope is being given to them. This is not explainable. So I am on the floor today, because we must go forward on a supplemental. Maybe my colleagues will join me and vote against the war supplemental so we will be able to balance the budget. But if they are not going to be serious about saving money, they cannot stop the vote to help provide unemployment insurance for Americans out of work. We have created 200,000 jobs in the last month; some are public jobs, but you cannot get the private-sector engaged until you begin to see the churning of the overall economy. The Federal Government is the umbrella for a rainy day. We are in a rainy day. But I have faith in this Nation. We always rise. We are going to rise now. We are going to stand with the unemployed so they can soon get work and we are going to give this money to them today. And I dare my Republican friends to vote against this effort to help our fellow Americans. Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore