Sheila Jackson Lee

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I thank the distinguished gentleman from California, and I thank him for yielding. I have listened to the gentleman. We have participated in a number of caucuses where we have collectively expressed the importance of reinstituting regulation, but, more importantly, letting the people speak. Our challenges to the actions of AIG are not new. I am reminded of the works that were done in the last administration in 2008. There was a whole litany of prohibition and restrictions, particularly to regulate how that money would be given. No bonuses was one of those that was highlighted. In addition, to restrain the random use of money, reporting transparency, the idea of set-asides for those involved in mortgage foreclosures or modification, these are the issues we fought for. And in a lesson that has been bitter, we have seen AIG literally implode the, if you will, sympathy of the American taxpayer. I believe that the tax bill that's going to be on the floor tomorrow, I happen to support the efforts that are being made by the Judiciary Committee to provide for enforcement against those who would issue such, in essence, retention bonuses and to likewise require penalties and reimbursement. But let me just indicate why we need to be strong in our regulation on these issues. We take note of the fact that the CEO of AIG came just a few months ago. We thanked him for committing to serving after AIG had reached the brink of collapse. But I think the concern that I wish to speak to is the need for congressional oversight that was occurring in the Financial Services Committee today. It was occurring in the Judiciary Committee today. We should not be ashamed or shocked of holding the reins on entities that seem to be confused about the importance of congressional oversight. The points that were most provoking and striking to me today in the Financial Services Committee hearing are two: one, that these retention bonuses were issued on a Saturday night. Sounds to me like something of old, the Saturday Night Massacre. I frankly thought that much of our business is done from 9 to 5 from Monday to Friday, but that was not the case. But the other part of it that raised concern is the lack of transparency. Some government officials were made aware of this, in particular, the Federal Reserve. But committees that have oversight jurisdiction, either enforcement or regulation, just seem to be lost along the way. How many times do we have to repeat the fact that these Members do not represent themselves? This House, in fact, is the people's House. The upper body, of course, represents the combination of Congress. So I think it is important, as we look to the legislative focus, we also need to change minds and mindsets. But now that we are a major stakeholder, we do believe in capitalization, or capitalizing, restoring the markets, but we also think it is important that there be this link of understanding. My question would be, and I am wearing a lawyer's hat, that if there was a legal premise on which one thought they had to give these bonuses, frankly, I believe, our legal system is strong enough, and the financial system, to have indicated that we are not giving these bonuses at this time and to, in essence, say, let us take it to court. In that instance, we would have had an independent arbiter to address the question of whether these bonuses were, in fact, adequate. I look forward to the legislation making its way through this House dealing with taxation. I would hope that this would be recognized as not a punitive measure for people's hard work. Don't get the wrong idea. We understand hard work. We understand business hard work, small business hard work. We understand people who work in the financial markets, the hard work they do, the late hours. But we are partners now, and we have to do hard work on behalf of the American public. We have got to cherish their tax dollars as we look forward to reform the health care system, as we make the markets work again. We have got to restore their confidence, that people will believe it's okay to invest in these large entities to make the market work. So I would simply ask my colleagues as we begin to debate this, let us not mischaracterize any of our work. We have been fighting against this kind of debacle, if you will. Members have been working on both sides of the aisle. But I think it's honest to say that all of this started way back in the last administration. The language of the TARP bill of that era, the $350 billion, was not with any restraint, and many of us argued against it, and there were arguments across party lines. So let us now take the pledge, if you will, take the leap, if you will, in the cold waters to be able to accept the responsibilities--as a Judiciary Committee member, myself on the aspect of enforcement, and certainly I think the regulatory aspect, Mr. Sherman, is one that we need to ramp up. I will simply close by saying we're here tonight--it's about quarter to eight eastern standard time, but it is after a full day of work. I just hope that we can find a better day than late Saturday night, early Sunday morning, or midnight Saturday night and Sunday morning, to make important decisions that are made by the private sector and give the opportunity to the American people to see transparency and let us fix these markets. I'm prepared to fight the battle so that taxpayers can have a restoration of their confidence in what we are doing here but, more importantly, in what America stands for, and that is equality and justice and opportunity and fairness for all. I thank the gentleman for yielding to me at this time, and I'd be happy to yield back

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I had the pleasure this morning of visiting with a number of youngsters from the Youth Build Program. They participated with Mrs. Obama yesterday in building a home. It is interesting, when you speak of the words GIVE, that you can equate it to an organization such as AIG that simply takes. So I rise today to support the rule and the underlying bill. And let me explain to you what this means to America. How many of us can raise our hand and say that we understand what USAID means, or we understand what the Peace Corps means or AmeriCorps? And how many countless hours of youthful enthusiasm did we see after Hurricane Katrina? I know, because I am from Houston, Texas, and the thousands and thousands of survivors and evacuees that came, we were inundated, rightfully so and enthusiastically so, by these volunteers and by these workers from these many different aspects. Unregulated? No. Much of this will be volunteer service. Much of this will be educating people about service. Much of this will be doing what young people across America have asked us to do: Give them something to do. And that is what this bill intends. I am delighted to have joined as a cosponsor in the recent days. I am delighted to have been able to work on a specific amendment that is incorporated in the bill that reaches out to the underserved like Historically Black Colleges and Hispanic Serving Colleges, because America is a potpourri, it is a mosaic of so many different people with so many different histories, people who are already bilingual, who can speak to people who are in need, refugees, people who are fleeing oppression. There are so many different aspects of letting young people help other young people or young people help children. As the cofounder of the Congressional Children's Caucus, this bill specifically provides for enhanced community services with AmeriCorps, Learn and Serve America, VISTA, the National Civilian Community Corps, and Senior Corps. Mr. Speaker, this is the right direction for America in the 21st century. Be reminded that we ask not what this country can do for us. We don't equate AIG's insensitivity to the American taxpayer to this bill that gives everybody the opportunity to say, what can I do for my country, America the beautiful? That is what this bill is all about. I am so proud to stand alongside of this kind of legislation, because as our military forces are on the front lines, I want Americans to be able to stand on the front lines of this Nation, helping those who cannot help themselves. That is what this GIVE bill is all about. And I think we need to go around with a GIVE Bill button like I have got the Youth Bill button saying, Yes, We Can. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 1388, the ``Generations of Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act or the `GIVE Act'.'' I would like to thank my colleague Congresswoman McCarthy for introducing this important legislation, as well as the Chairman of the Committee on Education and Labor, Congressman George Miller, for his leadership in bringing this bill to the floor today. Mr. Speaker, this legislation will expand the already highly successful volunteer programs that empower community activists and improve the education and economic conditions of cities throughout the United States. It supports and increases funding for key community services programs, including AmeriCorps, Learn and Serve America, VISTA, National Civilian Community Corps, and Senior Corps. The GIVE Act creates opportunities for green jobs that will contribute to energy conservation and environmental protection. It will create critical educational opportunities for disadvantaged youth and will create incentives for students to improve their communities. Every year, more than 70,000 Americans participate in the AmeriCorps program alone, which provides relief to cities during natural disasters and reinvigorates communities. Over 50 million American volunteers build homes, organize food-drives, and improve schools through national service programs. The GIVE Act will broaden the opportunities for students and activists to participate in national service via education rewards that keep up with soaring costs of universities and Summer Service programs. After Ike and Katrina, thousands of local students worked to help rebuild communities and provide necessary services to distressed families. The GIVE Act is the critical lynchpin in sustaining this civic activism. Specifically, the GIVE Act would expand the job opportunities for Volunteers in Service to America, or VISTA, to re-integrate youth into society, increase literacy in communities through teaching opportunities in before and after-school programs, and to provide health and social services to low-income communities. VISTA is a critical step toward poverty alleviation, and the GIVE Act will equip it with the resources to fulfill its obligations. I am pleased to see that my colleague, representative Cuellar, revised the legislation to increase the number of volunteers from 75,000 to 250,000 members and added provisions for unemployed individuals to be included in the national service workforce, a step that will be a critical step to combating the employment crisis afflicting millions. I am also pleased that Congressman Miller further specified that the increase in volunteers is not just designed for AmeriCorps, but for all national service programs such as the Peace Corps and Opportunity Corps, and also included language to promote community based efforts to reduce crime and recruit public safety officers. In addition, the GIVE Act will create 4 new service opportunities including a Clean Energy Corps, an Education Corps, a Healthy Futures Corps, and a Veteran Service Corps. These volunteer opportunities will further improve environmental protection, health-care access, and services for veterans. These new service corps will address critical concerns in low-income communities. I am very happy that Congressman Teague revised the legislation to aid veterans in their pursuit of education and professional opportunities, and help veterans with the claims process, and assist rural, disabled, and unemployed veterans with transportation needs. Moreover, the GIVE Act will recognize colleges and universities that are strongly engaged in service through grants and rewards that will in turn improve educational access in the United States. I am pleased to see the retention of my language from the 110th Congress that gives special consideration to historically black colleges and universities, Hispanic-serving institutions, Tribal universities, and colleges serving predominantly minority populations. So strong are these universities' support of service, that ``veritas et beneficium,'' or ``truth and service'' in Latin, is inscribed on their insignias. The GIVE Act will create a Campuses of Service Program that will encourage and assist students in pursuing public service careers. It will also focus on recruiting scientists and engineers to keep America competitive for years to come. The Act will expand the Senior Corps as a way to keep Older Americans including seniors engaged in public service, and will create a Youth Engagement Zone to increase the number of young students in volunteer services. Moreover, it expands the focus of The National Civilian Community Corps to include disaster relief efforts and infrastructure improvement to allow quicker and more effective responses to disasters like Katrina and Ike that devastated numerous communities in the United States. Finally, the Give Act will launch a nation-wide Call to Service Campaign that encourages all Americans to engage in national service and to recognize September 11th as a National Day of Service and Remembrance. I am honored to cosponsor this legislation that will add service before self to America's future leaders. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this legislation.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 628, the ``Patent Judges Pilot Program in Certain District Courts.'' I urge my colleagues to support this bill. This bill will provide more expertise in skill in a difficult area of law: patent law. Americans hold the patents and patent law as important integral to our very lives. Patents reward ingenuity and creativity. As the Blackberry litigation demonstrated, deficiencies in the current system have the ability to paralyze America. Indeed, the New York Times noted that ``[something] has gone very wrong with the United States patent system.'' The Financial Times opined that ``[i]t is time to restore the balance of power in U.S. patent law.'' Indeed, there has been a cry for change in the patent system and increased expertise for many years now. The Constitution mandates that we ``promote the progress of science and the useful arts . . . by securing for limited times to . . . inventors the exclusive right to their . . . discoveries.'' In order to fulfill the Constitution's mandate, we, as Members of Congress, must examine the system periodically to determine whether there may be flaws in the system that may hamper innovation, including the problems described as decreased patent quality, prevalence of subjective elements in patent practice, patent abuse, and lack of qualified persons to study patent law. H.R. 628 attempts to correct some of these problems. H.R. 628 creates a pilot program to increase the expertise of U.S. District Court judges who wish to hear cases that involve issues related to patents or plant variety protection. The bill provides for the designation of not less than 6 United States district courts in at least 3 different circuits to take part in the pilot program. In the designated courts, judges who elect to hear patent or plant variety protection cases will be designated to do so by the chief judge. Cases will be assigned randomly, but undesignated judges may decline to accept patent and plant variety protection cases. The bill authorizes the expenditure of not less than $5 million per year for up to 10 years to pay for the educational and professional development of designated judges, and for compensation for law clerks with technical expertise related to patent and plant variety protection cases to be appointed by the designated courts. The high cost of patent litigation is widely publicized. It is not unusual for a patent suit to cost each party upwards of $10 million. Appeals from United States district courts to the Federal Circuit are frequent, in part because of the perception within the patent community that most district court judges are not sufficiently prepared to adjudicate complex, technical patent cases. In 2008, 45 percent of the patent cases that were appealed to the Federal Circuit were reversed in whole or in part or vacated and remanded. This bill seeks to promote consistency among United States district courts by increasing the expertise of district court judges, thus providing for more certainty in intellectual property protection. Taken together, these improvements would bring the American patent system up to speed for the twenty-first century. Instead of remaining a hindrance to innovation and economic growth, the patent system should work for inventors, ensuring America's patent system remains the best in the world and prevents risks to innovation. I am encouraged by this bill, and I am hopeful that minorities and women take advantage of this pilot program. The patent judges pilot program and pilot program for law clerks provides for the educational and professional development of the designated district judges in matters relating to patent and plant variety protection, and for compensating law clerks with expertise in technical matters arising in patent and plant variety protection cases. This is yet another step that America is taking to ensure that its patent system is the best in the world. I urge my colleagues to support this bill. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, obviously I rise to commemorate some special days, St. Patrick's Day to all of my wonderful Irish friends all over the Nation, and certainly to perpetuate the wonderful relationship that we have with the great nation of Ireland. At the same time, we have the opportunity to celebrate supporting the goals and ideals of National Women's History Month, and I thank my good friend, Congresswoman Lynn Woolsey, for offering H. Res. 211, supporting the goals and ideals of National Women's History Month. There is so much we can say as part of the great history of the women of this country and around the world, but we all should note that women express and exhibit a very special part of American history. Today, women account for 51 percent of the world's population, and throughout women's time, we have had countless sisters of brilliance. And so I salute them today and say we must stand for the cause of pay equity, and I am excited that one of the first bills that the President signed was pay equity. I am also excited to note that I offered legislation to support the placement of Sojourner Truth, a suffragette and an abolitionist, in the House of the United States Capitol, and that will be done. Let me close by simply thanking all of the great women of this Nation, Barbara Jordan and others, for what they have done and what they have contributed to America's history.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1541. The Small Business Administration (SBA) was created in 1953, and has a current business loan portfolio of roughly 220,000 loans worth more than $50 billion, which makes it the largest single financial backer of U.S. businesses. My district is home to these businesses, many of which are struggling to hang tough in this trying economy. In the 110th Congress, several short-term SBA authorization measures were enacted; the latest was signed into law on May 23, 2008. Under that law, authorization for SBA programs is scheduled to expire on March 20. I am hopeful that President Obama continues the recognition and support for small businesses that he demonstrated yesterday. His leadership, along with that of my colleague Nydia Velazquez on these issues could not come at a more important time. Small business is frequently viewed as an incubator for employment and economic growth, and is a continuing legislative and oversight concern for Congress due to its constitutional role, through the interstate commerce and general welfare clauses, to promote economic well being and prosperity. While many analysts believe a very significant percentage of the nation's jobs are created by small businesses, others note that a great many small businesses fail every year thereby eliminating jobs. The 111th Congress is likely to consider many small business issues as it debates reauthorization the many Small Business Administration (SBA) programs that are scheduled to expire in 2009. Our small business owners need certainty to plan for the future and I will continue to work hard for a more permanent solution to complement the authorizations that many businesses have to endure. A primary issue in the reauthorization is likely to be the cost to the government of various small business assistance programs. The Bush Administration had proposed that certain loan programs be cut back or eliminated, that borrowers in the SBA's basic loan program be charged higher fees, and that interest rates for disaster loans rise to market levels after five years. I hope that a full review of these policies is underway by the new administration. Ways to insure that small businesses benefit from economic stimulus programs are likely to be considered. Finding ways for small businesses to provide health insurance to employees could be vital in getting elements of the business community to be actively supporting and working with Congress as we press ahead with legislation on health care. I understand that we in Congress cannot run your businesses for you. I just want to be there to help fashion fair and reasonable legislation that affects small business. Mr. Speaker, this bill authorizes Small Business Administration programs and authority through July 31 and again it is my hope that we continue to engage the business community as this Congress seeks to move America from recession back to prosperity.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1429, ``Stop AIDS in Prison Act of 2009.'' I want to thank my colleague Congresswoman Maxine Waters of California for introducing this legislation. Mr. Speaker, I strongly support H.R. 1429, which designed to address the growing impact that HIV/AIDS is having on minority communities. According to the Black AIDS Institute, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) statistics reveal that African Americans account for half of all new HIV/AIDS cases. Racial and ethnic minorities comprise 69 percent of new cases, according to the 2005 data released by the CDC. African-American women account for the majority of new AIDS cases among women (67 percent in 2004); whereas white women account for 17 percent and Latinas 15 percent. The CDC estimates that 73 percent of all children born to HIV infected mothers in 2004 were African American. HIV/AIDS is now the leading cause of death among African Americans ages 25 to 44--deadlier than heart disease, accidents, cancer, and homicide. The CDC reported that Hispanics accounted for 18 percent of new diagnoses reported in the 35 areas with long-term, confidential name- based HIV reporting in the United States, and that most Hispanic men were exposed to HIV through sexual contact with other men, followed by injection drug use and heterosexual contact; and that most Hispanic women were exposed to HIV through heterosexual contact, followed by injection drug use. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, African Americans made up 41 percent of all inmates in the prison system at the end of 2004. Since African Americans are disproportionately represented in jails and prisons, the Stop AIDS in Prison Bill is one way to begin addressing this problem. The ``Stop AIDS in Prison Act of 2009'' directs the Bureau of Prisons to develop a comprehensive policy to provide HIV testing, treatment, and prevention for inmates in federal prisons and upon reentry into the community. The bill would require initial testing and counseling of inmates upon entry into the prison system and then ongoing testing available up to once a year upon the request of the inmate, or sooner if an inmate is exposed to the HIV/AIDS virus or becomes pregnant. Furthermore, the Bureau of Prisons will be required to make HIV/AIDS counseling and treatment available to prisoners, and give testing and treatment referrals to prisoners prior to reentering the community. The bill protects the confidentiality of prisoners, and allows prisoners to refuse routine HIV testing. Finally, the bill contains a requirement that the Bureau of Prisons report to Congress, no later than one year after enactment, the number of inmates who tested positive for HIV upon intake; the number of inmates who tested positive prior to reentry; the number of inmates who were not tested prior to reentry because they were released without sufficient notice; the number of inmates who opted-out of taking the test; the number of inmates who were tested following exposure incidents; and the number of inmates who were under treatment for HIV/AIDS. I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 1429 because we must reverse these costly trends. Currently, the only cure we have for HIV/AIDS is prevention. Had the bill gone through regular and been marked up, I was planning on offering an amendment that would permit those infected with HIV to elect, on their own volition, to be housed separate from the general population as long as the prison had the facilities. This way, those infected with HIV could be housed in safety. The HIV/AIDS pandemic is indeed a state of emergency in the African- American and Hispanic community. We must use all resources necessary to defeat this deadly enemy that continues to devastate the minority community. As Americans, we have a strong history, through science and innovation, of detecting, conquering and defeating many illnesses. We must and we will continue to fight HIV/AIDS until the battle is won. Mr. Speaker, I strongly support H.R. 1429, ``Stop AIDS in Prisons Act of 2009,'' and urge my colleagues to support it as well.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I stand here before you not only as a Member of the United States Congress, but as a woman. I fully support H. Res. 211, ``Supporting the goals and ideals of National Women's History Month'', this is an issue that I hold dear to my heart. This bill will increase awareness and knowledge of women's involvement in history. Women's history is a vital part of American history, however it is not public knowledge; mostly in part to the lack of women's history education in the schools. I thank my colleague Representative Woolsey for introducing this valuable piece of legislation. As Susan B. Anthony said ``It was we, the people; not we, the white male citizens; nor yet we, the male citizens; but we, the whole people, who formed the Union'' and ``There never will be complete equality until women themselves help to make laws and elect lawmakers.'' This national celebration and recognition of women's historic achievements began in 1980 when National Women's History Week was proclaimed by Presidential Proclamation. In 1987, this national celebration was expanded by Congressional Resolution to an entire month by declaring March as National Women's History Month. National Women's History Month provides an opportunity to educate the general public about the significant role of women in American history and contemporary society. Establishing this focal celebration has encouraged schools to introduce new curriculum, and communities to recognize women who have been pivotal in their own communities. The knowledge of women's history provides a more expansive vision of what a woman can do. This perspective can encourage girls and women to think larger and bolder and can give boys and men a fuller understanding of the female experience. Today, women account for 51% of the world's population and throughout ``woman's-kind'' we have had countless sisters whose brilliance, bravery and power changed the course of history. H. Res. 211 recognizes and honors the women and organizations in the United States that have fought for and continue to promote the teaching of women's history. While we have come a long way from the early nineteenth century, when women were considered second class citizens whose existence was limited to the interior life of the home and care of the children, we have yet to achieve equality. It is a shame that a decade into the new millennium we are still fighting for women's equality and the right to be respected for our contributions both in and out of the workplace. This bill will bring awareness to all of those women who have broken barriers and glass ceilings for the rest of us. Women such as the Honorable Speaker Pelosi, the Honorable Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Susan B. Anthony, the Honorable Barbara Jordan, Sojourner Truth, Sacagawea, Rosa Parks, Amelia Earhart, Joan of Arc, and the list could go on for miles. However, this month is not only about the well known women of history. It is also about those less renowned, such as Belva Ann Lockwood, who fought for admittance into law school. She fought to practice before the Supreme Court and even ran two full campaigns to run for President of the United States, although she could not vote. Texas is home to a multitude of women. The women of Texas are strong, and National Women's History Month is the perfect time to celebrate the diverse population of women that reside in the great state of Texas. I am a proud Texan, and today, I want to bring attention to several women from Texas who deserve recognition and praise for their influence in the continuing fight for women's equality. One of my personal heroes is Barbara Jordan. Barbara Jordan was born in the Fifth Ward of Houston to a Baptist minister and a domestic worker. She grew up a native Houstonian, attended Houston public school, and attended Texas Southern University in Houston. In 1966, Barbara Jordan was elected as State Senator becoming the first woman to serve since 1883. Her political career continued to grow when she was elected to Federal Representative in 1972. As a Congresswoman, Barbara Jordan sponsored the cause of the poor, black, and disadvantaged people. She is truly a strong woman from Texas that is more than deserving of our recognition during National Women's History Month. A native Texan, Ann Richards was politically motivated from a young age. Through the 1950s and 60s, she volunteered on several Democratic Governor campaigns, and by 1976, she won her first political position as a Commissioner in Travis County. Beginning in 1982, she became the first woman elected to statewide office in 50 years as state Treasurer, and in 1990, a Democrat turned the typically red state of Texas blue. Ann Richards worked hard to champion for all of her constituents while she was in office and continued this fight even after she was out of office. In 2006, Ms. Richards passed away, but she will always be remembered for her kind heart and determined demeanor. She was an advocate for women everywhere. I want to make sure that her Texas memory is not forgotten. Alongside Barbara Jordan and Ann Richards there are many Texas women that have championed to represent strong, Texas women. Throughout Texas, there are women that have paved their individual paths independently and with dignity. Texas Railroad Commissioner Lena Guerrero was also a Hispanic legend in Texas. She was the youngest ever President of the Young Democrats of Texas at 21 years of age and was elected as a state representative in 1984. She was the first Hispanic and first woman on the Texas Railroad commission. Tragically, Lena met her demise at the age of 50. However, in her short time, Lena was someone to be admired and who made many contributions as a Texas citizen. Dr. Polly Turner, an Associate Professor of Health Administration at Texas Southern University is another outstanding woman I would like to direct attention to. In 2007, she was awarded the Outstanding Texan Honoree in Education by State Representative Garnet Coleman. Vanessa Diane Gilmore is a judge on the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas. She was appointed to this position by President Clinton in 1994. At that time, she was the youngest sitting federal judge in the United States. She was also the first graduate of the University of Houston to be appointed to the federal bench. Hazel Hainsworth Young is another Texan deserving of our respect. In 1926, Hazel Young was named the first Latin teacher at the brand-new Jack Yates High School. In 2008, HISD honored Ms. Young and her contributions as a teacher at her 103rd birthday. I would also like to direct attention to Faye B. Bryant, the 21st International President of Alpha Kappa Alpha (AKA) Sorority, Inc. Faye B. Bryant was born in Houston in 1957. Since then, Ms. Bryant has worked as a teacher and administrator of Houston Independent School District (HISD). Along with her education focus, she stayed a strong supporter of her sorority, and as President of AKA, she has reached out to other nations and developed programs such as the African Village Development Program. Mattelia B. Grays, the 18th International President of AKA, was also a native born Houstonian. After her education in Michigan and California, Ms. Grays returned to Houston to teach for public schools. Under her leadership the Rodgers Educational Enrichment Center was named one of ``One of Six Super Schools'' by Texas Monthly magazine. Like Ms. Bryant, Ms. Grays held positions of influence in HISD and championed for children's rights. Aside the plethora of minority women that have made a name and established a foothold in the state of Texas, there are Caucasian women such as Patricia Lykos who is currently the District Attorney of Harris County. A graduate of the University of Houston and South Texas College of Law, Patricia has dedicated her career to the administration of justice. In 1980, she was the first Republican elected to the Harrison County criminal court bench. Melissa Noriega is also a woman to be admired. She is a 27 year veteran of the HISD, a community activist, and a former member of the Texas House of representatives. Melissa's actions demonstrate her belief in public service and her ability to set aside her personal agendas for the greater good. Furthermore, Rosanna Osterman was a Texas pioneer, American Civil War nurse and philanthropist. She lived in Galveston, and during the 1853 yellow fever epidemic, she erected a temporary hospital on her family premises in order to nurse the sick and the dying. Osterman also chose to stay in Galveston during the civil war and opened her home as a hospital, first to Union soldiers, then to Confederate soldiers. I am proud to stand here today as a female member of Congress and champion for the unending fights for the rights and equality of women, and I am proud that I am able to bring recognition to these truly amazing women from Texas. Women have a distinct place in American history as well as world history. Women had to fight uphill battles in order to free themselves from their cages. For example, women had to prove that intense physical or intellectual activity would not in fact be injurious to the ``delicate'' female biology, and to be seen as individuals and not property and objects of beauty. As Susan B. Anthony said ``It was we, the people; not we, the white male citizens; nor yet we, the male citizens; but we, the whole people, who formed the Union'' and ``There never will be complete equality until women themselves help to make laws and elect lawmakers''. Women face discrimination and prejudice everyday, yet women all over the world continue to work hard to make a difference--to alter their lives and the lives of others. I believe that women have always had the power to change the world and we will. I urge my colleagues to support this important resolution.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise to celebrate and congratulate my constituents' Jack Yates High School basketball team that won the State of Texas' championship. It is important to emphasize when young people are committed to excellence, and I want to congratulate this school for never giving up, never giving out, and never giving in, as I have heard so often from my good friend and colleague. It is important to note that this school was challenged to be closed some 3 years ago. But yet not only have they excelled academically, they excelled on the basketball court, having lost some of their star players in the last school year. Congratulations to their great coach. Congratulations to those students who were persevering. And isn't it exciting to win their first championship since the 1940s? Go Jack Yates, a great basketball team. We're excited, and we are proud of you.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Allow me to thank the gentlelady from Ohio for really taking up the very important mantle of leadership in communicating to our colleagues why we really need to be in a team effort. I was with Senator Rodney Ellis, a State senator in my State, just yesterday. We have to use time when we can, and that was Sunday. We were standing up, along with certainly many members of the State legislature and many Members here in the House, on the great need for receiving stimulus dollars and unemployment dollars in the State of Texas. $555 million is presently being rejected by this Governor of our State. And the quote that comes to mind from that State senator was that when people are hurting or unemployed or in foreclosure, they don't see Democrats or Republicans. They just see pain. And that is why I think it is important that we convey to our colleagues that their constituents don't see a Democratic or Republican Congressperson. They just see a major dilemma from which they are wondering how they can get out. So this evening, I would like to emphasize something that seems to have been lost, and that is that this ongoing foreclosure crisis was percolating way before the inauguration of our present President. And in fact, I'm reading from a document that was dated 2006, and it says ``foreclosures up 72 percent from last year.'' That would have been 2005. That was the last administration. The previous administration was a Republican administration. But I imagine that this number, 72 percent, was not coded according to Democrat or Republican homeowners. But it did say that it was up 72 percent. And it goes on to say that ``national foreclosure filings continued to climb in the first 3 months of 2006, evidence that more U.S. homeowners are struggling to stay current on their monthly mortgage payments.'' Why, then, wasn't it addressed by the administration during that time? That is 2006, ``a total of 323,102 properties nationwide entered some stage of foreclosure in the first quarter of 2006.'' Again, it mentions ``a 72 percent year-over-year increase from the first quarter of 2005 and a 38 percent increase from the previous quarter.'' It specifically talks about the fact that Texas, Florida and California report the most foreclosures. Now we are a prosperous State, or at least we are defined as such. It must be because we have government officials suggesting that we don't need unemployment dollars. Texas reported the most first-quarter foreclosures of any State with 40,236, and Florida reported the second most with 29,636, and California was a close third with 29,537 properties entering some stage of foreclosure in the first quarter, again, this is 2006. And let me just say I do know this is 2009. I think it is important to note that we did not create this crisis. The election of 2008 didn't all of a sudden make it where people are foreclosing. This has been happening. And what we are trying to do is to emphasize that we have to act now. That is why the President is so interested, the administration is so interested in making sure that there is a moratorium, that there is $75 billion that is being set aside, something that we debated when we were working with the previous administration that you can't give then-Secretary of the Treasury a carte blanche utilization of then the $350 billion. So many of us argued vehemently about that. Let me say to my good friend from Ohio that these numbers are not ignoring the fact of how difficult it has been in the Midwest and in Ohio in particular. Again, this was emphasizing the high numbers of big States. But certainly it has Ohio. And it mentions, of course, that you, too, were in the midst of huge foreclosures. In 2006 it looks like you were in the 8,000, 9,000. You kept going up. In February you had 9,000. So you were going up, and the other States were going up as well, which means that this is not an issue for small States, big States, or middle States. So I come to the floor really to suggest that we are in a crisis that has to be acted upon. That is why so many of us rallied around the Helping Homes legislation that is not a giveaway. It is not a refuge for deadbeats and people who can't handle their finances. It is really, as I indicate on the floor of the House, the bankruptcy provision is the little guy's helping hand, because we bailed out every large entity that we could possibly bail out. Just give the roll call of the big banks, the big investment houses, the big AIGs. We have bailed them out. When I got on the floor to debate this bankruptcy provision, which we have been trying for a number of years, it would have been helpful if the previous administration had allowed this to go forward in 2006 with these high numbers. And then we could have had individual, responsible families who simply wanted to get time, that is what the bankruptcy does. Nobody goes to the bankruptcy court and says ``take my house.'' We are trying to keep them from going through that humiliating experience of seeing your house auctioned off. And all of us have seen the video on television where we see families sit there with tears in their eyes. Yes, some people benefit by maybe being able to buy a house. But mostly the people with tears in their eyes, some hoping they could buy it back, others watching their house peter away in an auction process. The Helping Homes that I know my colleague voted on and understood how important it was as a lawyer and former mayor and understands about the tax base that just deteriorates when we lose our home, this just allows the homeowner to go into the courthouse with a trained bankruptcy judge who is not prone to go lightly on people who are frivolously coming in masquerading themselves, never paid a bill in their life, but it allows them, just like you've allowed the big corporations that have gone into bankruptcy to be able to reorder. And so, it is truly important to ensure, to help the little person, that this bankruptcy bill that has been passed by the House and the Senate, as I understand it, it may be that we move this bill along that will allow the cramdown that everybody talked about, you're going to disadvantage the lender. No, you're not. Because there are now different provisions that puts in that any value that comes through the sale of that house goes back to the lender, there are protections about the cramdown, there are notices that have to be given so that maybe you can modify the loan without going into bankruptcy. And if any lender is smart, they will do that. But at the bottom line, this bankruptcy provision helps hardworking Americans wherever they live to save their house with dignity. Mr. and Mrs. Jackson-Lee, Mr. and Mrs. Lee, Mr. and Mrs. Fudge, Mr. and Mrs. Jones, Mr. and Mrs. Smith, Mr. and Mrs. Gonzalez can go in and fix that problem through the courts and save the house for them and their four children or two children. In USA Today, there was an article that you, as a former mayor, would understand, the dumbing down of the amount of money that is going to school districts because we were reaching a crisis of how many homes were being foreclosed and seeing the tax base just dwindle away, in fact, I would say, go rapidly down a fast moving tube. So it is a ripple effect of not only destroying neighborhoods, which is why these neighborhood stabilization moneys in the stimulus package are crucial, but also destroying obviously paramount families, lives, and then the ability to pay for the education of your children, and then, of course, the ultimate dump of a whole town, whole city, a whole hamlet, village, being just blocks and blocks of foreclosed homes. So I think it is important that we begin to stand on the floor of the House to support America's families. And I can't help but as I speak with you this evening and to my colleagues, I just have to hold this up because it certainly shows the strength of our President, it says, this is a headline, Obama berates AIG and vows to try and block bonuses. Well, we know there are some legal issues that have been represented to us that provides a problem, but I will just simply say that having practiced in the courts, it is a shame that we couldn't just say, ``sue me,'' which would have just had those individuals who thought that they were owed the bonus to be able to go into the courthouse and try to get the money. I think I would like to commend our Speaker who has indicated that these moneys should then be paid back now by AIG. If you figured that you couldn't have any other out, you couldn't stand the impact of a lawsuit for people who were getting these huge bonuses, $160 billion plus, then why don't you go ahead and put on the requirement that they should pay the taxpayers back. But I use this as an example that we have to be able to help these hardworking taxpayers who themselves have suffered because we have not been able to provide the relief. I just want to add that new home sales have fallen by about 50 percent. One in six homeowners owes more on a mortgage than the home is worth which raises the possibility of default. Home values have fallen nationwide from an average of 19 percent from their peak in 2006, and this price plunge has wiped out trillions of dollars in home equity. That is the sadness of it. Many people were going to use this for retirement, had the ability to pass on a debt-free house to their children. This was the bottom line or the first line of wealth for many Americans. We were told to buy that wonderful nest egg, buy that home that will be a nest egg. The tide of foreclosure might become self- perpetuating. The Nation could be facing a housing depression something worse than the recession. Of course, we know about the TARP bill that has helped us to move forward. But then again, we realize that there have been, certainly in the first issuance of the dollars, these major problems. And so that is why we have turned our attention, and I want to congratulate Chairman Conyers, who had been on this issue, in the previous administration we had attempted to get the language put in the TARP. And many times, Congresswoman Fudge, the Congress doesn't get the recognition. And certainly none of us are saying me, me, me or I, I, I. And we also know that we are in a business that we are responsible enough to take criticism. But they need to know that we were fighting the Judiciary Committee to get the bankruptcy language into the TARP legislation a way long time ago, recognizing the importance. But it would not, could not be moved forward because of opposition from the then-White House. And so it is important to note tonight that I am very glad that you had this particular Special Order so that we could provide the basis of the work that we have done and also ask our colleagues to encourage all of their constituents to seek foreclosure modification in their loan, to not sit by silently, that the banks are now under a burden to not foreclose but to be able to talk to you about loan modification. Everyone should seek loan modification now. Do not suffer in silence, because we realize that it is not only a predatory lending issue which has occurred, but there are people who have regular loans that may be finding themselves in difficulty and have the right for loan modification. We do want to say that we want to get out of this issue that whenever we see certain economic or certain neighborhoods that that particular lendee is a prime target for subprime mortgages. Now some people have indicated to me that subprime mortgages have been used sometimes favorably to allow someone with some challenges. But certainly subprime should not equate to predatory. And there has been predatory lending going on. And so these subprimes have equated to that. And I want the bankers to be able to be more creative than to see certain neighborhoods, certain, if you will, ethnicities or racial groups, and the only thing you can give them is a subprime when their particular portfolio suggests that they are equal or able to take on any regular loan. And what happened is they put more people in subprime based on ethnicity and race. So I wanted to add as I draw to a close, and I welcome your participating in this legislation that I intend to drop, and that is to ensure that individuals who are in mortgage foreclosure because of subprime and predatory lending will not have that foreclosure on their credit score. You know what happens with credit scoring. When you go into a bank and they pull that score up, hardworking families suffer because of the credit score. Probably they were thrown into the subprime and predatory markets because of that. So the language says in particular that a foreclosure on a subprime mortgage of a consumer may not be taken into account by any person in preparing or calculating the credit score as defined in subsection F(2) for or with respect to the consumer. Subprime defined. The term ``subprime mortgage'' means any consumer credit transaction secured by the principal dwelling of this consumer that bears or otherwise meets the terms and characteristics of such a transaction that the board has defined as subprime mortgage. So if you have been a victim of predatory lending, we will add that. And you have made every effort through loan modification or you have been caught up in this whirl of confusion, then we don't want to impact your credit score even more, make it worse, if you will, by adding this foreclosure to you; and, therefore, making it even more impossible for you to then move into a home or buy another home or to transition to get your life in order. I want our colleagues to realize that this is going to be an ongoing concern. And the fact that it is an ongoing concern means we have to work with our local communities. That is why I have supported the TARP funding to be as responsive to community, regional and private banks as they are to the big banks. I think it is important that we invest in the smaller banks by making sure that they get TARP funds. And I think it is enormously important for the President's mission that says that we should in fact for every dollar lent to these banks, they must lend it out, and we must lend it not only to those who are attempting to modify their loans, but to the new generation of homeowners. Let us not kill off the incentive for others to buy homes, co-ops, condominiums, brownstones, the two stories, the split levels, if you will, two families in one home scenario, we should not take away the American dream of a house. I believe that if we can watch AIG with some sort of cavalier attitude, giving $160 million in bonuses and not wanting to issue a report on where the moneys went, we can certainly be helpful to those who are struggling. I would like to engage the gentlelady in a conversation, particularly as she comes from Ohio, and just get a sense of the impact that comes about when homes are foreclosed. With your experience as a former mayor and how important those local resources are, what happens to a community when there are massive foreclosures and that income doesn't come in any more?

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I think it is important for people to hear stories from all over the country. I think one of the salient points that you have made is how it puts people on the street and how it clogs the courts. Different from the bankruptcy proceedings which allows people to stay in their homes, the foreclosure proceeding is so long and protracted, most people will be abandoning doing their home before it concludes. I thank the gentlelady from Ohio for being able to both express some of the outrage and pain. And this was not created under this administration. We are trying to be the problem solvers, and it would have just been great if we had looked at this issue from the administration's perspective in 2006 and before. We might then have been able to put our finger in the dike and help those who were on the verge of going over the cliff. But now we are holding an enormous burden, and I guess the parting words are let's look at the people who are rolling up their sleeves. The media pundits who can criticize rain, if you will. If it is raining, they can criticize that. But people who are trying to build banks backs and make them responsive to our neighborhoods and school districts, let's look at the Federal legislation trying to help people modify their loans and keep them off the streets and save families and school districts. Why don't we listen to that explanation, which I am sure will give us a better understanding than national pundits who make their money off of worrying about whether it is raining and therefore if it is, that gives them a mouthful to criticize. I would rather stand with those who are trying to stand with the American people, and I believe that is what your Special Order has been about tonight. I thank you for giving me this opportunity. Mr. Speaker, home foreclosures are at an all-time high and they will increase as the recession continues. In 2006, there were 1.2 million foreclosures in the United States, representing an increase of 42 percent over the prior year. During 2007 through 2008, mortgage foreclosures were estimated to result in a whopping $400 billion worth of defaults and $100 billion in losses to investors in mortgage securities. This means that one per 62 American households is currently approaching levels not seen since the Depression. The current economic crisis and the foreclosure blight has affected new home sales and depressed home value generally. New home sales have fallen by about 50 percent. One in six homeowners owes more on a mortgage than the home is worth which raises the possibility of default. Home values have fallen nationwide from an average of 19 percent from their peak in 2006, and this price plunge has wiped out trillions of dollars in home equity. The tide of foreclosure might become self-perpetuating. The nation could be facing a housing depression--something far worse than a recession. Obviously, there are substantial societal and economic costs of home foreclosures that adversely impact American families, their neighborhoods, communities and municipalities. A single foreclosure could impose direct costs on local government agencies totaling more than $34,000. I am glad that recently we have seen legislation on the floor the United States House of Representatives. I have long championed in the first TARP bill that was introduced and signed late last Congress, that language be included to specifically address the issue of mortgage foreclosures. I had asked that $100 billion be set aside to address that issue. Now, my idea has been vindicated as the TARP today has included language and we here today are continuing to engage in the dialogue to provide monies to those in mortgage foreclosure. I have also asked for modification of homeowners' existing loans to avoid mortgage foreclosure. I believe that the rules governing these loans should be relaxed. These are indeed tough economic times that require tough measures. Because of the pervasive home foreclosures, federal legislation is necessary to curb the fall out from the subprime mortgage crisis. For consumers facing a foreclosure sale who want to retain their homes, Chapter 13 of the Bankruptcy Code provides some modicum of protection. The Supreme Court has held that the exception to a Chapter 13's ability to modify the rights of creditors applies even if the mortgage is under-secured. Thus, if a Chapter 13 debtor owes $300,000 on a mortgage for a home that is worth less than $200,000, he or she must repay the entire amount in order to keep his or her home, even though the maximum that the mortgage would receive upon foreclosure is the home's value, i.e., $200,000, less the costs of foreclosure. I have long championed the rights of homeowners, especially those facing mortgage foreclosure. I have worked with the Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee to include language that would relax the bankruptcy provisions to allow those facing mortgage foreclosure to restructure their debt to avoid foreclosure. Because I have long championed the rights of homeowners facing mortgage foreclose in the recent TARP bill and before the Judiciary Committee, I have worked with Chairman Conyers and his staff to add language in the Helping Americans Save Their Homes bill that would help Americans stay in their homes that would make the bill stronger and that would help more Americans. Specifically, I worked with Chairman Conyers to ensure that section 109(h) of the Bankruptcy Code would be amended to waive the mandatory requirement, under current law, that a debtor receive credit counseling prior to filing for bankruptcy relief. Under the amended language there is now a waiver that will apply where the debtor submits to the court a certification that the debtor has received notice that the holder of a claim secured by the debtor's principal residence may commence a foreclosure proceeding against such residence. This is important because it affords the debtor the maximum relief without having to undergo a slow credit counseling process. This will help prevent the debtors credit situation from worsening, potentially spiraling out of control, and result in the eventual loss of his or her home. The recent bill before Congress, Helping Homeowners Save Their Home Act, relaxes certain Bankruptcy requirements under Chapter 13 so that the debtor can modify the terms of the mortgage secured by his or her primary residence. This is an idea that I have long championed in the TARP legislation--the ability of debtors to modify their existing primary mortgages. The bill allows for a modification of the mortgage for a period of up to 40 years. Such modification cannot occur if the debtor fails to certify that it contacted the creditor before filing for bankruptcy. In this way, the language in the bill allows for the creditor to demonstrate that it undertook its ``last clear'' chance to work out the restructuring of the debt with its creditor before filing bankruptcy. Importantly, the Act amends the bankruptcy code to provide that a debtor, the debtor's property, and property of the bankruptcy estate are not liable for fees and costs incurred while the Chapter 13 case is pending and that arises from a claim for debt secured by the debtor's principal residence. Lastly, I worked to get language in the Helping Home Owners Save Their Homes Act that would allow the debtors and creditors to negotiate before a declaration of bankruptcy is made. I made sure that the bill addressed present situations at the time of enactment where homeowners are in the process of mortgage foreclosure. This was done with a view toward consistency predictability and a hope that things will improve.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE

Ms. JACKSON-LEE. Mr. Speaker, I think it is very important as we begin to build the building blocks of fixing this economy that maybe we should give a greater understanding of what the stimulus dollars are to be utilized for. There are Congresspersons and Senators and Governors and State legislators and others, but the President's intent, the administration's intent is these dollars are to be in the hands of taxpayers. The good news for those who have been criticizing is the Dow went up this week, and the Governors of the Nation were in Washington to get their instructions on how to make sure that these grants and these moneys are transparent, to make sure that grants are competitive and, yes, that the dollars are in the hands of small businesses; of primary and secondary schools; of hospitals; of municipal governments; of putting shovel in the ground, if you will, fixing utilities, fixing roads. That should be the message and the work of those of us who serve in the United States Congress. It's my intent to be at home educating those of my constituents on how to use this money effectively. The only way that they will be successful is if they can count jobs one at a time. That's what the President wants. That's what we are doing. And those who are criticizing need to look at the people who are now working.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chair, I rise today with great enthusiasm for H.R. 1262, the ``Water Quality Investment Act of 2009'', which renews the Federal commitment to addressing our nation's substantial needs for wastewater infrastructure by investing $18.7 billion over five years in wastewater infrastructure and other efforts to improve water quality. H.R. 1262 increases investment in wastewater infrastructure, reduces the cost of constructing and maintaining that infrastructure, and promotes energy- and water-efficiency improvements to publicly owned treatment works to reduce the potential long-term operation and maintenance costs of the facility. Mr. Chair, from my perch as Chairwoman of the Subcommittee on Transportation and Infrastructure Protection I have promoted shoring up our water infrastructure. Indeed, in the last Congress I introduced Chemical Facility Security Improvement Act of 2007, which prohibits federal funds from being used by the Secretary of Homeland Security to approve a site security plan for a chemical facility unless the facility meets or exceeds security standards and requirements to protect it against terrorist acts established by the state or local government for the area where it is located. Although much progress has been made in achieving the ambitious goals that Congress established more than 35 years ago to restore and maintain the physical, chemical, and biological integrity of the nation's waters, long-standing problems persist, and new problems have emerged. Water quality problems are diverse, ranging from pollution runoff from farms and ranches, city streets, and other diffuse or ``nonpoint'' sources, to ``point'' source discharges of metals and organic and inorganic toxic substances from factories and sewage treatment plants. And many of these problems need funding--and frankly cannot wait. The quality of our water supply is at stake. My bill also amended the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2007 to: (1) repeal a provision prohibiting the Secretary from disapproving a site security plan based on the presence or absence of a particular security measure; (2) require vulnerability assessments and site security plans to be treated as sensitive security information; and (3) repeal a provision limiting to the Secretary any right of action against a chemical facility owner or operator to enforce security measures. The connection is that water facilities use chemicals to ensure safety and eliminate harmful elements. The main law that deals with polluting activity in the nation's streams, lakes, estuaries, and coastal waters is the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, commonly known as the Clean Water Act, or CWA. It consists of two major parts: regulatory provisions that impose progressively more stringent requirements on industries and cities to abate pollution and meet the statutory goal of zero discharge of pollutants; and provisions that authorize federal financial assistance for municipal wastewater treatment plant construction. Both parts are supported by research activities, plus permit and enforcement provisions. Programs at the federal level are administered by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA); state and local governments have major responsibilities to implement CWA programs through standard-setting, permitting, and enforcement. The water quality restoration objective declared in the 1972 act was accompanied by statutory goals to eliminate the discharge of pollutants into navigable waters by 1985 and to attain, wherever possible, waters deemed ``fishable and swimmable'' by 1983. Although those goals have not been fully achieved, considerable progress has been made, especially in controlling conventional pollutants (suspended solids, bacteria, and oxygen- consuming materials) discharged by industries and sewage treatment plants. I have noted that progress has been mixed in controlling discharges of toxic pollutants (heavy metals, inorganic and organic chemicals), which are more numerous and can harm human health and the environment even when present in very small amounts--at the parts-per-billion level. Moreover, efforts to control pollution from diffuse sources, termed nonpoint source pollution (rainfall runoff from urban, suburban, and agricultural areas, for example), are more recent, given the earlier emphasis on ``point source'' pollution (discharges from industrial and municipal wastewater treatment plants). Overall, data reported by EPA and states indicate that 45% of river and stream miles assessed by states and 47% of assessed lake acres do not meet applicable water quality standards and are impaired for one or more desired uses. In 2006 EPA issued an assessment of streams and small rivers and reported that 67% of U.S. stream miles are in poor or fair condition and that nutrients and streambed sediments have the largest adverse impact on the biological condition of these waters. Approximately 95,000 lakes and 544,000 river miles in the United States are under fish-consumption advisories (including 100% of the Great Lakes and their connecting waters), due to chemical contaminants in lakes, rivers, and coastal waters, and one-third of shellfishing beds are closed or restricted, due to toxic pollutant contamination. Mercury is a contaminant of growing concern--as of 2003, 45 states had issued partial or statewide fish or shellfish consumption advisories because of elevated mercury levels. The last major amendments to the law were the Water Quality Act of 1987. These amendments culminated six arduous years of congressional efforts to extend and revise the act and were the most comprehensive amendments since 1972. Authorizations of appropriations for some programs provided in P.L. 100-4, such as general grant assistance to states, research, and general EPA support authorized in that law, expired in FY1990 and FY1991. Authorizations for wastewater treatment funding expired in FY1994. None of these programs has lapsed, however, as Congress has continued to appropriate funds to implement them. EPA, states, industry, and other citizens continue to implement the 1987 legislation, including meeting the numerous requirements and deadlines in it. The Clean Water Act has been viewed as one of the most successful environmental laws in terms of achieving its statutory goals, which have been widely supported by the public, but lately some have questioned whether additional actions to achieve further benefits are worth the costs. Criticism has come from industry, which has been the longstanding focus of the act's regulatory programs and often opposes imposition of new stringent and costly requirements. Criticism also has come from developers and property rights groups who contend that federal regulations (particularly the act's wetlands permit program) are a costly intrusion on private land-use decisions. States and cities have traditionally supported water quality programs and federal funding to assist them in carrying out the law, but many have opposed CWA measures that they fear might impose new unfunded mandates. Many environmental groups believe that further fine-tuning is needed to maintain progress achieved to date and to address remaining water quality problems. I am committed to ensuring that I continue to do my part as the Chairwoman of the House Homeland Security Subcommittee on Transportation and Infrastructure Protection.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H. Con. Res. 38, ``Authorizing the use of the Capitol Grounds for the National Peace Officers' Memorial Service'', introduced by Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton, of the District of Columbia. I would also like to thank Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton for her leadership on this. Everyday, men and women from all over the nation put their lives on the line to protect the freedoms that we all enjoy. They have taken an oath to serve and protect us from dangers both seen and unseen, and do so with distinction and great diligence. This very brave group of people put aside all fears and inhibitions, risking their health, well- being, and comfort of their families to serve in a capacity that few desire. I believe it to be a worthy honor to have the Capitol grounds used for the memorial services. Many believe that police officers have the most stress filled jobs. There's no question that police officers experience stressful situations with more frequency than most people. While municipals hire and pay individual policemen, they seldom consider that the entire family endures the pains of the job, many of which have a deleterious affect on the family. The job and family simultaneously creates an environment that can be managed by few. Given the many sacrifices officers make during their lives for our rights and privileges, the burdens on the family should be few and minimized. Using the Capitol grounds for memorial services offers appreciation to not only the officer, but to the entire family, which they so graciously deserve. Washington, DC, our nation's capital, is filled with memorials and museums that help us to remember the countless sacrifices that men and women have made for the freedoms of our great nation. We are a nation who knows the importance of erecting these symbols to help us remember those who fought and died for the greater good. The World War II Memorial honors the 16 million who served in the armed forces of the U.S., the more than 400,000 who died, and all who supported the war effort from home. Symbolic of the defining event of the 20th Century, the memorial is a monument to the spirit, sacrifice, and commitment of the American people. The Veteran's Memorial, which is a gleaming black granite wall etched with the names of the 60,000 soldiers who died in Vietnam or remain missing in action. While it does nothing to diminish the tears of families who visit year after year; however, it permanently helps them recognize that their dying was not in vain and that the government of the United States remembers their sacrifice. There are veterans and other exceptional individuals buried at Arlington National Cemetery from the Revolutionary War to the present military action in Iraq and Afghanistan. Since May of 1864, Arlington has been a fully operational National Cemetery. Today, the cemetery performs services for military casualties from the Iraqi and Afghanistan war fronts, as well as the aging World War II veterans. This country has a long history of recognizing soldiers who have fallen fighting foreign threats. This country must also recognize those who fall fighting domestic threats. Therefore, I stand in support of H. Con. Res. 38, ``Authorizing the use of the Capitol Grounds for the National Peace Officers' Memorial Service.''

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H. Res. 226, recognizing the Tibetan People on the anniversary of the Dalai Lama's exile. As a member of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs I am pleased to join my colleague Rush Holt in his sponsorship of this important resolution. As we move to engage the government in Beijing I would only hope that the United States' foreign policy once again becomes a policy of peace and goodwill and not a harbinger to international hostilities. It is no accident that the first foreign trip of our new Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, was to Asia. China is integral to the re- establishment of American foreign policy in Asia. As we engage the Chinese it is important that we address human rights issues as well. The Dalai Lama has emerged on the international scene as a force for human rights around the world. He has exhibited a grace and sense of compassion throughout the strife that has visited his homeland. For more than 2,000 years Tibet maintained a sovereign national identity distinct from the national identity of China. In 1949, however, Chinese troops invaded and occupied Tibet and have remained ever since. According to the State Department and numerous international human rights organizations, the Chinese government continues to commit widespread and well-documented human rights abuses in both China and Tibet. China also has yet to demonstrate its willingness to abide by internationally accepted norms of freedom of belief, expression, and association by repealing or amending laws and decrees that restrict those freedoms. We urge the Chinese government to seek conciliation with its many different groups, as opposed to employing further government restrictions. In addition, while China is a signatory to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the United Nations Convention Relating to Refugees, and the United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Forms of Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, in practice, the Chinese government has often not followed the treaties. March 10th marks the 50th anniversary of an uprising against Chinese rule by the Tibetan people--an uprising that forced the 14th Dalai Lama into exile in India. On the anniversary last year, Tibetan Buddhist monks and nuns in and around Lhasa were blocked by Chinese authorities from staging demonstrations and were met with force by the Chinese authorities. Protests then spread inside the Tibet Autonomous Region and other Tibetan areas of China. Over the years, talks between envoys of the Dalai Lama and representatives of the Chinese government have failed to achieve any concrete and substantive results. This resolution recognizes the Tibetan people for their perseverance and endurance in face of hardship and adversity in Tibet and for creating a vibrant and democratic community in exile that sustains the Tibetan identity. The measure recognizes the government and people of India for their generosity toward the Tibetan refugee population for the last 50 years. It calls upon the Chinese government to respond to the Dalai Lama's initiatives to find a lasting solution to the Tibetan issue, cease its repression of the Tibetan people, and to lift immediately the policies imposed on Tibetans, including patriotic education campaigns, detention and abuses of those freely expressing political views or relaying news about local conditions, and limitations on travel and communications. Finally, Mr. Speaker, the resolution calls upon the administration to recommit to a sustained effort consistent with the Tibetan Policy Act of 2002, that employs diplomatic, programmatic, and multilateral resources to press the Chinese government to respect the Tibetans' identity and the human rights of the Tibetan people. Mr. Speaker, we must continue to engage the government in Beijing at all levels and Tibet must be at the top of the list. Again, I wish to thank my colleagues for their work on this matter.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Res. 194, ``Supporting the goals of International Women's Day''. As a member of the Congressional Caucus for Women's Issues this resolution is very important to me and I thank my colleague Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky for introducing this resolution. H. Res. 194 recognizes and honors the women who have fought and continue to struggle for equality. There are over 3,000,000,000 women in the world, representing 51 percent of the world's population and yet, women remain vastly underrepresented in national and local assemblies, face political and economic obstacles, struggle for basic rights, face the threat of discrimination, and are targets of violence all over the world. Despite tremendous gains over the past 20 years women still have great strides to make. How is it that women work \2/3\ of the world's working hours, produce half of the world's food, yet earn only 1 percent of the world's income and own less than 1 percent of the world's property? Today, although women have reached great heights, women are still earning less than their male counterparts in the workforce. Two-thirds of illiterate individuals worldwide are women which is quite distressing. Throughout the world, women are victims of violence and disease. Women have become victims of illegal human trafficking for the purpose of forced labor, domestic servitude, and/or sexual exploitation. We must pledge to stop this violence against women. Domestic violence causes more deaths and disability among women between the ages of 15 and 44 than cancer, malaria, traffic accidents, and war. Worldwide, at least 1 out of every 3 women and girls have been beaten in her lifetime and at least 1 out of every 6 women and girls in the United States has been sexually abused in her lifetime. Furthermore, 70 percent of the people living in poverty around the world are women and children. In addition, women account for half of all cases of HIV/AIDS worldwide. These statistics are staggering and show why this resolution must be passed. The United States House of Representatives must show a commitment to ending discrimination and violence against women and girls, to ensure their safety and welfare, and to pursue policies that guarantee their basic rights. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this extremely important resolution, H. Res. 194, ``Supporting the goals of International Women's Day''. Women's rights affect everyone, as we all have a mother.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H. Con. Res. 64, ``Urging the President to designate 2009 as the `Year of the Military Family'.'' I want to thank my colleague Congressman Ike Skelton of Missouri for introducing this resolution. No group of Americans has stood stronger and braver for our nation than those who have served in the Armed Forces. From the bitter cold winter at Valley Forge to the boiling hot Iraqi terrain, our soldiers have courageously answered when called upon, gone where ordered, and defended our nation with honor. Their noble service reminds us of our mission as a nation--to build a future worthy of their courage and your sacrifice. We celebrate, honor and remember these courageous and faithful men and women. While the nation's attention has been wholly focused on the economic crisis, Americans continue to die in wars across the globe, from Iraq to Afghanistan and beyond. The war in Iraq no longer makes headlines, but for military families it remains a daily reality, and I urge my colleagues to recognize the challenges that the families of these brave soldiers face and support this resolution in their honor. When American troops are the ones fighting abroad, it is our military families who must also suffer. They wait every day and night hoping to hear from their loved ones, praying that they are not put in harm's way, that they may come home soon. Too many families have not been so lucky, finding out the news of a loved one's death is not only emotionally traumatizing it can have long term effects for the family that may never be repaired. We must all stand as champions for our men and women fighting abroad. These soldiers who bravely reported for duty, they are our sons and our daughters, they are our fathers and mothers, they are our husbands and wives, they are our fellow Americans. There are over 26,550,000 veterans in the United States. In the 18th Congressional district of Texas alone there are more than 38,000 veterans and they make up almost ten percent of this district's civilian population over the age of 18. We remember and honor the sacrifices of our forces and their families. And we renew our national promise to fulfill our sacred obligations to those who have worn this nation's uniform. Our veterans and their families ask for nothing more. Let us fight the good fight.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 837, the ``Ronald H. Brown United States Mission to the United Nations Building''. I would like to thank my colleague Charlie Rangel for introducing this legislation. H.R. 837 moves to designate the federal building at 799 United Nations Plaza in New York as the Ronald H. Brown United States Mission to the United Nations Building. Former United States Secretary of Commerce under President Clinton, Ronald Brown, has always been a dedicated U.S servant. Born in Washington, DC, he quickly showed an interest in public service, as a young man he was a member of the African-American social and philanthropic organization. Brown also worked for the Jack and Jill foundation, an organization that works to help children to have cultural opportunities, develop leadership skills, and form social networks even in a segregated society. Having not only a passion for public service Brown had a strong desire to serve his country as well. In 1962 upon graduation of Middlebury College he enlisted in the army, where he served in Korea and Europe. Upon being discharged Brown joined the National Urban League, an organization that aims at advocating on behalf of African Americans and against racial discrimination in the United States. He would excel within the organization where he moved all the way up to Deputy Executive Director for Programs and Governmental Affairs. Following his service with the National Urban League, he immediately began fighting for another great American public servant, Edward M. Kennedy. Brown served as campaign manager for the now second most senior member of the United States Senate. After running Kennedy's successful Senate campaign, Brown began a string of political occupations that include lobbying for the law firm Patton, Boggs & Blow, Head of the Jesse Jackson convention team for the Democratic National Convention in Atlanta. Finally Brown was elected chairman of the Democratic National Committee in February of 1989. Tragically, on April 3. 1996 on an official trade mission, his plane carrying him and 34 other passengers struck a mountain while attempting a procedural landing. Ronald H. Brown was a man that dedicated his entire life to bettering the lives of others. Whether it be young African Americans in New York, fighting for the freedom of all Americans in some of the worlds most dangerous battlefields, or working day in and out to help promote and excel the careers of others whose ideals and policies he believed would better the nation. Brown's is a story that deserves to be recognized everyday. I feel designating a building in his name is the perfect way to recognize this true American public servant. This building will stand long after generations have gone and will hopefully remind all generations to come, that a dedicated spirit and a devotion to country are qualities that deserve recognition. Mr. Speaker I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 837, designating the federal building at 799 United Nations Plaza in New York as the ``Ronald H. Brown United States Mission to the United Nations Building''. To recognize a great American man who devoted his life to the betterment of his country.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE

Ms. JACKSON-LEE. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1106, ``Helping Families Save Their Homes in Bankruptcy Act of 2009.'' I would like to thank Chairman Conyers of the House Judiciary Committee and Chairman Barney Frank of the Financial Services Committee for their leadership on this issue. I also would like to thank Arthur D. Sidney of my staff who serves as my able Legislative Director. Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support this bill because it provides a viable medium for bankruptcy judges to modify the terms of mortgages held by homeowners who have little recourse but to declare bankruptcy. This bill could not have come at a more timely moment. This bill is on the floor of the House within weeks after the President's address before the Joint Session of Congress where President Obama outlined his economic plan for America and discussed the current economic situation that this country is facing. To be sure, there are many economic woes that saddle this country. The statistics are staggering. Home foreclosures are at an all-time high and they will increase as the recession continues. In 2006, there were 1.2 million foreclosures in the United States, representing an increase of 42 percent over the prior year. During 2007 through 2008, mortgage foreclosures were estimated to result in a whopping $400 billion worth of defaults and $100 billion in losses to investors in mortgage securities. This means that one per 62 American households is currently approaching levels not seen since the Depression. The current economic crisis and the foreclosure blight has affected new home sales and depressed home value generally. New home sales have fallen by about 50 percent. One in six homeowners owes more on a mortgage than the home is worth which raises the possibility of default. Home values have fallen nationwide from an average of 19 percent from their peak in 2006, and this price plunge has wiped out trillions of dollars in home equity. The tide of foreclosure might become self-perpetuating. The nation could be facing a housing depression--something far worse than a recession. Obviously, there are substantial societal and economic costs of home foreclosures that adversely impact American families, their neighborhoods, communities and municipalities. A single foreclosure could impose direct costs on local government agencies totaling more than $34,000. I am glad that this legislation is finally on the floor of the United States House of Representatives. I have long championed in the first TARP bill that was introduced and signed late last Congress, that language be included to specifically address the issue of mortgage foreclosures. I had asked that $100 billion be set aside to address that issue. Now, my idea has been vindicated as the TARP today has included language and we here today are continuing to engage in the dialogue to provide monies to those in mortgage foreclosure. I have also asked for modification of homeowners' existing loans to avoid mortgage foreclosure. I believe that the rules governing these loans should be relaxed. These are indeed tough economic times that require tough measures. Because of the pervasive home foreclosures, federal legislation is necessary to curb the fall out from the subprime mortgage crisis. For consumers facing a foreclosure sale who want to retain their homes, Chapter 13 of the Bankruptcy Code provides some modicum of protection. The Supreme Court has held that the exception to a Chapter 13's ability to modify the rights of creditors applies even if the mortgage is under-secured. Thus, if a Chapter 13 debtor owes $300,000 on a mortgage for a home that is worth less than $200,000, he or she must repay the entire amount in order to keep his or her home, even though the maximum that the mortgage would receive upon foreclosure is the home's value, i.e., $200,000, less the costs of foreclosure. Importantly, H.R. 1106 provides for a relaxation of the bankruptcy provisions and waives the mandatory requirement that a debtor must receive credit counseling prior to the filing for bankruptcy relief, under certain circumstances. The waiver applies in a Chapter 13 case where the debtor submits to the court a certification that the debtor has received notice that the holder of a claim secured by the debtor's principal residence may commence a foreclosure proceeding against such residence. This bill also prohibits claims arising from violations of consumer protection laws. Specifically, this bill amends the Bankruptcy Code to disallow a claim that is subject to any remedy for damages or rescission as a result of the claimant's failure to comply with any applicable requirement under the Truth in Lending Act or other applicable state or federal consumer protection law in effect when the noncompliance took place, notwithstanding the prior entry of a foreclosure judgment. H.R. 1106 also amends the Bankruptcy Code to permit modification of certain mortgages that are secured by the debtor's principal residence in specified respects. Lastly, the bill provides that the debtor, the debtor's property, and property of the bankruptcy estate are not liable for a fee, cost, or charge incurred while the Chapter 13 case is pending and that arises from a debt secured by the debtor's principal residence, unless the holder of the claim complies with certain requirements. I have long championed the rights of homeowners, especially those facing mortgage foreclosure. I have worked with the Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee to include language that would relax the bankruptcy provisions to allow those facing mortgage foreclosure to restructure their debt to avoid foreclosure.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, we have seen the unemployment numbers continue to climb in our Nation. We're watching the Dow tremble. But I think it is important that we understand help is on the way, that the American people are watching a process in this body and in the other body that will generate not earmarks but dollars for communities. For many people think that earmarks are moneys that we grab and put in our pocket. It is only the direction given to money already there to help the people in your community: rural Appalachia, Iowa. So in addition to this appropriations bill that is now in the other body, this Congress voted against their salary increase. And for those who don't understand that, as the debate is going on in the other body, we have already done it. We have already put forward a bill that speaks to the people's needs and makes sure that our salary increase is not there. Our leadership demanded that. So I ask the other body to get on with their work and vote for the bill.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, H. Res. 210 seeks to express the sense of the House of Representatives that providing breakfast in schools through the National School Breakfast Program has a positive impact on classroom performance. I salute my colleague, Rep. Moore from Wisconsin, in her efforts to promote the National School Breakfast Program, and to recognize the positive impact that it has on our students. I urge my colleagues to support this important resolution. It has often been said that the children are our future. As Members of Congress and adults, we must do all that we can to provide their well-being, safety, and excellence in school. A former U.S. Surgeon General once articulated, ``This is expensive stupidity . . . trying to educate children with half starved bodies.'' While educators, parents and policymakers generally agree that children need breakfast in order to learn, function and grow, the nation still has a ways to go to insure that all needy and at-risk children receive a daily school breakfast. While nearly 100,000 individual schools across the country offer a school lunch, more than 15,000 of them still do not make breakfast available to children who are in need. In some states, only 50-60% of the schools serving students lunch also provide them with a breakfast to start the day. We must endorse programs aimed to enhance the educational welfare of our children. As President Obama recently stated in his first address to a joint session of Congress, ``These education policies will open the doors of opportunity for our children. But it is up to us to ensure they walk through them.'' Beginning over twenty years ago, and continuing today, scholarly research has established that the School Breakfast Program significantly improves the cognitive abilities and learning capacities of children. Matched controlled studies, for example, indicate that low-income children who receive school breakfasts do significantly better on a variety of indicators than low-income peers who go without breakfasts. Notably, the better outcomes associated with school breakfast include both educational preparedness (attendance, energy, alertness, memory) and educational outcome measures (math scores, grades, reading ability). When a child misses even one meal, let alone experiences chronic food shortages, impairments occur whether they are lethargy and inattention, tiredness and distraction, or actual physical symptoms such as stomachaches and headaches. The research from the United States Department of Agriculture shows that feeding children breakfast in school helps to prevent these adverse outcomes. Children getting breakfast at school also are sick less often, have fewer problems associated with hunger, such as dizziness, stomachaches and ear aches, and do significantly better than their peers who do not get a school breakfast in terms of cooperation, discipline and inter-personal behaviors. Mr. Speaker, our failure to fully utilize the School Breakfast Program has substantial costs, costs that greatly reduce the return on educational investment in communities and states across the nation. Moreover, longer-term costs also are borne by young children who arrive at school unable to fully participate in the educational process due to lack of adequate nutrition. We, as Members of Congress, cannot allow for a matter such as child hunger, which we as Congress can help eradicate, to act as an impediment to the education of our children. President Obama articulated very fittingly, that ``in a global economy where the most valuable skill you can sell is your knowledge, a good education is no longer just a pathway to opportunity--it is a pre-requisite.'' Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support H. Res. 210, expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that providing breakfast in schools through the National School Breakfast Program has a positive impact on classroom performance, because the School Breakfast Program represents a key way to protect these children and to get a better return on educational investments as well.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, I am respectfully writing to you so that it is acknowledged, had I been present to vote on H. Res. 153 ``Commending the University of Southern California Trojan football team for its victory in the 2009 Rose Bowl'' my vote would have been cast in support of this resolution.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I came to the floor, Mr. Speaker, because I wanted to make sure that this was the day that the United States Congress addressed the question of responsible, hardworking Americans. I came to the floor with my BlackBerry because there's a message about one of our renowned mortgagers, Countrywide, that is in the process of evicting one of my constituents--a hardworking, long- standing, if you will, working American trying to save their home. Long message as to what has been going on in this instance and the insensitivity of the mortgager. So today is a day for being responsible. It is not a day for those who have, in essence, been irresponsible. It is a day to allow them, as every American has a right, their day in court with a judge with a fine-tooth comb who will review all of the documents and even including the responsibility of that particular petitioner to include all of the information on income, expenses and debts to the holder of the mortgage, with the second amendment including a particular clawback provision that increases the amount of money that the lender might get if the particular house was sold. In addition, I am supporting this rule, but I do look forward to the conference, which I hope that I will be a participant, because, in fact, if these individuals are victims of predatory lending, which many of them have been--meaning that they would go to a servicer who would masquerade their documents and say they can get into a house--this particular action of bankruptcy should not be part of the credit score which then dumbs down the opportunity for this individual to restore themselves, get back into the economic market, be able to get credit, be able to buy things and turn this economy.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I thank the distinguished gentleman. This is a fair and reasonable bill, along with the manager's amendment that, in fact, allows this particular homeowner, the person that is in this BlackBerry that is in the midst of an eviction having purchased a house in honesty with the lights on, putting forward the documentation but yet being subjected to that well-known mortgager, Countrywide, that gave vast numbers of, if you will, mortgages in the context that might not have been the most appropriate. Today we are allowing the courts of law, the established bankruptcy court--established statutorily and protected by the Constitution--to allow someone due process. That's all we're saying, Mr. Speaker. And all of this about irresponsible persons offends me because there are thousands, and now millions, of families who are simply trying to say, Keep the tax base for my struggling city, allow my neighbors to not have their homes depreciated because I have had the unfortunate mistake of being misrepresented to. Some of these people are still working. I close by saying 3,500 people are in line for a job. Today is the little person's opportunity. Mr. Speaker, thank you for your leadership on this very important question. Chairman Conyers and Chairman Frank, I would like to also thank you for your leadership. Lastly, I would like to thank my able Legislative Director, Arthur Sidney, for his hard work on this issue. The bill before us today is very important and will help Americans during this difficult economic time. As you know, home foreclosures are at an all-time high and they are poised to accelerate as the recession deepens. In 2006, there were 1.2 million foreclosures in the United States, representing an increase of 42 percent over the prior year. During 2007 through 2008, mortgage foreclosures were estimated to result in a whopping $400 billion worth of defaults and $100 billion in losses to investors in mortgage securities. During this time, debtors and average homeowners found themselves in the midst of a home mortgage foreclosure crisis of unprecedented levels. Many of the mortgage foreclosures were the result of subprime lending practices. Subprime lending did not always have a bad name; however, within the last five to seven years, unscrupulous lenders have preyed upon buyers in a predatory fashion. The amendment that I offered before the Rules Committee was intended to address this issue.Specifically, my amendment would preclude a foreclosure and bankruptcy that resulted from subprime and predatory lending from being included in the determination of a debtor's creditor score. Certainly, a debtor's declaration of foreclosure or bankruptcy has a deleterious effect on one's credit score. This makes a bad situation, worse. If a debtor has poor credit to begin with and is forced to declare bankruptcy or is forced into foreclosure, this combination would make it almost impossible for a debtor to secure credit in the future. A lowered credit score results in a downward spiral for the debtor and ultimately leads to an economic quagmire for the debtor.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of this bill reauthorizing two very important programs, the Non-Minister Religious Worker Program and the Program for Doctors Serving in Underserved Areas Program. I urge my colleagues to support this important bill that reauthorizes these much needed and much utilized programs. ``The Special Immigrant Non-Minister Religious Worker Visa Program.'' The participants under this program have come under closer scrutiny as investigations have determined that the participants were engaging in fraud. The religious worker visa program allows U.S. religious denominations to fill critical religious worker positions for which there are no qualified candidates in the U.S. with qualified religious workers abroad. The program provides for two types of visas. The one is a special immigrant visa, which allows qualified religious workers to immigrate to the U.S. permanently and later become citizens if they so choose and meet the qualification. The other is the non-immigrant visa, which allows qualified religious workers to enter temporarily and perform services in the U.S. for a proscribed period. Both of these visas may be granted to both ministers and non-minister religious workers. This bill extends the program but does not provide for it to be in place permanently. I think that this bill is much needed and I urge my colleagues to support it. The second program extended under this bill is the special program for doctors serving underserved communities. The Immigration and Nationality Act allows for foreign doctors to train in the United States under the ``J-1'' visa program, otherwise known as non- immigrants in the ``Exchange Visitor Program.'' This Exchange Visitor Program seeks to promote peaceful relations and mutual understanding with other countries through educational and cultural exchange programs. Accordingly, many exchange visitors, including doctors in training, are subject to a requirement that they must return to their home country to share with their countrymen the knowledge, experience, and impressions gained during their stay in the United States. Unless USCIS approves a waiver of this requirement in those cases, the exchange visitors must depart from the United States and live in their home country for two years before they are allowed to apply for an immigrant visa, permanent residence, or a new nonimmigrant status. A waiver of the two year foreign residency requirement is available for doctors who have trained in the United States under the J-1 visa if a state or an interested federal agency sponsors the physician exchange visitor to work in a health manpower shortage area within the state for 3 years as a non-immigrant in H-1B status (temporary worker in specialty occupation). The Secretary of Health and Human Services determines which areas have a health manpower shortage. This bill would extend this waiver to ensure that areas in the United States with a shortage of doctors have an option to hire a doctor with a J-1 visa for three years where there is no other doctor available to fill the job. As the immigrant doctors are getting a benefit so too should underserved Americans. In the underlying bill, I am pleased that my language was included. Specifically my language ensured that the underserved would indeed be served. My language provided:

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I thank the manager for all of her hard work. I want to pay tribute to Chairman Conyers for standing up in early January and insisting that we complete our tasks, and I always come to the floor to say, this is the little guy's day. I came earlier today to speak of an individual who had foreclosure issues, but as I proceeded to read her case, she actually went into loan modification with her mortgager, her lender, Countrywide. And isn't it interesting that as her fees were paid and the loan was supposed to be modified, that some days later, here comes the mortgager with the foreclosure notice or a foreclosure person at her door taking pictures trying to decide what the situation was. Interestingly enough, the house had gone into sale. These are the unscrupulous types of activities that have come about when there is no binding, if you will, judgment that can come about through the bankruptcy court. Again, this bill forces no one to pay anything. It takes no money out of the government. All it does is it allows us to treat those fairly who are going into foreclosure. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1106, ``Helping Families Save Their Homes in Bankruptcy Act of 2009.'' I would like to thank Chairman Conyers of the House Judiciary Committee and Chairman Barney Frank of the Financial Services Committee for their leadership on this issue. I also would like to thank Arthur D. Sidney of my staff who serves as my able Legislative Director. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support this bill because it provides a viable medium for bankruptcy judges to modify the terms of mortgages held by homeowners who have little recourse but to declare bankruptcy. This bill could not have come at a more timely moment. This bill is on the floor of the House within weeks after the President's address before the Joint Session of Congress where President Obama outlined his economic plan for America and discussed the current economic situation that this country is facing. To be sure, there are many economic woes that saddle this country. The statistics are staggering. Home foreclosures are at an all-time high and they will increase as the recession continues. In 2006, there were 1.2 million foreclosures in the United States, representing an increase of 42 percent over the prior year. During 2007 through 2008, mortgage foreclosures were estimated to result in a whopping $400 billion worth of defaults and $100 billion in losses to investors in mortgage securities. This means that one per 62 American households is currently approaching levels not seen since the Depression. The current economic crisis and the foreclosure blight have affected new home sales and depressed home value generally. New home sales have fallen by about 50 percent. One in six homeowners owes more on a mortgage than the home is worth which raises the possibility of default. Home values have fallen nationwide from an average of 19% from their peak in 2006, and this price plunge has wiped out trillions of dollars in home equity. The tide of foreclosure might become self- perpetuating. The nation could be facing a housing depression-- something far worse than a recession. Obviously, there are substantial societal and economic costs of home foreclosures that adversely impact American families, their neighborhoods, communities and municipalities. A single foreclosure could impose direct costs on local government agencies totaling more than $34,000. I am glad that this legislation is finally on the floor of the United States House of Representatives. I have long championed in the first TARP bill that was introduced and signed late last Congress, that language be included to specifically address the issue of mortgage foreclosures. I had asked that $100 billion be set aside to address that issue. Now, my idea has been vindicated as the TARP today has included language and we here today are continuing to engage in the dialogue to provide monies to those in mortgage foreclosure. I have also asked for modification of homeowners' existing loans to avoid mortgage foreclosure. I believe that the rules governing these loans should be relaxed. These are indeed tough economic times that require tough measures. Because of the pervasive home foreclosures, federal legislation is necessary to curb the fallout from the subprime mortgage crisis. For consumers facing a foreclosure sale who want to retain their homes, Chapter 13 of the Bankruptcy Code provides some modicum of protection. The Supreme Court has held that the exception to a Chapter 13's ability to modify the rights of creditors applies even if the mortgage is under-secured. Thus, if a Chapter 13 debtor owes $300,000 on a mortgage for a home that is worth less than $200,000, he or she must repay the entire amount in order to keep his or her home, even though the maximum that the mortgage would receive upon foreclosure is the home's value, i.e., $200,000, less the costs of foreclosure. Importantly, H.R. 1106 provides for a relaxation of the bankruptcy provisions and waives the mandatory requirement that a debtor must receive credit counseling prior to the filing for bankruptcy relief, under certain circumstances. The waiver applies in a Chapter 13 case where the debtor submits to the court a certification that the debtor has received notice that the holder of a claim secured by the debtor's principal residence may commence a foreclosure proceeding against such residence. This bill also prohibits claims arising from violations of consumer protection laws. Specifically, this bill amends the Bankruptcy Code to disallow a claim that is subject to any remedy for damages or rescission as a result of the claimant's failure to comply with any applicable requirement under the Truth in Lending Act or other applicable state or federal consumer protection law in effect when the noncompliance took place, notwithstanding the prior entry of a foreclosure judgment. H.R. 1106 also amends the Bankruptcy Code to permit modification of certain mortgages that are secured by the debtor's principal residence in specified respects. Lastly, the bill provides that the debtor, the debtor's property, and property of the bankruptcy estate are not liable for a fee, cost, or charge incurred while the Chapter 13 case is pending and that arises from a debt secured by the debtor's principal residence, unless the holder of the claim complies with certain requirements. I have long championed the rights of homeowners, especially those facing mortgage foreclosure. I have worked with the Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee to include language that would relax the bankruptcy provisions to allow those facing mortgage foreclosure to restructure their debt to avoid foreclosure. Manager's Amendment Because I have long championed the rights of homeowners facing mortgage foreclose in the recent TARP bill and before the Judiciary Committee, I have worked with Chairman Conyers and his staff to add language that would make the bill stronger and that would help more Americans. I co-sponsored sections of the Manager's Amendment and I urge my colleagues to support the bill. Specifically, I worked with Chairman Conyers to ensure that in section 2 of the amendment, section 109(h) of the Bankruptcy Code would be amended to waive the mandatory requirement, under current law, that a debtor receive credit counseling prior to filing for bankruptcy relief. Under the amended language there is now a waiver that will apply where the debtor submits to the court a certification that the debtor has received notice that the holder of a claim secured by the debtor's principal residence may commence a foreclosure proceeding against such residence. This is important because it affords the debtor the maximum relief without having to undergo a slow credit counseling process. This will help prevent the debtor's credit situation from worsening, potentially spiraling out of control, and result in the eventual loss of his or her home. Section 4 of the Manager's Amendment relaxes certain Bankruptcy requirements under Chapter 13 so that the debtor can modify the terms of the mortgage secured by his or her primary residence. This is an idea that I have long championed in the TARP legislation--the ability of debtors to modify their existing primary mortgages. Section 4 allows for a modification of the mortgage for a period of up to 40 years. Such modification cannot occur if the debtor fails to certify that it contacted the creditor before filing for bankruptcy. In this way, the language in the Manager's Amendment allows for the creditor to demonstrate that it undertook its ``last clear'' chance to work out the restructuring of the debt with its creditor before filing bankruptcy. Importantly, the Manager's Amendment amends the bankruptcy code to provide that a debtor, the debtor's property, and property of the bankruptcy estate are not liable for fees and costs incurred while the Chapter 13 case is pending and that arises from a claim for debt secured by the debtor's principal residence. Lastly, I worked to get language in the Manager's Amendment that would allow the debtors and creditors to negotiate before a declaration of bankruptcy is made. I made sure that the bill addresses present situations at the time of enactment where homeowners are in the process of mortgage foreclosure. This is done with a view toward consistency, predictability, and a hope that things will improve. Rules Committee During this time, debtors and average homeowners found themselves in the midst of a home mortgage foreclosure crisis of unprecedented levels. Many of the mortgage foreclosures were the result of subprime lending practices. I have worked with my colleagues to strengthen the housing market and the economy, expand affordable mortgage loan opportunities for families at risk of foreclosure, and strengthen consumer protections against risky loans in the future. Unfortunately, problems in the subprime mortgage markets have helped push the housing market into its worst slump in 16 years. Before the Rules Committee, I offered an amendment that would prevent homeowners and debtors, who were facing mortgage foreclosure as a result of the unscrupulous and unchecked lending of predatory lenders and financial institutions, from having their mortgage foreclosure count against them in the determination of their credit score. It is an equitable result given that the debtors ultimately faced mortgage foreclosure because of the bad practices of the lender. Simply put, my amendment would prevent homeowners who have declared mortgage foreclosure as a result of subprime mortgage lending and mortgages from having the foreclosure count against the debtor/ homeowner in the determination of the debtor/homeowner's credit score. Specifically, my amendment language was the following: