Sheila Jackson Lee

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. The gentleman has his own time. I appreciate it. I am concluding. And finally, let me say that I offered an amendment to maintain NASA human space exploration and the funding as it was. I look forward to working with this Congress and the Democrats to make sure that happens.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I thank you for the opportunity to explain my amendment to H.R. 4899--``Supplemental Appropriations Act 2010.'' 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. My amendment would ensure: all managed funding for the National Aeronautics Space Administration (NASA) NASA Constellation programs will be maintained through fiscal year 2015 with the assumption that the Constellation program will continue: (2) U.S. human space flight systems shall be lead by the U.S. government to ensure crew safety and to ensure skill, capabilities and institutional knowledge attributable to NASA and ISS can be retained by the U.S. for the appropriate time; (3) strengthen partnerships between universities and NASA centers; and (4) ensure a protocol for commercial human space flight utilization shall be established. The President's proposed FY2011 budget eliminates funding for a portion of the Constellation Program which includes the Orion Crew Capsule, the Altair Lunar Lander, and the Ares I and Ares V rockets. Earlier this year, I introduced H. Res. 1150, ``Designating the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) as a national security Interest and Asset,'' and stating findings that the elimination of funding for the NASA Constellation program in the President's proposed FY 2011 budget presents national security concerns. It is critical that managed funding for the NASA Constellation programs is maintained through fiscal year 2015 as: 1. Elimination of the Constellation programs will present Homeland Security implications for Cyberspace, critical infrastructure, and Intelligence community of the United States; 2. Elimination of the Constellation programs will compromise the effectiveness of the International Space Station as it relates to the strategic importance of space station research, and intelligence; and 3. Continuation of NASA's Constellation program is crucial to maintaining thousands of American jobs and the U.S.'s leadership role and technological edge as well as securing valuable knowledge that improves national security, climate, and research in science and medicine. International Leadership and Technological Competitive Edge Eliminating the Constellation upon retirement of the Space Shuttle will diminish the nation's international leadership role and efforts to advance scientific research in space. The United States will for the first time, since its space program began, be without a human space flight program. Additionally, transferring funds from the Constellation program to the development of commercial space programs to carry a human crew into space is taking a chance on an unproven quantity and is an unnecessary and unreasonable risk this country must not take at this time. It is more prudent to establish a protocol for commercial human space flight utilization at this time. It will take years for the commercial spaceflight industry to get up to speed to reach the level of competence that exists at NASA today. Our government has already invested literally years and billions of dollars into this program. We should build upon these investments and not abandon them. Our country can support the commercial spaceflight industry, but not at the expense of our human spaceflight program, which for years has inspired future generations and driven technology that enhances our quality of life. The retirement of the Space Shuttles this year will leave the United States vulnerable and dependent upon Russia to put U.S. astronauts in orbit without the Constellation program. In May of last year when it became clear the U.S. had no one else to turn to, Russia raised its prices from $48 to $51 million per launch for each astronaut. In addition, it is important for us to remember that the Constellation program is not just about going to the moon, as the U.S. has a commitment to the International Space Station (ISS). With the Space Shuttles being retired this September, the Constellation is the only system under development that will give NASA the future capability to launch crews to and retrieve them from the ISS. Decreasing the use of the International Space Station would impact the ability to sustain its systems and physical infrastructure. National Security and Homeland Security The Congress should recognize the policy outlined in section 501(a) of the National Aeronautics and Space Authorization Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 16761(a), that the United States shall maintain an uninterrupted capability for human space flight and operations in low-earth orbit, and beyond, as an essential element of national security and the ability to ensure continued United States participation and leadership in the exploration of space. The human space flight program should be funded to continue use of the International Space Station to support the agency and other Federal, commercial, and academic research and technology testing needs. NASA conducts aeronautics research to address aviation safety, air traffic control, noise and, emissions reductions and fuel efficiency. NASA's contribution to our knowledge of air and water supports has improved decision making for natural resource management and emergency response, thus enabling us to better respond to future homeland security threats. Knowledge of Earth's water cycle is a critical first step in protecting our water supply; water flows over the Earth's surface in oceans, lakes, and streams, and is particularly vulnerable to attack. NASA sensors provide a wealth of information about the water cycle, and contribute to improving our ability to monitor water resources and water quality from space. We must also protect the quality and safety of the air we breathe; airborne contaminants can pose danger to human health; and chemical, nuclear, radiological, and biological attacks are plausible threats against which we can better protect the United States through NASA's research. Elimination of the Constellation program will present homeland security implications for cyberspace, critical infrastructure, and the intelligence community of the United States. Elimination of the Constellation program will also compromise the effectiveness of the International Space Station as it relates to the strategic importance of space station research, and intelligence. Continuation of NASA's human space flight program is crucial to improving national security, studying climate change and its effects, and research in science and medicine. Conclusion For all of the above reasons, it is my hope that this committee will join me in supporting efforts to maintain NASA's Constellation Program. It is through balanced policies that promote economic growth that we will continue to maintain our international leadership and technological competitive edge, and gain valuable knowledge relating to the national security of our nation. I look forward to working with all of you to ensure that we preserve a robust human space flight program in the United States. Amendment to H.R. 4899 Offered by Ms. Jackson Lee of Texas At the appropriate place, insert the following:

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, tell me it's not true. Republicans again are attacking Social Security. Yesterday, our minority leader indicated that he wanted sweeping cuts in Social Security. Sounds like deja vu when the Republicans stood side-by-side saying ``privatize Social Security.'' Can you believe that the Republicans are now standing with raising the age for retirees to get Social Security to age 70? Can you believe there will be a means test that you won't be able to get Social Security if you earn a certain amount? Can you believe they want to take this money to pay for the Iraq and Afghan war? Can you believe they're fighting Democrats to not extend unemployment benefits? Can you believe that they are fighting us from creating jobs, as Democrats are doing, giving opportunities to small businesses. I really can't believe it, Mr. Speaker. Here we go again--cutting our seniors again, raising the Social Security means test as a way of saving money. What are we going to do? Fight back as Democrats and stand with our seniors.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H. Res. 1462, support for the people of Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador as they persevere through the aftermath of Tropical Storm Agatha which swept across Central America causing deadly floods and mudslides. I would like to thank Mr. Mack for introducing this resolution underlining our heartfelt support for our North American neighbors in their time of desperate need. Mr. Speaker, the countries of Central America have suffered devastating damage and loss of life at the hands of Mother Nature. Tropical Storm Agatha has left over 200 dead and over 95,000 in shelters, most of them in Guatemala. The powerful storm has inflicted over $475,000,000 in damages throughout the region, destroying critical water and sanitation infrastructure. Combined with recent droughts, high food prices and a dramatic drop in remittances from the United States, Guatemala in particular has suffered severe food insecurity that will likely increase due to the effects of the storm. I join my fellow members in expressing our most heartfelt condolences for the loss of life and suffering the Guatemalan, Honduran and Salvadoran people have endured in the wake of the storm. We mourn for those who are no longer with us, and extend our deepest sympathies to those they have left behind, in many cases without food or shelter. It is a tragedy for anyone to lose their home, their father, their mother, their children, their friends. We will do everything we can to help them recover from this disaster. But we also commend the people of these ravaged countries for their bravery, and for standing tall in the face of adversity. In spite of the frustration and sadness that come in the aftermath of a disaster, they are fighting hard to recover. They could certainly use our help. The international community and the United States have already responded. Countries, NGOs and humanitarian aid agencies from around the world have generously contributed millions of dollars in medicine and aid, and mobilizing to transport and deliver support and supplies. The United States continue to assert and strengthen our commitment to participate in the global outpouring of support to our devastated neighbors to the south. After all, we are no strangers to the effects of natural disasters, and many of our cities have suffered through more than their fair share. As a Representative of the good people of Houston, Texas, many of the Atlantic hurricanes and tropical storms that wreak havoc every summer hit very close to home. From Ike to Ivan to Wilma to Katrina, we know all too well the devastation that befalls those unfortunate enough to be standing in the path of one of the North Atlantic's deadly hurricanes or tropical storms. We have seen the destruction first hand; I have spoken to the victims; we have known the pain and suffering those natural disasters can cause. We know the road of recovery can be long and fraught with challenges. But we have recovered, and so shall the people of Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador. And the United States must help ensure that they do. As such, I am proud to stand behind my fellow members in calling upon the Congress to urge the Secretary of State and the United States Agency for International Development to continue working on a strategic plan to promote food security and recovery efforts, with the aim of mitigating current and future effects of the recent natural disasters that have devastated Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of S. 3140, a bill to permanently authorize Radio Free Asia, and for other purposes. I thank my colleague Senator Lugar for introducing this important bill that reasserts our commitment to a free press and freedom of speech in Asia and throughout the world. Freedom of the press is one of our most cherished values and enshrined in our first amendment. ``Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.'' I believe it is one of the most valuable and fundamental rights written in the Constitution, as it grants us as people the ability to speak truth to tyranny. In the United States we often take this freedom for granted, but in many countries throughout the world it does not exist at all, or exists only on paper and not in practice. Thus the United States has long sought to expand this freedom throughout the world, promoting free speech and freedom of information in places where governments have strangled their people's ability to speak their minds. Most notably during the Cold War, Radio Free Europe was one of the many tools the United States used to try and reach out to those behind the Iron Curtain, who were deprived of information and whose right to speak their minds freely was severely curtailed. Radio Free Asia, RFA, attempts to do the same for the people of Asia whose freedom of speech and press, particularly in China and North Korea, has been stifled by increasingly restrictive government policies. The consistent and continued attempts on behalf of these governments to block and jam RFA's broadcasts are a testament to their value and effectiveness. Like a cool breeze drafting through a hot, stifled room, RFA is a breath of fresh air to those who are deprived of information and afraid to speak freely. Creatively using shortwave broadcasts and the Internet, RFA has been able to circumvent many of the restrictive tactics of oppressive governments, often relying on the ingenuity and intelligence of local listeners themselves to spread the word. But RFA needs more time and more resources to do its job right. It is of paramount importance that Radio Free Asia continue its broadcasts in the future, until its implementation is made obsolete by its own success in promoting freedom of information in the countries it currently serves. According to Freedom House, freedom of the press is in decline almost everywhere in the world, making Radio Free Asia's services that much more vital in reaffirming this Congress' concern for the freedom of people around the globe. I am glad that the Congress has decided to continue the important work of the RFA and to promote freedom to our oppressed brethren in Asia. Ms.ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H. Res. 1405: ``Congratulating the people of the 17 African nations that in 2010 are marking the 50th year of their national independence.'' As a cosponsor of this resolution, I am proud to acknowledge the progress made by these 17 nations as well as the other African nations that gained independence in the early 1960s. The 17 African nations that gained independence in 1960 are: The Republic of Cameroon (January 1, 1960); The Togolese Republic (April 27, 1960); The Republic of Mali (June 20, 1960); The Republic of Senegal (June 20, 1960); The Republic of Madagascar (June 26, 1960); The Democratic Republic of the Congo (June 30, 1960); Somalia gained its independence on (July 1, 1960); The Republic of Benin (August 1, 1960); The Republic of Niger (August 3, 1960); Burkina Faso (August 5, 1960); The Republic of Cote d'Ivoire (August 7, 1960); The Republic of Chad (August 11, 1960); The Central African Republic (August 13, 1960); The Republic of the Congo (August 15, 1960); The Gabonese Republic (August 17, 1960); The Federal Republic of Nigeria (October 1, 1960); and The Islamic Republic of Mauritania (November 28, 1960) When the nations in Africa gained independence during the 1960s and 1970s, there was an expectation that the end of colonialism would usher in a new era of representative government in which the people of these new nations could freely choose a government that represented their interests. Fifty years after independence, however, the progress of these nations has been mixed at best. In many nations, progress has failed to match expectations as the people of these new nations struggled to shed the yoke of their colonial legacies. These legacies include inorganic borders and inherited systems of patronage. Although many African nations were dealt a difficult hand, the continent's new leaders, by in large, sought to consolidate and retain power rather than embrace political systems defined and strengthened by their diversity. Since independence, transfer of political power has consistently been a thorn in the side of side of most African nations. Although many of the challenges of broadening and democratizing political participation in Africa rests in the hands of a few `big men,' there are also significant challenges at local levels. Today, millions of people in Africa are stateless. Some because their births were never recorded, others because they belong to the `wrong' ethnic group. Civil conflicts in Cote d'Ivoire, the Democratic Republic of Congo and numerous other countries have been fuelled if not created by pernicious citizenship policies that sever the link between certain parts of the population and the state. As rebel leader in the Ivory Coast reportedly exclaimed, ``Give us our identity cards and we hand over our Kalashnikovs.'' This, to me, captures both the tension and the stakes in play. The people of Sudan, the DRC, Guinea, and others have long since passed the point where they can afford to be at war. It is imperative that we work to end conflicts and facilitate governments that reflect the will of the people. While we must remain vigilant in our scrutiny of those leaders who stifle democracy, we must also recognize leaders who promote democracy even if it imperils their own political position. Last summer, I visited Ghana and saw a democracy that is heading in the right direction. During the December 2008 Presidential elections, John Atta Mills of the National Democratic Congress (NDC) won the election in an extremely narrow victory that required a run-off with Nana Akufo-Addo of the former ruling New Patriotic Party (NPP). Domestic and international observers deemed the election free and fair. Facilitating mature democracies requires us to find ways to encourage leaders to relinquish power, and I think we can improve our use of these `carrots.' Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in support of this resolution and renew the commitment of the United States to help the people of sub-Saharan Africa to foster democratic rule, advance civic freedom and participation, and promote market-based economic growth, and to alleviate the burden of poverty and disease that so many in the region continue to face. We must also remember to keep ``fifty years of independence'' in context. Fifty years may seem like a long time, but consider America's own history when, fifty years after independence, the country had not yet had experienced its civil war.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H. Res. 1321, expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the political situation in Thailand be solved peacefully and through democratic means. I thank my colleague, Mr. -Faleomavaega, for introducing this important resolution. Beginning in mid-March 2010, anti-government protestors occupied parts of Bangkok for nine weeks. Initially peaceful, the demonstrations and the response from the security forces became increasingly aggressive, eventually spiraling into urban warfare. Most of the protestors, known as the ``red shirts,'' are loyal to former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra who was ousted in a military coup in 2006. On May 3, 2010, the Thai Prime Minister, Abhisit Vejjajiva, offered talks and proposed a ``reconciliation plan'' including an election on November 14, 2010 in an effort to end the political crisis that immobilized Bangkok and killed 88 people and wounded hundreds. Although the violence has subsided, the political divisions remain stark and the threat of more confrontation lingers. Continuous progress has been made on the Thai Government's reconciliation plan. A public forum was convened on June 17, 2010 as a brainstorming session on how to move the process forward. According to the Prime Minister, the views gathered during this public forum reflect visions for both the Thai people and society and were in line with those of the government. Two committees will be set up by the end of June. The first committee will focus on strategies and priorities for reform to be proposed to the government and the second will work on nation reform assembly which will serve as a channel for all sectors of society to put forward their views and proposals with help from academic works. Thailand has been a long-time military ally and a significant trade and economic partner. Our close relationship and longstanding friendship with Thailand dates back to 1883 when the two countries signed the Treaty of Amity and Commerce. Despite differences on Burma policy and human rights issues, shared economic and security interests have long provided the basis for U.S.-Thai cooperation. Thailand contributed troops and support for U.S. military operations in both Afghanistan and Iraq and was designated as a major non-NATO ally in December 2003. Thailand's airfields and ports play a particularly important role in U.S. global military strategy, including having served as the primary hub of the relief effort following the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami. As a major recipient of foreign direct investment, and with exports of goods accounting for over 70 percent of its GDP in 2007, Thailand's economy depends heavily on its trading partners. Economic relations with the United States are central to Thailand's outward-looking economic strategy. According to the U.S. Commerce Department, U.S. trade with Thailand in 2008 consisted of $9.1 billion in exports and $23.5 billion in imports. The State Department reports that although Japan is Thailand's biggest trading partner, the United States is currently Thailand's largest export market. With more than 200,000 people tracing their ancestry to Thailand, our two nations share extensive social and cultural links. We recognize that enormous challenges remain ahead. Thailand has a past of turbulence and turmoil--the country has experienced 18 coups in the past 77 years. I am hopeful that their continued progress can lead to an ever more fruitful economic and political relationship between the United States and Thailand, contributing to the well being and prosperity of both our nations. The United States is hopeful that Thailand's political problems will be solved peacefully and through democratic needs. The United States supports the national reconciliation plan proposed by the Prime Minister which encompasses upholding the monarchy, instituting political reform, and eradicating injustice.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, this is a very emotional time for many Americans as they look at pending unemployment, long months of addressing the question of how they pay their mortgage, and reflecting on how we got to this place. That is why I stand today to support the underlying rule and this financial accountability complex legislation that has taken many, many hours and days and weeks for us to come up with a way to say to America, We heard you. And so the first point of this bill is that there will be no taxpayer-paid bailouts. And then for the first time the consumers of America will have their own personal advocacy. They will have the Consumer Protection Board that will look at credit card increases and outlandish interest rates. They will have an oversight board that will look at how they address the question of banking loans. Small businesses will be able to access credit. There will be transparency and accountability. What is there to be opposed to? Those who happen to be included in minority- and women-owned businesses will for the first time not be stopped at the door to access credit. Then of course we'll be able to have an oversight board that will forever eliminate the words ``too big to fail.'' Experts who will continuously look at the infrastructure of this financial system. We know that capitalism is strong, but it must be a strong system that has a heart, that can withstand the scrutiny of those who are seeking to find the weaknesses. We have to stand with the consumer so that the consumer does not fall victim to the too big to fail who were willing to take risks because they were padding their pockets. This is the right decision that is now being made, and this bill will provide you with the oversight and the protective coverage for the banking consumer. Support the underlying rule and this bill. Stand with the American people and make a difference.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise before you today in support of H. Con. Res. 284, ``Recognizing the work and importance of special education teachers.'' I would like to thank my colleague from Texas for shedding light on this very demanding and vital occupation. Special education teachers teach students with both physical and mental impairments. A physical impairment is defined by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) as: ``Any physiological disorder or condition, cosmetic disfigurement, or anatomical loss affecting one or more of the following body systems: neurological, musculoskeletal, special sense organs, respiratory (including speech organs), cardiovascular, reproductive, digestive, genitourinary, hemic and lymphatic, skin, and endocrine.'' A mental impairment is defined by the ADA as: ``Any mental or psychological disorder, such as mental retardation, organic brain syndrome, emotional or mental illness, and specific learning disabilities.'' Neither the statute nor the regulations list all diseases or conditions that make up ``physical or mental impairments,'' because it would be impossible to provide a comprehensive list, given the variety of possible impairments. However, the number of disabilities covered by the ADA continues to grow, as has the number of people diagnosed with learning disabilities. For example, it is estimated that between 3 and 5 percent of children have met criteria for diagnosis of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). This represents approximately 2 million children in the United States, and means that in a classroom of 25 to 30 children, it is likely that at least one will have ADHD. In total, according to the U.S. Department of Education, approximately 6,500,000 children (roughly 10 percent of all school-aged children) receive special education services. Mr. Speaker, it is said that ``The highest cost of an education is not getting one.'' in 1972, the United States Supreme Court ruled that children with disabilities have the same right to receive a quality education in the public schools as their nondisabled peers. Because of this ruling, special education teachers had to be prepared to handle these students and their individual needs. Special education teachers work with children and young adults who have a range of disabilities. A small number of special education teachers work with students with severe cognitive, emotional, or physical disabilities, primarily teaching them life skills and basic literacy. However, the majority of special education teachers work with children with mild to moderate disabilities, modifying the general education curriculum to meet the individual needs of the child and providing required corrective instruction. Today there are over 370,000 highly qualified special education teachers in the United States. Special education teachers use various techniques to promote learning. Depending on the student, teaching methods can include intensive individualized instruction, problem-solving assignments, and small-group work. Special education teachers ensure that appropriate accommodations are provided, such as having material read orally, or lengthening the time allowed to take the test for students who need special accommodations to learn the general curriculum or to take a test. In some cases, teachers also provide students with career counseling or help them learn life skills, such as balancing a checkbook. Helping these students can be highly rewarding and gratifying for the teacher, but the work also can be emotionally demanding and physically draining. Teachers are often consumed with paper work and burdened with a heavy workload--not to mention administrative responsibilities. The teacher is responsible for assessing the student's progress toward gaining the knowledge necessary to pass the course as well as consider the students' progress coping with their learning disability. I applaud the steadfastness of all teachers for their diligence in teaching our youth and preparing them for the future. I am grateful for special educational instructors, who not only must deal with the curriculum of a classroom, but must also manage all of the other factors that may impede learning. Because of this, I strongly support H. Con Res. 284 and I encourage my colleagues to join me.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, I rise to honor a great husband, father, entrepreneur, community activist and all-around great American, Percy P. Creuzot, Jr., who passed on from his earthly life on Sunday, June 6, 2010. We are privileged and honored to salute him as a Great Houstonian for all of America to admire. Percy Creuzot had a unique ability to reach out and help others. Mr. Creuzot effectively articulated that strong communities are created when we recognize that every member of the community is important. He demonstrated this belief in every aspect of his life. In 1966 his family moved to Houston, Texas, where he was employed by Herff-Jones Jewelry, a graduation supply company. Percy's first entrepreneurial endeavor in Houston was a snow-ball shop in Houston on Dowling and McGowan. There was a dearth of restaurant chains and, even fewer operated in minority neighborhoods. Mr. Creuzot saw the need for uplifting his community with his cuisine and with that envisioned a need and market in Houston for Southern Louisiana foods. With the influence from family members he decided to open a small sandwich shop in Houston's Third Ward community. The Scott Street location sold a variety of oyster, shrimp and roast beef po-boys; the business became known as ``Frenchy's Po-Boy.'' As the business showed promise, expansion into other endeavors was likely. With the motivation of a close friend, Mr. Creuzot dove into the fried chicken business and ``Frenchy's Creole Fried Chicken'' is a bustling business to this day. In 1977, Percy expanded his business interests and opened Frenchy's Sausage Company. The goal was to produce and market Creole foods to restaurants and grocery stores in the Houston area. The business grew successfully and is now run by Percy's son, Percy III, and has become a leading producer of Creole foods and various processed meats in Houston and surrounding areas. Percy's civic/community involvements began with a desire to enhance the success of Texas Southern University. Percy was a tireless supporter of Texas Southern University and, after being appointed by Texas Governor Bill Clements to its Board of Regents, he faithfully served for 12 years which included being its Vice Chairman. Governor Clements also appointed Percy to the Texas Private Industry Council and he was appointed to the Houston Citizen's Review Board where he served with distinction. Percy also was an active member of the National, Texas, and Houston Restaurant Associations as well as serving on the Catholic Charities' Board of Directors. Percy was a long time member of Alpha Phi Alpha and Sigma Pi Phi (Nu Boule) Fraternities and the Knights of Peter Claver. Until his death, Percy provided financial support to the United Negro College Fund, the Urban League, and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, University of Houston, Texas Southern University, Xavier University and Hampton University. Percy is survived by his wife, Sallie Creuzot; daughter Angele; sons Percy III (Cheryl) and John; grandchildren Simone and Terry Williams, Percy IV , Coline and Phillipe Creuzot, Ethan Creuzot ; great-grandson Christien Gilliam; his sister, Martina Cox (Dr. Frank); and numerous nieces and nephews. He also left to treasure his memories many in-laws, colleagues, friends, community members, numerous Houstonian mentees including Anthony Gaynor and Charlie Reado, as well as countless high school and college students. Madam Speaker, Percy P. Creuzot, Jr.'s life should serve as an inspiration to us all. Through his life and through his legacy he has challenged those who are caught in the grips of poverty to take control of their own destinies. By his openhandedness to his community, he is a shining example of how those more fortunate should share their lives with others. Madam Speaker, a great American is gone from our midst, but we have been empowered to carry on his work and continue to press toward the mark. His family, friends and everyone he has touched will be in our thoughts and prayers.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Res. 1244, ``Recognizing the National Collegiate Cyber Defense Competition for its now five-year effort to promote cyber security curriculum in institutions of higher learning,'' as introduced by my fellow member of the Texas delegation, Rep. Ciro Rodriguez. Our nation's critical infrastructure is composed of public and private institutions in the sectors of agriculture, food, water, public health, emergency services, government, defense industrial base, information and telecommunications, energy, transportation, banking and finance, chemicals and hazardous materials, and postal and shipping. Cyberspace is their nervous system--the control system of our country. Cyberspace is composed of hundreds of thousands of interconnected computers, servers, routers, switches, and fiber optic cables that allow our critical infrastructures to work. Thus, the healthy, secure, and efficient functioning of cyberspace is essential to both our economy and our national security. One of the most significant security challenges that our Federal government faces today is ensuring that we have an abundance of adequately trained individuals defending our information infrastructure. In the past, I have been proud to sponsor bills that would increase funding for cybersecurity education programs, to ensure that we have a properly trained workforce to protect this vital infrastructure. The National Collegiate Cyber Defense Competition (CCDC) is an important piece of the cybersecurity education puzzle. Since 2005, the National Collegiate Cyber Defense Competition has given students in the field of cybersecurity the opportunity to showcase their abilities. Rather than having students design an ``ideal'' network, the CCDC requires participants to assume the administrative and protective duties for an existing ``commercial'' network. This allows participants to show their skill at ``real world'' situations, as very few cybersecurity workers will have the luxury of building a perfect system from the ground up. While we obviously want to build the most secure networks possible, our experts must be able to work with the infrastructure that exists, finding and eliminating weaknesses that may already exist, and making imperfect systems secure. Over the last few years, the contest has grown to include regional competitions in Texas, Maine, Washington, California, and Minnesota, among other locations. This year, there were more than eighty schools that participated, from all parts of the country. The students participating in this contest have not only demonstrated their knowledge and understanding of this important function, but they have also had the opportunity to hone their skills by dealing with actual, real time issues. The National Collegiate Cyber Defense Competition plays an important role in the development of our next generation of cybersecurity professionals, and I am proud to join Mr. Rodriguez in recognizing it.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak about the special order topic of financial reform. I would like to thank my colleague Congresswoman Marcia Fudge for bringing this issue to the floor tonight. I would also like to thank CBC Chair Barbara Lee for her leadership on continuing to shine the light on important issues that matter to the CBC and our constituents as well as the Nation as a whole. It is past time that we take strong action to reform our financial system to ensure that we have strong measures in place to best prevent the economic crisis that we have been experiencing over the last few years. We had years without accountability for Wall Street and the Big Banks under President Bush and congressional Republicans which cost the people of this Nation 8 million jobs. We will: Rein in Big Banks and their Big Bonuses, put an end to bailouts and the idea of ``too big to fail,'' and create a consumer financial protection agency to protect and empower consumers to make the best decisions on homes, credit cards, and their own financial future. Mr. Speaker, we can no longer afford to let the fox watch the henhouse. For eight years, President Bush and congressional Republicans looked the other way as Wall Street and the Big Banks exploited loopholes, gambled your money on complex schemes, and rewarded failure and recklessness. America's families and small businesses paid the price. We lost 8 million jobs and $17 trillion in retirement savings and Americans' net worth. This Congress and President Obama have made tough choices and taken effective steps to bring our economy back from the brink of disaster. The Recovery Act has already saved or created up to 2.8 million jobs and much of the TARP has been paid back. And now we are taking another key step forward with a final agreement on the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. As we rebuild our economy, we must put in place commonsense rules to ensure Big Banks and Wall Street can't play Russian Roulette again with our futures. Wall Street may be bouncing back, but we know from experience they're not going to police themselves. Common-sense reforms that hold Wall Street and the Big Banks accountable will: End bailouts by ensuring taxpayers are never again on the hook for Wall Street's risky decisions Protect families' retirement funds, college savings, homes and businesses' financial futures from unnecessary risk by CEOs, lenders, and speculators Protect consumers from predatory lending abuses, fine print, and industry gimmicks Inject transparency and accountability into a financial system run amok

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H. Res. 1244, ``Recognizing the National Collegiate Cyber Defense Competition for its for its now five-year effort to promote cyber security curriculum in institutions of higher learning,'' as introduced by my fellow member of the Texas delegation, Rep. Ciro Rodriguez. Our Nation's critical infrastructure is composed of public and private institutions in the sectors of agriculture, food, water, public health, emergency services, government, defense industrial base, information and telecommunications, energy, transportation, banking and finance, chemicals and hazardous materials, and postal and shipping. Cyberspace is their nervous system--the control system of our country. Cyberspace is composed of hundreds of thousands of interconnected computers, servers, routers, switches, and fiber optic cables that allow our critical infrastructures to work. Thus, the healthy, secure, and efficient functioning of cyberspace is essential to both our economy and our national security. One of the most significant security challenges that our Federal government faces today is ensuring that we have an abundance of adequately trained individuals defending our information infrastructure. In the past, I have been proud to sponsor bills that would increase funding for cybersecurity education programs, to ensure that we have a properly trained workforce to protect this vital infrastructure. The National Collegiate Cyber Defense Competition (CCDC) is an important piece of the cybersecurity education puzzle. Since 2005, the National Collegiate Cyber Defense Competition has given students in the field of cybersecurity the opportunity to showcase their abilities. Rather than having students design an ``ideal'' network, the CCDC requires participants to assume the administrative and protective duties for an existing ``commercial'' network. This allows participants to show their skill at ``real world'' situations, as very few cybersecurity workers will have the luxury of building a perfect system from the ground up. While we obviously want to build the most secure networks possible, our experts must be able to work with the infrastructure that exists, finding and eliminating weaknesses that may already exist, and making imperfect systems secure. Over the last few years, the contest has grown to include regional competitions in Texas, Maine, Washington, California, and Minnesota, among other locations. This year, there were more than eighty schools that participated, from all parts of the country. The students participating in this contest have not only demonstrated their knowledge and understanding of this important function, but they have also had the opportunity to hone their skills by dealing with actual, real time issues. The National Collegiate Cyber Defense Competition plays an important role in the development of our next generation of cybersecurity professionals, and I am proud to join Mr. Rodriguez in recognizing it.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, I join my colleagues in strong support of NASA programs across the country, and I share their concerns regarding the administration's proposal to cancel NASA's Constellation Program, which includes the Orion Crew Capsule, the Altair Lunar Lander, and the Ares I and Ares V rockets. These programs, which together comprise our human spaceflight program, were authorized in both 2005 and 2008 by Republican and Democratic Congresses respectively. It is under the Constellation program that NASA is currently developing new launch vehicles and spacecraft capable of travel to the moon, Mars and other destinations. Not only does cancelling the Constellation Program jeopardize America's leadership role in human space exploration, but it will have detrimental effects on our economy and national security. Take, for example, the Johnson Space Center in Houston, Texas. The Johnson Space Center has the lead to manage the Constellation Program and several of its major elements, including the Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle and the Altair Lunar Lander. Without Constellation, the Johnson Space Center could lose anywhere from 4,000 to 7,000 high-tech jobs. If the JSC loses 4,000 direct jobs, an additional 2,315 indirect jobs would be lost, totaling 6,315; loss of income and expenditures locally would be over $567 million. If the JSC loses 7,000 direct jobs, an additional 4,052 indirect jobs would be lost, totaling 11,052; loss of income and expenditures locally would total almost $1 billion. When speaking of the decision to cancel the Constellation Program, Administrator Bolden stated that ``NASA intends to work with the Congress to make this transition smooth and effective, working responsibly on behalf of the taxpayers.'' To the contrary, I believe that the best use of taxpayers' money is to continue the investment in NASA to build America's scientific future. That future will create jobs. The present administration's plan for the Constellation Program would cause drastic job loss across America and would place America in a behind the edge position as it relates to competitiveness in scientific research. NASA and the space industry are critical to Houston's economic success in both the short and long term. According to the Bay Area Houston Economic Partnership, NASA accounts for nearly 16,800 direct federal jobs and serves as the engine for another 3,100 civilian jobs that together supply more than $2.5 billion in payroll into Houston's regional economy. The Johnson Space Center is the primary location for training astronauts for spaceflights and this move; yet, the proposed budget will effectively cancel America's human spaceflight program. In his statement announcing NASA's budget, Administrator Bolden stressed that changes in the FY 2011 budget would be ``good for NASA, great for the American workforce, and essential for our nation's future prosperity.'' Madame Speaker, while I seek the same objectives, I strongly disagree with the closing of this project and I believe it will hurt America's scientific progress. Additionally, the aerospace industry would lose as many as 20,000-30,000 jobs nationally in either of these scenarios. Given our current economic downturn, we cannot take the possibility of these job losses lightly and the Johnson Space Center is just one example of what the cancellation of this program would do to other NASA centers nationally. It will take years for the commercial spaceflight industry to get up to speed to reach the level of competence that exists at NASA today. Our government has already invested literally years and billions of dollars into this program. We should build upon these investments and not abandon them. Our country can support the commercial spaceflight industry, but not at the expense of our human spaceflight program, which for years has inspired future generations and driven technology that enhances our quality of life. This technology is crucial to our national security. NASA conducts aeronautics research to address aviation safety, air traffic control, noise and, emissions reductions and fuel efficiency. NASA's contribution to our knowledge of air and water supports improved decision making for natural resource management and emergency response, thus enabling us to better respond to future homeland security threats. Knowledge of Earth's water cycle is a critical first step in protecting our water supply; water flows over the Earth's surface in oceans, lakes, and streams, and is particularly vulnerable to attack. NASA sensors also provide a wealth of information about the water cycle; and contributes to improving our ability to monitor water resources and water quality from space; we must also protect the quality and safety of the air we breathe; airborne contaminants can pose danger to human health; and chemical, nuclear, radiological, and biological attacks are plausible threats against which we can protect. I have asked my colleagues in Congress to join me in my efforts to restore funding for the Constellation to the FY 2011 budget for the following reasons: 1. Elimination of the Constellation program will present homeland security implications for cyberspace, critical infrastructure, and the Intelligence community of the United States; 2. Elimination of the Constellation program will compromise the effectiveness of the International Space Station as it relates to the strategic importance of space station research, and intelligence; 3. Continuation of NASA's Constellation program is crucial to improving national security, climate, and research in science and medicine. It is my hope, that this Congress will continue to support NASA's Constellation program and to support balanced energy policies that promote economic growth and will help us meet our clean energy goals. H. Res. 1150 Whereas the United States has invested in human flight program since May 5, 1961, a program that has been a source for the United States leadership role in space exploration and advancement in scientific research; and is a national security interest and asset for the Nation. Whereas the Constellation program is a human space flight program that includes: the Ares I launch vehicle, capable of launching to low-Earth orbit; the Ares V heavy-lift launch vehicle, to send astronauts and equipment to the Moon; the Orion capsule, intended to carry astronauts to low-Earth orbit and beyond; and the Altair lunar lander and lunar surface systems astronauts will need to explore the lunar surface. Whereas the President's Fiscal Year 2010 Budget provided $18,700,000,000 for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA); the Budget funds a program of space- based research to advance our understanding of climate change and its effects, as well as human and robotic space exploration; and the budget supports the use of the Space Shuttle to complete assembly of the International Space Station. Whereas the 2010 NASA budget funded a program of space- based research that supports the Administration's commitment to deploy a global climate change research and monitoring system. Whereas 2010 NASA budget was to fund the safe flight of the Space Shuttle through the vehicle's retirement at the end of 2010. An additional flight will be conducted if it can be completed safely before the end of 2010. Whereas the President's Fiscal Year 2011 Budget proposes to eliminate the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)'s Space Shuttle and Constellation program and allocate $6,000,000,000 over 5 years for the purpose of developing commercial space flight. Whereas the Congress recognizes the policy outlined in section 501(a) of the National Aeronautics and Space Authorization Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 16761(a)), that the United States shall maintain an uninterrupted capability for human space flight and operations in low-earth orbit, and beyond, as an essential element of national security and the ability to ensure continued United States participation and leadership in the exploration of space. Whereas eliminating the Constellation upon retirement of the Space Shuttle will create a national security risk to the United States and will diminish the Nation's efforts to advance scientific research in space. Whereas the United States will for the first time since its space program began, be without a human space flight program. Whereas transferring funds from the Constellation program to the development of commercial space programs to carry human and crew into space is taking a chance on an unknown quantity and is an unnecessary and unreasonable risk this country must not take. Whereas the retirement of the Space Shuttle this year will leave the United States vulnerable and depending on Russia to put United States astronauts in orbit without the Constellation program; in May of last year when it became clear the United States had no one else to turn to, Russia raised its prices from $48,000,000 to $51,000,000 per launch for each astronaut. Whereas the Constellation program is not just about going to the moon, as the United States has a commitment to the International Space Station (ISS), and with the Space Shuttle being retired this September, the Constellation is the only system under development that will give NASA the future capability to launch and retrieve crews to and from the ISS. Whereas decreasing the use of the International Space Station would impact the ability to sustain its systems and physical infrastructure. Whereas the Constellation program should be funded to continue use of the International Space Station to support the agency and other Federal, commercial, and academic research and technology testing needs. Whereas partnerships between universities and NASA centers should be established to provide research opportunities for conduct of research in the United States International Space Station National Laboratories for the next generation of scientists in order to ensure effective utilization of the International Space Station research capabilities. Whereas NASA conducts aeronautics research to address aviation safety, air traffic control, noise and, emissions reductions and fuel efficiency. Whereas NASA's contribution to our knowledge of air and water supports improved decisionmaking for natural resource management and emergency response, thus enabling us to better respond to future homeland security threats. Whereas knowledge of Earth's water cycle is a critical first step in protecting our water supply; water flows over the Earth's surface in oceans, lakes, and streams, and is particularly vulnerable to attack. Whereas NASA sensors provide a wealth of information about the water cycle; and contributes to improving our ability to monitor water resources and water quality from space; we must also protect the quality and safety of the air we breathe; airborne contaminants can pose danger to human health; and chemical, nuclear, radiological, and biological attacks are plausible threats against which we can better protect the United States through NASA's research: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Representatives that-- (1) NASA is a national security asset and interest for the United States; (2) elimination of the Constellation program will present Homeland Security implications for cyberspace, critical infrastructure, and the intelligence community of the United States; (3) elimination of the Constellation program will compromise the effectiveness of the International Space Station as it relates to the strategic importance of space station research, and intelligence; (4) continuation of NASA's Constellation program is crucial to improving national security, climate, and research in science and medicine; and (5) the United States should maintain its funding of the Constellation program and should begin funding commercial space in 5 years and not sooner.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I wish to thank Congress members Dahlkemper, Kratovil and Childers for introducing this important and much-needed piece of legislation. The mortgage crisis continues to affect millions of Americans, and has greatly interfered with the American dream of home ownership. It is imperative that we help everyday Americans in their effort to remain afloat in light of the ongoing effects of the economic meltdown. For these reasons, I support the proposed amendments to this Act which will extend the closing deadline for the First-Time Homebuyer tax credit to September 30, 2010. The housing market is an area that was, perhaps, the most largely affected by the economic crisis. As of January, 2010, there were 315,716 foreclosures on properties in the United States reported just within the month. Additionally, 1 in every 409 U.S. housing units received a foreclosure filing in the same month. Texas received the sixth highest number of foreclosure filings in January, 2010. As of March, 2010, the foreclosure rate in Houston, Texas had increased by almost ten percent from the previous month. Although our economy appears to be on the path to recovery, these statistics are still cause for concern. The programs set in place to counteract the effects of the economic downturn have attracted many ordinary Americans who are desperate to keep their homes. The first-time homebuyer tax credit, specifically, represented positive steps to guide ordinary Americans towards financial recovery. However, it is important to allow all who are eligible, and especially all who require the help, to benefit from the tax credit by extending the closing deadline. There has been a delay in processing due to all the new mortgages that have resulted from the tax credit. However, ordinary Americans who have attempted to obtain new mortgages, and are sincerely in need of the aid provided through the tax credit should not be punished for the backlog that resulted from factors entirely outside of their control. We are all familiar with the ongoing effects of the economic meltdown. Jobs have been lost, homes have been foreclosed upon, and many have been left with no source of income or livelihood. In addition, many Americans have been stripped of the ability to achieve a goal that they have, in certain instances, worked decades to attain-- owning a home. Extending the tax credit will provide everyday citizens with an opportunity to realize this dream, even in the midst of a recovering economy.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 5611, the Airport and Airway Extension Act of 2010: Part II. This Act would extend the funding and expenditure authority of the Airport and Airway Trust Fund as well as extend authorizations for the airport improvement program. The Airport and Airway Trust Fund (AATF) provides much needed funding to assist in our Federal commitment to the Nation's aviation system. Such funding is necessary for the development of our nationwide airport and airway system as well as for investments in air traffic control facilities to meet the current and future projected growth in aviation. The Trust Fund provides 100 percent of the funding for Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) airport grants, facilities and equipment, and research, engineering, and development. Allocations are also provided to the Airport Improvement Program (AIP), and Facilities and Equipment, (F&E) and funding from the Trust Fund also helps support basic FAA operations. I would like to emphasize that the AAFT trust fund was not created solely to finance aviation infrastructure. Throughout its history, it has financed a wide array of operations including administrative expenses, attributable to the administration of the airport improvement program and research and development, as well as general FAA operations. It is very important that this funding be continued. While the trust fund pays a large share of the bills for the FAA to operate the national airspace system, a troubling gap has grown between the revenue that comes in and what it costs to govern the FAA. This has sharply driven down the Trust Fund's uncommitted balance; its surpluses from previous years. If this trend continues in our poor economic state where airlines are cutting benefits and increasing prices, the future of American aviation is grim. Mr. Speaker I am concerned for the future of American aviation-- especially for the future of the George Bush Intercontinental Airport located in my home district of Houston, Texas. Current airport standards are not only threatened by decreased FAA funding but also by the proposed merger of Continental and United Airlines, the former of which is based in Houston. Should this merger be allowed, the future of American aviation in regards to customer satisfaction, safety standards, and general flight, would slowly decline. We cannot add to such destruction by denying the FAA appropriate funds through the AATF. As the airline industry continues to grow and serve more and more Americans, it is our duty to the American people to ensure that the future of airport security, infrastructure and improvement, research and development, continue to develop to better serve our needs. For these reasons Mr. Speaker, I support H.R. 5611, the Airport and Airway Extension Act of 2010: Part II.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 5618, Restoration of Emergency Unemployment Compensation Act. 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. People cannot function without some means to subsist, while continuing to look for work that in many places in 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. Unemployment is an emergency. Just ask someone who has been unemployed and looking for work, and they will tell you the same. With a national unemployment rate of 9.7 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, with more than 241,152 individuals remaining unemployed. Indeed, I cannot 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 the hot summer of 2010--only made more unbearable by this nonsensical approach to their plight. H.R. 5618 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 the economy, we cannot sit idly and ignore the unemployed. As such, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 5618.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, I was listening to the tribute to Senator Byrd yesterday on the floor of the Senate, the other body, and I was struck by one comment on his integrity. It was that if Senator Byrd gave you his word you could go to the bank on it. I rise today to support this legislation because I want the American people to know that this Congress who has taken their vote really needs to stand by its word. That word is to be there for America during a rainy day. This unemployment insurance extension is not a handout; it's a hand up. Democrats have voted to create thousands of jobs in America but it is not enough. All the economists will tell you that Americans are not at work because they don't want to work. They are not at work because jobs have not been created, and one of the downfalls of the bailout, for those of us who did vote against it but because of the outpouring of our own constituents who asked us to vote ``yes,'' we voted ``yes'' for small businesses and businesses in general to create jobs, but if the too- big-to-fail banks refuse to give them loans to create jobs then we are stuck with no job creation at the level we would like. We need to be able to provide for those who need us now, provide for those without jobs or losing jobs, and get off this high horse of breaking your word to the American people.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, I was detained when my colleagues were on the floor of the House paying tribute to Senator Byrd and did not want this time to go without acknowledging my deep sympathy to his family and to my good friend from West Virginia and to acknowledge how special this man was to the institution we call Congress and to the freedom that this Nation stands for. I cannot account for my personal encounters with Senator Byrd, but I can tell you, as someone who respects and loves this institution, what a man who understood the Constitution and rules that were not for selfish reasons, to keep people from being in power, but really it was to empower people. He had no qualms in standing up against Presidential authority that was wrong in the Iraq War. He had no qualms in fighting to ensure that resources came to his great State. He loved the institution. He was a holder of knowledge, and what we will lose with his passing is that special sensitivity to the rules and to the responsibility we have to not play politics with this institution. We are here to serve America, and Senator Byrd did serve America. May God rest his soul and may he rest in peace. Senator Byrd, we will miss you.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 5552, the Firearms Excise Improvement Tax Act of 2010. I would like to thank Chairman Levin and Congressman Kind for their leadership in bringing this important bill to the floor. H.R. 5552 will amend the Internal Revenue Code to require: (1) excise taxes on recreational equipment to be due and payable on the date for filing the return for such taxes (i.e., quarterly); and (2) the Secretary of the Treasury to assess and collect, in the same manner as delinquent taxes are assessed and collected, mandatory orders of restitution for victims of crime. The bill has the support of Members on both sides of the aisle. The funding will also create jobs for Americans across the country. Mr. Speaker, it must be stated that in a time when firearms are being used to commit heinous crimes against individuals in this country, it is important that we remember to ensure that we use strict measures to ensure that we can track the owners of firearms and requiring such excise taxes is one way to do so. In this Congress, I introduced H.R. 257, The Child Gun Safety and Gun Access Prevention Act of 2009--which would amend the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act to: (1) raise the age of handgun eligibility to 21 (currently, 18); and (2) prohibit persons under age 21 from possessing semiautomatic assault weapons or large capacity ammunition feeding devices, with exceptions. It would also increase penalties for: (1) a second or subsequent violation by a juvenile of Brady Act provisions or for a first violation committed after an adjudication of delinquency or after a state or federal conviction for an act that, if committed by an adult, would be a serious violent felony; and (2) transferring a handgun, ammunition, semiautomatic assault weapon, or large capacity ammunition feeding device to a person who is under age 21, knowing or having reasonable cause to know that such person intended to use it in the commission of a crime of violence. The bill also would prohibit any licensed importer, manufacturer, or dealer from transferring a firearm to any person (other than a licensed importer, manufacturer, or dealer) unless the transferee is provided with a secure gun storage or safety device. Authorizes the Attorney General to suspend or revoke any firearms license, or to subject the licensee to a civil penalty of up to $10,000, if the licensee has knowingly violated this prohibition. H.R. 257 would prohibit keeping a loaded firearm or an unloaded firearm and ammunition within any premises knowing or recklessly disregarding the risk that a child: (1) is capable of gaining access to it; and (2) will use the firearm to cause death or serious bodily injury. It would also require the parent or legal guardian of a child to ensure that a child attending a gun show is accompanied by an adult. My bill would also authorize the Attorney General to provide grants to enable local law enforcement agencies to develop and sponsor gun safety classes for parents and children. The bill also expresses the sense of Congress that each school district should provide or participate in a firearms safety program for students. Yesterday, in its second major ruling on gun rights in three years, the Supreme Court extended the federally protected right to keep and bear arms to all 50 states. We know that the decision will be hailed by gun rights advocates and comes over the opposition of gun control groups, the city of Chicago and four justices. Justice Samuel Alito wrote for the five justice majority saying ``the right to keep and bear arms must be regarded as a substantive guarantee, not a prohibition that could be ignored so long as the States legislated in an evenhanded manner.'' The ruling builds upon the Court's 2008 decision in D.C. v. Heller that invalidated the handgun ban in the nation's capital. Moreover, that decision held that the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms was a right the Founders specifically delegated to individuals. The justices affirmed that decision and extended its reach to the 50 states. Today's ruling also invalidates Chicago's handgun ban. The irony is that there have been 209 homicides so far this year in 2010 in Chicago. We need to strike a reasonable balance between upholding our Second Amendment rights to bear arms, and at the same time ensure that we enact appropriate laws to address criminal behavior and to ensure the health and safety of Americans across this nation. I hope that we can work towards a reasonable solution whereby gun owners are not deprived of their right to hunt, fish, and use their firearms in law-abiding manners, and also provide the most effective measures to control gun violence and limit injury and death to Americans as a result of unlawful firearm use.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, we have had a good week, and I am very grateful we had the opportunity today to say to the doctors of America that we are committed to your practice and your medicine and your caring for our seniors. In addition, we were able to say to Iran, which has called for the extinguishing of Israel, has caused the existence of Camp Ashraf in Iraq, and literally has tried to destroy dissidents and resisters for democracy, that we will not tolerate an Iran that is nuclear-armed. And so I am glad that we passed the Iran Sanctions Act. But we have more to do. And I am grateful that the President saw fit to change command in Afghanistan. It is unfortunate that the commands of the commander in chief were not respected, but we know that this is a civilian government and the military respects the civilian leadership. That must be. But now we must turn to establishing a pathway out of Afghanistan. We must go after the terrorists that threaten us, but we must recognize a smart power, political power, diplomatic power, empowering the people, providing for education is the way to solve the Afghanistan problem, not 30,000 soldiers that are engaged in war.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. I thank the distinguished manager of the Rules Committee for his leadership. I thought I would just hold up this book that has many items in it, but the most precious document is the Constitution. And I do want to say that it is clear that the First Amendment, the number one amendment in the Bill of Rights, is not violated, but enhanced by this legislation. That's why the commonsense judgment of Americans are wholeheartedly supporting this. I had my doubts because there are exemptions here that may help organizations that I would disagree with and do not support, but frankly, this legislation reflects the First Amendment because what it says is we want transparency that in essence tells us who you are. That is no greater affirmation of the First Amendment than one could imagine. So it is important to acknowledge concerns expressed, but it is equally important to say that we stand on the side of a fair and impartial election, an un-ugly election. And when you get unfettered money in elections, it becomes ugly. So that if you were in the hurricane plains, if you will, of the gulf region and you had a referendum to ask your utility company to stop putting utility poles above ground, spend some money to put them underground so we're not in the dark for 8 and 9 weeks during a campaign season and they take their money in the referendum and work hard to defeat it, that is to undermine the needs of the people of that region. Or you have insurance companies who are not seeing what the American people are now seeing, that, wow, this health care bill really can help me, and they begin to massively campaign against the implementation of the health care bill against America's interests. This is what this is about because when you see who's putting these political ads up--maybe helping another candidate, a pro-insurance, big business candidate who cares nothing about the people of this Nation-- you will say, you know what? I want to side with letting this health bill work itself out. I want to side with young people being covered. I want to side with seniors getting money back from health reform. That's what legislation is about. So I would offer to say to my colleague on the other side of the aisle you are wrong. This Constitution and the First Amendment provides that no law should impede your right to access, to association, and to freedom of speech, but impeding it does not mean don't tell us who you are, it does not mean contributions can hide in the dark. And every single candidacy, be it city council, or mayor, or be it a Federal election, will have the opportunity to have funds dumped on them with a means of replying.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. I thank the gentleman. Here's what I'd like to do in an election--I'd like us to be able to engage and tell you what our issues are, whatever we're running for. And yes, we have to run with the resources that we raise; and when I say that, no matter what office you are running for, no matter what party you are in. Without this legislation big money will control the people's voice. But what we most want to do is to break the locks and chains that big money causes in elections. We want to take away the right of those who want to demonize someone who, for example, may be interested in comprehensive immigration reform. That's their viewpoint, they're running on that. Maybe they're not. Or someone who's running against it. We don't want to have big money demonize a perspective that maybe the public should hear. So I don't know what the opposition is on the other side because the First Amendment is protected. And I believe, though it's a struggle because we know that there are elements that do raise the concern to some, but I would argue that we should want to break those locks and break those chains of big money telling the American people what to do. I ask my colleagues to support H.R. 5175, the underlying bill, and the rule. Madam Speaker, after weighing the pros and cons of H.R. 5175, the DISCLOSE Act, I have decided to support the bill. This was a decision that took a lot of deliberation, but in the end it is clear that in the absence of supporting H.R. 5175, we run the risk of witnessing the greatest deluge of unreported cash from the richest corporations and special interests that has occurred throughout the history of American politics. Without some mechanism to ensure that the American people know who is spending potentially millions to influence their vote, we threaten the fundamental core of our democracy--the result will amount to a corporate special interest takeover of our elections. This is the reality. This is what is at stake. Right now, any corporation can spend unlimited amounts of money on our elections. The bill is not perfect, but it provides unprecedented transparency and disclosure of political expenditures by powerful special interests. Much has been said, and many of you have concerns, about exemptions in the bill. Let me be clear: all groups will be forced to disclose more than they do now. Every single 501(c)(4) will be forced to ``stand by their ad'' so you know exactly which group sponsors the advertisement. Additionally, any exempted groups will be prevented from spending a single corporate dollar on campaign-related expenditures. We are far better off with these reforms than with nothing at all. Madam Speaker, I want to remind my colleagues that this legislation is bipartisan. Our former colleagues, Marty Meehan of Massachusetts, and Christopher Shays of Connecticut helped authored the bipartisan campaign reform act. Yesterday, they released a joint statement in support of the DISCLOSE Act: ``Voters have a fundamental right to know who is spending money to influence their elections and where that money is coming from. With hundreds of millions of dollars being spent by corporations and labor unions to influence elections, secrecy about these expenditures is simply unacceptable. We urge our former colleagues in the House to vote for the DISCLOSE Act and for the right of citizens to know who is spending money to influence their votes.'' The DISCLOSE Act ensures that shadowy special interests and sham organizations are not able to hide their funders, and is critical if we ever hope to keep our constituents informed on who is trying to influence their vote. This bill breaks the ``locks and chains'' of ``big money'' in our democratic process of elections. I would submit this is the time to move forward. As such, I urge my colleagues to support the DISCLOSE Act, H.R. 5175 .House of Representatives, Washington, DC June 23, 2010. Congresswoman Jackson Lee Urges Support for H.R. 5175, the DISCLOSE Act Dear Colleague: After weighing the pros and cons of H.R. 5175, the DISCLOSE Act, I have decided to support the bill. This was a decision that took a lot of deliberation, but in the end it is clear that in the absence of supporting H.R. 5175, we run the risk of witnessing the greatest deluge of unreported cash from the richest corporations and special interests that has occurred throughout the history of American politics. Without some mechanism to ensure that the American people know who is spending potentially millions to influence their vote, we threaten the fundamental core of our democracy--the result will amount to a corporate special interest takeover of our elections. This is the reality. This is what is at stake. Right now, any corporation can spend unlimited amounts of money on our elections. The bill is not perfect, but it provides unprecedented transparency and disclosure of political expenditures by powerful special interests. Much has been said, and many of you have concerns, about exemptions in the bill. Let me be clear: all groups will be forced to disclose more than they do now. Every single 501(c)(4) will be forced to ``stand by their ad'' so you know exactly which group sponsors the ad. Additionally, any exempted groups will be prevented from spending a single corporate dollar on campaign related expenditures. We are far better off with these reforms than with nothing at all. The DISCLOSE Act ensures that shadowy special interests and sham organizations are not able to hide their funders, and is critical if we ever hope to keep our constituents informed on who is trying to influence their vote. This bill breaks the ``locks and chains'' of ``big money'' in our democratic process of elections. I would submit this is the time to move forward. As such, I urge your support of the DISCLOSE Act,

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 2194, to avoid the nuclear attack that Iran represents to the world and to Israel. I rise to give strong support to H.R. 2194, and I ask my colleagues to support it. Mr. Speaker, this legislation provides another tool for the President to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons by allowing the administration to sanction foreign firms who attempt to supply refined gasoline to Iran or provide them with the materials to enhance their oil refineries. These sanctions would further restrict the government of Iran's ability to procure refined petroleum. Currently, the availability of petroleum products is stagnant in Iran. Private firms have decided that the government of Iran's refusal to cooperate with the multilateral community on nuclear proliferation generates a significant risk to doing business with Iran. I would like to thank Chairman Berman for incorporating my concerns about the human rights situation in Iran into the findings of this legislation. It is important that we acknowledge that, throughout 2009, the government of Iran has persistently violated the rights of its citizens. The government of Iran's most overt display of disregard for human rights happened in the presidential elections on June 12, 2009. As I said on June 19, 2009, ``we must condemn Iran for the absence of fair and free Presidential elections and urge Iran to provide its people with the opportunity to engage in a Democratic election process.'' The repression and murder, arbitrary arrests, and show trials of peaceful dissidents in the wake of the elections were a sad reminder of the government of Iran's long history of human rights violations. The latest violations were the most recent iteration of the government of Iran's wanton suppression of the freedom of expression. It is important that we are clear that our concerns are with the government of Iran and not its people. The State Department's Human Rights Report on Iran provides a bleak picture of life in Iran. The government of Iran, through its denial of the democratic process and repression of dissent, has prevented the people from determining their own future. Moreover, it is the government of Iran that persecutes its ethnic minorities and denies the free expression of religion. As we proceed with consideration of this legislation, we should all remember that the sole target of these sanctions is the Iranian government. Mr. Speaker, the government of Iran has repeatedly shown its disdain for the international community by disregarding international nonproliferation agreements. Iran's flagrant violation of nonproliferation agreements was evidenced most recently in the discovery of the secret enrichment facility at Qom. The government of Iran's continued threats against Israel, opposition to the Middle East peace process, and support of international terrorist organizations further demonstrates the necessity for action. Iran with nuclear weapons and a mindset to destroy Israel cannot be tolerated by the world community. We must stop Iran's determination to become a nuclear power. Iran's recent actions towards the international community reflect a very small measure of progress. Iran's decision to allow International Atomic Energy Agency, IAEA, inspectors to visit this facility was a positive sign, but not a sufficient indication of their willingness to comply with international agreements. The recent announcement that Iran will accept a nuclear fuel deal is also indicative of their willingness to engage in dialogue, though it remains to be seen what amendments they will seek to the deal. While these actions indicate a small degree of improvement in Iran's position, the legislation before us today demonstrates that only continued dialogue and positive actions will soften the international community's stance towards Iran. I would also like to emphasize that the legislation before us provides only one tool for achieving Iran's compliance with international nonproliferation agreements. I continue to support the administration's policy of engagement with Iran and use of diplomatic talks. I believe that diplomacy and multilateralism are the most valuable tools we have to create change in Iran. After those tools fail, I believe that the sanctions are an appropriate recourse.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to support the permanent fix for doctors. That's what we have been saying as Democrats for more than a year. I want to thank the leadership, who has taken the calls of Members who are representing their doctors and seniors and who are saying we have got to do this. So let me tell the doctors of America: Look at what your friends look like--Democrats, who have been fighting over and over again. I promised physicians in my area, the doctors who work in inner city neighborhoods, that we were not going to leave them without help. I hope the other body and my friends on the other side of the aisle, the Republicans, will really understand the facts. We have to join together. Doctors help save lives. They tend to our seniors. It is important that they have the reimbursement they need. We rise today to support the 6-month fix, but we rise today to say the Democrats have been fighting to get this right. We are going to get it right. We are going to provide for the physicians. We are going to stop this 21 percent cut, and we are going to provide doctors for Americans who are waiting for us to do our jobs. Support the legislation. Physicians, your friends are us. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 3962, the ``Preservation of Access to Care for Medicare Beneficiaries and Pension Relief Act of 2010,'' a provision that retroactively reverses the 21 percent cut in Medicare payments to physicians scheduled for June 1, 2010; and also provides a 2.2 percent status report to physician payments through November 30, 2010. This provision also protects TRICARE military families dedicated to the service of this nation. Mr. Speaker, I would like to pay special tribute to my good friend, Chairman Henry Waxman, for his lifetime of devoted service to the cause of affordable health care for all Americans. I also thank the Democratic leadership, led by Speaker Pelosi, making health care affordable for Medicare beneficiaries a central issue. Democrats promised to chart a new direction for America if given the chance to lead. Today, we take another giant step toward fulfilling that promise. For nearly a decade, Medicare patients and the doctors who treat them have been held hostage by short-term patches to an unworkable Sustainable Growth Rate (SGR) formula. In the months to come, I look forward to working with Members of Congress from both sides of the aisle to repeal the SGR formula and to replace it with a permanent physician payment system for Medicare that rewards value and ends the uncertainty for patients and providers alike. In addition, the bill provides enhanced Medicaid funding to states to assist them with the added costs of providing health coverage to underserved and underrepresented individuals and for home and community based services that must be extended. Under current law, all outpatient services provided within three days before an inpatient admission and are related to the inpatient admission must be included in the bundled payment for that admission. The provision closes a loophole that had allowed the unbundling of services and submission of adjustment claims seeking separate and additional Medicare payments. This provision provides temporary, targeted funding relief for single employer and multiemployer pension plans that suffered significant losses in asset value due to the steep market slide in 2008. Employers that elect the relief would be required to make additional contributions to the plan if they pay compensation to any employee in excess of $1 million, pay extraordinary dividends, or engage in extraordinary stock buybacks during the first part of the relief period. Additional relief is available to certain plans sponsored by charitable organizations. Mr. Speaker, this provision will provide much needed fiscal relief to the states and to unemployed individuals. Although this fix is for 6 months, I am committed to working with my colleagues to deliver a permanent fix for our nation's physicians, and I am committed to fight for critical job-creating measures, on behalf of all of the American people and to strengthen our economy, as well as such vital provisions as extending unemployment benefits for the millions who have lost their jobs through no fault of their own. We must uphold our responsibility to the seniors and persons with disabilities who depend upon the Medicare program and the military families who depend upon the TRICARE program. The 21 percent cut in fees that physicians are seeing now is jeopardizing the relationship between Medicare and TRICARE patients and their doctors, and we cannot allow that to stand. This is a matter of whether seniors will have access to care or whether that access to care will be diminished because doctors will no longer be able to afford to continue to sustain their businesses with the cuts under the SGR for Medicare. That is why I support passage of this legislation. Over the months we struggled with Republicans over this issue. I continuously spoke to doctors in my district to say, I would not forget this important issue. I worked with the leadership, voted for a permanent fix and continued to call on the Senate to move this bill. Now we have a temporary fix of 6 months. However, I will work for a permanent fix with the Democratic leadership in spite of those of my Republican colleagues who oppose it. I believe in bipartisanship to help doctors and patients including seniors, get reimbursed and get the care they need. I support this legislation.