Sheila Jackson Lee

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Can you imagine that the human rights and dignity of those who are already brutalized through a horrific tragedy of catastrophic proportions are now denied their human dignity because this oppressive regime in Burma refuses to allow the international aid organizations to go forward? I hope by our reemphasizing this declaration, that we will stand in abhorrence, in outrage over such undignified treatment. And then I would ask, as we move forward, that we can no longer tolerate the genocide in Sudan, and the completely reckless response of the Sudanese Government in Khartoum to the dignity and human rights of those in Darfur. We have a litany of those. Those Tibetans who continue to fight every day in Tibet simply to be acknowledged, simply to allow the Dalai Lama to return over religion reasons. And to think that he has to be denied the right to come back over religion reasons, Mr. Speaker. They allow him to come on political reasons, on government affirmation, on saluting the government, but just to be able to engage in his religious, if you will, explanation, he is denied his human rights, the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world. We could give a roll call along the way of the travesties of justice. Might I compliment and announce the change-around in Liberia with President Johnson, who recognized a nation that had literally burned the principles of human dignity and human rights; now, with her stellar leadership, she is restoring the dignity to the Liberian people. It can be done. It can be done in Sudan. It can be done in Bangladesh. It can be done in Burma. It can be done in North Vietnam. It can be done in places where oppression exists. But I rise today to recount the tragedies of denial of human rights, but also to applaud those who have overcome. And I believe it is our responsibility to not only applaud them, but to encourage them. I ask my colleagues to support this legislation, and let us do it by words and deeds.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Let me thank the distinguished chairperson of the Africa Subcommittee on Foreign Affairs and the full committee chair, Mr. Berman, and the ranking member of the full committee, Ms. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, and the ranking member of the subcommittee that Mr. Payne chairs. This is an important reiteration of this Congress' commitment to the premises of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. And I might read, in part, the language of this declaration that says, ``The recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world.'' I believe that there is no better time than the time that we are engaged in today, the era of the world status, to reemphasize the importance of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The United Nations General Assembly proclaimed it on December 10, 1948, and the language stated that it was declared as a ``common standard of achievement for all peoples and nations.'' Sadly, in the 21st century, when we would hope to be celebrating the foundation of freedom, justice and peace to the world, the world is conflicted. It is conflicted in Iraq, where the different, distinctive ethnic groups of Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds are engaged in violations, respectively, of each of them by the other. And so even in a place of disruption in Iraq, in a war that I oppose, we have concerns that are ignoring the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. We must call for the protection of human rights in Iraq. We must call for the protection of human rights in Iran. Today, I had the chance to speak to a young woman in Iran long distance, international conversation to Miriam, a young woman of 22, who had a wonderful vision in front of us for freedom, and the ability to be the best interior designer the world would know. To do that, she must have freedom, justice and peace in the world. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights must apply to Iran. And as we look to the tragedy in Burma, now some weeks old, to understand that the junta continues to oppress those who suffer from the terrible and horrific tragedy that occurred, that people sit along roadsides trying to find, if you will, the resources that will come to them through the international aid organizations, and their oppressive regime is denying them that right.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I thank the distinguished gentlelady from California for yielding, and let me add my appreciation for the vast knowledge that she brings, particularly as it relates to the comparisons of our health care, to the international system of health care, having been an ambassador and knowing, really, some of the stark contrasts between nations that are developing and have a better health care system than we have here in the United States. I want to add my appreciation as well to Chairman John Conyers, who has single-handedly led the cause and the fight for universal access to health care, particularly as it relates to the legislation that all of us are looking forward to seeing passed, because this is legislation that clearly is enormously important. So I want to speak today on some issues and share some stories of individuals who are suffering in the State of Texas. Maybe those who are within the sound of our voices will understand that we do not take your plight lightly. We have heard Members come on the floor of the House and talk about the spiraling gasoline prices, we have heard them talk about the crisis in the housing market. I was in my district, and we had an hour-long program, and we really couldn't end the program. It was a television program, and all of the questions were on the foreclosure market. The producer came out and said, they don't want to ask any other questions. They just want to ask about the foreclosures. People are hurting, and if you juxtapose the high food gasoline prices high food prices and your mortgage being foreclosed on, or no place to live, can you imagine what it is like? You can imagine, with no health insurance, catastrophic conditions, with the backdrop of the spiraling unemployment, then I would say that we have a human crisis, an American crisis where people are falling on the spear. Yesterday, I introduced the Medicare Efficiency and Development of Improvement of Care and Services Act, MEDICS Act, of 2008. It is a complement to universal access to healthcare. But if we had universal access to health care, many of these issues would not have to be, if you will, remedied piece by piece. Just to give you a very brief overview, the bill that I introduced has an elimination of discriminatory copayment rates of Medicare outpatient mental health services. It also prohibits and limits certain sales and marketing activities under Medicare Advantage, and it has exemptions from income and resources for determination of eligibility for low-income subsidy. One of the key elements is if you are on Medicaid and you die, this eliminates the ability of States to collect from your estate, you don't have anything. It may be that you are leaving minimal resources to your children, and lo and behold, they want to grab that up to pay for the long-term care that you needed while you were in the hospital under Medicaid, more insult to your dignity. So very quickly let me say that I rise to support H.R. 676, the United States National Health Insurance Act, that is sponsored and introduced by my colleague, Chairman Conyers, of which I am an original cosponsor. I would just simply say in the State of Texas when you look at HIV and STDs, for example, there are 22,948 total AIDS cases in Harris County, this was in 2005. These are people who may have health issues we have to address. According to the Texas Department of State Health Services, 72.9 percent of African Americans in Texas are overweight, while 60.3 percent of the Anglo white population are overweight. That bodes for an unfortunate health situation. H.R. 676 would cover health care costs and would decrease for both families and for businesses. Currently the average family of four covered under an employee plan spends $4,225 on health care, $2,713 on premiums and $1,522 on medical services. I would say to you that under H.R. 676 a family of four making the medium income of $56,200 would pay about $2,700 for all health care costs, including the current Medicare. Is that not a reformation of this system? Is that not a light at the end of the tunnel? Businesses would benefit as well. They would pay a 4.75 percent payroll tax for all health care costs, including the current Medicare tax. For an employee making a median annual family income of $56,000, the employee would pay about $2,700 per year. That is the answer that we are giving tonight and why we are here on floor of the House. We want you to know, our colleague, that there is relief. We can move H.R. 676, which is based on the traditional Medicare model and provide health care coverage for a family of four that is drastically different from the crisis that they are facing today, because today they are facing a crisis such that if they are in any catastrophic illness you can be assured that they will have no relief. Let me close by sharing with you two very painful stories, and you can understand why, might I say to you, there are pages and pages of stories of those who are suffering in this dilemma of having to pay for all of these expenses and short-changing their families on health care. The lack of health care leads to death. Impossibly high gas prices can lead you to public transportation, it may lead you to walking. It may lead you not to going to places where you have not often gone, but you are still alive and might even be healthy. The lack of food may mean that you have a little less on the table, and it may mean your health, but it actually will not kill you directly. Certainly we know that we want better education and our troops home. But if you do not have good health care, it can lead to your death. Whether it's preventive health care, whether it's mental health services, it can actually lead to the death of your loved one. Poor health care can lead to the death of your loved one. We are speaking of life and death. This story is from Mike. ``I lost my job as an RN for advocating for better staffing ratios and patient safety.'' That means here is a registered nurse who is trying to fight for better quality of health care, got fired. ``With that job loss, I lost my medical insurance. On New Year's Day I had an ocular stroke. I was having symptoms for a couple of days prior, but without medical insurance, decisions are made in a different manner.'' ``I put off the treatment because I didn't have money to pay. In the process I delayed treatment, and now I am blind in that eye. If I had insurance, I would have sought treatment sooner. I am a health care professional who delayed treatment decisions because of the cost and lack of insurance.'' This person could have died. Now they are blind which limits I imagine some of their occupational opportunities. They are blind because America allowed them to live without health insurance. This is my final testament to the crisis we are in. This is from Robin: ``My daughter has a developmental disorder, something in the autism spectrum, her pediatrician has guessed. I am not certain of the extent of the diagnosis of her disorder due to the lack of my funds, being a single mother, and lack of quality health insurance. I can scrape together money to take her to the doctor if she has any routine sickness, and I push my budget the best I can to pay for 30 minutes of private speech therapy a week to complement what the school system provides. But there is so much more she needs. She could do so much better with medication that could possibly help her lead a decent life. If I could afford to get the extensive tests and evaluations, and even then, who knows if I could afford the medicine. She cannot qualify for SSI or Medicaid; they say I make too much money. That is an outrage. She cannot qualify for CHIPs; again, they say I make too much money. But I don't. Once I pay for day care, speech therapy, clothing, car insurance, food and shelter, transportation, the rising cost of gasoline, $38,000 gross without child support is not enough money. Can you imagine that they say $38,000 kicks her out of Medicaid and the CHIP program, especially when all your daughter can qualify for is a super-expensive health insurance risk pool. What can I do? I want the American dream, but I cannot have it. I am stuck in this old, falling- apart apartment with an old car and inadequate health coverage with my sweet, 7-year-old daughter. God help us, she deserves better.'' God help America. America deserves better. This universal access to health care is what we all should believe is the American dream. I close by simply saying what our Founding Fathers said: We all are created equal with certain inalienable rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. I will just simply say that God has to help us come to our senses and pass this legislation, H.R. 676, authored by my dear friend, John Conyers, and cosponsored by so many of us, otherwise God help us. I thank the gentlelady for her great leadership on this issue. I regard health care as one of the most pressing issues facing this country and the world. I have been a staunch supporter of legislation that aims to eliminate health disparities in this country, fight the HIV/AIDS pandemic, combat the childhood obesity crisis facing this Nation, and provide health insurance coverage for all Americans. Most of all, I strongly believe that quality healthcare should be affordable and accessible to all. Yesterday, I introduced the Medicare Efficiency and Development of Improvement of Care and Services Act (MEDICS Act) of 2008. For decades, Democrats have been fighting to fix the broken America's healthcare system and this initiative is an important tool to make sure that our most vulnerable get the healthcare they need. As a long supporter of Universal Health Care, I happy to announce that this legislation puts our healthcare system on the correct path of providing access to health care for our Nation's low income, minority and elderly populations. On Friday June 6, 2008, my colleague Senator Max Baucus introduced a health care reform bill that addresses these key problematic issues continuing to plague our health care system. I am happy to announce that The MEDICS Act is the companion bill to Senator Baucus' legislation, uniting Congress on one accord to push for crucial healthcare reform. In 2007, there was an estimated 47 million people uninsured in our Nation. This is un-American and unacceptable. Now is the time to ensure that every citizen has access to the proper health care benefits they need. In my house companion I have added a section requiring that within one year of enactment the Secretary, in coordination with the Association of American Medical Colleges, shall submit to Congress an effective plan to increase the number of primary care physicians particularly those practicing in counties, cities, or towns ``underserved'' or with a disproportionate number of Medicare-eligible and/or Medicare recipients. Without our primary care physicians, which act as the gateway to care we can never move towards an effective universal healthcare plan. According to the Texas Department of State Health Services, Texas HIV/STD Surveillance Report, there were 22,948 total AIDS cases in Harris County in 2005; a figure which almost doubled the next closest county in Texas. According to the Texas Department of State Health Services, 72.9 percent of African Americans in Texas are overweight or obese while 60.3 percent of White residents are obese. The need for a high-quality, accessible and affordable health care system has never been more urgent. There are currently 47 million uninsured Americans, 8 million of whom are children. Another 50 million are underinsured. Although the U.S. spends twice as much on health care per capita as countries with universal coverage, the World Health Organization ranks us 37th in overall health system performance. This Congress, I am an original cosponsor of H.R. 676, ``The United States National Health Insurance Act,'' introduced by my colleague Congressman Conyers. This act would allow for every American to receive heath Insurance. H.R. 676 would create a publicly financed, privately delivered health care system that improves and expands the already existing Medicare program to all U.S. residents, and all residents living in U.S. territories. The goal of the legislation is to ensure that all Americans will have access, guaranteed by law, to the highest quality and most cost effective health care services regardless of their employment, income or health care status. You, the American people called for universal health care, as it was one of the most prominent issues for Americans in the 2006 elections. The need for a high-quality, accessible and affordable health care system has never been more urgent. There are currently 47 million uninsured Americans, 8 million of whom are children. Another 50 million are underinsured. Although the U.S. spends twice as much on health care per capita as countries with universal coverage, the World Health Organization, ranks us 37th in overall health system performance. Major American corporations such as General Motors bear the brunt of an outdated health care system because they are at a competitive disadvantage relative to their international counterparts who pay less for health care. A Harvard study found that almost half of all bankruptcies are partially or fully related to health care bills. Universal health care would not cause a financial burden on American families. According to the Government Accountability Office (GAO), ``If the U.S. were to shift to a system of universal coverage and a single payer, as in Canada, the savings in administrative costs [10 percent of health spending] would be more than enough to offset the expense of universal coverage.'' Under H.R. 676, health care costs would decrease for both families and for businesses. Currently, the average family of four covered under an employee health plan spends a total of $4,225 on health care annually--$2,713 on premiums and another $1,522 on medical services, drugs and supplies. This figure does not include the additional 1.45 percent Medicare payroll tax levied on employees. Under H.R. 676, a family of four making the median family income of $56,200 per year would pay about $2,700 for all health care costs, including the current Medicare tax. Businesses will also save money under universal health care, as set forth by H.R. 676. In 2006, health insurers charged employers an average of $11,500 for a health plan for a family of four. On average, the employer paid 74 percent of this premium, or $8,510 per year. This figure does not include the additional 1.45 percent payroll tax levied on employers for Medicare. Under H.R. 676, employers would pay a 4.75 percent payroll tax for all health care costs, including the current Medicare tax. For an employee making the median annual family income of $56,200, the employer would pay about $2,700 per year. Our plan, H.R. 676, ``The United States National Health Insurance Act,'' guarantees every resident of the United States access to a full range of medically necessary services, including primary care, prescription drugs, mental health care and long term care. There are no co-pays or deductibles under this program. The role of the government would be limited to collecting revenues and disbursing payments; care would continue to be delivered privately. Patients could continue to use the same hospital, physician or health clinic from which they currently receive services. H.R. 676 is supported by over 210 labor unions and more than 100 grassroots groups across the country. The former editor of the New England Journal of Medicine, two former Surgeons General and 14,000 physicians support national health insurance. H.R. 676 is based on the traditional Medicare model, in which the government negotiates and pays service fees for private and public providers and mails its enrollees a card that gives them access to the doctors and hospitals of their choice. This system does not divert profits to insurance companies. This legislation is focused, first and foremost, on serving the American people, not on generating profits for big companies. Lack of health-care is no longer just a concern of those living in poverty. According to recent reports, more than one-third of the nearly 47 million uninsured Americans coming from households with family incomes of $40,000 or more, lack of health insurance has become a worry of the middle class. There is no reason why this country should continue down a dreadfully deleterious road of denying healthcare to any citizen of this country who needs it. Many of the health conditions, such as diabetes, obesity, kidney failure, cancer, hypertension and HIV/AIDS, the prevalence of which plagues our community the most, could be curtailed or even prevented if everyone had access to health insurance. I will continue to fight hard for the most effective policy measures that aim to narrow the racial health disparity gap.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I thank the chairman. Assessing the impact of the Merida Initiative on the border security operations of the relevant United States Government departments and agencies, including the Department of Homeland Security, and identify additional resources, if any, that the relevant United States Government departments and agencies, including the Department of Homeland Security, need to make available to carry out this initiative. I recall specifically as a member of the Subcommittee on Border Security writing legislation and the ranking member on the Immigration Subcommittee in our past Congresses on providing more resources for our Border Patrol. It was interesting that the administration was always voicing their leadership on the idea of border security, and our Border Patrol agents were suffering. There were not enough. They didn't have the kind of speedboats, night goggles and computers. Now you see it is like night and day because of legislation carried by members of the Democratic Caucus. And so it is important that as we go forward we find a collaboration of the Department of Homeland Security because human trafficking and drug trafficking are intertwined. The violation of the borders is intertwined with all we are doing here, and we need to have a collaboration with the Department of Homeland Security. I support this initiative, and I know it can be expanded. I rise today in cautious support of H.R. 6028, the ``Merida Initiative to Combat Illicit Narcotics and Reduce Organized Crime Act of 2008.'' I would like to thank my colleague Congressman Berman for introducing this legislation, as well as for his ongoing leadership as Chairman of the Committee on Foreign Affairs. While I do support this bill, I am extremely disappointed in the manner in which it was brought to the floor today. Like many Members, I have outstanding concerns about this legislation that have not yet been addressed, and I believe Members should have been given the opportunity to offer amendments to this important and far-reaching bill. I remain concerned about human rights in the region and I believe that the United States must do far more to address the demand for drugs in the United States, but I also believe that this legislation represents a positive step toward partnering with our southern neighbors to combat a problem that we share. Mr. Speaker, I had planned to introduce an amendment to this legislation that will require the President to submit a report (1) assessing the role of the relevant United States Government departments and agencies, including the Department of Homeland Security, in supporting the Merida Initiative; (2) providing specific information on what staffing, equipment, and other resources the relevant United States Government departments and agencies, including the Department of Homeland Security, have provided for the Merida Initiative; (3) assessing the impact of the Merida Initiative on the border security operations of the relevant United States Government departments and agencies, including the Department of Homeland Security; and (4) identifying additional resources, if any, that the relevant United States Government departments and agencies, including the Department of Homeland Security, need to make available to carry out the Merida Initiative. As a senior Member of the Committee on Homeland Security, I am cognizant of the fact that the Department of Homeland Security will play a major role in the implementation of the Merida Initiative. Among other things, Customs and Border Patrol will be involved in the procurement and training of non-intrusive inspection equipment (scanners, x-ray vans) and rescue and communications equipment, and Immigration and Customs Enforcement will be involved in modernizing Mexico's immigration database and the training of vetted units focused on anti-gang and anti-money laundering. In short, Mr. Speaker, the Merida Initiative will not be complete or successful without the cooperation of the Department of Homeland Security and the dedication of its brave men and women. The report required by my Amendment would have made sure Congress knows what resources DHS is contributing to the Merida Initiative and whether more are needed. It would also have let Congress know how the Merida Initiative is affecting DHS's ability to carry out its other missions, including border security. As we continue to fight criminal syndicates and terrorism organizations around the world, we must ensure that there is accountability for our precious resources and that we are not losing focus of the needs at home. I am extremely disappointed that this legislation has been brought up under suspension, as I believe that my amendment would have improved the legislation. On October 22, the United States and Mexico, in a joint statement, announced a multi-year, $1.4 billion plan to use U.S. assistance to combat drug trafficking and other criminal organizations. As part of this plan, known as the Merida Initiative, the Administration has requested $500 million for Mexico and $50 million for Central America in the FY 2008 Supplemental Appropriations. Since March 2007, when Presidents George W. Bush and Felipe Calderon met in Merida, officials of both governments, without the input of the legislative branch of either country, have been working on an initiative to expand bilateral and regional cooperation, in order to combat organized crime and criminal gangs in the region. Mexico has, in recent years, experienced an increase in drug violence. Much of the recent violence has been attributed to turf wars between drug cartels, with between 1,800 and 1,900 deaths of Mexicans in the first nine months of 2007 alone being attributed to cartel- related violence. More than 60 American citizens have been kidnapped in Nuevo Laredo, a Mexican town directly across the border from the city of Laredo, in my own state of Texas. Some of this violence is reportedly spilling over the border into the United States. Spill-over violence and attacks on Americans are not the only reasons Mexico's drug trade is of intimate interest to the United States. Mexico is the main foreign supplier of marijuana and a major supplier of methamphetamine to the United States, and, though it produces only a small share of global heroin production, it produces a sizeable proportion of the heroin distributed in the United States. In addition to production of drugs, Mexico is also a major transit country. According to State Department estimates, 90% of the cocaine entering the United States transits through Mexico. With the demise of powerful cartels in Colombia, Mexican drug cartels have recently become increasingly significant. According to the National Drug Intelligence Center, Mexican cartels now dominate the illicit U.S. drug market, using ``well-established overland transportation networks to transport cocaine, marijuana, methamphetamine, and heroin--Mexican and increasingly South American-- to drug markets throughout the country.'' Though Colombian groups retain a significant share of smuggling and distribution operations in the United States, the operations of Mexican groups continue to account for an increasingly large percentage of the market. Recent years have indicated that much more needs to be done to address issues of drug production and trafficking in Mexico. While I certainly agree that the Merida Initiative represents an important and much needed effort, I am extremely disappointed that neither members of the U.S. nor the Mexican congress were included in the discussion process. In addition, I have significant concerns about the initiative itself, and I believe there are many outstanding issues that remain to be addressed. Mr. Speaker, I do not believe we can address the problem of drug trafficking by combating the supply side alone. This legislation does require the President to submit a report on efforts to reduce demand in the United States, and I believe that this language is extremely important, acknowledging that this is not just a foreign issue. I would like to see this Congress take a more active role in reducing the prevalence of drug use and addiction in our own communities, in conjunction with working to eliminate the flow of drugs across our borders. Mr Speaker, it is essential that this Committee stay engaged with this program after it is implemented, particularly monitoring its effects on human rights. U.S. dollars absolutely should not be going to fund abuses; they should be used to build a culture of respect for fundamental human rights. To this end, I am pleased that this legislation states that one of the purposes of this initiative is to ``strengthen respect for internationally recognized human rights and the rule of law in efforts to stabilize the security environment relating to the illicit narcotics production and trafficking and organized crime.'' Further, this legislation restricts funding to any units known to commit gross violations of human rights, provides assistance for human rights training in relevant law enforcement units, and, perhaps most crucially, requires the President to report to Congress on the human rights impact of the equipment and training provided in this bill. Mr. Speaker, this language is important, but alone it is not enough, and I fully expect that this committee will remain engaged in this important issue following the implementation of this program. Mr. Speaker, despite my outstanding concerns and my disappointment over the manner in which this legislation was brought before us today, I do believe that this legislation will strengthen the bonds of cooperation with our southern neighbors on an important issue in which we all share a stake. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this legislation.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I thank the distinguished Speaker, and I thank her for her leadership. We will in just a few minutes begin to talk about a very serious issue on universal access to health care, so I rise today to remind my colleagues that we are still in a very troubling conflict in Iraq. We are still spending billions and billions and billions of dollars. Even in the last few days I have seen the loss of young sons, young brothers, young men in my own community. We have buried a number of our fallen soldiers in the Houston, Harris County and South Texas metroplex. We recognize that we are a nation that is willing to send her very best, her very brightest, to the front lines of Iraq and Afghanistan and places around the world to defend the honor, but yet the need for freedom and democracy. But this is a war that the American people over and over again, 60 to 70 percent have said we must bring our troops home. The American people have said enough is enough. We honor those who have fallen. We honored them in this memorial week. I was in Aviano, Italy, and celebrated there at the Air Force base with the young men and women, the fallen, who fell on foreign soil. It was my honor and my privilege to be there, and I will do so wherever there is the opportunity to say thank you to those that live injured, for those who gave the ultimate sacrifice. We will never dishonor their service. So I claim that today we can call the actions in Iraq, albeit my opposition to the offense or the invasion of Iraq by this country, we can call it a military success. We can call it a military success and bring our soldiers home. What disturbs me, Madam Speaker, is that this Nation, this administration, is negotiating for foreign bases on Iraq soil, U.S. bases on the soil of Iraq, when over and over again this Congress has voted against maintaining long-term bases, U.S. bases, in Iraq. We have said it clearly. We have said it over and over again. So I raise the question as to why is the administration engaging in negotiations for permanent military bases without the engagement and the affirmation of this Congress that has said to the administration that we do not want permanent military bases and neither do the people of the United States? Now, I recognize that we have the responsibility of transition as the new administration comes in. I am believing that the new administration that will come in to be President of the United States will be the administration that will oppose this war and that will begin to bring our troops home. But if, for example, we were concerned about transition, let me simply say, we are aware that we have a Central Command in the region. It is an active Central Command. It will be headed by General Petraeus for the next couple of months. There is no reason why when that region is in need that under the Central Command the appropriate military operation can be dispatched, if necessary, to the region, to Iraq and to other places around. It seems to be a smack in the face of Congress that has over and over again said that it is time to bring our troops home, that we cannot spend millions and millions and billions more of dollars in Iraq. It is time for Iraq to secure its own security, to defend itself, to build its own military bases. And, yes, we are quite happy to continue to train those Iraqi soldiers, which I visited with in the last couple of months. I was there. I saw them. They are committed and dedicated, the Iraqi soldiers. Their generals are committed and dedicated. Give them the opportunity to finance their own bases, to finance the military. But enough is enough. I believe the American people have spoken. So I say to the administration, we will not tolerate permanent bases on the soil. And I want to thank the Progressive Caucus with the leadership of Congresswoman Woolsey and Congresswoman Lee, the Out of Iraq Caucus with Congresswoman Waters, both of which I am a member of. We have worked on this. We have heard from the American people. We have heard testimony. Frankly, this is an insult to the Members of the United States Congress, when we know that there are alternatives to ensuring the safety and security of the region, and we also know that the American people have spoken. I stand with the American people. The needs are great. We must use this money for other reasons, bringing our soldiers home, training them, creating a green economy, making sure that we have the education we should and the health care that we should. It is time now to bring our troops home, and certainly it is time now to end this frivolous debate about permanent bases in Iraq.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 5683, the Government Accountability Office Act of 2008, introduced by my distinguished colleague from Illinois, Representative Danny K. Davis. This important legislation will improve the oversight, administration, and pay adjustment mechanisms at the Government Accountability Office. As highlighted by Mr. Davis, the former Comptroller General emphasized that Federal agencies should have ``modern, effective, credible, and, as appropriate, validated performance management systems in place with adequate safeguards, including reasonable transparency and appropriate accountability mechanisms, to ensure fairness and prevent politicalization and abuse.'' I have been an outspoken advocate for improved inner governmental mechanisms that would allow for more fluid movement of information, equity, and the adherence to clear fair processes. H.R. 5683 is imperative to ensure that we as lawmakers are working responsibly to meet the needs of our constituents. Some of the safeguards recommended by the Government Accountability Office, GAO, include a performance management system that makes meaningful distinctions in individual employee performance; involves employees and stakeholders in designing the system; and achieves consistency, equity and nondiscrimination. Over the last 2 years, the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform has conducted oversight, and has also investigated the implementation of GAO's new personnel system to determine if it meets the aforesaid criteria. This investigation revealed that it did not meet the criteria. In addition, based on its investigation the committee concluded that, contrary to legislative intent, GAO employees who met and exceeded expectations in 2006 and 2007, sadly, did not receive the annual across-the-board increase that other GAO employees received. This important legislation would restore the 2006 and 2007 annual across-the-board increase to GAO employees who met expectations but did not receive the adjustment. It would also put into place a ``floor guarantee'' that would preserve GAO's performance-based compensation system, while ensuring that GAO employees receive an annual increase in their permanent pay, provided they ``meet expectations,'' that is at least equal to the congressionally approved across-the-board increase. The floor guarantee will be comprised of the annual adjustment to the GAO pay schedule plus the permanent merit pay increase received by an employee under GAO's merit pay system. This bill also establishes an Office of the Inspector General in GAO, who shall report semiannually to the Comptroller General to ensure that GAO is operating on one accord and is putting forth its best effort in implementing H.R. 5683. While I recognize that there are additional improvements that need to be made, this legislation will help improve the morale at GAO and remedy the inequities that resulted from the denial of the 2006 increase and the across-the-board adjustments. This legislation is imperative to change certain pay practices, compensate employees for certain past practices, and increase salary payments to some GAO employees. It would also increase the cap on employees pay. This bill will expand the types of pay that are included in retirement benefit calculations. H.R. 5683 contains no inter- governmental or private sector mandated mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, UMRA, and would not affect the budgets of States, local or tribunal governments. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this important legislation.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 5938, the ``Former Vice President Protection Act of 2008.'' I would like to thank the Chair of the Judiciary Committee, Congressman Conyers, for introducing this bill and for providing leadership on this important issue. The former vice presidents of the United States have brought to that office significant public service experience, including as members of Congress or state governors. Some came to their role as president of the Senate already familiar with the body, having served as U.S. Senators. Several vice presidents later returned to serve again in the Senate, among them former President Andrew Johnson. Two vice presidents, George Clinton and John C. Calhoun, held the office under two different presidents. Of the fourteen vice presidents who fulfilled their ambition by achieving the presidency, eight succeeded to the office on the death of a president, and four of these were later elected president. Two vice presidents, Hannibal Hamlin and Henry Wallace, were dropped from the ticket after their first term, only to see their successors become president months after taking office, when the assassination of Abraham Lincoln made Andrew Johnson president and the death of Franklin D. Roosevelt raised Harry Truman to the presidency. Similarly, when Spiro Agnew resigned, he was replaced under the Twenty-fifth Amendment by Gerald R. Ford, who became president when Richard M. Nixon resigned less than a year later. The vice-presidency was generally held by men of mature years, with most of them in their fifties or sixties when they took office. The youngest, John C. Breckinridge of Kentucky, was thirty-six at the beginning of his term. At seventy-two, Alben Barkley, another Kentuckian, was the oldest when his term began. Because I recognize the importance of the vice-presidency and the pivotal role it plays in American politics, I believe that tribute, respect, honor, and protection should be afforded to the person, and the family, that has obtained this position. I am proud to support this legislation. Specifically, Title 18 U.S.C. provides former Presidents and their spouses protection by the United States Secret Service after leaving office but provides no such protection for former Vice Presidents and their families. H.R. 5938, authorizes the United States Secret Service to protect the former Vice President of the United States, his/her spouse, and his/her children under the age of 17 for not more than six months after the Vice President leaves office. The bill would also allow protection to continue should circumstances warrant extension. After the assassination of President William McKinley in 1901, Congress informally requested Secret Service presidential protection. A year later, the Secret Service assumed full-time responsibility for protection of the President. Today, the secret service, which is under the Department of Homeland Security, is tasked with protecting the President of the United States and spouse and children under 17 years old for up to ten years after serving in office. The Secret Service also provides protection for widow(er) of the President and it provides protection for foreign heads of state and accompanying spouse when they visit the United States. To date, four presidents have been assassinated, and there have been approximately twelve other assassination attempts on U.S. presidents. Under current law, because of the prestige of the office of President, current and former Presidents are protected by the secret service. Former Vice Presidents have not received any protection from the secret service after the vice president's term in office had expired. This legislation would ensure that Vice Presidents get protection for as long as necessary. Thus, the legislation ensures the safety and well- being of the Vice-President, spouse, and children under 17 years of age. This bill recognizes the important role of the office of Vice President. It is a powerful role with important responsibilities. This bill makes an important statement regarding our appreciation, commitment, and respect to the second most powerful position in this, our great country. I think this bill makes sense. It is reasonable in its scope and its terms. I am proud to support this bill and I urge my colleagues to do likewise.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong supoprt of H. Res. __ ``A resolution regarding the passing of Bo Diddley.'' I am proud to join my colleagues in cosponsoring this timely legislation. I would like to thank my colleague, Chairman Conyers of the Judiciary Committee, for introducing this bill, and for providing leadership on this important issue. Bo Diddley was a musician par excellence. He was a singer, guitarist, songwriter, music pioneer, and actor. He was born December 30, 1928, and recently passed on June 2, 2008. He was an American rock and roll singer. In fact, he was the progenitor of the genre. He was a guitarist, songwriter, and more. He was the key figure that transitioned from blues to rock and roll. Bo Diddley gave America hard rhythms, hard guitar, and his characteristic rectangular guitar. He was born in McComb, Mississippi, as Ellas Otha Bates. He was adopted and raised by his mother's cousin, Gussie McDaniel, whose surname he assumed, becoming Ellas McDaniel. His family moved to Chicago when he was the tender age of seven. There, he took violin lessons, but was inspired to become a guitarist after seeing John Lee Hooker. He worked as a carpenter, mechanic, and began his musical career with his friends in the 40s and 50s. In 1955, he released his #1 R&B hit, called ``Bo Diddley.'' He appeared on The Ed Sullivan Show on November 20, 1955. During that appearance, he sang his hit ``Bo Diddley.'' He continued to have hits through the late 1950s and the 1960s. In 1963, he starred in a U.K. concert tour with the Everly Brothers and Little Richard. The Rolling Stones, still unknown at that time, appeared much lower on the same bill. He would play with the Rolling Stones years later in 1979. He would play with the Grateful Dead, The Clash. His music was covered by countless American musicians ranging from Elvis Presley, Bruce Springsteen, U2, The Who, The Police, David Bowie, George Michael, and the Animals, to name a few. His music is timeless. Diddley's song ``Who Do You Love'' can be heard in the intro credits to the movie La Bamba. He appeared on a 2003 episode of the sitcom According to Jim entitled ``Bo Diddley,'' had a small role in the film Trading Places, starring Eddie Murphy and Dan Aykroyd, and appeared in George Thorogood's ``Bad to the Bone'' video. The song ``Bad to the Bone'' is a rework of Diddley's ``I'm A Man.'' Eric Clapton's 1992 ``Unplugged'' included a cover of Diddley's ``Before you accuse me.'' On his music Bo Diddley once said ``I don't like to copy anybody. Everybody tries to do what I do, update it,'' he is quoted as telling the Associated Press. ``I don't have any idols I copied after.'' ``They copied everything I did, upgraded it, messed it up. It seems to me that nobody can come up with their own thing, they have to put a little bit of Bo Diddley there,'' he said. He has left an indelible mark on American music. The founder of rock and roll. He was a tremendous musician and he had over a half-century of experience in the music business. He was a mastermind, a genius, he was Bo Diddley. We honor him and his tremendous contribution to American music. Heaven is a sweeter place now that Bo Diddley is there. And, the angels are surely singing.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 5593, the ``Congressional Review Improvement Act.'' I am proud to join my colleagues in cosponsoring this timely legislation. I would like to thank my colleague, Congresswoman Linda Sanchez, for introducing this bill, and for providing leadership on this important issue. I support this bill. It eliminates waste by minimizing the production of paper that is required to be provided to Congress. It should reduce duplicative paperwork and eliminate waste. These reduction and minimization of waste standards provided by this bill should result in a substantial cost savings to the Federal Government. In times like we are in now, it is important that the Government cut costs. I support this bill. It is a first step in cutting needless and excessive costs. The congressional review mechanism of agency rules, known as the Congressional Review Act, CRA, requires that all agencies promulgating a rule must submit a report to both Houses of Congress and to the GAO. According to the CRA, the report must contain a copy of the rule, a concise general statement describing the rule, and the proposed effective date of the rule. A rule cannot take effect if the report is not submitted. Each House must then send a copy of the report to the chairman and the ranking member of each jurisdictional committee. The promulgating agency must then submit to the GAO: (1) a complete copy of the cost-benefit analysis; (2) a description of the agency's actions; and (3) other relevant information required under any other act or executive order. This information must also be made available to each House. H.R. 5593 amends the current law, to reduce paperwork. The primary purpose of the legislation is to ensure that the same material is not submitted, housed, and printed at four different Government entities. H.R. 5593 eliminates the requirement that agencies submit paper copies of their rules that are printed in the Federal Register to each House while continuing a referral of all rules printed in the Federal Register and the periodic indication of those referrals in the Congressional Record. Instead, both the House and Senate would receive a weekly list of rules from the GAO and then the House and Senate would put that list in the Congressional Record. This bill eliminates the excessive duplication and printing of rules. No longer are the rules housed at four Government agencies. Under this bill, the House would receive a weekly list of rules that would then be added to the Congressional Record. This bill adds a commonsense approach to rulemaking, the printing, publication and dissemination of those rules. It is simple and the reforms that it brings should yield a substantial cost savings to the U.S. Treasury. I am proud to support this bill because it eliminates duplicative and needless paperwork and should provide a cost savings. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support H.R. 5569. I am proud to join my colleagues in cosponsoring this timely legislation. I would like to thank my colleague, Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren, Chairwoman of the Immigration Subcommittee, for her leadership on sponsoring this legislation. I would also like to thank Mr. Blake Chisam, counsel on the Immigration Subcommittee, and Mr. Arthur Sidney, of my staff, for their important work in including my amendment in the bill. By way of background and explanation, H.R. 5569 extends for five years the EB-5 regional center pilot program. Congress created the fifth employment-based preference, EB-5, immigrant visa category in 1990 for immigrants seeking to engage in a commercial enterprise that will benefit the U.S. economy and create at least 10 full-time jobs. The basic amount required to invest is $1 million, although that amount may be $500,000 if the investment is made in a ``targeted employment area.'' Of the approximately 10,000 numbers available for this preference each year, 3,000 are reserved for entrepreneurs who invest in targeted employment areas. A separate allocation of 3,000 visas is set aside for entrepreneurs who immigrate through a regional center pilot program. In 2003, Congress asked the U.S. Government Accountability Office, GAO, to study the EB-5 program. The GAO report concluded that the program has been under-used for a variety of reasons, including the rigorous application process and the failure to issue regulations implementing the 2002 law. The report found that even though few people have used the EB-5 category, EB-5 participants have invested an estimated $1 billion in a variety of U.S. businesses. My amendment expresses the sense of Congress that, to the extent possible, qualifying investments should be made in targeted employment areas, including rural areas and areas of high unemployment. My amendment defines rural areas as an area other than an area within a metropolitan statistical area within the outer boundary of any city or town having a population of 20,000 or more based upon the most recent decennial census of the United States. My amendment also defines an area of high unemployment as an area that has experienced unemployment of at least 150 percent of the national average rate. The purpose of my amendment is to ensure that all of America will benefit from greater development and investment. The amendment is a bold first step in ensuring that all Americans have a seat at the table and are able to progress and advance as a result of foreign investment as Americans in the wealthy cities and suburbs. I have long championed the rights of Americans in the rural areas and in underserved communities. These Americans are our brothers and sisters. To be sure, no Americans should be left out from investment. My amendment makes sure that these groups that are often forgotten are not left out. Ms. ZOE, LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to discuss my vote on H.R. 5658, the Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009. I applaud Chairman Skelton and Ranking Member Hunter for the work they have done. In fact, I quote Samuel Adams, who said, ``All might be free if they valued freedom and defended it as they should.'' We applaud the young men of the United States military, and I believe this bill that has $2 billion toward unfunded readiness initiatives is a good bill. I believe the $800 million for National Guard and Reserve equipment makes it a good bill, $650 million to keep defense facilities in good working order makes it a good bill, the 3.9 percent increase in raise for all servicemembers, the health provisions. The bill establishes a career intermission pilot program to allow a servicemember to be released from active duty for a maximum of 3 years to focus on personal or professional goals outside the military. I believe it is important to note that there are new procedures for interrogation in the field. And yet I did offer an amendment that would have helped us end the war in Iraq by recounting the fact that all the tasks for ending the war have been accomplished by the military. That amendment was not accepted. And as well, I offered an amendment that would have celebrated all of our troops from Afghanistan and Iraq when they come home. The fact that this bill provides $70 billion for the Iraq War, Mr. Speaker, I could not vote for the bill. I voted ``no.'' I explain this so that all might know there are good provisions in this bill, but I cannot support the war ever again. I voted ``no'' on this bill.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, this coming Monday, Americans will gather to do what so many families wish they did not have to do. That is to mourn the dead who have fallen in battle. Certainly there will be many who will come simply to honor them as heroes, but many of the families will have the fresh memories of young men and women who have recently fallen in the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. I rise to take this opportunity on behalf of the 18th Congressional District, of the people of Houston, Texas, to acknowledge and respect and pay tribute to the soldiers of this Nation that have fallen in battle throughout the centuries. For it is, in fact, true that our freedoms are vested in the willingness of young men and women who take the oath to give the ultimate sacrifice so that our Constitution and our values may be preserved. And I take their oath very seriously and believe it is important that, as Members of the United States Congress and the Commander in Chief, that when we send Americans into battle, it must be based upon thought and prayers and reason. But this coming Monday, we will embrace these families, some who are freshly mourning, others who have long memories. We will commemorate the missing in action, the POWs, all who have suffered at the hands of the violence of others. In Houston, Texas, we commemorate Memorial Day at out Veterans Cemetery. It is in my congressional district. And I have over the years enjoyed the fellowship with the families and the sacred spirit of what occurs. This Memorial Day I will place a memorial wreathe in Europe in honor of those troops who have fallen. My staff will represent me at the memorial commemoration. But they will also be present and my community will be present on Sunday as they place small white crosses to acknowledge the number of soldiers who have now died in Iraq. Memorial Day is a time for the Nation to come together. It is not an accusatory time. It is to recognize everyone's fallen life equally, with appreciation and deep gratitude. And so, Mr. Speaker, I have risen today to assure those families who mourn for the recent loss, those who are mourning of memories past, that America remains a grateful Nation. And on behalf of those of the 18th Congressional District, to the fallen soldiers and those families who mourn, I offer them my deepest and most sincere debt of gratitude and sympathy. Let this Memorial Day be a reminder of the preciousness of life, the soldiers who serve us, but as well the ultimate cost that is paid in war. And let it remind us that, yes, we have valiant heroes, but that we as a Nation should continue to work as hard as we can to achieve peace not only amongst us but around the world. May God bless those who have fallen, God bless their families, and God bless America.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to discuss H.R. 5658, the Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2009 which has many important provisions to help our military personnel and their families. I want to thank my colleague Congressman Skelton for his leadership on the House Armed Services Committee in bringing a bill to the floor that not only protects but supports our military and our veterans. Samuel Adams, who was known as the Father of the American Revolution, stated ``All might be free if they valued freedom, and defended it as they should.'' Well, while most of us value freedom many of us do not risk our lives for it the way our men and women in the armed forces do on a daily basis. This defense bill reflects our commitment to support the men and women who fight to secure not only our citizen's freedom but the freedom of others. This bill will provide the necessary resources to protect the American people and our national interests at home and abroad. The Armed Services committee has provided for military readiness; taking care of our troops and their families; increasing focus on the war in Afghanistan; and improving interagency cooperation, oversight, and accountability in this year's defense authorization bill. Defense Provisions We must maintain our efforts to restore military readiness in order to meet current military challenges and prepare for the future. This bill directs approximately $2 billion toward unfunded readiness initiatives requested by the services, which includes an additional $932 million to deal with equipment shortages and for equipment maintenance. The bill also provides $800 million for National Guard and Reserve equipment and $650 million to keep defense facilities in good working order and to address urgent issues such as dilapidated military barracks. To boost readiness and to reduce the strain on our forces, the bill increases the size of the military by 7,000 Army troops and 5,000 Marines, and prevents further military to civilian conversions in the medical field by authorizing an additional 1,023 Navy sailors and 450 Air Force personnel. To improve the quality of life for our forces and their families, the bill provides a 3.9 percent pay raise for all service members, which is .5 percent more than the President's budget request, and extends the authority for the Defense Department to offer bonuses and incentive pay. The bill also preserves important health benefits to improve the readiness of our force, keep servicemembers and their families healthy, and to reduce the overall need for care. The bill establishes a Career Intermission Pilot Program to allow a servicemember to be released from active duty for a maximum of 3 years to focus on personal or professional goals outside of the military. The bill also provides tuition assistance to help military spouses establish their own careers, authorizes Impact Aid funding to assist schools with large enrollments of military children, and establishes a DoD School of Nursing to address the critical nursing shortage in our military services. This bill addresses the need to improve the command and control structure for military forces operating in Afghanistan providing equipment to train and properly equip the Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF). This bill urges the President to appoint a Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR), as required by law, at the earliest possible time. More importantly this bill contains several layers of transparency and accountability. By requiring more detailed reporting to Congress on the status and strategies of our forces in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as on the performance of Provincial Reconstruction Teams (PRTs) and information on U.S. contractors--this bill provides greater oversight by this body. Rep. Jackson-Lee Proposed Amendments While I do believe that Congressman Skelton and the Armed Services Committee have done a great job at trying to address the needs of our servicemembers, their families, and our national interests, I am disappointed to see certain areas were not addressed. I offered two amendments to the defense authorization to improve its ultimate outcome. My first amendment would have added three sense of Congress paragraphs: (1) the war in Iraq should end as safely and quickly as possible and our troops should be brought home; (2) the performance of United States military personnel in Iraq and Afghanistan should be commended, their courage and sacrifice have been exceptional, and when they come home, their service should be recognized appropriately, including through the observance of a national day of celebration; and (3) the primary purpose of funds made available by this Act should be to transition the mission of United States Armed Forces in Iraq and undertake their redeployment, and not to extend or prolong the war. This amendment was borne from my deeply held belief that we must commend our military for their exemplary performance and success in Iraq. As lawmakers continue to debate U.S. policy in Iraq, our heroic young men and women continue to willingly sacrifice life and limb on the battlefield. Our troops in Iraq did everything we asked them to do. The United States will not and should not permanently prop up the Iraqi government and military. Whether or not my colleagues agree that the time has come to withdraw our American forces from Iraq, I believe that all of us in Congress should be of one accord that our troops deserve our sincere thanks and congratulations. My amendment explicitly stated that the goals laid out by the Authorization for Use of Military Force against Iraq Resolution of 2002 (AUMF) have all been achieved by our troops in Iraq. Due to the skill and dedication of the members of the Armed Forces, the entire world has now been assured that Iraq does not possess weapons of mass destruction that could threaten the United States or any member nation of the international community. The United States Armed Forces successfully toppled the regime of Saddam Hussein and captured the key cities of Iraq in only 21 days. The Armed Forces performed magnificently in conducting military operations designed to ensure that the people of Iraq would enjoy the benefits of a democratically elected government governing a country that is capable of sustaining itself economically and politically and defending itself militarily. While our troops have achieved the objectives for which they were sent to Iraq, they are now caught in the midst of a sectarian conflict. Unfortunately, there is no military solution to Iraq's ongoing political and sectarian conflicts. My second amendment would have made a declaration of U.S. policy that ``The Authorization for Use of Military Force against Iraq Resolution of 2002 (Public Law 107-243; approved on October 16, 2002) is the basis of authority pursuant to which the President launched the invasion of Iraq in March 2003.'' Further, it describes the authorization's two stated objectives: to enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq, and to defend the national security of the United States (i) by disarming Iraq of any weapons of mass destruction that could threaten the security of the United States and international peace in the Persian Gulf region, (ii) by ensuring that the regime of Saddam Hussein would not provide weapons of mass destruction to international terrorists, including al Qaida, (iii) by changing the Iraqi regime so that Saddam Hussein and his Baathist regime no longer pose a threat to the people of Iraq or Iraq's neighbors, and (iv) by bringing to justice any members of al Qaida bearing responsibility for the attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, known or found to be in Iraq. Most crucially, my second amendment states unequivocally that ``the objectives of Public Law 107-243 described in subparagraphs (A) and (B) of paragraph (2) have been achieved. This amendment would have provided an expressed acknowledgment by the Congress that the objectives for which the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) resolution of 2002 authorized the use of force in Iraq were achieved by the Armed Forces of the United States. The objectives for which this Congress authorized war in Iraq have been met; therefore, that authorization should no longer be the basis for ongoing involvement by U.S. armed forces. Our military has already paid too heavy a price for this Administration's ill-advised and poorly planned war effort in Iraq. My amendment would have recognized the exemplary performance of our men and women in uniform, and emphasizes that our military has already achieved the objectives for which it was sent to Iraq. Mr. Chairman, although I would have liked to see my amendments included in this bill I am supportive of much of the provisions of this bill; however since this legislation provides for continued funding of the Iraq war I will not be able to vote for the continuation of the war. I will vote no.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, I rise today to talk about some important legislation that honors the sacrifice and courage of our women who have served and are currently serving in our armed forces. The Veteran's legislation we considered today provides an opportunity for each of us, regardless of political views, religion, ethnicity, gender, or background to come together, and to recognize and honor our Nation's heroes. We gather here today, in the midst of ongoing conflict and warfare, to celebrate the dedication of our men and women in uniform. Though we may be divided by our positions on the war in Iraq, we stand together to support our veterans. Our Nation has a proud legacy of appreciation and commitment to the men and women who have worn the uniform in defense of this country. We must be united in seeing that every soldier, sailor, airman, and marine is welcomed back with all the care and compassion this grateful Nation can bestow. All too many of our veterans are left without the help and support they need to transition from the horrors they bravely face on the front lines of battle to successful civilian life. According to the Veterans Affairs Department, as of 2006, on any given night, 196,000 veterans of all ages were homeless. The V.A. also reports 400 veterans of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan alone have already become homeless, and this figure only takes into account those who have sought services from V.A.-sponsored programs. Experts have predicted that the trauma resulting from the extreme horrors of these modern wars could lead to a surge in homeless veterans in the coming years. I chose to celebrate one of our heroic daughters of Texas, Specialist Monica L. Brown of the United States Army with House Concurrent Resolution 320 for her efforts earlier this year. Spec. Brown was the first woman in Afghanistan and only the second female soldier since World War II to receive the Silver Star, the Nation's third-highest medal for valor. This solider from Lake Jackson, Texas is only 19 years old. On April 25, 2007, Specialist Brown was part of a four-vehicle convoy patrolling near Jani Kheil in the eastern province of Paktia on April 25, 2007, when a bomb struck one of the Humvees. When Spec. Brown saw her fellow soldiers were injured, she grabbed her aid bag and started running toward the burning vehicle as insurgents opened fire. All five wounded soldiers from her platoon scrambled out. Under this commotion, she assessed her patients and moved them to a safer location because they were still receiving incoming fire. The Pentagon's official policy is to prohibit women from serving in front-line combat roles in the infantry, armor or artillery, but the nature of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, with no real front lines, has seen women soldiers take part in close-quarters combat more than previous conflicts. According to the army four Army nurses in World War II were the first women to receive the Silver Star, though three nurses serving in World War I were awarded the medal posthumously in 2007. Sgt. Leigh Ann Hester, of Nashville, Tenn., was the first to receive the Silver Star in 2005 along with two fellow male soldiers for her gallantry during an insurgent ambush on a convoy in Iraq. The Army has stated that Spec. Brown's ``bravery, unselfish actions and medical aid rendered under fire saved the lives of her comrades and represents the finest traditions of heroism in combat.'' Though I have opposed the war in Iraq from its inception, I remain absolutely committed to ensuring that we recognize, celebrate, and honor the service of our sons and daughters returning from Iraq and Afghanistan. Our troops in Iraq did everything we asked them to do, and I firmly believe that we must commend the men and women of our military for their exemplary performance and success in Iraq. I am proud to be a cosponsor on H. Res. 1054--Honoring the service and achievements of women in the Armed Forces and female veterans (Representative Davis (CA)--Armed Services) and H.R. 3819--Veterans Emergency Care Fairness Act of 2007 (Representative Space--Veterans' Affairs). We are providing for our Veterans with legislation such as: H.R. 6081--The Heroes Earnings Assistance and Relief Tax Act of 2008 (Representative Rangel--Ways and Means). H. Res. 986--Recognizing the courage and sacrifice of those members of the United States Armed Forces who were held as prisoners of war during the Vietnam conflict and calling for a full accounting of the 1,729 members of the Armed Forces who remain unaccounted for from the Vietnam conflict (Representative Boehner--Armed Services)--Recorded Vote H.R. 2790--To establish the position of Director of Physician Assistant Services within the office of the Under Secretary of Veterans Affairs for Health as amended (Representative Hare--Veterans' Affairs). H.R. 3681--Veterans Benefits Awareness Act of 2007 (Representative Boozman--Veterans' Affairs). H.R. 3889--To require the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to conduct a longitudinal study of the vocational rehabilitation programs administered by the Secretary (Representative Boozman--Veterans' Affairs)--Passed H.R. 5554--Veterans Substance Use Disorders Prevention and Treatment Act of 2008 (Representative Michaud--Veterans' Affairs)--Passed H.R. 5664--To direct the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to update at least once every six years the plans and specifications for specially adapted housing furnished to veterans by the Secretary (Representative Rodriguez--Veterans' Affairs). H.R. 5826--Veterans' Compensation Cost-of-Living Adjustment Act of 2008 (Representative Rodriguez--Veterans' Affairs)--Recorded Vote H.R. 5856--Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Facility Authorization and Lease Act of 2008 (Representative Michaud--Veterans' Affairs). H.R. 6048--To amend the Service members Civil Relief Act to provide for the protection of child custody arrangements for parents who are members of the Armed Forces deployed in support of a contingency operation (Representative Turner--Veterans' Affairs). I firmly believe that we should celebrate our veterans after every conflict, and I remain committed, as a Member of Congress, to both meeting the needs of veterans of previous wars, and to provide a fitting welcome home to those who are now serving. Veterans have kept their promise to serve our Nation; they have willingly risked their lives to protect the country we all love. We must now ensure that we keep our promises to our veterans. Currently, there are over 25 million veterans in the United States. There are more than 1,633,000 veterans living in Texas and more than 32,000 veterans living in my congressional district alone. I hope we will all take the time to show appreciation to those who have answered the call to duty. As Winston Churchill famously stated, ``Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few.'' Madam Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to join me in supporting our troops of yesteryear and our troops of today.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, let me thank the distinguished chairman. Let me rise to indicate the broad opposition to the veto of the President on this agricultural bill, and I'm going to try to rush through some very vital issues that are of concern to many of us. I just came back from Haiti and recognized the crisis that our very good friend and neighbor, the poorest country in the western hemisphere. The good news is that President Preval, who asked us to create an opportunity for jobs in a country that is hungry and lacks jobs, the Haiti trade provisions were in the bill, but unfortunately vetoed which causes us an urgent necessity to override this veto. The Caribbean Basin Initiative extension is a vital part. But yet I look forward to us fixing the parts that included the trade title that left out the food aid, very important; McGovern-Dole, which is food for education; giving girls the incentives to come to school. And then the market access problems that are crucial. We know there are 850 million hungry people in the world; 300 million of them are children; 40 percent of those in Haiti eat one meal a day. We are in a crisis. This is a crucial legislative initiative.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. So what we are talking about here, I think there is something important to bipartisanship. Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member, thank you for this. I've lived around the edges of the agriculture bill ever since I came here from Texas. We know about specialty crops. We know about ranches and farms. I think you did a great job for these fruits and vegetable farmers because you give them an incentive to get to market. And thank you for what you've done for the black farmers, especially on Pigford, where you allowed those late filers--I've always heard from them throughout the work on the Judiciary Committee to get back in the court by being able to file again. We are delighted that you also give them a greater access; you allow them to have transparency and accountability in the USDA, and I'm glad that what we do is try to preserve the black farmers. This is an important bill. Let's fix the trade part of it, but let's join together and override a bill that promotes energy and food and understands you can't have a food fight when people are starving. I urge our colleagues to vote to override the veto.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 6049, Renewable Energy and Job Creation Act of 2008. I would like to thank my colleague the Chairman of Ways and Means, Congressman Charles Rangel for bringing this energy legislation forward . The bill extends dozens of expired or expiring tax provisions, and extends and creates new energy-related tax incentives for the production of wind and other renewable energy and for homeowners' investment in solar and fuel cell equipment. Texas has invested in the production of wind and is looking to come up with more ways to aid us in energy conservation and harnessing our natural resources in a way that does not damage the environment. There is an undeniable consensus on the importance of America achieving energy independence in the 21st century. It is critical that we terminate our dependence on foreign sources of oil, the majority of which are located in regions of the world which are unstable and in most circumstances, opposed to our interests. Accordingly, there is no issue more essential to our economic and national security than energy independence. By investing in renewable energy and increasing access to potential sources of energy, I believe we can be partners with responsible members of America's energy producing community in our collective goal of reaching energy independence. Houston, Texas, is the energy capital of the world, for the past 12 years I have been the Chair of the Energy Braintrust of the Congressional Black Caucus. During this time, I have hosted a variety of Energy Braintrusts designed to bring in all of the relevant players ranging from environmentalists to producers of energy from a variety of sectors including coal, electric, natural gas, nuclear, oil, and alternative energy sources as well as energy producers from West Africa. My Energy Braintrusts were designed to be a call of action to all of the sectors that comprise the American and international energy industry, to the African American community, and to the nation as a whole. Energy is the lifeblood of every economy, especially ours. Producing more of it leads to more good jobs, cheaper goods, lower fuel prices, and greater economic and national security. Bringing together thoughtful yet distinct voices to engage each other on the issue of energy independence has resulted in the beginning of a transformative dialectic which can ultimately result in reforming our energy industry to the extent that we as a nation achieve energy security and energy independence. Because I represent the city of Houston, the energy capital of the world, I realize that many oil and gas companies provide many jobs for many of my constituents and serve a valuable need. The energy industry in Houston exemplifies the stakeholders who must be instrumental in devising a pragmatic strategy for resolving our national energy crisis. Mr. Speaker, this legislation will aid Americans as we seek to wean ourselves from our foreign oil dependence. I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 6049.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, I rise today to support this legislation that honors the sacrifice and courage of women in our armed forces. I would like to thank my fellow Women's Caucus member and the gentle lady from California, Congresswoman Susan Davis for introducing this legislation. This legislation could not be more timely. Last week we failed to pass the Iraq/Afghanistan Supplemental Appropriations bill. This failure was not due to our feelings for our men and women in the armed forces but goes to the heart of where we stand with this ill-begotten war. No matter how we voted last week, I believe that all of us, on both sides of the aisle, strongly support our men and women who are in harm's way. At this point I truly believe that only diplomacy and global cooperation can ease the tensions in Iraq and Afghanistan. This resolution brings us back to focusing on the actual men and women in our armed forces. This is right where the focus should be. With over 185,000 women having been deployed in support of Operation Enduring Freedom, Operation Iraqi Freedom, and other missions since 2001 and nearly 350,000 women serving in the Armed Forces make up almost 15 percent of active duty personnel and over 17 percent of the National Guard reserve forces--it is time we celebrate what women are doing in the armed forces. Women have been aiding the U.S. war effort for years. With 34,000 women serving in World War 1, 400,000 serving in World War II, 120,000 serving in the Korean War, and well over 7,000 served in the Vietnam War--women were clearly serving in our Nation's military well before our current missions. I chose to celebrate one of our heroic daughters of Texas, Specialist Monica L. Brown of the United States Army with House Concurrent Resolution 320 for her efforts earlier this year. Spec. Brown was the first woman in Afghanistan and only the second female soldier since World War II to receive the Silver Star, the Nation's third-highest medal for valor. This solider from Lake Jackson, Texas is only 19 years old. On April 25, 2007, Specialist Brown was part of a four-vehicle convoy patrolling near Jani Kheil in the eastern province of Paktia on April 25, 2007, when a bomb struck one of the Humvees. When Spec. Brown saw her fellow soldiers were injured, she grabbed her aid bag and started running toward the burning vehicle as insurgents opened fire. All five wounded soldiers from her platoon scrambled out. Under this commotion, she assessed her patients and moved them to a safer location because they were still receiving incoming fire. The Pentagon's official policy is to prohibit women from serving in front-line combat roles in the infantry, armor or artillery, but the nature of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, with no real front lines, has seen women soldiers take part in close-quarters combat more than previous conflicts. According to the Army four Army nurses in World War II were the first women to receive the Silver Star, though three nurses serving in World War I were awarded the medal posthumously in 2007. Sgt. Leigh Ann Hester, of Nashville, Tenn., was the first to receive the Silver Star in 2005 along with two fellow male soldiers for her gallantry during an insurgent ambush on a convoy in Iraq. The Army has stated that Spec. Brown's ``bravery, unselfish actions and medical aid rendered under fire saved the lives of her comrades and represents the finest traditions of heroism in combat.'' This legislation is not about condoning the wars in Afghanistan or in Iraq. This legislation is about us supporting and honoring our troops. It is about this Nation's children fighting for the rights of all of us in places we do not dare to go, under environments we cannot fully appreciate from this comfortable position. Spec. Brown reminds us that our youth are fighting in this war, our mothers and daughters are fighting in this war, and they deserve to be recognized for their achievements. However, we not only recognize the sacrifice and courage of Spec. Brown, or even just the brave acts of her fellow soldiers, marines, and airmen. We must also recognize the families of our military. Spec. Brown's grandmother said she was the proudest grandmother in all of Lake Jackson, Texas, when she learned of her granddaughter's heroism. We should all be as proud of our young men and women as Spec. Brown's grandmother. In being proud of them, we are not condoning the Administration, we are recognizing their efforts and their belief in what they have been tasked to do. We sit in these chambers and discuss the idea of war, and the economic costs to the Nation. However, our men and women in Afghanistan and Iraq are dealing with the realities of war every day. Their families are also dealing with it every day, as they have to move forward without their loved ones. I am proud of Specialist Monica L. Brown, Texas is proud of Monica L. Brown, and this country should be proud of all the Specialist Brown's and all the women like her who have fought the equality war at home and the fight for freedom abroad. Mr. Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to join Representative Susan Davis and myself in recognizing our women in the armed forces.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. As I indicated on the floor, I am an oil and gas lawyer and obviously have a broadened perspective. But I would like to just say that I hope that even as you are presenting your presentation, that you heard what I said, which is I think that the energy leaders of the respective multinational companies that are in the United States need to sit down with all of us and refine an energy policy. I will just limit my remarks, since I was on the floor, and just say that my support of the Outer Continental Shelf is in this way: Limited to the areas that the constituencies have been used to it, have seen it work environmentally, and that would be, in my perspective, and I have done work on that and legislation on that, the Gulf of Texas and Louisiana. I think if you have a model and show how it works, you may be able to bring your other colleagues on. Because I want you to note, and I think you would note, that the opposition to the Outer Continental Shelf is bipartisan on the coast, bipartisan a lot on the coast of California, both Democrats and Republican opposition; in Florida it is Democrats and Republicans; and I assume up the coast of New York. So I think maybe we can be used as a model. Those of us from Texas, and you are not, you are from way up Midwest, but from those of us from Texas and Louisiana, we have seen it. The point I made is even after Hurricane Katrina, we saw the survival of an environmentally safe water system where those rigs did not fall because we have understood the construction and we also understand the environment. I would yield back, but I just wanted to say I think we have to educate, and I am ready to show how it works in the Gulf. And that is where I limit my support of the Outer Continental Shelf, where it has been done, where it can be proven it can be done right.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Would the gentleman yield for just a moment?

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I thank the distinguished gentleman from Houston, the distinguished chairman. And I am delighted to be here with the distinguished congressman from New York (Mr. Hall). I really appreciated listening to the diversity of the debate on energy, from the far northern parts of New York to the gulf States of Texas and, I might add, Louisiana because we have a number of Louisiana residents, of course, now making their home in Texas, and many of them happen to have worked in the energy industry, of course, and came to Houston because of the difficulty and the tragedy of Hurricane Katrina and then ultimately Hurricane Rita. We know, interestingly enough, Mr. Hall, and I am sort of sidestepping here for a moment, that a number of rigs in the gulf suffered the consequences of Hurricane Katrina. And I think we should go on record to note, because I happen to believe in a diverse energy policy, that I am going to say all of them, and I have not heard a counter to this, managed to withstand Hurricane Katrina without an oil leak. And I only say that to say that those of us in the gulf have experienced off of our shores, and again we speak specifically to offshore work off of the gulf, environmentally safe drilling. And I say that because as we listen to those of us who come from different parts of the country, I think we can get an energy policy that fits us all. I have listened to your discussion. I don't think that we necessarily need to intrude on the Outer Continental Shelf. Off the East Coast there is opposition. Maybe in time. I know there is opposition off the coast of Florida. There is opposition off the coast of California. I heard you talk about hydropower that works or would work very well. I guess I'm reminded of Niagara Falls. I got a chance to see that to see the power of water and energy that could be utilized and as well the energy that maybe I'm more familiar with. That is why I think the thoughtful legislation of my good friend from Texas, the Invest in Energy Independence Act, H.R. 6067, which I am going to encourage all of my colleagues to join, and let me tell you why, Mr. Lampson. I think you really hit the nail on the head. I think we did this together when I was on the Science Committee and you were on the Science Committee when we tried to advocate for NASA. We tried to sell it not so much as it's a program to send people into space, but how it helps our daily lives. Many people don't know what the Strategic Petroleum Reserve is all about. What is that foreign entity, SPR? Is it some kind of unfortunate disease? But it is an existing entity that sits amongst us. Really, I don't think this administration has taken advantage of it because I don't think it would offend our environmentalists, our colleagues from California, our colleagues from Arizona, our colleagues from New York, because it is existing petroleum. Of course, our Speaker has been more eloquent or most eloquent about releasing the resources from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to help us, and that is barrels of oil that are sitting there in case of danger, in case of terrorist acts, in case of an attack against the United States, we would have it. But what Mr. Lampson has determined is that this is filled up with light and medium crude, and our refineries, I think some 36 of our refineries out of 74, deal with heavy crude. And so part of your bill suggests that we put heavy crude in. Let me tell you why this is important. That is really the bottom line of why our immediate problems of dealing with gasoline prices. It's all about supply and demand, it's all about refineries being old and antiquated and can't get their product out. That is one of the pieces of it. I don't want to suggest that I don't believe in conservation or diversity, because I'm going to get to that point. But having been an oil and gas lawyer for a period of time, I realize that we have got to look through a broad lens. And part of the problem is the opposition that we have given to building refineries. But it's not only the problem of the United States Congress. Frankly, Mr. Lampson, it is the problem of tunnel vision energy industry that gives the industry a bad name, the oil and gas industry, that really has not sat down with this Congress or opened up options. Whenever we talk about the price per barrel of oil or talk about high gasoline prices, our good friends in the energy industry, particularly oil and gas, do tunnel vision. They say, I've got mine; you get yours. I've got my high profits, I've got my shareholders happy with me, and I am not going to look at any idea. I think the Energy Independence Act causes them to look at other ideas but also may draw them out because I don't know how long Americans are going to continue to accept these accelerating prices. I saw a scenario on CNN that really said that we might be paying $8 or $9 or $10. This, I hope, is a legislative initiative that really calls our energy barons to sit down and say, Let me listen to Mr. Hall from New York about hydro. Maybe my company is named energy for the very fact that it should be diverse. That the energy industry should be investing in hydro. You are giving the opportunity through utilizing the $574 million or $584 million that is now in the Department of Energy's account. I don't know how many people know we have got $584 million sitting around and moms and pops who are trying to go back and forth to schools or trying to get to work or trying to get on vacation for the free days that they can, drive to grandma's house, because that's about all the vacation people will be getting this summer, probably, are sitting around in an account. And so this bill, I believe, is important because it throws the onus back on thinking people about how we can be creative in energy. What it does, of course, is ARPA, which deals with R&D, but Texas is the near capital of wind energy. We don't even get touted for that. No one celebrates the fact that we have got wind energy. I sat down with an energy company, a wind energy company, and let me not speak too quickly, but I was saying how can I get in the middle of this. It was fascinating that these guys are building windmills and creating energy right in the United States, in Texas. We don't know that. Oil and gas State. Solar energy. What kind of jobs can be created by solar. First of all, you can get everybody to get a panel in their house. That is putting people to work. I mean the solar panels. Get your roof redone and that is putting people to work. Weatherization for my seniors. If we can ever get people to understand the importance of weatherizing houses, older houses, East Coast houses. My daughter worked in Albany so, my friend, it can get pretty cold in the upper parts of New York. Weatherization of your oldest stock of houses because it's a State that was one of the 13 colonies. It has older products. So the weatherization part of it is so important. And then, of course, working with hydrokinetic and marine, you add that $30 million. But what I think this should do most of all, Congressmen, is wake up this industry. If I might, let me cite some numbers here so that I can speak to what we are afraid to speak to, and I just think we have to get to. The U.S. Minerals Management Service indicates that America's deep seas on the Outer Continental Shelf, the OCS, contain 420 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. The U.S. consumes only 23 TCF per year. So this is 420 trillion already sitting there, already on the U.S. side of the world, already ours, in essence, and 86 billion barrels of oil. The U.S. imports 4.5 billion a year. So, in essence, it would keep us going for a couple of years. Even with all these energy resources, the United States sends more than $300 billion and countless American jobs overseas. That's $300 billion and countless American jobs overseas. We do that, unfortunately, because we don't know how to frame our domestic energy policy. This frames it. But I want to speak vocally for the fact that I am not in opposition and the Members of Congress and the constituents of the region are not in opposition to the exploration of the Gulf. We have done it quietly. We haven't bothered anybody about it. We are not interested in disrupting the Outer Continental Shelf off of New York, off of Florida, or California. But we have not promoted domestic production in that area by giving incentives, by doing more R&D so that we can be more environmentally safe so I can give comfort to my colleagues who, rightly so, speak to the environment. We keep focused on ANWR. We know how divisive that is rather than getting our attention as Republicans and Democrats and Independents about where it is welcomed. At the same time, to take the R&D and use it for hydro and to be able to use it for wind and solar, which I have gotten enormously excited about because I think it is a place for small businesses, minority-owned businesses, women-owned businesses. What a way to put people to work, by getting this vast amount of diversity into the energy business so it's not just the conglomerates to refuse to sit down with us. I want to take just a moment to pay tribute to John Hofmeister of Shell because if there has ever been a face for energy, it has been John Hofmeister. He has been unafraid; he has gone to places where he has been booed and applauded. But he has taken his ship on the road, or his bus on the road, his whole tour on the road, talking about the idea of how we can sit down and develop an energy plan. Let me conclude by suggesting that, first of all, the United States imports nearly 60 percent of the oil it consumes. The world's greatest petroleum reserves reside in the regions of high geopolitical risk, including 57 percent in the Persian Gulf. So we import from a high-risk area. And yet, we have 86 billion barrels of oil here in the United States, or in reserves in the United States, or in places that have not yet been explored. And we have 420 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. Why then can we not construct an energy policy that embraces the concept of energy independence. With all due respect, why can't we get cellulosic ethanol off of the bean, if you will, with your research dollars to kick it into a full press to make it work. We recognize and respect our friends who are using ethanol. But just think if we can get cellulosic from just being a ``pie in the sky,'' we could also do the right kind of thing. So, Mr. Lampson, and to Mr. Hall, let me thank you for inviting me and allowing me to join you. I couldn't help but hear such thoughtful discussion about why we can't move forward on legislation like this that would embrace all of our constituencies and regions under one umbrella. We would make everyone happy, from solar, to wind, to the environmentalists, and to people like me, who, frankly, are in the environmentalist skin, who support the concepts of what we are doing as Democrats, what our leadership is trying to do, letting us become independent. Yet, this brings the balance. Because I believe that we should not throw away the value of natural gas that exists here or the oil that exists here in the United States in safe waters in areas where the constituency believe that it is acceptable to do. It creates jobs, it creates safety, and I think the Energy Independence Act, H.R. 6067, let's all of us get a piece of the pie. It is an important step forward. I look forward to supporting it, but I also hope that my energy leaders of the various companies, who someone may be looking at this, realize that I think that they are having tunnel vision, I think they are wrong for not engaging us, I think they are wrong for not engaging the Members of Congress who happen to be Democrats, who happen to be in their areas, and they know who I'm speaking of, and they know they have not done it, they know they are wrong, and they know they are wrong on behalf of the American people because they know the American people are going every day to their gas stations, their brand and buying it and being upset and not getting relief. I think the energy companies who have been blessed by the safety and security of this Nation owe to the United States and to its people a consensus discussion and a friendly discussion on how we can move this country forward. With that, I yield to the distinguished gentleman.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, it's an honor to be able to rise today to celebrate two important statements that were made on the floor of the House today. I might alter that and say ``celebrate'' but also to acknowledge and commemorate. I do want to associate myself with the legislation of Congresswoman Susan Davis of California in acknowledging the women in the United States military. Women have shown themselves in Iraq and Afghanistan and all around the world to be true leaders. Many have been injured, many of them have seen serious injuries. They have been mothers, they have been sisters and daughters. They have led their families, but yet they have been warriors and battlers for the freedom of America. I salute them and celebrate them as we commemorate Memorial Day. Let me also join Mr. Wu in offering my deepest sympathy to the people of China for this tragic earthquake and the loss of now some thousands upon thousands of individuals. We extend our hand not only of friendship but of support and charity, and I look forward to working with the Counsulate General in Houston to be able to provide support for those families here in the United States as well as those who are suffering in China. Our deepest prayers and deepest sympathy for those who mourn the loss of their loved ones.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Res. 1195, expressing condolences and sympathy to the people of the People's Republic of China for the grave loss of life and vast destruction caused by the massive earthquake centered in Sichuan Province. I would like to thank my colleague Representative David Wu of Oregon for introducing this important legislation that reaffirms the humanitarian commitment of the United States to the people of the People's Republic of China who have become victims of a catastrophic earthquake. Let me also thank the Chairman of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, Chairman Berman, for his leadership in bringing this resolution to the floor today. As my colleagues are aware, the province of Sichuan, in southwest China, was struck by a 7.9 magnitude earthquake on May 12th. Centered in Wenchuan County, the earthquake brought a plethora of devastating aftershocks, casualties, and tragedy. It is reported that the death toll has approached 40,000, and a further 250,000 people have been injured. With tens of thousands of people still missing, it is likely that these figures will only rise. Furthermore, the earthquake has left an estimated 4.8 million people homeless making this one of the most devastating earthquakes in China since the 1976 Tangshan earthquake. A New York Times article published this morning describes the many residents of neighboring counties who have traveled long distances without hesitation to volunteer their services to the humanitarian needs of the victims. Record sums of money had also been donated to the victims of the earthquake. I hope that this resolution and stories of heroic action will also inspire others to take part in the global community to take action in contributing humanitarian aid. While the human toll is tragic, the sheer numbers of people who have lost their homes is truly colossal. Though rescue efforts may be nearing a close, relief efforts are only just beginning. Five million people are reported to be homeless in the wake of the earthquake, with government officials citing a ``desperate need for tents.'' Even as we work to meet these emergency needs, Mr. Speaker, we must also focus our efforts in studying and implementing ways on which we can prevent future disasters from affecting as many people. As Chair of the Congressional Children's Caucus, I am particularly concerned by the large number of children who were trapped within collapsing school buildings when the earthquake hit. Particularly tragic was the collapse of a three-story school building in the city of Dujiangyan, burying an estimated 900 students. According to reports, it is still not known how many children were killed by their own schools as the buildings fell down on their heads, and the Chinese government has reportedly called for an investigation into the collapse of school buildings. I would especially like to extend my condolence to many children caught up in this immense disaster. Mr. Speaker, I take this opportunity to commend the thousands of police and civilian rescue workers who have been working tirelessly in disaster areas to aid in rescue and recovery efforts. They are truly a testament to the good that exists in the world today. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this legislation to extend sincere condolences and further the efforts of the United States to ensure the complete restoration of the tragic loss of life and devastation of the People's Republic of China.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. If the gentlewoman would yield for just a moment, on that very note, this is the People's House, and what I would like to encourage right now on the floor of the House is let us call for Haitian-Americans who are here in the United States to come to Washington. Some are as close as your congressional district. Let us collectively merge our bills, or maybe reintroduce all of our bills or portions of our bills that we have and make that push, I would never use the term ultimatum, but make the urgent push that we need to move forward on hearings dealing with TPS. That is the first step of moving toward a markup of some component thereof of a TPS. Temporary. It could be a TPS for a year. That is what we did with El Salvador, and then it was renewed. We did it with Liberia, that was deferred, DED, I believe. So we have had these moments when there is a crisis. There is clearly a crisis in Haiti. And I would like to join with the gentlewoman to organize that and call that session in and make the point that we need to move on that issue as quickly as possible.