Sheila Jackson Lee

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, this is a very important debate. I want to thank the chairman of the Financial Services Committee. I would imagine that this was the vision of the Founding Fathers when they created the basic infrastructure of our constitutional government that the people of this Nation should have the opportunity to hear the truth and hear us speak the truth. And so today I think it is important that the truth be known and told. And frankly, I think the real question for my good friends on the other side of the aisle is, what did the previous administration do with that money? That is the angst. That is the reason why we have this controversy. Because those of us who in good intentions and goodwill responded to the pending crisis, even as the administration was leaving, the lights are being turned out, we said we had to do something for the American people. We begged them to respond to the mortgage foreclosure, the collapse of the market. It was not done. There was no reporting as to what happened to the money. And so, as Mark Zandi has said, chief economist of Moody's economy.com, the global financial system has effectively collapsed, undermining investor, household, and business confidence and pushing the economy into a lengthy and severe recession. The proximate cause, he says, of the crisis was a collapse of the U.S. housing market and the resulting surge in mortgage loan defaults. We asked the former Secretary, we asked and begged him to deal with the mortgage foreclosure of the American people. They did not do it. Now, we come full circle with a new administration who has articulated their commitment to addressing this mortgage foreclosure collapse. We have to do it with the money that is pending today. That is why I rise in opposition to this legislation. In the requirements that have been dictated by this House, we are setting aside money that is specifically for the use of hardworking Americans who bought into mortgages that were, through no fault of their own, smoke and mirrors. And so today we have $100 billion set aside so that your mortgages, your homes can be saved. Is that not the responsibility of the Federal Government? Is that not the reason why we are here? We must give these monies to the Obama administration for them to give them to the American taxpayer. That is what this is about. In addition, we will be providing more dollars to what we call private banks, many of them in your home towns where you know your bankers, who have not been able to get these dollars. We want the small businesses, minority, women, and others that are just simply small, the backbone of America, to be able to get the credit that you need for your payroll. That is what this is about. This is a complete 180-degree turn. We want to do what was not done. In addition, we have language that is requiring the banks to give us a point-by-point, dot-by-dot, line-by-line explanation of the use of these moneys.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. So line by line to be able to report to you, the American people, what is this money going for. I know a pastor in Houston, Texas, Reverend Samuel Smith, who has a church that has remained in an inner city area. He has rebuilt his church. He did it because he got credit, he got money so that his parishioners could come to that area that needed redevelopment so he could continue to provide life to that area. That is what these funds can be used for if they go to the banks of the community. The big banks will not be able to use these dollars to buy up little banks. The money will go to these little banks and help the inner cities and rural communities of America and so you know your banker and know they have money to lend to you. This is what is happening today. And by the way, my friends, in this language it says so more of these big bonuses and compensation and grandstanding resort packages, no more of that. A number of other restraints are in the package that we passed last week. Please provide us with the hope and spirit of our new President who said we can do this. This is a bad bill, and I stand opposed to it because I stand with the American people. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.J. Res. 3, relating to the disapproval of obligations under the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (EESA). This resolution disapproves the use of the second $350 billion of the funds that were made available to the Secretary of the Treasury under the EESA. Under the ``fast track'' consideration provisions of EESA, such a resolution is in order upon the transmittal by the President of a plan to use the second $350 billion. Passage of this resolution would prevent the new Administration, unless vetoed by the President, from using the second $350 billion. Already the Senate has rejected its resolution of disapproval last Friday when it was offered in the Senate. This body should do the same. Likewise, the House should also join me in rejecting this resolution. We cannot hold the present Administration accountable for the missteps and misdeeds of the past Administration. It is my firm belief that this Administration must be given the most latitude in its decision regarding how the monies will be dispensed and used. The current Administration should not be fettered but should be free to use the monies as it sees fit, using judiciousness, practicality, and commonsense. Moreover, this body voted to pass H.R. 384 TARP Reform and Accountability Act, which provided greater accountability and oversight in the use of TARP. Therefore, there is no reasonable, articulable basis to deny the Administration access to the TARP monies. Just yesterday, the House of Representatives voted on a bill that would amend the TARP provisions of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (EESA) to strengthen accountability, close loopholes, increase transparency, and most importantly, require the Treasury Department to take significant steps on foreclosure mitigation. Mr. Speaker, I was particularly pleased to work with Chairman Frank and his staff on significant portions of the Manager's Amendment to this legislation, which ensures that small and minority businesses along with local, community, and private banks gain fair and equitable access to the TARP funds. It has been 3 months since the Treasury started disbursing TARP funds. Just in time perhaps for a lot of big banks however, smaller banks have been locked out so far. A lot of small banks certainly are in need of relief as the real estate crisis continues to worsen, despite hundreds of small banks having already applied. According to recent reports, the Treasury Department has yet to issue ``the necessary guidelines for about 3,000 additional private banks. Most of them are set up as partnerships, with no more than 100 shareholders. They are not able to issue preferred shares to the government in exchange for capital injections, as other banks can. While Treasury officials state they are ``working on a solution,'' for these private banks time is of the essence. The Treasury Department has handed out more than $155 billion to 77 banks. Of that sum, $115 billion has gone to the 8 largest banks. Community banks hold 11 percent of the industry's total assets and play a vital role in small business and agriculture lending. Community banks provide 29 percent of small commercial and industrial loans, 40 percent of small commercial real estate loans and 77 percent of small agricultural production loans. I worked diligently with Chairman Frank and the financial services Committee to ensure that language was included to assist private banks such as Unity Bank and Amegy Bank in Houston to shore up their liquidity and ability to extend credit to local businesses and families. This legislation also provides funds for foreclosure counseling, legal assistance to homeowners facing foreclosure and training for foreclosure counselors. I have been a long-time advocate for foreclosure mitigation working with state and local government and nonprofit organizations to help families in need. Last year, I championed setting aside $100 billion to address homeowner foreclosure prevention. I also fought to amend bankruptcy provisions to allow individual homeowners to be able to modify their home mortgages to prevent foreclosure. As I look at this revised legislation I feel a sense of vindication. I kept sounding the alarm to provide language that explicitly addressed homeowner foreclosure prevention and loss mitigation. As it now appears, my efforts were not in vain. Foreclosure prevention-loss mitigation programs have given millions of Americans, who face foreclosure, the opportunity to get back on track and save their homes from foreclosure. Every year there are millions of Americans who find themselves in a pre-foreclosure situation. Most feel that they are alone when they face a foreclosure situation. This legislation will allow Americans to get them help they need to stop foreclosures and ultimately help people stay in their homes. The Manager's Amendment requires that the Treasury Department act promptly to permit smaller community financial institutions that have been shut out so far to participate on the same terms as the large financial institutions that have already received funds. Small businesses are the backbone of our Nation, and unfortunately, they have not been afforded the opportunity that large financial institutions have had to TARP funds and loans. Small businesses represent more than the American dream--they represent the American economy. Small businesses account for 95 percent of all employers, create half of our gross domestic product, and provide three out of four new jobs in this country. Small business growth means economic growth for the Nation. We cannot stabilize and revitalize our economy without ensuring the inclusion and participation of the small business segment of our economy. With the ever worsening economic crisis, we must ensure in this legislation that small and minority businesses and community banks are afforded an opportunity to benefit from this important legislation. I am very pleased that the Manager's Amendment will effect this change. In Section 107, the Manager's Amendment creates an Office of Minority and Women Inclusion, which will be responsible for developing and implementing standards and procedures to ensure the inclusion and utilization of minority and women-owned businesses. I sought the creation of such and office and I am pleased it was included in this legislation. These businesses will include financial institutions, investment banking firms, mortgage banking firms, broker-dealers, accountants, and consultants. Furthermore, the inclusion of these businesses should be at all levels, including procurement, insurance, and all types of contracts such as the issuance or guarantee of debt, equity, or mortgage-related securities. This Office will also be responsible for diversity in the management, employment, and business activities of the TARP, including the management of mortgage and securities portfolios, making of equity investments, the sale and servicing of mortgage loans, and the implementation its affordable housing programs and initiatives. Section 107 also calls for the Secretary of the Treasury to report to Congress in 180 days detailed information describing the actions taken by the Office of Minority and Women Inclusion, which will include a statement of the total amounts provided under TARP to small, minority, and women-owned businesses. The Manager's Amendment in Section 404 also has clarifying language ensuring that the Secretary has authority to support the availability of small business loans and loans to minority and disadvantaged businesses. This will be critical to ensuring that small and minority businesses have access to loans, financing, and purchase of asset-backed securities directly through the Treasury Department or the Federal Reserve. H.R. 384 reforms TARP by increasing oversight, reporting, monitoring and accountability. It requires any existing or future institution that receives funding under TARP to provide no less than quarterly public reporting on its use of TARP funding. Any insured depository institution that receives funding under TARP is required to report quarterly on the amount of any increased lending (or reduction in decrease of lending) and related activity attributable to such financial assistance. In connection with any new receipt of TARP funds, Treasury is also required to reach an agreement with the institution, and its primary federal regulator on how the funds are to be used and benchmarks the institution is required to meet so as to advance the purposes of the Act to strengthen the soundness of the financial system and the availability of credit to the economy. In addition, a recipient institution's primary federal regulator must specifically examine use of funds and compliance with any program requirements, including executive compensation and any specific agreement terms. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that this legislation has strong requirements regarding executive compensation. Mr. Speaker, the Act provides that the second $350 billion is conditioned on the use of up to $100 billion, but no less than $40 billion, for foreclosure mitigation, with a plan required by March 15, 2009. By that date, the Secretary shall develop (subject to TARP Board approval) a comprehensive plan to prevent and mitigate foreclosures on residential mortgages. The Secretary shall begin committing TARP funds to implement the plan no later than April 1, 2009. The Secretary must certify to Congress by May 15, 2009, if he has not committed more than required minimum $40 billion. The foreclosure mitigation plans must apply only to owner-occupied residences and shall leverage private capital to the maximum extent possible consistent with maximizing prevention of foreclosures. Treasury must use some combination of the following program alternatives: (1) Guarantee program for qualifying loan modifications under a systematic plan, which may be delegated to the FDIC or other contractor; (2) Bringing costs of Hope for Homeowner loans down (beyond mandatory changes in Title V below), either through coverage of fees, purchasing H4H mortgages to ensure affordable rates, or both; (3) Program for loans to pay down second lien mortgages that are impeding a loan modification subject to any write-down by existing lender Treasury may require; (4) Servicer incentives/assistance--payments to servicers in connection with implementation of qualifying loan modifications; and (5) Purchase of whole loans for the purpose of modifying or refinancing the loans (with authorization to delegate to FDIC) In consultation with the FDIC and HUD and with the approval of the Board, Treasury may determine that modifications to an initial plan are necessary to achieve the purposes of this act or that modifications to component programs of the plan are necessary to maximize prevention of foreclosure and minimize costs to the taxpayers. A safe harbor from liability is provided to servicers who engage in loan modifications, regardless of any provisions in a servicing agreement, so long as the servicer acts in a manner consistent with the duty established in Homeowner Emergency Relief Act (maximize the net present value (NPV) of pooled mortgages to all investors as a whole; engage in loan modifications for mortgages that are in default or for which default is reasonably foreseeable; the property is owner- occupied; the anticipated recovery on the mod would exceed, on an NPV basis, the anticipated recovery through foreclosure). This bill requires persons who bring suit unsuccessfully against servicers for engaging in loan modifications under the Act to pay the servicers' court costs and legal fees. It also requires Servicers who modify loans under the safe harbor to regularly report to the Treasury on the extent, scope and results of the servicer's modification activities. In addition to the above requirements, an Oversight Panel is required to report to Congress by July 1st on the actions taken by Treasury on foreclosure mitigation and the impact and effectiveness of the actions in minimizing foreclosures and minimizing costs to the taxpayers. H.R. 384 clarifies and confirms Treasury authorization to provide assistance to automobile manufacturers under the TARP. With respect to the assistance already provided to the domestic automobile industry, includes conditions of the House auto bill, including long-term restructuring requirements. There is further clarification on: Treasury's authority to provide support to the financing arms of automakers for financing activities is clarified to ensure that they can continue to provide needed credit, including through dealer and other financing of consumer and business auto and other vehicle loans and dealer floor loans. Treasury's authority to establish facilities to support the availability of consumer loans, such as student loans, and auto and other vehicle loans. Such support may include the purchase of asset- backed securities, directly or through the Federal Reserve. Treasury's authority to provide support for commercial real estate loans and mortgage-backed securities. Treasury's authority to provide support to issuers of municipal securities, including through the direct purchase of municipal securities or the provision of credit enhancements in connection with any Federal Reserve facility to finance the purchase of municipal securities. In addition, more reforms are enunciated for Homeowners in Title V. The Home Buyer Stimulus provisions requires Treasury to develop a program, outside of the TARP, to stimulate demand for home purchases and clear inventory of properties, including through ensuring the availability of affordable mortgages rates for qualified home buyers. In developing such a program Treasury may take into consideration impact on areas with highest inventories of foreclosed properties. The programs will be executed through the purchase of mortgages and MBS using funding under HERA. Treasury will provide mechanisms to ensure availability of such reduced rate loans through financial institutions that act as either originators or as portfolio lenders. Under this provision, Treasury has to make affordable rates available under this program available in connection. with Hope for Homeowner refinancing program. This legislation will give a permanent increase in FDIC and NCUA Deposit Insurance Limits, it makes permanent the increase in deposit insurance coverage for banks and credit unions to $250,000, which was enacted temporarily as part of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act and is scheduled to sunset on December 31, 2009, and includes an inflation adjustment provision for future coverage. Finally, I applaud Chairman Frank and the Committee on Financial Services for their hard work on this important piece of legislation. In this economic climate it is critical for us to remember that while we need to assist our financial institutions, we cannot do this without implementing reforms to protect Americans' hard-earned money. I strongly urge my colleagues to join me in opposition to this resolution. The reforms of the bill that we voted upon just yesterday adds greater accountability and oversight to the EESA. I do not believe that the President should be fettered in his use of the monies allotted to his Administration and the Treasury in the EESA. The previous Administration was able to use the monies in an unfettered fashion, there is no articulable reason why the present Administration must undergo a different process or procedure than its predecessor Administration.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 384, the Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP) Reform and Accountability Act of 2009. This bill will amend the TARP provisions of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, EESA, to strengthen accountability, close loopholes, increase transparency, and most importantly, require the Treasury Department to take significant steps on foreclosure mitigation. Madam Speaker, I was particularly pleased to work with Chairman Frank and his staff on significant portions of the Manager's amendment to this legislation which ensures that small and minority businesses along with local, community, and private banks gain fair and equitable access to the TARP funds. It's been 3 months since the Treasury started disbursing TARP funds. Just in time perhaps for a lot of big banks, however smaller banks have been locked out so far. A lot of small banks certainly are in need of relief as the real estate crisis continues to unfold and hundreds have already applied. According to recent reports, the Treasury Department has yet to issue ``the necessary guidelines for about 3,000 additional private banks. Most of them are set up as partnerships, with no more than 100 shareholders. They are not able to issue preferred shares to the government in exchange for capital injections, as other banks can.'' While Treasury officials state they are ``working on a solution,'' for these private banks time is of the essence. The Treasury Department has handed out more than $155 billion to 77 banks. Of that sum, $115 billion has gone to the eight largest banks. Community banks hold 11 percent of the industry's total assets and play a vital role in small business and agriculture lending. Community banks provide 29 percent of small commercial and industrial loans, 40 percent of small commercial real estate loans and 77 percent of small agricultural production loans. This Manager's amendment requires that the Treasury Department act promptly to permit smaller community financial institutions and specifically private banks that have been shut out so far in participating on the same terms as the large financial institutions that have already received funds. This is a major change for millions of Americans who bank in private banks and who deserve the same access to needed capital. Small businesses are the backbone of our Nation, and unfortunately, they have not been afforded the opportunity that large financial institutions have received to TARP funds and loans. Small businesses represent more than the American dream--they represent the American economy. Small businesses account for 95 percent of all employers, create half of our gross domestic product, and provide three out of four new jobs in this country. Small business growth means economic growth for the Nation. We cannot stabilize and revitalize our economy without ensuring the inclusion and participation of the small business segment of our economy. With the ever worsening economic crisis, we must ensure in this legislation that small and minority businesses and community banks are afforded an opportunity to benefit from this important legislation. I am very pleased that the Manager's amendment will affect this change. In Section 107, the Manager's amendment creates an Office of Minority and Women Inclusion, which will be responsible for developing and implementing standards and procedures to ensure the inclusion and utilization of minority and women-owned businesses. These businesses will include financial institutions, investment banking firms, mortgage banking firms, broker-dealers, accountants, and consultants. Furthermore, the inclusion of these businesses should be at all levels, including procurement, insurance, and all types of contracts such as the issuance or guarantee of debt, equity, or mortgage-related securities. This office will also be responsible for diversity in the management, employment, and business activities of the TARP, including the management of mortgage and securities portfolios, making of equity investments, the sale and servicing of mortgage loans, and the implementation its affordable housing programs and initiatives. Section 107 also calls for the Secretary of the Treasury to report to Congress in 180 days detailed information describing the actions taken by the Office of Minority and Women Inclusion, which will include a statement of the total amounts provided under TARP to small, minority, and women-owned businesses. The Manager's amendment in Section 404 also has clarifying language ensuring that the Secretary has authority to support the availability of small business loans and loans to minority and disadvantaged businesses. This will be critical to ensuring that small and minority businesses have access to loans, financing, and purchase of asset-backed securities directly through the Treasury Department or the Federal Reserve. H.R. 384 reforms TARP by increasing oversight, reporting, monitoring and accountability. It requires any existing or future institution that receives funding under TARP to provide no less than quarterly public reporting on its use of TARP funding. Any insured depository institution that receives funding under TARP is required to report quarterly on the amount of any increased lending (or reduction in decrease of lending) and related activity attributable to such financial assistance. In connection with any new receipt of TARP funds, Treasury is also required to reach an agreement with the institution, and its primary Federal regulator on how the funds are to be used and benchmarks the institution is required to meet so as to advance the purposes of the Act to strengthen the soundness of the financial system and the availability of credit to the economy. In addition, a recipient institution's primary Federal regulator must specifically examine use of funds and compliance with any program requirements, including executive compensation and any specific agreement terms. Madam Speaker, I am pleased that this legislation has strong requirements regarding executive compensation. For any new receipt of TARP funds (except those by small financial institutions), this legislation applies the most stringent non-tax executive compensation restrictions from EESA across the board including: 1. Requiring Treasury to prohibit incentives that encourage excessive risks, 2. Providing for claw-back of compensation received based on materially inaccurate statements; and 3. Prohibits all golden parachute payment for the duration of the investment. Included in this legislation is a requirement of government board representation by authorizing Treasury to have an observer at board or board committee meetings of recipient institutions. This legislation changes to structure and authority of TARP board--the Financial Stability Oversight Board is expanded to include the chairman of the FDIC and two additional members who are not currently Federal employees, who shall be appointed by the President and subject to Senate confirmation. The board will have the authority to overturn policy decisions of the Treasury Secretary by a \2/3\ vote. Madam Speaker, the Act provides that the second $350 billion is conditioned on the use of up to $100 billion, but no less than $40 billion, for foreclosure mitigation, with plan required by March 15, 2009. By that date, the Secretary shall develop, subject to TARP Board approval, a comprehensive plan to prevent and mitigate foreclosures on residential mortgages. The Secretary shall begin committing TARP funds to implement the plan no later than April 1, 2009. The Secretary must certify to Congress by May 15, 2009, if he has not committed more than the required minimum $40 billion. The foreclosure mitigation plans must apply only to owner-occupied residences and shall leverage private capital to the maximum extent possible consistent with maximizing prevention of foreclosures. Treasury must use some combination of the following program alternatives: 1. Guarantee program for qualifying loan modifications under a systematic plan, which may be delegated to the FDIC or other contractor 2. Bringing costs of Hope for Homeowner loans down (beyond mandatory changes in Title V below), either through coverage of fees, purchasing H4H mortgages to ensure affordable rates, or both 3. Program for loans to pay down second lien mortgages that are impeding a loan modification subject to any writedown by existing lender Treasury may require 4. Servicer incentives/assistance--payments to servicers in connection with implementation of qualifying loan modifications 5. Purchase of whole loans for the purpose of modifying or refinancing the loans (with authorization to delegate to FDIC) In consultation with the FDIC and HUD and with the approval of the board, Treasury may determine that modifications to an initial plan are necessary to achieve the purposes of this act or that modifications to component programs of the plan are necessary to maximize prevention of foreclosure and minimize costs to the taxpayers. A safe harbor from liability is provided to servicers who engage in loan modifications, regardless of any provisions in a servicing agreement, so long as the servicer acts in a manner consistent with the duty established in the Homeowner Emergency Relief Act, maximize the net present value, NPV, of pooled mortgages to all investors as a whole; engage in loan modifications for mortgages that are in default or for which default is reasonably foreseeable; the property is owner- occupied; the anticipated recovery on the mod would exceed, on an NPV basis, the anticipated recovery through foreclosure. This bill requires persons who bring suit unsuccessfully against servicers for engaging in loan modifications under the Act to pay the servicers' court costs and legal fees. It also requires Servicers who modify loans under the safe harbor to regularly report to the Treasury on the extent, scope and results of the servicer's modification activities. In addition to the above requirements, an Oversight Panel is required to report to Congress by July 1 on the actions taken by Treasury on foreclosure mitigation and the impact and effectiveness of the actions in minimizing foreclosures and minimizing costs to the taxpayers. H.R. 384 clarifies and confirms Treasury authorization to provide assistance to automobile manufacturers under the TARP. With respect to the assistance already provided to the domestic automobile industry, includes conditions of the House auto bill, including long-term restructuring requirements. There is further clarification on: Treasury's authority to provide support to the financing arms of automakers for financing activities is clarified to ensure that they can continue to provide needed credit, including through dealer and other financing of consumer and business auto and other vehicle loans and dealer floor loans. Treasury's authority to establish facilities to support the availability of consumer loans, such as student loans, and auto and other vehicle loans. Such support may include the purchase of asset- backed securities, directly or through the Federal Reserve. Treasury's authority to provide support for commercial real estate loans and mortgage-backed securities. Treasury's authority to provide support to issuers of municipal securities, including through the direct purchase of municipal securities or the provision of credit enhancements in connection with any Federal Reserve facility to finance the purchase of municipal securities. In addition, more reforms are enunciated for Homeowners in Title V. The Home Buyer Stimulus provisions require Treasury to develop a program, outside of the TARP, to stimulate demand for home purchases and clear inventory of properties, including through ensuring the availability of affordable mortgage rates for qualified home buyers. In developing such a program Treasury may take into consideration impact on areas with the highest inventories of foreclosed properties. The programs will be executed through the purchase of mortgages and MBS using funding under HERA. Treasury will provide mechanisms to ensure availability of such reduced rate loans through financial institutions that act as either originators or as portfolio lenders. Under this provision, Treasury has to make affordable rates available under this program available in connection with Hope for Homeowner refinancing program. This legislation will give a permanent increase in FDIC and NCUA Deposit Insurance Limits, it makes permanent the increase in deposit insurance coverage for banks and credit unions to $250,000, which was enacted temporarily as part of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act and is scheduled to sunset on December 31, 2009, and includes an inflation adjustment provision for future coverage. Finally, I applaud Chairman Frank and the Committee on Financial Services for their hard work on this important piece of legislation. In this economic climate it is critical for us to remember that while we need to assist our financial institutions, we cannot do this without implementing reforms to protect Americans' hard-earned money. Madam Speaker, I strongly urge my colleagues to join me in support of this important legislation.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I find it a constitutional necessity that will equate to the cleansing of this body and of this process or these processes that we've seen. A cleansing. When we were engaged in the impeachment process that I was engaged in some years ago, we went back to the Madison Papers to be able to read as to whether or not we were on solid ground in the approach that we were taking. Many of us who opposed this impeachment believed that we were not on solid ground because it was not a governmental action, if you will. What we want to do is to lay the record and make it clear and not have someone guessing whether or not waterboarding equates to torture. We want someone to not guess whether or not it is appropriate for the counsel to the President to go into the night in a hospital room and seek some action from a sick cabinet officer. It could be an action to go to war. It could be an action to eliminate Medicare. But we want to have a basis of refining and clearing up. I'm not looking to throw darts and call names. These are pointed issues. And let me lead into something that goes to this point.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. It is a pleasure to join two distinguished Members of not only this body but the Progressive Caucus. And I thank you so very much for yielding. And, as well, let me thank both of you for framing the issue and giving voice to what I believe represents a broad breadth of the American people. And let me thank the distinguished co-chairman for jump-starting this session, for not taking for granted that we have a lot to celebrate-- and we do. As the American people watch us, they still have in their memory what I thought was a day of reckoning, a day of reconciliation, a day of movement. But, at the same time, the Progressive Caucus wants to not only give voice--and I heard both of you speaking--but to give action, hearings and legislation. And, Congressman Ellison, I appreciate greatly the reach that you have shown, the breadth and the depth, the understanding of finite issues dealing with the rule of law. And I came to the floor today--and I thank you for allowing me--just to take one small corner. I've heard the discussion as you opened and you talked about our economy, and I think the important point is there should be a progressive voice on all of that. Now, some would say that we're the guys that are anti-PAYGO. No. There is no doubt that we have to balance our pocketbooks, our wallets just like anyone else. What we are for is to make sure that the voices of the people that ride the bus, that have to leave at 6 a.m. in the morning to get to work, that don't have childcare, that, in fact, are still waiting on lines to be employed, never having been employed, those who are underemployed, those who have gotten out of, as I said, the line and therefore are not even counted anymore, those who are making $18,000 a year, such as a constituent in my constituency, who is trying to hold on to a home that obviously was given some years ago under the adjustable mortgage rate, so this is who we are speaking to. And I am, frankly, a supporter of a balanced budget. I want to make sure that our monies are used well, that there is transparency. But again, I want to have a hand--or a handle, if you will--on making sure those dollars--the economic stimulus package, I've had people ask me, am I going to have an impact? Is it going to get to me down in fifth ward Texas? I imagine there are some neighborhoods both in your great State and that of our chairperson's to ask, is it going to get to the Indian reservations or pueblos that have been lost, if you will--even though a lot of people say that they get a big donation, but there are great needs on our Indian reservations. So I come today to just take a corner of what you were speaking of called the rule of law. And I would like to, as well, thank Chairman John Conyers. And, of course, we organized today, and I'm very excited to have had my first time opportunity to be on the Constitution Subcommittee. Mr. Ellison, we miss you, but as well you are going on to do great works, and I look forward to working with you and collaborating on a number of issues. But this basic document suggested that, one, the continuation of congressional oversight. One of the criticisms we got over the last 8 years--though it was not accurate, we were in the minority, as Democrats--is that there was no oversight. But we were, we were sort of fighting in the darkness. I was reminiscing about the vote on the Iraq war before you came. There was a corner of about 133 of us who just worked and whipped and worked and whipped, but the loud noise, the thunderous noise drowned us out. We were on the floor asking and begging that we not go to war, that it was the wrong direction. So congressional oversight is key. The independent criminal probes by the incoming Justice Department must continue. I would almost suggest that we look at this issue called prosecutorial abuse, and you know what? I'm open minded. I would as well look at the case in North Carolina. You remember that, with I believe it was not the soccer team but it was one of the sports teams of a university. It's coming to me. Everyone will remember that case. But they should also look at Jena 6.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. The lacrosse team. Thank you very much. You're absolutely right. I don't mind looking at that case or looking at the case of Jena 6, looking at the Sean Bell case in New York or wherever these cases might be. We must look at that. And then the creation of a blue ribbon commission to fully investigate the last administration's actions. I think we had a meeting and we thought that was a productive manner in which we should work. But I want to focus on this FISA, the Restore Act, and just indicate that one of the areas that I was targeting was reverse targeting. For Americans what that means is I'm calling my aunt overseas and they use that call to then reverse target me. And what we have said is that that is such a significant breach of the Constitution, unreasonable search and seizure, that we wanted a warrant to issue. And, of course, we went back and forth and back and forth, and the language that we attempted to use was language that indicated that you must use a significant purpose as a basis for being able to do that. The language that finally got, I call it, watered down says when the government seeks to conduct electronic surveillance. That means if you just feel like fishing, they could surveil you here minding your business in the United States. The government wouldn't have to explain that it was a significant purpose. And, frankly, I think that much of the premise of our new President, and he made it clear--I congratulate him for some of the actions today indicating the closing of Guantanamo Bay. I heard you mention that. Most people think we'll be in danger, but I think we are in danger as it is now. And believe it or not, we have a rule of law and a system of law that will capture all of those who need to be captured in the system and will find all of those on the basis of our system innocent or guilty. I'm not interested in terrorists running free as well.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of this special order. I would like to discuss the importance of America returning to the rule of law and respect for our Constitution in the immediate aftermath of the Bush-Cheney legacy. Madam Speaker, I thank you for the opportunity to address this issue. Since 2001, the Bush Administration's policies impacting civil liberties have raised grave constitutional and legal concerns. After the myriad hearings and investigations last year, there is much we do not know about the Bush Administration. Last week, Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee released a report, entitled ``Reining in the Imperial Presidency: Lessons and Recommendations Relating to the Presidency of George W. Bush.'' This document contained nearly 500 pages. The report detailed numerous examples of these abuses by the administration from allegations of torture and inhumane treatment, extraordinary rendition, and warrantless domestic surveillance to the U.S. Attorney scandals. The report also contained over 45 pages of recommendations designed to restore our Constitution's traditional system of checks and balances. Chief among these recommendations are: (1) The continuation of congressional oversight; (2) independent criminal probes by the incoming Justice Department; and; (3) the creation of a blue ribbon commission to fully investigate the Bush Administration's activities. My office will work to put some of these into law. These included recommendation number 17 on pages 280 to 281, regarding the President, the Director of National Intelligence, the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, and the Director of the National Security Agency should implement policies to ensure that there is no ``reverse targeting'' used under authorities created by the FISA Amendments Act of 2008. Specifically, I have long championed the inclusion of language that would prohibit ``reverse targeting.'' Indeed, I worked on specific language that was included in an early version of the FISA Act, the RESTORE Act, which was added during the markup made a constructive contribution to the RESTORE Act by laying down a clear, objective criterion for the administration to follow and the FISA court to enforce in preventing reverse targeting. ``Reverse targeting,'' a concept well known to members of this Committee but not so well understood by those less steeped in the arcana of electronic surveillance, is the practice where the Government targets foreigners without a warrant while its actual purpose is to collect information on certain U.S. persons. One of the major concerns that libertarians and classical conservatives, as well as progressives and civil liberties organizations, have is that there is an understandable temptation of national security agencies to engage in reverse targeting that may be difficult to resist in the absence of strong safeguards to prevent it. My amendment reduces even further any such temptation to resort to reverse targeting by requiring the administration to obtain a regular, individualized FISA warrant whenever the ``real'' target of the surveillance is a person in the United States. The amendment achieves this objective by requiring the administration to obtain a regular FISA warrant whenever a ``significant purpose of an acquisition is to acquire the communications of a specific person reasonably believed to be located in the United States.'' The current language in the bill provides that a warrant be obtained only when the Government ``seeks to conduct electronic surveillance'' of a person reasonably believed to be located in the United States. It was far from clear how the operative language ``seeks to'' is to be interpreted. In contrast, the language used in my amendment, ``significant purpose,'' is a term of art that has long been a staple of FISA jurisprudence and thus is well known and readily applied by the agencies, legal practitioners, and the FISA Court. Thus, the Jackson- Lee Amendment provides a clearer, more objective, criterion for the administration to follow and the FISA court to enforce to prevent the practice of reverse targeting without a warrant, which all of us can agree should not be permitted. I am also pleased that the chairman has accepted my recommendation for the President to end abuses of Presidential signing statements. I have re-introduced a bill to address this issue in the 111th Congress. In an earlier Congress, I introduced the ``Congressional Lawmaking Authority Protection Act'' or CLAP Act of 2006, which: (1) prohibited the expenditure of appropriated funds to distribute, disseminate, or publish Presidential signing statements that contradict or are inconsistent with the legislative intent of the Congress in enacting the laws; and (2) bars consideration of any signing statement by any court, administrative agency, or quasi-judicial body when construing or applying any law enacted by Congress. I am proud to say that the chairman was one of the original co-sponsors of my bill. In the 110th Congress, I introduced another bill substantially in the same form in the current Congress, except that the new bill, H.R. 264, makes clear that the limitations of the law do not apply to Presidential signing statements that are consistent with congressional intent. This is not a hard test to administer. As the late Justice Potter Stewart said about obscenity: ``it may be hard to define, but you know it when you see it.'' I have now reintroduced this bill in the 111th Congress. Notwithstanding that we have a new President, my bill is still relevant. If there be any question whether the Congress has the power to ban the use of appropriated funds to publish or distribute signing statements, the answer is simple: regardless of whether it is wise to do so, if no one seriously can question Congress's constitutional authority to terminate the Executive's use of appropriated funds to wage military operations, a fortiori, Congress has the constitutional authority to withhold from the President funds needed to distribute a signing statement that undermines the separation of powers. The problem with presidential signing statements is that their use fosters abuse and misuse. Presidential signing statements seek to alter Congress's primacy in the legislative process by giving a President's intention in signing the bill equal or greater standing to Congress's intention in enacting it. This would be a radical, indeed revolutionary, change to our system of separated powers and checks and balances. Bill signing statements eliminate the need for a President ever to exercise the veto since he or she could just reinterpret the bill he signs so as to make it unobjectionable to him. Such actions deprive Congress of the chance to consider the President's objections, override his veto, and in the process make it clear that the President's position is rejected by an overwhelming majority of the people's representatives. Since few Presidents wish to suffer a humiliation so complete and public they have strong incentive to work closely with the Congress and are amenable to negotiation and compromise. This is precisely the type of competitive cooperation the Constitution contemplates and which bill signing statements threaten. Again, I thank the Chairman for including these two very important ideas in his very thorough and thoughtful report. There is much work to be done by the Members of Congress to fix the mistakes that were made during the prior administration so that the proper foundation can be laid for a succesful President Obama and his administration. It is my hope that we can wipe the slate clean from the Bush Administration and start afresh for the current administration. I agree that we must investigate the U.S. Attorney firings to determine what precisely happened. We need to determine why these firings occurred. Moreover, the incoming administration should limit the ability of Executive Branch officials to prevent victims of terrorism from recovering for their losses. The President should seek to resolve a dispute between victims of torture and the government of Iraq committed during the Gulf War. Because of the myriad of problems that we have seen at the Department of Justice, I recommend that the Department of Justice should issue guidelines to require transparency and uniformity of corporate deferred and non-prosecution agreements. These are agreements between the Federal Government and individual corporations in which the Government agrees to not prosecute or defer criminal prosecution in exchange for the corporation agreeing to specific actions such as changes in corporate policies and payment of monetary penalties. We should also consider whether we should consider legislation concerning the exercise of clemency involving government officials. This is important so that we can truly learn what happened during the Bush Administration. We should also enact changes in statutes and rules to strengthen protection for Executive Branch whistleblowers, Congress's contempt powers, and the incoming administration should establish procedures for asserting executive privilege. There are a myriad of laws that we must enact to set this Nation on the right track. We must roll up our sleeves and get ready to work with the new administration to restore the rule of law to America and its position of respect on the world stage.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Let me thank you very much. Obviously, we have only been at the tip of the iceberg of what we have to talk about in the future. Certainly I want to make the point very clear that as it relates to the TARP and the economic stimulus package, the Progressive Caucus will be very much engaged, collaborating, of course, with a number of other caucuses, Hispanic Caucus, Women's Caucus and the Congressional Black Caucus and others, not from the perspective of isolation but from the perspective of ensuring, again, that voices that cannot speak for themselves are heard and particularly to go to places where others might not attempt to go. Again, what does that mean? It means that as we rallied around our opposition for the Iraq war, it was a willingness to be able to stand in the eye of the storm on many of these issues, whether it be on the reform of health care, looking to not talk about socialized medicine but ensuring that everyone has access to health care. That will be a progressive, if you will, challenge, to ensure that that happens. Finally, let me say that we are here to shine the light on items that some may think was not necessarily an item or an issue that needed to be broadly affirmed or confirmed. I am still questioning the administrative agreement that took place in the resolve of the Iraq war, not resolving it but establishing the role of our American soldiers, the soldiers that we love. The care and the nurturing of those soldiers in Iraq is an administrative document that this Congress has not had a chance to review. So the Progressive Caucus is that light that is to shine, not for ourselves but for all of those who asked what is it that this government is doing and what are they doing for me as I am trying to do for my Nation. So I thank you. We are patriots, and I hope that as our voices are heard, as you have made a commitment, we will be part of the cornerstone of legislation and laws, and we will therefore serve the American people even better.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Many of those who did likewise. And let me finish on these points because you raised a very good point. In the redistricting case in Texas, the staff of the Department of Justice agreed with the kind of redistricting arguments that were being made by the congressional delegation of Texas, the legal arguments that were being made about diversity, representation, and the way the lines were drawn. The professional staff agreed with the State of Texas prior to the loss of seven or eight Members, who happened to be Democrats. Well, interestingly enough, the political folk came in and altered their presentation and representation, which significantly caused a completely opposite result, which, of course, is the result that lost eight Members of Congress, not on the fact that eight Members of Congress don't have a right to win or lose, but it was because we reconfigured the Voting Rights Act of 1965 to the contrary of how it should have been interpreted. So that wasn't necessarily a signing statement, but we found many incidences like that in the actions of those, and needless to say, the Judiciary Committee spent many, many days and hours, able work by able subcommittees, on this whole question of the U.S. attorneys and political appointments. Let me close, and then I want as well to have you yield to my good friend from Arizona, just to simply say that this is an important journey that we are about to venture, and that is the cleaning and cleansing and restoring of the Constitution; the protecting of your rights of privacy; the questioning of the watch list, which, as a chairwoman of the Transportation Security Committee of the last Congress, we looked at and will forge ahead in the new Congress as well. But this is an important and vital opportunity for not only the Progressive Caucus, which will lead, but as I look at it, the body of this institution. The Madison Papers would not be what they are today if there was not a meticulous and interested body of lawmakers that wrote meticulously what the law should be in the early stages of this Nation's history. I want to be part of the positive history that protects every boy and girl, every man and woman, every family from the injustices that will come about through an unruly and a wrong-headed direction as it relates to the rule of law. Let me thank you very much, Mr. Chairperson. Let me thank you again for yielding to me. And I think that we are making some important steps to help lead this Congress on issues that must be addressed to protect the American people and to work with the new President of the United States of America.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. He obviously had in mind that he could overturn our position on that, as the PATRIOT Act and, of course, in others, yes. And, of course, we had the famous memo, the memorandum that came in one of the Department of Justice, if you will, lawyers who today still defend----

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I will be happy to do so because I think it really hit us over this last 8 years. The legislature, our body, the House and the Senate, would write a bill, and we would do our work teams. We would have what we call a conference, and that means that House and Senate Members would come to the conference. We'd finish that bill. It could be on the Medicare prescription drug benefit, of course, which was so controversial and went completely upside down and cost Americans millions and millions of dollars. That bill would go to the President's desk, and he would sign it with a signing statement saying you and the administration, my executives, my State Department, my Health and Human Services, my Department of Transportation, you don't have to pay attention to that at all. So they would completely have the authority or they would sense that their President has told them that the law that was passed by this body fairly representing the many millions of Americans in transparency--our hearings are open, the floor debate is open--did not matter. So the work that we might have done to create a summit jobs program, there might be a signing statement saying it's too costly or it is not a worthy program, ignore it. That means the Department of Labor could ignore it.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I thank you for yielding. I think you have drawn for me, and that's a wonderful cross-examination, counselor, but you've drawn for me to say that that is a simple underpinning of a blue ribbon commission, to restore the understanding of the Constitution. Might I tell my friends around America and my colleagues that are here that there is something called legislative history, and years down the road that legislative document will be used to help further interpret the actual law itself. That's why we're on the floor of the House, and this will be used to further interpret the understanding. So the gentleman that was captured inappropriately by Canada, and there may be people now incarcerated here in the United States, they will look to the laws and its legislative history to assist them. For example, two border patrol agents' sentences have been commuted. I happen to be a supporter of that. Why? I was a supporter of that because I found the facts needed to, in essence, provide mercy. It seemed like a contrary position by someone from the Progressive Caucus. But I also believe there should be fairness to individuals who were dealing with drugs on the border and an incident happened. I would have preferred for them to be reprimanded and fired if they misused a firearm or some other handling of it. They were incarcerated, in jail. I happen to think that even their rights might have been somewhat shortchanged. So the sentence was commuted. In the course of that, there was probably a statement of sorts, some explanation that can be used further down the road to say why the sentence was commuted. So this blue ribbon commission, and I know you're about to drop and I hope to join with you, I think is a vital response to the cleansing of the last actions that occurred in the last 8 years but also to help support what the Constitution stands for. Our duty is to provide the eyes and ears of the American people. Let me just finish with a point as well. I talked about FISA, but I wanted to also talk about the Congressional Lawmaking Authority Protection Act, which we are reintroducing, and it has to do with signing statements. And one would think we have this new President which we are so enthusiastic of supporting.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. The Constitution of the United States of America.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, yesterday the theme ``One America'' rose to the highest mountain tops as we celebrated the inauguration of President Barack Obama and Vice President Biden. There were many great heroes yesterday, those in the audience and those working for us. I rise today to congratulate one of my own, Houston Metro Police Officer Eliot Swainson, who, with his quick reaction, saved a 68-year- old woman who fell on a train station. With his attention to detail, seeing the Red Line train coming very fast, he directed the woman to get under a cove area and remain there because they could not pull her up in time. Officer Swainson exhibited quick service, a quick attitude and a great deal of hope, and I am grateful that there were many from my community who were here to observe and congratulate Officer Eliot Swainson, a 15-year Houston Metro Police veteran. They were Rev. Samuel Smith, Rev. Harvey Clements, Bishop James Dixon, Rev. Lightfoot, Rev. Marcus Crosby, Rev. Kirby John Caldwell, Rev. Edwin Davis and many others who are so very proud of the idea that we are, in fact, our brothers' and sisters' keeper. Thank you, Houston Metro Police Officer Eliot Swainson. We wish you well, and we wish you the continued attitude that in America we are all our brothers' and sisters' keepers.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, this is a moment to pause as we speak on the floor of the House in this enormously symbolic year, a very special time to honor Dr. Martin Luther King. I would like to thank my chairman, John Conyers, for the role he has played, both in the fact that Dr. King saw fit to endorse him in his first run for Congress out of the great city of Detroit; he probably envisioned a man that would be a fighter for justice, and he has not been disappointed. My colleagues have just listened to John Lewis, who remains the conscience of this Nation and of this Congress. Oh how he must have felt yesterday as he saw the continuum of a dream. I stand here as a former staffer of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, having had the opportunity to work under the tutelage of the soldiers, the foot soldiers of Dr. Martin Luther King, being reminded of traveling up and down Auburn, and finding that almost storefront building that represented and embodied all of the cerebral thought, all of the brain power, all of the love, all of the courage, all of the strength of those who found guidance in Dr. King. And so this is a particularly important resolution, for many have asked those of us who look like me whether or not the dream has been completed. I will say that there is a man that now sits in the White House who holds the dream, and he has given us our roadmap. And that roadmap is that we are in this together, that we are the wind beneath his wings, that America has always been and should be a One America. And we are reminded of Dr. King's words in 1963, where he talked about not looking at anyone for their color or their religion. Isn't this great and wonderful that we have now come full circle to have the words and his dreaming come to a point where we are now comfortable with not looking at each other by the color of our skin or our ethnicity. And so, yes, the dream is continuing. But Dr. Martin Luther King, and the reason I rise today, was a prophet in his time. For many, they are not used to using that term. He told us about economic hard times and the desire to give everyone an opportunity for education and their day in the sun and the economic opportunity, and look at us today. Our President is now trying to lead us in the message of Dr. King; that as long as anyone suffers, any of our brothers and sisters are not able to have food on the table or a job, to look into the bright future, to give a child a chance to be an astronaut or a president or a teacher, then Dr. King's dream must continue. And as I have talked to Martin Luther King III and visited with the sister of Dr. King and the daughter of Dr. King, they agree that we are in this fight together; that the Judiciary Committee has its role in this Congress to ensure that the rule of law is followed, that we torture no more. Oh what a great day yesterday was and the day before, the commemoration of Dr. King's birthday. But isn't it greater now that America stands one and united, not off in the shopping centers on his birthday, but now understanding what it truly meant that those who suffered and bled did not do so for themselves, but honestly did so, so that all of my friends, from Texas and Georgia and New York and Mississippi and Washington State, Michigan and Illinois, and the deep parts of Georgia and, yes, Texas could look at each other as friends, brothers and sisters, even our sisters and brothers who yet have not learned the English language but they are striving to become a great part of this great Nation. So I am celebrating this resolution that recounts the history of Dr. King. Madam Speaker, isn't it great that we end that this is one Nation, one America, and Dr. King told us so. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of this resolution supporting the observation of the birthday of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and encouraging the people of the United States to observe the birthday of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and the life and legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. I thank my colleague Representative John Lewis for authoring this resolution. I urge my colleagues to support this resolution also. Madam Speaker, a few days ago, the Nation observed for the 21st time the Martin Luther King, Jr. holiday. Each year this day is set aside for Americans to celebrate the life and legacy of a man who brought hope and healing to America. The Martin Luther King holiday reminds us that nothing is impossible when we are guided by the better angels of our nature. We must continue to recognize the life and legacy of Dr. King. We must continue to honor his legacy by serving on the day that we have set aside to observe his life. Dr. King's inspiring words filled a great void in our Nation, and answered our collective longing to become a country that truly lived by its noblest principles. Yet, Dr. King knew that it wasn't enough just to talk the talk; he knew he had to walk the walk for his words to be credible. And so we commemorate on this holiday the man of action, who put his life on the line for freedom and justice everyday. Every January 19th, this Nation honors the courage of a man who endured harassment, threats and beatings, and even bombings. We commemorate the man who went to jail 29 times to achieve freedom for others, and who knew he would pay the ultimate price for his leadership, but kept on marching and protesting and organizing anyway. Dr. King once said that we all have to decide whether we ``will walk in the light of creative altruism or the darkness of destructive selfishness. Life's most persistent and nagging question, he said, is `what are you doing for others?' '' When Martin talked about the end of his mortal life in one of his last sermons, on February 4, 1968, in the pulpit of Ebenezer Baptist Church, even then he lifted up the value of service as the hallmark of a full life. ``I'd like somebody to mention on that day Martin Luther King, Jr. tried to give his life serving others,'' he said. ``I want you to say on that day, that I did try in my life . . . to love and serve humanity.'' Madam Speaker, during these difficult days when the United States is bogged down in a misguided and mismanaged war in Iraq; calamities on Wall Street--Main Street--and in the American automobile industry; we should also remember that the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., who was above all, a person who was always willing to serve to help his fellow man. This year thousands of Americans across the country will celebrate the national holiday honoring the life and work of Martin Luther King, Jr. by making the holiday ``a day on, not a day off.'' The King Day of Service is a way to transform Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s life and teachings into community service that helps solve social problems. That service may meet a tangible need, such as fixing up a school or senior center, or it may meet a need of the spirit, such as building a sense of community or mutual responsibility. On this day, Americans of every age and background celebrate Dr. King through service projects that: Strengthen Communities--Dr. King recognized the power of service to strengthen communities and achieve common goals. Through his words and example, Dr. King challenged individuals to take action and lift up their neighbors and communities through service. Empower Individuals--Dr. King believed each individual possessed the power to lift himself or herself up no matter what his or her circumstances--rich or poor, black or white, man or woman. Whether teaching literacy skills, helping an older adult surf the Web, or helping an individual build the skills they need to acquire a job, acts of service can help others improve their own lives while doing so much for those who serve, as well. Bridge Barriers--In his fight for civil rights, Dr. King inspired Americans to think beyond themselves, look past differences, and work toward equality. Serving side by side, community service bridges barriers between people and teaches us that in the end, we are more alike than we are different. These ideas of unity, purpose, and the great things that can happen when we work together toward a common goal--are just some of the many reasons we honor Dr. King through service on this special holiday. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this legislation and the man who epitomized community service--Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Just yesterday, January 20, 2009, this Nation witnessed a historic moment. We stood in awe and watched the inauguration of this Nation's first African American President. We have come a long way since Dr. King's ``I Have a Dream'' speech. Yesterday, we have seen another part of the ``dream'' fulfilled. I am hopeful and expectant that America's future will be bright, and that it will be even brighter under the helm and leadership of President Barack Obama. President Obama has taught us that yes we can! I am delighted to be living the dream.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Res. 56, ``Expressing support for designation of the week of February 2 through February 6, 2009, as `National School Counseling Week.' '' I would like to thank my colleague Congresswoman Linda Sanchez for highlighting such essential education staff with this important resolution. This resolution brings public attention to the unique contribution of professional school counselors within our Nation's school systems. National School Counseling Week highlights the tremendous impact school counselors can have in helping students achieve school success and plan for a career. It recognizes that school counselors help develop well-rounded students by guiding them through their academic, personal, social, and career development. They play a vital role in ensuring that students are aware of financial aid and college opportunities as well as encouraging students to pursue challenging academic courses to prepare them for college majors and careers in the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics fields. School counselors provide support for students whose family members have been deployed to conflicts overseas and help students cope with serious and common challenges of growing up, including peer pressure, mental health issues, school violence, disciplinary problems, and problems in the home. School counselors are among the few professionals in a school building that are trained in both education and mental health. Despite the important contributions of school counselors to student success, counseling positions are not always protected when budgets are cut, especially in tough economic times. The average student-to-counselor ratio in America's public schools, 475 to 1, is almost double the 250 to 1 ratio recommended by the American School Counselor Association, the American Counseling Association, and other organizations. As chair of the Congressional Children's Caucus, I understand how important school counselors are for our youth. Madam Speaker, today many youth face temptations that often lead them down destructive paths and it is vitally important that we provide guidance that helps them make good decisions. Why do we need to highlight the work of school counselors? There are 35.2 million young people ages 10-18 in the U.S. today; of those young people: 1 out of 4 lives with only one parent; 1 out of 10 was born to teen parents; 1 out of 5 lives in poverty; 1 out of 10 will not finish high school. Madam Speaker, a school counselor is sometimes the only person to whom our young people can go for advice and guidance. Imagine how many young lives could be positively impacted if we increased the number of school counselors and remembered their important role when budgets are cut. School counselors can help give those youth living in poverty to strive towards a brighter future for themselves. Every child could benefit from having someone in his or her life to turn to for advice and help in the time of need. The positive relationships and reinforcement that school counselors provide is clearly effective. Young people today are confronted with many challenges in life. They can find the confidence to overcome many of these challenges through quality counseling. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this legislation.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, I rise today to commend the University of Florida's 2008 football team for winning the 2008 NCAA National Championship on January 8, 2009, over the Oklahoma Sooners. The 2008 Florida Gators football team represented the University of Florida exceptionally well in the 2008 college football season. The team was coached by Urban Meyer and finished the season ranked as the number one team in the Associated Press poll and USA Today Coaches poll. After clinching the Southeastern Conference Eastern Division, the team defeated the then number one-ranked Alabama Crimson Tide 31-20 in the 2008 SEC Championship Game to win the EC title. The Gators closed their season after the 2009 BCS National Championship Game, where they defeated the Oklahoma Sooners for the BCS National Championship with a score of 24-14. In over 100 years of play, Florida has been recognized as SEC champions eight times--finishing first in the conference an additional three times--and were national champions of the 1996, 2006, and 2008 college football seasons. The University of Florida is the winningest college football team in the Nation since 1990. Understandably so, I know that Congressman Stearns and the other Representatives from the State of Florida are quite proud of this amazing feat, just as I had the opportunity to rejoice when the pride of Texas, our University of Texas Longhorns, celebrated their national championship victory at the Rose Bowl in 2006. Madam Speaker, this commendation today recognizes this exceptional team and the University of Florida's athletic program's rich winning tradition. This resolution also notes the extraordinary commitment and daily sacrifices made by these outstanding young men. I would also like to commend the ``Pride of the Sunshine'' Fightin' Gator Marching Band who performed magnificently and one of their alumna and an important member of my staff, Erin Dominguez.

Ms JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for affording me this opportunity to address H. Res. 62, the rule providing for consideration of H.R. 384, the TARP Reform and Accountability Act of 2009. I believe the rule can be supported by every Member of the House. Mr. Speaker, I was pleased to work with Chairman Frank and his staff on significant portions of this Manager's Amendment to ensure that small and minority businesses along with local, community, and private banks gain fair and equitable access to the TARP funds. Small businesses are the backbone of our Nation, and unfortunately, they have not been afforded the opportunity that large financial institutions have received to TARP funds and loans. With the ever worsening economic crisis, we must ensure in this legislation that small and minority businesses and community banks are afforded an opportunity to benefit from this important legislation. I am very pleased that this Manager's Amendment does just this. This bill will amend the TARP provisions of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (EESA) to strengthen accountability, close loopholes, increase transparency, and most importantly, require the Treasury Department to take significant steps on foreclosure mitigation. Mr. Speaker, I was particularly pleased to work with Chairman Frank and his staff on significant portions of the Manager's Amendment to this legislation which ensures that small and minority businesses along with local, community, and private banks gain fair and equitable access to the TARP funds. It's been 3 months since the Treasury started disbursing TARP funds. Just in time perhaps for a lot of big banks, however smaller banks have been locked out so far. A lot of small banks certainly are in need of relief as the real estate crisis continues to unfold and hundreds have already applied. According to recent reports, the Treasury Department has yet to issue ``the necessary guidelines for about 3,000 additional private banks. Most of them are set up as partnerships, with no more than 100 shareholders. They are not able to issue preferred shares to the government in exchange for capital injections, as other banks can.'' While Treasury officials state they are ``working on a solution,'' for these private banks time is of the essence. The Treasury Department has handed out more than $155 billion to 77 banks. Of that sum, $115 billion has gone to the eight largest banks. Community banks hold 11 percent of the industry's total assets and play a vital role in small business and agriculture lending. Community banks provide 29 percent of small commercial and industrial loans, 40 percent of small commercial real estate loans and 77 percent of small agricultural production loans. Specifically, I worked with Chairman Frank on the language in the Manager's Amendment. In Section 107, the Manager's Amendment creates an Office of Minority and Women Inclusion, which will be responsible for developing and implementing standards and procedures to ensure the inclusion and utilization of minority and women-owned businesses. These businesses will include financial institutions, investment banking firms, mortgage banking firms, broker-dealers, accountants, and consultants. Furthermore, the inclusion of these businesses should be at all levels, including procurement, insurance, and all types of contracts such as the issuance or guarantee of debt, equity, or mortgage-related securities. This office will also be responsible for diversity in the management, employment, and business activities of the TARP, including the management of mortgage and securities portfolios, making of equity investments, the sale and servicing of mortgage loans, and the implementation of its affordable housing programs and initiatives. Section 107 also calls for the Secretary of the Treasury to report to Congress in 180 days detailed information describing the actions taken by the Office of Minority and Women Inclusion, which will include a statement of the total amounts provided under TARP to small, minority, and women-owned businesses. The Manager's Amendment in Section 404 also has clarifying language ensuring that the Secretary has authority to support the availability of small business loans and loans to minority and disadvantaged businesses. This will be critical to ensuring that small and minority businesses have access to loans, financing, and purchase of asset-backed securities directly through the Treasury Department or the Federal Reserve. Mr. Speaker, and I urge my colleagues to support this rule.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I'd be happy to yield.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Well, let me thank you specifically for the Office of Minority and Women Inclusion. It is a great edition. And I would say this is a tough business. People are hurting. It's time to move forward on a newly regulated TARP, the American people's taxpayer dollars will be protected. Mr Chair, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 384, the Troubled Assets Relief Program, TARP, Reform and Accountability Act of 2009. This bill will amend the TARP provisions of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, EESA, to strengthen accountability, close loopholes, increase transparency, and most importantly, require the Treasury Department to take significant steps on foreclosure mitigation. Mr. Chair, I was particularly pleased to work with Chairman Frank and his staff on significant portions of the manager's amendment to this legislation which ensures that small and minority businesses along with local, community, and private banks gain fair and equitable access to the TARP funds. It has been 3 months since the Treasury started disbursing TARP funds. Just in time perhaps for a lot of big banks; however, smaller banks have been locked out so far. A lot of small banks certainly are in need of relief as the real estate crisis continues to unfold and hundreds have already applied. According to recent reports, the Treasury Department has yet to issue ``the necessary guidelines for about 3,000 additional private banks. Most of them are set up as partnerships, with no more than 100 shareholders. They are not able to issue preferred shares to the government in exchange for capital injections, as other banks can.'' While Treasury officials state they are ``working on a solution,'' for these private banks time is of the essence. The Treasury Department has handed out more than $155 billion to 77 banks. Of that sum, $115 billion has gone to the eight largest banks. Community banks hold 11 percent of the industry's total assets and play a vital role in small business and agriculture lending. Community banks provide 29 percent of small commercial and industrial loans, 40 percent of small commercial real estate loans, and 77 percent of small agricultural production loans. This manager's amendment requires that the Treasury Department act promptly to permit smaller community financial institutions that have been shut out so far to participate on the same terms as the large financial institutions that have already received funds. Small businesses are the backbone of our Nation, and unfortunately, they have not been afforded the opportunity that large financial institutions have received to TARP funds and loans. Small businesses represent more than the American dream--they represent the American economy. Small businesses account for 95 percent of all employers, create half of our gross domestic product, and provide three out of four new jobs in this country. Small business growth means economic growth for the Nation. We cannot stabilize and revitalize our economy without ensuring the inclusion and participation of the small business segment of our economy. With the ever worsening economic crisis, we must ensure in this legislation that small and minority businesses and community banks are afforded an opportunity to benefit from this important legislation. I am very pleased that the manager's amendment will effect this change. In Section 107, the manager's amendment creates an Office of Minority and Women Inclusion, which will be responsible for developing and implementing standards and procedures to ensure the inclusion and utilization of minority and women-owned businesses. These businesses will include financial institutions, investment banking firms, mortgage banking firms, broker-dealers, accountants, and consultants. Furthermore, the inclusion of these businesses should be at all levels, including procurement, insurance, and all types of contracts such as the issuance or guarantee of debt, equity, or mortgage-related securities. This office will also be responsible for diversity in the management, employment, and business activities of the TARP, including the management of mortgage and securities portfolios, making of equity investments, the sale and servicing of mortgage loans, and the implementation of its affordable housing programs and initiatives. Section 107 also calls for the Secretary of the Treasury to report to Congress in 180 days detailed information describing the actions taken by the Office of Minority and Women Inclusion, which will include a statement of the total amounts provided under TARP to small, minority, and women-owned businesses. The manager's amendment in Section 404 also has clarifying language ensuring that the Secretary has authority to support the availability of small business loans and loans to minority and disadvantaged businesses. This will be critical to ensuring that small and minority businesses have access to loans, financing, and purchase of asset-backed securities directly through the Treasury Department or the Federal Reserve. H.R. 384 reforms TARP by increasing oversight, reporting, monitoring and accountability. It requires any existing or future institution that receives funding under TARP to provide no less than quarterly public reporting on its use of TARP funding. Any insured depository institution that receives funding under TARP is required to report quarterly on the amount of any increased lending, or reduction in decrease of lending and related activity attributable to such financial assistance. In connection with any new receipt of TARP funds, Treasury is also required to reach an agreement with the institution, and its primary Federal regulator on how the funds are to be used and benchmarks the institution is required to meet so as to advance the purposes of the act to strengthen the soundness of the financial system and the availability of credit to the economy. In addition, a recipient institution's primary Federal regulator must specifically examine use of funds and compliance with any program requirements, including executive compensation and any specific agreement terms. Mr. Chair, I am pleased that this legislation has strong requirements regarding executive compensation. For any new receipt of TARP funds, except those by small financial institutions, this legislation applies the most stringent non-tax executive compensation restrictions from EESA across the board including: 1. Requiring Treasury to prohibit incentives that encourage excessive risks, 2. Providing for claw-back of compensation received based on materially inaccurate statements; and 3. Prohibits all golden parachute payment for the duration of the investment. Included in this legislation is a requirement of government board representation by authorizing Treasury to have an observer at board or board committee meetings of recipient institutions. This legislation changes the structure and authority of TARP board--the Financial Stability Oversight Board is expanded to include the Chairman of the FDIC and two additional members who are not currently Federal employees, who shall be appointed by President and subject to Senate confirmation. The Board will have the authority to overturn policy decisions of the Treasury Secretary by a two-thirds vote. Mr. Chair, the act provides that the second $350 billion is conditioned on the use of up to $100 billion, but no less than $40 billion, for foreclosure mitigation, with plan required by March 15, 2009. By that date, the Secretary shall develop, subject to TARP Board approval, a comprehensive plan to prevent and mitigate foreclosures on residential mortgages. The Secretary shall begin committing TARP funds to implement the plan no later than April 1, 2009. The Secretary must certify to Congress by May 15, 2009, if he has not committed more than required minimum $40 billion. The foreclosure mitigation plans must apply only to owner-occupied residences and shall leverage private capital to the maximum extent possible consistent with maximizing prevention of foreclosures. Treasury must use some combination of the following program alternatives: 1. Guarantee program for qualifying loan modifications under a systematic plan, which may be delegated to the FDIC or other contractor; 2. Bringing costs of Hope for Homeowner loans down, beyond mandatory changes in Title V below, either through coverage of fees, purchasing H4H mortgages to ensure affordable rates, or both; 3. Program for loans to pay down second lien mortgages that are impeding a loan modification subject to any writedown by existing lender Treasury may require; 4. Servicer incentives/assistance--payments to servicers in connection with implementation of qualifying loan modifications; and 5. Purchase of whole loans for the purpose of modifying or refinancing the loans with authorization to delegate to FDIC. In consultation with the FDIC and HUD and with the approval of the Board, Treasury may determine that modifications to an initial plan are necessary to achieve the purposes of this act or that modifications to component programs of the plan are necessary to maximize prevention of foreclosure and minimize costs to the taxpayers. A safe harbor from liability is provided to servicers who engage in loan modifications, regardless of any provisions in a servicing agreement, so long as the servicer acts in a manner consistent with the duty established in Homeowner Emergency Relief Act, maximize the net present value, NPV, of pooled mortgages to all investors as a whole; engage in loan modifications for mortgages that are in default or for which default is reasonably foreseeable; the property is owner- occupied; the anticipated recovery on the mod would exceed, on an NPV basis, the anticipated recovery through foreclosure. This bill requires persons who bring suit unsuccessfully against servicers for engaging in loan modifications under the act to pay the servicers' court costs and legal fees. It also requires servicers who modify loans under the safe harbor to regularly report to the Treasury on the extent, scope, and results of the servicer's modification activities. In addition to the above requirements, an oversight panel is required to report to Congress by July 1 on the actions taken by Treasury on foreclosure mitigation and the impact and effectiveness of the actions in minimizing foreclosures and minimizing costs to the taxpayers. H.R. 384 clarifies and confirms Treasury authorization to provide assistance to automobile manufacturers under the TARP. With respect to the assistance already provided to the domestic automobile industry, includes conditions of the House auto bill, including long-term restructuring requirements. There is further clarification on: Treasury's authority to provide support to the financing arms of automakers for financing activities is clarified to ensure that they can continue to provide needed credit, including through dealer and other financing of consumer and business auto and other vehicle loans and dealer floor loans; Treasury's authority to establish facilities to support the availability of consumer loans, such as student loans, and auto and other vehicle loans. Such support may include the purchase of asset- backed securities, directly or through the Federal Reserve; Treasury's authority to provide support for commercial real estate loans and mortgage-backed securities; and Treasury's authority to provide support to issuers of municipal securities, including through the direct purchase of municipal securities or the provision of credit enhancements in connection with any Federal Reserve facility to finance the purchase of municipal securities. In addition, more reforms are enunciated for homeowners in title V. The home buyer stimulus provisions requires Treasury to develop a program, outside of the TARP, to stimulate demand for home purchases and clear inventory of properties, including through ensuring the availability of affordable mortgages rates for qualified home buyers. In developing such a program Treasury may take into consideration impact on areas with highest inventories of foreclosed properties. The programs will be executed through the purchase of mortgages and MBS using funding under HERA. Treasury will provide mechanisms to ensure availability of such reduced rate loans through financial institutions that act as either originators or as portfolio lenders. Under this provision, Treasury has to make affordable rates available under this program available in connection with Hope for Homeowner refinancing program. This legislation will give a permanent increase in FDIC and NCUA deposit insurance limits, it makes permanent the increase in deposit insurance coverage for banks and credit unions to $250,000, which was enacted temporarily as part of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act and is scheduled to sunset on December 31, 2009, and includes an inflation adjustment provision for future coverage. Finally, I applaud Chairman Frank and the Committee on Financial Services for their hard work on this important piece of legislation. In this economic climate it is critical for us to remember that while we need to assist our financial institutions, we cannot do this without implementing reforms to protect Americans' hard-earned money. I strongly urge my colleagues to join me in support of this important legislation.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I'd be happy to yield.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. We talked about minority participation. You have now some language that says, not only can they benefit as small businesses from loans, but they can service or participate in that process of doing business.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. We thank you very much. And the language does move this along, and I want to thank you. Quickly, let me also thank you for regulating the automobile industry, which you promised to do, which you also worked specifically to provide more credit to the automobile industry. But in that light we talked about----

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Let me thank the chairman very much. And I might just simply say that I remember the haggling previously in the last year about this bill. And one of the issues was the veto threat of the President in not allowing us to add language earlier. We fought for it. Let me thank the chairman very much for what we've all fought for over the years, over the last couple of months, and that is the amount of, if you will, mortgage set aside money. I want to announce that over and over again, that there is now money included in here to directly work with my constituent who I sat down at her kitchen table. She gets $18,000 a year, but she's hardworking and she had a home that she could afford, except for the adjustable rate. So I want to thank for that. And it is something that I want more. We all want more, but we're starting out in that direction to be able to focus on mortgage workouts. Mr. Chairman, I'd like to engage in a colloquy at this time. Quickly, the Treasury Department has yet to issue the necessary guidelines for about 3,000 additional private banks. Most of them are set up as partnerships with no more than 100 shareholders. They are not able to issue preferred shares to the government in exchange for capital injections at other banks. However, they are very vital to the inner city. And I ask, in our work together, whether or not if you can explain the language.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support for the ``Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2009.'' We stand today, closer to helping 4 million children without health insurance. No longer will these children be forced to live with fear of getting sick. Today is a great day. Today we can bring 4 million children into the fold. Today we can tell those 4 million children that are begging for help that Yes We Can!