Sheila Jackson Lee

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 3773, the ``Responsible Electronic Surveillance That Is Overseen, Reviewed, and Effective Act of 2007.'' I support this legislation, the RESTORE Act, because it corrects the damage done by the misnamed Protect America Act and restores this Nation's commitment to the rule of law, the dignity of the individual, and the separation of powers. This legislation is worthy of an aye vote from all Members because it restores allegiance to the Constitution and gives our intelligence agencies all the tools they need to conduct the foreign surveillance necessary to keep our country safe. Mr. Speaker, in August of this year, I strongly opposed S. 1927, the so-called ``Protect America Act'' (PAA) when it came to a vote on the House floor. And I was a very reluctant supporter of H.R. 3356, the House alternative that attracted a majority of votes, but not a two- thirds super-majority, on the House floor. Had the Bush Administration and the Republican-dominated 109th Congress acted more responsibly in the two preceding years, we would not have been in the position of debating legislation that had such a profoundly negative impact on the national security and on American values and civil liberties in the crush of exigent circumstances. As that regrettable episode clearly showed, it is true as the saying goes that haste makes waste. The PAA was stampeded through the Congress in the midnight hour of the last day before the long August recess on the dubious claim that it was necessary to fill a gap in the Nation's intelligence gathering capabilities identified by Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell. But in reality it would have eviscerated the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution and represented an unwarranted transfer of power from the courts to the Executive Branch and a Justice Department led at that time by an Attorney General whose reputation for candor and integrity was, to put it charitably, subject to considerable doubt. The legislation before us, the RESTORE Act, H.R. 3773 is superior to the PAA by orders of magnitude. This is due in no small measure, Mr. Speaker, to the willingness of the leadership to reach out to and work with all members of the House. The result shows. The RESTORE Act does not weaken our Nation's commitment to its democratic traditions. Rather, it represents a sound policy proposal for achieving the only legitimate goals of a terrorist surveillance program, which is to ensure that American citizens and persons in America are secure in their persons, papers, and effects, but terrorists throughout the world are made insecure. Let me direct the attention of all members to several of the more important aspects of this salutary legislation. First, H.R. 3773 explicitly affirms that that the exclusive law to follow with respect to authorizing foreign surveillance gathering on U.S. soil is the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). As initially enacted by Congress in 1978, the exclusivity of FISA was undisputed and unambiguous. I hasten to add, however, that while FISA remains the exclusive source of law, H.R. 3773 recognizes that the law as enacted in 1978 can and should be adapted to modern circumstances and to accommodate new technologies. And it does so by making clear that foreign to foreign communications are not subject to the FISA, even though modern technology enables that communication to be routed through the United States. Second, under H.R. 3773, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) is indispensable and is accorded a meaningful role in ensuring compliance with the law. The bill ensures that the FISC is empowered to act as an Article III court should act, which means the court shall operate neither as a rubber- stamp nor a bottleneck. Rather, the function of the court is to validate the lawful exercise of executive power on the one hand, and to act as the guardian of individual rights and liberties on the other. Third, the bill does not grant amnesty to any telecommunications company or to any other entity or individual that helped Federal intelligence agencies spy illegally on innocent Americans. I strongly support this provision because granting such blanket amnesty for past misconduct will have the unintended consequence of encouraging telecommunications companies to comply with, rather than contest, illegal requests to spy on Americans. The only permissible path to legalization of conduct in this area is full compliance with the requirements of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Moreover, Mr. Speaker, it is important to point out that the loudest demands for blanket immunity comes not from the telecommunications companies but from the Administration, which raises the interesting question of whether the Administration's real motivation is to shield from public disclosure the ways and means by which government officials may have ``persuaded'' telecommunications companies to assist in its warrantless surveillance programs. I call my colleagues' attention to an article published in the Washington Post last Sunday, in which it is reported that Joseph Nacchio, the former CEO of Qwest, alleges that his company was denied NSA contracts after he declined in a February 27, 2001 meeting at Fort Meade with National Security Agency (NSA) representatives to give the NSA customer calling records. Mr. Speaker, the authorization to conduct foreign surveillance on U.S. soil provided by H.R. 3773 is temporary and will expire in 2 years if not renewed by the Congress. This is perhaps the single most important limitation on the authority conferred on the Executive Branch by this legislation. The good and sufficient reason for imposing this limitation is because the threats to America's security and the liberties of its people will change over time and thus require constant vigilance by the people's representatives in Congress. To give a detailed illustration of just how superior the RESTORE Act is to the ill-considered and hastily enacted Protect America Act, I wish to take a few moments to discuss an important improvement in the bill that was adopted in the full Judiciary Committee markup. The Jackson-Lee Amendment added during the markup made a constructive contribution to the RESTORE Act by laying down a clear, objective criterion for the Administration to follow and the FISA court to enforce in preventing reverse targeting. ``Reverse targeting,'' a concept well known to members of this Committee but not so well understood by those less steeped in the arcana of electronic surveillance, is the practice where the government targets foreigners without a warrant while its actual purpose is to collect information on certain U.S. persons. One of the major concerns that libertarians and classical conservatives, as well as progressives and civil liberties organizations, have with the PAA is that the understandable temptation of national security agencies to engage in reverse targeting may be difficult to resist in the absence of strong safeguards in the PAA to prevent it. My amendment reduces even further any such temptation to resort to reverse targeting by requiring the administration to obtain a regular, individualized FISA warrant whenever the ``real'' target of the surveillance is a person in the United States. The amendment achieves this objective by requiring the administration to obtain a regular FISA warrant whenever a ``significant purpose of an acquisition is to acquire the communications of a specific person reasonably believed to be located in the United States.'' The current language in the bill provides that a warrant be obtained only when the Government ``seeks to conduct electronic surveillance'' of a person reasonably believed to be located in the United States. It was far from clear how the operative language ``seeks to'' is to be interpreted. In contrast, the language used in my amendment, ``significant purpose,'' is a term of art that has long been a staple of FISA jurisprudence and thus is well known and readily applied by the agencies, legal practitioners, and the FISA Court. Thus, the Jackson- Lee Amendment provides a clearer, more objective, criterion for the administration to follow and the FISA court to enforce to prevent the practice of reverse targeting without a warrant, which all of us can agree should not be permitted. Let us be clear, Mr. Speaker, that nothing in the bill or in my amendment requires the Government to obtain a FISA order for every overseas target on the off chance that they might pick up a call into or from the United States. Rather, the bill requires, as our amendment makes clear, a FISA order only where there is a particular, known person in the United States at the other end of the foreign target's calls in whom the Government has a significant interest such that a significant purpose of the surveillance has become to acquire that person's communications. This will usually happen over time, and the Government will have the time to get an order while continuing its surveillance. And it is the national security interest to require it to obtain an order at that point, so that it can lawfully acquire all of the target person's communications rather than continuing to listen to only some of them. The Jackson-Lee amendment gives the Government precisely what Director of National Intelligence McConnell asked for when he testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee: ``It is very important to me; it is very important to members of this Committee. We should be required--we should be required in all cases to have a warrant anytime there is surveillance of a US [sic] person located in the United States.'' In short, the Jackson-Lee amendment makes a good bill even better. For this reason alone, civil libertarians should enthusiastically embrace the RESTORE Act. Nearly 2 centuries ago, Alexis de Tocqueville, who remains the most astute student of American democracy, observed that the reason democracies invariably prevail in any martial conflict is because democracy is the governmental form that best rewards and encourages those traits that are indispensable to martial success: initiative, innovation, resourcefulness, and courage. Mr. Speaker, the best way to win the war on terror is to remain true to our democratic traditions. If it retains its democratic character, no nation and no loose confederation of international villains will defeat the United States in the pursuit of its vital interests. Thus, the way forward to victory in the war on terror is for the United States country to redouble its commitment to the Bill of Rights and the democratic values, which every American will risk his or her life to defend. It is only by preserving our attachment to these cherished values that America will remain forever the home of the free, the land of the brave, and the country we love.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this resolution, and I yield myself such time as I my consume. It is all too common these days to see headlines in media around and about the rise of modern-day slavery. The stories are enough to turn anyone's stomach. Cambodian mothers driven by intense poverty selling their daughters into prostitution; children as young as 5 shipped to Nigeria to slave away in underground granite mines; hundreds of African boys and girls smuggled to Britain, forced to work as domestic servants; brutish uniformed soldiers dragging Burmese men and women from their homes to labor on government construction projects; and even though it is not directly related, women in Saudi Arabia victimized by getting the lash and being convicted even though they have been a victim of rape and being utilized as sex tools or toys and sometimes being utilized as slaves. These nightmares unfolding thousands of miles from our shores are deeply tragic. But to many, they seem profoundly disconnected from our comfortable lives here in America. They are not. Human trafficking happens here at home right under our noses. Let me, of course, thank Chairman Lantos and Ranking Member Ileana Ros-Lehtinen for working with Congressman Conyers and many of us on this important legislation. Let me thank Congressman Conyers for his constant and consistent leadership on this important legislation, and as well his continued work as the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, on which I serve with him. Just a few weeks ago, a frightened young Tanzanian woman bravely came before the Foreign Affairs Committee to testify. For more than 4 years, she had been forced to do domestic work without pay for a diplomat at the Tanzanian Embassy in Washington. She was denied medical care. And when this frail young woman complained that her feet were infected, she was forced outside without shoes to shovel snow. While we would all like to view this heart-rending case as an isolated incident, it is sadly part of a growing international trend in which millions of men, women and children are forced into sexual slavery, labor or indentured servitude each year. Think for a moment if each of these individuals had a little camera on their back or their shoulder and we could truly see this woman with infected feet in icy snow shoveling snow, or someone who was never able to leave their house and never have any time off even here in the United States, or some of the other examples that we have already highlighted, we had a camera to see the harshness of it, the shame of it, the sadness of it, the cruelty of it. Trafficking is the world's fastest growing international organized crime, and one of the most profitable, yielding up to $17 billion each year. Every year traffickers move between 700,000 and 2 million women and children across international borders for the purpose of serving in the sex trade or in forced labor. Congress has worked for nearly a decade to ramp up our country's efforts to prevent trafficking, protect victims and prosecute perpetrators. With approval of the bill before the House today, we can redouble these efforts and dramatically increase the ability the United States has to work to end the scourge of modern-day slavery. H.R. 3887 requires the administration to compile data from every U.S. agency, international organizations and private sources so that the executive branch can prepare a comprehensive analysis of trafficking patterns. This will help us better understand where victims are actually going and how to free them. It also provides help for countries to prevent trafficking by registering vulnerable populations that currently go unrecognized so that potential victims can be identified and educated. And it provides assistance to increase inspections abroad where forced labor occurs to help trafficking victims from slave-like conditions. The legislation also prevents new visas for domestic servants for diplomats in the United States who belong to any embassy where abuse of such workers occurs. This will encourage self-policing of such embassies by their ambassadors. The bipartisan bill before the House will not end trafficking overnight but it will dramatically increase America's ability to stop trafficking here at home and to work with other countries to battle this rapidly growing international crime. The legislation shows that it is still possible for Republicans and Democrats to work together to get something big and important done and to save lives. Mr. Speaker, let me thank my good friend and colleague, the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Africa and Global Health, Chris Smith, for his extraordinary leadership on the trafficking issue for many years and for his many contributions to this important legislation. Let me also thank Chairman Payne for working with him on this issue and working together with the full committee. Two centuries ago, William Wilberforce moved mountains to convince the British Parliament to ban slavery in the United Kingdom. In fact, there is a Historically Black College named after him: Wilberforce University. More than 140 years ago our Nation adopted a 13th amendment banning slavery right here at home. But slavery in many forms still stubbornly persists in our country, in Britain, and in nations around the world. Mr. Speaker, enough is enough. Modern-day slavery must end. Our country already plays a leadership role in bringing about this supremely moral objective, but we simply must do more. Mr. Speaker, I urge all Members to support this legislation. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, the surge of HIV/AIDS is on. And although we have had an extensive decades-long effort to overcome the devastation of HIV/AIDS, I believe it is appropriate to again declare not only a national emergency but a concern for the international crisis. Madam Speaker, you have heard my colleagues tonight, and I thank you for your presence and leadership here tonight to listen to many of our Members who have raised the question of the epidemic of HIV/AIDS. We have raised it because we have been in our districts on World AIDS Day, and I spent 24 hours, maybe 48 hours, 2 days visiting with a number of community groups meeting on the topic of HIV/AIDS. Domestically we still have a crisis, and certainly internationally. I joined the first Presidential mission to Zambia, Zimbabwe, and South Africa a few years ago to look at the rising crisis in Africa. Now we know that thousands upon thousands, millions of children have been orphaned by both parents, single parents, or having one parent being afflicted and then losing their life with HIV/AIDS. We know that it is prevalent in Africa to have grandmothers who are taking care of six and seven and eight and nine and ten grandchildren because of the loss of their parents. I am very gratified to see the work of the Gates Foundation, the Clinton Foundation that have brought necessary medicines to those who now can live with HIV/AIDS. But the key for us around the world and here in the United States is prevention. The largest percentage of those infected with HIV/AIDS today find themselves in the African American population. It is not just a disease that plagues the homosexual community, but it is a heterosexual disease as well. People who are hemophiliacs may be succumbed by HIV/AIDS. So the issue, as I said, is prevention, and we must work collectively together. I believe it is important to continue research to find a cure, a vaccine for HIV/AIDS. But as well, I believe it's important to continue to educate about how the disease is transmitted, how it can be transmitted from mother to infant, and how it can be stopped. Interestingly enough, we believe when we don't hear something, something has passed. But I will never forget going into a hut and seeing on the floor an afflicted man. He had both HIV/AIDS and tuberculosis. And who was caring for him? A 4-year-old. The only remaining healthy person in that whole area, that whole compound in Africa, was a 4-year-old taking care of an elderly dying man. When we in this world have come to that, there is a reason to raise our voices. So I salute the various institutions in my own community, the Harris County Hospital District, Ben Taub Hospital and the researchers and doctors who are there, the Thomas Street Clinic, who are continuing to care for those who are in need, the City of Houston's Health Department, the great program that they had at Texas Southern University, along with the hip-hop community, to emphasize the need for testing and prevention. I myself have held testing events with the faith community. We intend to hold more, and the emphasis is faith, hip-hop, whoever is willing to collaborate to ensure that people are tested. I advocate for testing to be part of everyone's physical examination, that insurance companies should pay for those tests to be diagnosed. A $2 test means you get a mail-back; a $10 test means right on the spot you get a diagnosis. That's what we should be doing to help those here in America. I also believe that we should test persons who have been incarcerated, men and women. Those going into the prison should be tested; those coming out of the prison should be tested, for that is how in many instances, besides drug utilization, that many of the HIV/ AIDS individuals who receive it are infected. Madam Speaker, this issue of HIV/AIDS is a family affair; it is a Nation's affair, and in order to save lives, we have to stand up and be counted. We cannot allow the stigma of HIV/AIDS to dominate our reason and our hearts. We must embrace those who have it and help them live the best quality of life that they can. More funding for community health clinics that will treat people with HIV/AIDS. But at the same time, we must wage a major campaign for those who are intravenous drug users, that we have clean needles; for those who have been incarcerated, that they be tested; for young people who are frivolous and believe that promiscuity is the way of life, we have to say ``no.'' And, frankly, we have to say that testing is not a shame. It is an honor to be tested to find out, one, that you're healthy, and to be tested to find out that you need treatment and you need to be careful. I hope, as we commemorate World AIDS Day, we recognize that it is an international circle, and that circle must never end until we find the cure for HIV/AIDS, we stamp it up, and provide people with a better quality of life. Madam Speaker, I stand here today to recognize the importance and significance of World AIDS Day. about world aids day--december 1st Established by the World Health Organization in 1988, World AIDS Day serves to focus global attention on the devastating impact of the HIV/ AIDS epidemic. Observance of this day provides an opportunity for governments, national AIDS programs, churches, community organizations and individuals to demonstrate the importance of the fight against HIV/ AIDS. It has been 25 years since the first AIDS cases were reported. Since then countless researchers, health care providers, politicians, and educators have contributed to the global initiative to contain and eventually eliminate its presence in all corners of the world, a presence that has grown increasingly ominous with time. Although HIV/AIDS is no longer a mysterious and mischaracterized entity, it retains, and rightfully so, its chilling aura as the most relentless and indiscriminate killer of our time. And though a diagnosis is no longer the sealing of an immediate fate, it is the beginning of an indefinite battle for life and for social belonging. impact on world community With an estimated 33.2 million people worldwide currently living with HIV, and more than 25 million people having died of AIDS since 1981, December 1st serves to remind everyone that action makes a difference in the fight against HIV/AIDS. Let there be no mistake; we are here to acknowledge that AIDS is a deadly enemy against which we must join all our forces to fight and eliminate. Americans should be reminded that HIV/AIDS does not discriminate. With an estimated 1,039,000 to 1,185,000 HIV-positive individuals living in the U.S., and approximately 40,000 new infections occurring every year, the U.S., like other nations around the world is deeply affected by HIV/AIDS. impact on african-americans AIDS is devastating the African-American community. As of February 2006, African-Americans represented only 13 percent of the U.S. population, but accounted for 40 percent of the 944,306 AIDS cases diagnosed since the start of the epidemic and approximately half (49 percent) of the 42,514 cases diagnosed in 2004 alone. African-Americans also account for half of new HIV/AIDS diagnoses in the 35 states/areas with confidential name-based reporting. The AIDS case rate per 100,000 population among African-American adults/adolescents was nearly 10.2 times that of whites in 2004. African-Americans accounted for 55 percent of deaths due to HIV in 2002 and their survival time after an AIDS diagnosis is lower on average than it is for other racial/ethnic groups. HIV was the third leading cause of death for African-Americans, ages 25-34, in 2002 compared to the sixth leading cause of death for whites and Latinos in this age group. impact on african-american women and children; and hispanic women African-American women and children have been disproportionately victimized by this deadly disease. African-American women account for the majority of new AIDS cases among women (67 percent in 2004); white women account for 17 percent and Latinas 15 percent. Among African- Americans, African-American women represent more than a third (36 percent) of AIDS cases diagnosed in 2004. Although African-American teens (ages 13-19) represent only 15 percent of U.S. teenagers, they accounted for 66 percent of new AIDS cases reported among teens in 2003. impact in houston/harris county, texas The detrimental effects of AIDS have also hit home. In 2004, right here in my home district of Houston/Harris County, there were over 14,000 reported persons living with HIV (non-AIDS) and more than 8,000 reported persons living with AIDS. Sadly, there were almost 400 deaths resulting from AIDS in Houston/Harris County, Texas in 2004. This problem continues to escalate as there were more than 800 newly diagnosed AIDS cases in Harris County in 2004. In Houston alone, there were more than 1,000 reported HIV Diagnosis in 2005. We must continue to forge a tough fight to reverse all of these costly and tragic trends. Billions and billions of private and federal dollars have been poured into drug research and development to treat and manage infections, but the complex life cycle and incessant mutation rates of HIV strains has made this endeavor difficult. Though the drugs we currently have are effective in managing infections and reducing mortality by slowing the progression to AIDS in an individual, they do little to reduce disease prevalence and prevent new infections. Currently, the only cure we have for HIV/AIDS is prevention. While we must continue efforts to develop advanced treatment options, it is crucial that those efforts are accompanied by dramatic increases in public health education, awareness, and prevention measures. roundtable of aids experts Earlier this year, with the hope of bringing attention to the importance of HIV/AIDS testing in the fight to eliminate HIV/AIDS, especially in the African American community, I hosted an AIDS roundtable of AIDS experts and community leaders, in Houston, that included free voluntary HIV/AIDS testing. We discussed policy changes dealing with the AIDS crisis in our communities across the United States. I consult with AIDS experts and we vowed to work hard to create constructive and effective vehicles to address the very real need of testing within certain groups of the population. potential mandatory testing among certain populations and the prison population We discussed the potential mandatory testing for certain populations as well as mandatory testing for all of the prison population. Consideration of such potential solutions is not intended to stigmatize and exploit individuals who may be suffering; it is a means of saving lives. potential availability of testing as part of routine physicals; managed-care opportunities Our AIDS roundtable also considered the option of making AIDS testing available as part of routine physicals. We also discussed the potential for education and preventative measures to be included in HIV managed- care programs. These are all possible solutions we considered as means of combating the HIV/AIDS crisis and to silence the sorrowful cries of the victims and many more potential victims of this deadly disease. All of us must continue to use our creative ideas to find effective ways to break the cycle of death that has been resulted from the HIV/AIDS scourge. ryan white act As your Congresswoman, I have fully and eagerly supported all legislation that has given increased attention and resources to HIV/ AIDS, including the Ryan White CARE Act, which is currently slated to receive about $2.2 billion in funding for FY2007. The Ryan White Act, originally signed on August 18, 1990, is the primary source of medical care for HIV positive children, youth and pregnant women. The Ryan White CARE Act funds more than 600 sites through 91 grants in 35 states, DC, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. I know I need not convince you of the fact that this legislation, and the money it authorizes, is crucial to our national fight against HIV/AIDS. I will continue to push hard to ensure that the purpose of the the Ryan White Act is fully funded. served and realized. I will also work hard to make sure that the Ryan White Act is tailored to the challenges that we face today. In addition, I have supported legislation to reauthorize funding for community health centers (H.R. 5573, Health Centers Renewal Act of 2006), including the Montrose and Fourth Ward clinics right here in Houston, as well as supported legislation to provide more nurses for the poor urban communities in which many of these centers are located (H.R. 1285, Nursing Relief Act for Disadvantaged Areas). I have also supported and introduced legislation aimed to better educate our children (H.R. 2553, Responsible Education About Life Act in 2006) and eliminate health disparitis (H.R. 3561, Healthcare Equality and Accountability Act and the Good Medicine Cultural Competency Act in 2003, H.R. 90). And I will continue to endorse and push for similar legislation. Twenty-five years from now, I hope that we will not be discussing data on prevalence and mortality, but rather how our sustained efforts have been successful. But if we are ever to have that discussion, there are a number of actions that we must take right now. We must continue research on treatments and antiretroviral therapies, as well as pursue a cure. And we absolutely have to ensure that everyone who needs treatment receives it. In order to do this, we have to increase awareness of testing, access to testing, and the accuracy of testing. Knowledge truly is power. We must also increase funding for local health departments and community health clinics, as well as fully fund the Ryan White CARE Act. Lastly, but perhaps most importantly, it is imperative that we work to increase funding for HIV prevention and education, so that our children will be equipped with sufficient and appropriate knowledge of this growing threat within our communities, especially within our black communities and among black women. If blacks are eleven times as likely to acquire infection, then we need to make eleven times the effort to educate. And we need to apply similar efforts in every community until HIV/AIDS becomes a memory. If not, our friends and family will be memories instead. Community volunteers from churches and other organizations have done commendable work here in Houston. I think everyone can learn something from their selflessness and their will to serve their communities. We need more people to follow their lead. We do not have time for excuses or hesitation. We have the passion and dedication, and we are securing more and more resources. It is up to us to get the resources where they are needed. I implore all of us, politicians, researchers, clergy, and community leaders to continue to work on the very challenging mission of eliminating HIV/AIDS. To do this, we must continue to pass legislation that will continue to fund research, as well as prevention and treatment programs to combat HIV/AIDS. We must also increase our efforts to provide compassionate care, pursue rigorous research, educate our communities, and raise awareness. By doing this together, we will help all of our friends, relatives, and children live healthy and full lives.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Let me thank the distinguished Chair for yielding the time. And let me acknowledge in this very short time the importance of this legislation, and particularly, its importance to my community in Houston. The most important point that I would like to emphasize is the issue of the standards being put in place for mortgage brokers. I happen to be very happy that standards are preempting State standards in this instance, because Texas needs that kind of regulation. Let me also take note of the fact that I know Mr. Watt was intending to bring forward an amendment regarding reverse mortgages, and may submit it or not. But knowing that I just recently dealt with a constituent, an elderly constituent who suffered from a reverse mortgage loan, she utilized the reverse mortgage, and now she can't find any of those that provided that loan and cannot afford to pay it back and she is about to lose her house. So, with the numbers of homeless in our community and with the numbers of homeless across America, the fact that we are talking about creating a better housing market and also creating jobs as we go forward, this is a constructive bill. I would ask my colleagues to consider the fact that affordable housing only comes from a regulated and positive market. I like the underlying amendment, but I think it is important to set standards for mortgage brokers and to ensure that there is consumer protection in housing for those most vulnerable. And I appreciate, in particular, that this bill has created a Office of Housing Counseling to help new homeowners. And might I, as I close, Madam Chairman, just indicate that I support the concerns of ACORN and the NAACP and look forward to those issues being corrected as we make our way to conference.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I thank both chairmen, Chairman Conyers for his leadership and Chairman Reyes. In the month of August, I stood here and shredded paper to reflect that the vote we took on that bill was really a destruction of the Constitution. I am very glad to be able to stand here today to hold the Constitution sacredly in my hand and to indicate that this bill does, in fact, offer a restoration of the civil liberties of Americans but yet does not protect one single terrorist. It is a bill that avoids reverse targeting of Americans. But it is a bill that provides the opportunity that if there was a pending threat against the United States, the Attorney General, the National Security Director, and three others could, in fact, prevent a terrorist act from occurring in the United States. This restores justice and it protects the American people. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 3773, introduced by my colleague Mr. Conyers. Had the Bush administration and the Republican- dominated 109th Congress acted more responsibly in the 2 preceding years, we would not be in the position of debating legislation that has such a profound impact on national security and on American values and civil liberties in the crush of exigent circumstances. More often that not, it is true, as the saying goes, that haste makes waste. Mr. Speaker, the legislation before us is intended to fill a gap in the Nation's intelligence gathering capabilities identified by Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell, by amending the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, FISA. It gives our intelligence professionals the tools they need to legally monitor suspect foreigners outside the United States, while protecting the fundamental rights of Americans at home. Nearly two centuries ago, Alexis de Tocqueville observed that the reason democracies invariably prevail in any martial conflict is because democracy is the governmental form that best rewards and encourages those traits that are indispensable to martial success: initiative, innovation, resourcefulness, and courage. The United States would do well to heed de Tocqueville and recognize that the best way to win the war on terror is to remain true to our democratic traditions. If it retains its democratic character, no nation and no loose confederation of international villains will defeat the United States in the pursuit of its vital interests. A major challenge facing the Congress today is to ensure that in waging its war on terror, the administration does not succeed in winning passage of legislation that will weaken the Nation's commitment to its democratic traditions. This is why the upcoming debate over congressional approval authorizing the administration to conduct terrorist surveillance on U.S. soil is a matter of utmost importance. I offer some thoughts on the principles that should inform that debate. In the waning hours before the August recess, the House acceded to the Bush administration's request and approved the woefully misnamed ``Protect America Act,'' which gives the Federal Government enlarged powers to conduct electronic surveillance of American citizens under the guise of conducting surveillance of foreign terrorists. Mr. Speaker, FISA has served the Nation well for nearly 30 years, placing electronic surveillance inside the United States for foreign intelligence and counter-intelligence purposes on a sound legal footing. Given the exigent circumstances claimed by the administration, I am prepared to support a number of temporary changes to FISA legislation, provided that they follow certain principles. First, I am prepared to accept temporarily eliminating the need to obtain a court order for foreign-to-foreign communications that pass through the United States. But I do insist upon individual warrants, based on probable cause, when surveillance is directed at people in the United States. The Attorney General must still be required to submit procedures for international surveillance to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court for approval, but the FISA Court should not be allowed to issue a ``basket warrant'' without making individual determinations about foreign surveillance. There should be an initial emergency authority so that international surveillance can begin while the warrants are being considered by the Court. And there must also be congressional oversight, requiring the Department of Justice Inspector General to conduct an audit every 60 days of U.S. person communications intercepted under these warrants, to be submitted to the Intelligence and Judiciary Committees. This legislation allows the interception of electronic communications between foreigners outside of the United States without a warrant and permits the director of national intelligence and the attorney general to seek ``blanket'' warrants to intercept communications of people reasonably believed to be outside the United States, even if such communication happens to involve ``U.S. persons.'' Wiretap surveillance could be conducted for 7 days before a warrant must be sought, and the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance court would have to act on the application for a blanket warrant within 15 days. This legislation has many other important provisions. It affirms that FISA is the exclusive source of legal authority for conducting electronic surveillance for foreign intelligence. Crucially, it does not grant amnesty to telecommunications companies for any past violations of law. Finally, it gives the FISA Court more oversight authority and terminates the authorization to conduct foreign surveillance on U.S. soil after 2 years. In all candor, Mr. Speaker, I must restate my firm conviction that when it comes to the track record of this President's warrantless surveillance programs, there is still nothing on the public record about the nature and effectiveness of those programs, or the trustworthiness of this administration, to indicate that they require any legislative response, other than to reaffirm the exclusivity of FISA and insist that it be followed. This could have been accomplished in the 109th Congress by passing H.R. 5371, the ``Lawful Intelligence and Surveillance of Terrorists in an Emergency by NSA'' Act, LISTEN Act, which I have cosponsored with the then ranking members of the Judiciary and Intelligence Committees, Mr. Conyers and Ms. Harman. The Bush administration has not complied with its legal obligation under the National Security Act of 1947 to keep the Intelligence Committees ``fully and currently informed'' of U.S. intelligence activities. Congress cannot continue to rely on incomplete information from the Bush administration or revelations in the media. It must conduct a full and complete inquiry into electronic surveillance in the United States and related domestic activities of the NSA, both those that occur within FISA and those that occur outside FISA. The inquiry must not be limited to the legal questions. It must include the operational details of each program of intelligence surveillance within the United States, including: (1) who the NSA is targeting; (2) how it identifies its targets; (3) the information the program collects and disseminates; and most important; (4) whether the program advances national security interests without unduly compromising the privacy rights of the American people. Given the unprecedented amount of information Americans now transmit electronically and the post-9/11 loosening of regulations governing information sharing, the risk of intercepting and disseminating the communications of ordinary Americans is vastly increased, requiring more precise--not looser--standards, closer oversight, new mechanisms for minimization, and limits on retention of inadvertently intercepted communications. Mr. Speaker, the legislation before us is necessary. It is incumbent on the Congress to act expeditiously to amend existing laws so that they achieve the only legitimate goals of a terrorist surveillance program, which is to ensure that Americans are secure in their persons, papers and effects, but terrorists throughout the world are made insecure. The best way to achieve these twin goals is to follow the rule of law. And the exclusive law to follow with respect to authorizing foreign surveillance gathering on U.S. soil is the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. It is my sincere hope that my colleagues will join together today in enacting important and much needed reforms to FISA. Finally, Mr. Speaker, I am proud to support the Manager's Amendment to this legislation. This amendment clarifies that nothing in this act can be construed to prohibit lawful surveillance necessary to prevent Osama Bin Laden, al Qaeda, or any other terrorist organization from attacking the U.S., any U.S. person, or any ally of the U.S.; to ensure the safety and security of our Armed Forces or other national security or intelligence personnel; or to protect the U.S., any U.S. person, or any U.S. ally from the threat of WMD or any other threats to national security. Mr. Speaker, even as we work to protect our Nation, we must remember the fundamental need to protect Americans. At bottom, America is its people connected to each other, and to past and future generations, as in Abraham Lincoln's unforgettable phrase, by ``the mystic chords of memory stretching from every heart and hearthstone.'' America, in other words, is Americans coming together in a community of shared values, ideals and principles. It is those shared values that hold us together. It is our commitment to those values that the terrorists wish to break because that is the only way they can win. Thus, the way forward to victory in the war on terror is for this country to redouble its commitment to the values that every American will risk his or her life to defend. It is only by preserving our attachment to these cherished values that America will remain forever the home of the free, the land of the brave and the country we love. H.R. 3773 does just that. It balances the interest in protecting the Nation from terrorists who would do us harm and, at the same time, ensures that the constitutional rights of American citizens and persons in America are not abridged. I strongly urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this legislation.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 3915, the Mortgage Reform and Anti-Predatory Lending Act of 2007, introduced by my distinguished colleague from North Carolina, Representative Brad Miller. This important legislation will address and reform the mortgage lending processes ``to avert a recurrence of the current situation with rising defaults and foreclosures, especially in the sub-prime market.'' Mr. Chairman, it is essential that this Congress protects the needs of American families and nothing is more imperative than ensuring that all people have a home. Recent studies have reported that 92 percent of the American population has at some point feared being homeless and this legislation is an important step in alleviating those fears. The current lending crisis must be addressed. The Federal Government must play an important role in revitalizing and restoring opportunities for Americans to reach the American dream of owning a home. One of the major contributors of the affordable housing shortage is the sub-prime lending crisis that has caused serious negative economic and social consequences that resulted from too little regulation. Because of the lack of regulation by the Federal Government, many loans were accompanied by fraud, inadequate information and other failures of responsible marketing. Foreclosure rates are at 14 percent and are rising at an alarming rate and homeowners across America are losing their homes. Throughout the country, homeowners are surprised to find out that their monthly payments are spiking and they are struggling to make these increasingly high payments. The sub-prime mortgage crisis has impacted families and communities across the country. Home foreclosure filings rose to 1.2 million in 2006--a 42 percent jump--due to rising mortgage bills and a slowing housing market. In Iowa, 3,445 families experienced foreclosure last year, up 64 percent from 2005. Nationally, as many as 2.4 million sub-prime borrowers have either lost their homes or could lose them in the next few years. The Democratic-led House Financial Services Committee has been intently focused on this and other issues and is working toward a balanced solution that helps stabilize the mortgage market, stops abuses, preserves access to credit, and aids stable homeownership. Creating more affordable housing opportunities will increase more job opportunities for the people of Houston and Harris County. We hope that an increase in affordable housing and job opportunities will also reduce the high rates of homelessness among Houston residents. As you may know: Houston's homeless population increased to approximately 14,000 in 2005 before Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. Hurricane evacuees remaining in the Houston area could result in the homeless population increasing by some 23,000 to 30,000. Houston's homeless population includes an estimated 28 percent of American Veterans. Some 59 percent became homeless because of job loss. A full 10 percent of the city's homeless are believed to be able to return to self-sufficiency with 12-18 months of assistance and affordable housing. Shelter and housing for Houston's homeless currently is reported at around 4,235 beds and or units, leaving 10,000 on the streets. I have cosponsored a number of bills to address the housing crisis in this country. In the 109th Congress I cosponsored H.R. 1182, the Prohibit Predatory Lending Act, and H.R. 1994, the Predatory Mortgage Lending Reduction Act. I will continue to support legislation to address the housing crisis facing the people of this country. This important piece of legislation will ``create a licensing system for residential mortgage loan originators, establish a minimum standard requiring that borrowers have a reasonable ability to repay a loan, and will attach a limited liability to secondary market securitizers.'' This is extremely significant in the sense that it will ensure that Americans who dream of home ownership will not engage in loans that they will be unable to repay. It will enhance and expand consumer protections against ``high-cost loans.'' It will protect renters of foreclosed homes and establish through the Department of Housing and Urban Development an Office of Housing Counseling that will ensure that consumers will be fully aware of all possible avenues. While this legislation is a step in the right direction, we must ensure that this legislation does not hurt those who it is intended to protect. We must ensure that families with a less-than-perfect credit history are not denied outright their dream of home-ownership and that lenders do not abuse their discretionary powers. This legislation creates a standard licensing system for residential mortgage loan originators that will ensure a consistent rubric for loans and protect American families from would-be predatory lenders. It further expands consumer protections from high-cost loans by: prohibiting the financing of points and fees; prohibiting excessive fees for payoff information, modifications, or late payments; prohibiting practices that increase the risk of foreclosure, such as balloon payments, encouraging a borrower to default, and call provisions, and requiring pre-loan counseling. This is an unprecedented step forward for hard working Americans with the dream of home-ownership and I applaud this legislation for this significant first step towards helping Americans realize their dreams. Finally, let me acknowledge the concerns of strong advacates for the housing needs of the vulnerable--ACORN and the NAACP, among others, and I look to working on changes in this legislation as the bill moves to address their concerns.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, this afternoon we saw a varying level of discourse and debate over an enormously important and I might say singularly important issue that is facing the American public, and that is the question of the war in Iraq. No matter how you touch the hearts and minds of Americans, whether or not they suggest that this Congress and this President is not paying enough attention to the domestic concerns, woven into the crisis of where we stand today is the conflict in Iraq. I think Americans understand Afghanistan more than we might think they do. They know that this Nation was attacked on September 11, 2001. They know that when the Nation is attacked, the Commander in Chief, leaders of this government have the responsibility of defending the honor and the security of America. They see Afghanistan as defending that honor and that security. They know that the Taliban, Osama bin Laden, those who collaborated were the basis of the attack against the World Trade towers and other sites in this country. They know that our lives have changed because of the horrific tragedy of 9/11. And they are willing to accept that. They faced up against new laws that seem to undermine their liberties, and within reason they are willing to acknowledge that things must change. I am grateful, however, that there are those of us who understand that the greatest success of a terrorist is to cause you to terrorize yourself. So many of us have asked to modify and assess the PATRIOT Act. We are looking to redo the FISA law that deals with electronic surveillance. But mostly in debating this question, Americans understand that their lives have changed. But the Iraq War continues to be a questioning action by this administration. All of us have tried to give respect to the basis and the reason of this direction that this government took in the fall of 2002. I, for one, was very hesitant to speak about a war for oil. I recognize that there might have been many deliberations that have occurred that might have caused this administration to make this unfortunate leap of preemptive attack. I have come full circle now, however, and I am enormously disappointed in the thought process and the respect not given to the American people. For the American people, over 56 percent, want this war to end, want these troops to come home, want to see a troop reduction. So this debate today was not a frivolous debate. And the leadership of the Democratic Caucus, the leadership of this Congress took great pains to try to address this in a fair and dignified manner. They worked very hard to bring a concise document that spoke to the safety and security of the troops, the respect of the troops, the acknowledgment of their hard work; but yet to insist that a plan be laid out by this administration to reduce the number of troops in Iraq while at the same time ensuring that if there are outstanding conflicts, firefights, terrorists to be fought, that we'd have the troops on the ground. I believe that this has been the most misdirected war that history will record. I believe that it beats out the Civil War, the War of 1812, World War I, World War II, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, Persian Gulf. For any of those who opposed those wars, and I was not there for all of them, if there was any opposition for reasons that I don't know, this has to be the single most dangerous and devastating action that this Nation could have ever taken. There is no sense for it. There is no basis for it. But if there was a case that you could make, you could make the case that the military has done every single thing that it was asked to do. So, Mr. Speaker, that is why I was moved to write the Military Success Act of 2007. It indicates that Congress recognizes that the military, in the invasion of Iraq, as authorized by a resolution given to the President in 2002, going into Baghdad was probably one of the best executed military operations in modern history, alongside of the Persian Gulf. The armed services successfully toppled the regime of Saddam Hussein. And as I close, it lists a whole series of successes. And then it indicates that every single aspect of the 2002 resolution has been complied with. And, therefore, that means that the task of the 2002 resolution has ended. And it calls then for the troops to come home, for them to be acknowledged, for them to be given free, with no attachment, $5,000 for each returning troop from Iraq. Mr. Speaker, this was a difficult debate, but I think and know that we made the right decision. But we could do even more. We can affirm that these troops need to come home, and we can celebrate them for the heroes that they are.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, on the previous motion to recommit vote, in light of the new extraordinary and difficult and strenuous voting time, I was unavoidably delayed in an Iraq briefing. If I was present, I would have voted ``nay'' on the motion to recommit on the Transportation-HUD appropriations bill.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, the American people get it. Over 50 percent of the American people believe that we should now begin a reduction of our troops. As I listened here on the floor of the house, and I listened to my good friends on the other side of the aisle claiming the me-me's and the I-I's, I hear no one talking about victory. Victory in what sense? So that we can pound our chests and brag about what this Congress and this President has done? We're talking about lives here. We're talking about lives. And I am sick and tired of listening to people bragging about who can claim a victory. Well, my belief is that the soldiers on the battlefield, the most deadliest year that we've ever had, 2006, we buried more than we could ever imagine. Those soldiers have already claimed victory. They took Fallujah. They took Baghdad. And my concern is why have we not championed the victory of those soldiers? Why haven't we welcomed them home, given them accolades because they have been victorious? Someone on the other side has not read this bill. This bill allows for a redeployment in an orderly manner, and it demands that the President use these dollars to redeploy. I am not going to trample on the graves of dead soldiers and continue a war that has no end. That government has the ability in Iraq to diplomatically deal with democracy. We have died so they can deal with democracy. It is time to end this war now and to bring our soldiers home with the dignity and victory they deserve. Right now, in the Nation's hospitals, we are seeing the results of his victory. We are seeing soldiers with brain injury, soldiers with no limbs. And we have a broken health care system that can't even address the question of those soldiers with posttraumatic stress brain injury and otherwise. My voice is gone, but I am tired of this question of victory because I believe, and I have a bill, and I ask my good friend from California to join it, the Military Success Act of 2007 that chronicles the victories of our soldiers. We can bring them home with dignity. I am not going to tolerate one more dead body. And it is time to end this war and end it now. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 4156, introduced by my colleague, Mr. Obey. I would like to thank him for his ongoing leadership as chairman of the Committee on Appropriations, and on this important issue in particular. The legislation we are considering today provides our troops with the resources they need, but it does not give the President the blank check he has asked for to fund an endless combat operation in Iraq. Instead of his additional $200 billion, we are considering a $50 billion package, which institutes a redeployment timeline, as well as other critical directives designed to transition our role in Iraq and bring our troops home. Madam Speaker, the funds provided by this legislation are, crucially, tied to a requirement for the immediate start of the redeployment of U.S. forces. It sets December 15, 2008, as the target date for the completion of the redeployment, and requires redeployment to begin within 30 days of enactment. 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. We sent them overseas to fight an army; they are now caught in the midst of an insurgent civil war and continuing political upheaval. The United States will not and should not permanently prop up the Iraqi Government and military. U.S. military involvement in Iraq will come to an end, and, when U.S. forces leave, the responsibility for securing their nation will fall to Iraqis themselves. However, 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. For this reason, I extremely please to have worked with the Democratic leadership to include language recognizing the extraordinary achievements of our men and women in uniform. Paragraph 2 of Title I reads, ``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.'' I believe that the inclusion of this language makes it clear that we are proud of the accomplishments of our troops, and we look forward to commending them as they return safely home. I also worked with the Leadership to include the language in Paragraph 3 of Title 1. This paragraph reads, ``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 language makes explicit that this legislation is providing funding for the safe and responsible redeployment of our troops, not for the continuation of combat operations. This legislation protects our troops, by providing them with the funding they need to safely and successfully redeploy from Iraq. It also prohibits the deployment of forces to Iraq who are not fully trained and fully equipped. In addition, this legislation includes an extension to all U.S. Government agencies and personnel of the current prohibition in the Army Field Manual against the use of certain interrogation techniques. Mr. Speaker, this bill contains important language that changes the mission of U.S. forces in Iraq to diplomatic and force protection, targeted counterterrorism operations, and limited support to Iraqi security forces. I firmly believe that we must make diplomacy and statecraft tools of the first, rather than the last, resort. We must seek constructive engagement with Iraq, its neighbors, and the rest of the international community, as we work to bring resolution to this calamitous conflict that has already gone on far too long. Because of my deeply held belief that we must commend our military for their exemplary performance and success in Iraq, I have introduced legislation, H.R. 4020, with the support of a number of my colleagues, entitled the ``Military Success in Iraq Commemoration Act of 2007.'' This legislation recognizes the extraordinary performance of the Armed Forces in achieving the military objectives of the United States in Iraq, encourages the President to issue a proclamation calling upon the people of the United States to observe a national day of celebration commemorating the military success of American troops in Iraq, and provides other affirmative and tangible expressions of appreciation from a grateful Nation to all veterans of the war in Iraq. Mr. Speaker, we have already expended 3,500 American lives and $400 billion in taxpayer dollars in Iraq. We have occupied the country for over 4 years. And our President continues to push a strategy devoid of clear direction and visible targets, while rejecting congressional calls to solidify an exit strategy. Last November, the American people clearly stated that they did not want to see an endless conflict in Iraq; they went to the polls and elected a new, Democratic Congress to lead our Nation out of Iraq. I am proud to be a member of the Congressional class that listens and adheres to the will of the American people, as we did when both houses of Congress approved Iraq Supplemental bills that instituted a timetable for U.S. withdrawal. We need a new direction, because we owe our brave, fighting men and women so much more. Washington made a mistake in going to war. It is time for politicians to admit that mistake and fix it before any more lives are lost. This Congress will not, as the previous, Republican, Congress did, continue to rubber stamp what we believe to be an ill-conceived war. As we continue to receive reports on the situation in Iraq, it is important that we continue to look forward, to the future of Iraq beyond a U.S. military occupation. Despite the multitude of mistakes perpetrated by President Bush and former Defense Secretary Rumsfeld, our troops have achieved a military success in ousting Saddam Hussein and assisting the Iraqis in administering a democratic election and electing a democratic government. However, only the Iraqi government can secure a lasting peace. Time and time again, the Iraqi government has demonstrated an inability to deliver on the political benchmarks that they themselves agreed were essential to achieving national reconciliation. Continuing to put the lives of our soldiers and our national treasury in the hands of what by most informed accounts, even by members of the Bush Administration, is an ineffective central Iraqi government is irresponsible and contrary to the wishes of the overwhelming majority of the American people. Our Nation has already paid a heavy price in Iraq. Over 3,810 American soldiers have died. In addition, more than 27,660 have been wounded in the Iraq war since it began in March 2003. June, July, and August have marked the bloodiest months yet in the conflict, and U.S. casualties in Iraq are 62 percent higher this year than at this time in 2006. This misguided, mismanaged, and misrepresented war has claimed too many lives of our brave servicemen; its depth, breadth, and scope are without precedent in American history. In addition, the United States is spending an estimated $10 billion per month in Iraq. This $10 billion a month translates into $329,670,330 per day, $13,736,264 per hour, $228,938 per minute, and $3,816 per second. For this huge sum of money, we could have repaired the more than 70,000 bridges across America rated structurally deficient, $188 billion, potentially averting the tragedy that occurred August 1 in Minneapolis, Minnesota. We could have rebuilt the levees in New Orleans, $50 billion, protecting that city from future hurricanes that could bring Katrina-like destruction upon the city. We could have provided all U.S. public safety officials with interoperable communication equipment, $10 billion, allowing them to effectively communicate in the event of an emergency, and we could have paid for screening all air cargo on passenger planes for the next 10 years, $3.6 billion. And, we could have enrolled 1.4 million additional children in Head Start programs, $10 billion. Instead of funding increased death and destruction in Iraq, we could have spent hard-earned taxpayer dollars on important progress here at home. The Foreign Affairs Committee, of which I am proud to be a member, has recently heard a string of reports from military and civilian officials about the political, military, social, and economic situation in Iraq. Two weeks ago, the Government Accountability Office, GAO, informed the Congress that the Iraqi government has met only 3 of the 18 legislative, economic, and security benchmarks. Despite the surge, despite increasing U.S. military involvement, the Iraqi Government has not made substantial progress toward stabilizing their country. President Bush rationalized his surge, over opposition by myself and other House Democrats, by arguing it would give the Iraqi government ``the breathing space it needs to make progress in other critical areas,'' bringing about reconciliation between warring factions, Sunni and Shia. However, non-partisan assessments, such as last week's GAO report, have illustrated that escalating U.S. military involvement in Iraq is instead hindering that nation's ability to move beyond the devastation of war and death, to build a successful new government, and to create a stable and secure environment. In the 7 months since the surge began, increased American military presence has not been able to end the relentless cycles of sectarian violence that continue to plague Iraq. Nor have larger numbers of U.S. troops been successful in unifying and strengthening the Iraqi Government. Instead, the security situation continues to deteriorate. Sectarian violence remains high, and even the Bush administration has noted the unsatisfactory progress toward political reconciliation. The Sunni-led insurgency continues, with insurgents conducting increasingly complex and well-coordinated attacks. The August 2007 National Intelligence Estimate cited ongoing violence, stating, ``the level of overall violence, including attacks on and casualties among civilians, remain high; Iraq's sectarian groups remain unreconciled.'' The report went on to note that al-Qaeda in Iraq, AQI, ``retains the ability to conduct high-profile attacks,'' and ``Iraqi political leaders remain unable to govern effectively.'' The ever-increasing sectarian violence is causing immense daily challenges for Iraqis. Millions have been displaced, and an Iraqi Red Crescent Organization has reported an increase of nearly 630,000 internally displaced persons from February 2007 to July 2007. The same organization predicts an additional 80,000 to 100,000 persons are displaced each month. The UN High Commissioner for Refugees has estimated that 1.8 million Iraqis are now refugees, with an additional 40,000 to 50,000 fleeing to neighboring countries each month. Iraq has become a humanitarian disaster, and one that continues to get worse every day. The United States military is a skilled and highly proficient organization, and where there are large numbers of U.S. troops, it is unsurprising that we see fewer incidents of violence. However, it is our responsibility to take a longer-term view. The United States will not and should not permanently prop up the Iraqi Government and military. U.S. military involvement in Iraq will come to an end, and, when U.S. forces leave, the responsibility for securing their nation will fall to Iraqis themselves. And so far, we have not seen a demonstrated commitment by the Iraqi Government. In addition, evidence suggests that not only is increased U.S. military presence in Iraq not making that nation more secure, it may also be threatening our national security by damaging our ability to respond to real threats to our own homeland. The recently released video by Osama bin Laden serves to illustrate that President Bush has not caught this international outlaw, nor brought him to justice. Instead, he has diverted us from the real war on terror to the war of his choice in Iraq. The former Chairman and Vice Chairman of the 9/11 Commission, Thomas H. Kean and Lee H. Hamilton, share this view. In a recent op-ed, Kean and Hamilton note that our own actions have contributed to a rise of radicalization and rage in the Muslim world. Kean and Hamilton write that ``no conflict drains more time, attention, blood, treasure, and support from our worldwide counterterrorism efforts than the war in Iraq. It has become a powerful recruiting and training tool for al-Qaeda.'' Our troops in Iraq did everything we asked them to do. We sent them overseas to fight an army; they are now caught in the midst of an insurgent civil war and political upheaval. I have, for some time now, advocated for congressional legislation declaring a military victory in Iraq, and recognizing the success of our military. Our brave troops have completed the task we set for them; it is time now to bring them home. Our next steps should not be a continuing escalation of military involvement, but instead a diplomatic surge. Democrats in Congress will not continue to rubber stamp the President's ill-conceived war effort. Last November, the American people spoke loudly and clearly, demanding a new direction to U.S. foreign policy, and we here in Congress are committed to seeing that change be brought about. We are working to see the extensive funds currently being spent to sustain the war in Iraq go to important domestic programs and to securing our homeland against real and imminent threats. President Bush and Vice President Cheney have been given numerous chances and ample time by the American people and the Congress to straighten out the mess in Iraq. They have failed. It is pure fantasy to imagine that President Bush's military surge has created the necessary safety and security to meet economic, legislative, and security benchmarks. It is time for a new strategy, a new plan that will encourage Iraqis to take charge of their own destiny, seek constructive and sustained regional engagement, and substitute the ill- advised military surge for a thoughtful diplomatic one. It is time to be realistic and pragmatic, to recognize that our troops achieved what they were initially sent in for and that continued U.S. military engagement is not bringing about the desired results. Mr. Speaker, this legislation provides our brave soldiers in Iraq with the resources they need, while requiring that the President begin to redeploy our troops. It keeps our soldiers safe, and it keeps our Nation safe. By bringing an end to this conflict, this Democratic Congress is making significant strides forward toward protecting and securing America. I strongly urge all my colleagues to join me in supporting today's legislation, and in giving the troops the resources they need to safely redeploy from Iraq.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1593, the Second Chance Act of 2007. I would like to thank my dear colleague Mr. Danny Davis of Illinois for sponsoring this very important legislation that addresses the prison warehousing crisis in this country. H.R. 1593, a bill of which I am an original co-sponsor, addresses the very serious concerns about the compromised state of warehousing prisoners. Earlier this year, the Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security of which I am a member, held hearings to address the state of certain conditions within the United States prison system. In one of those hearings, my colleagues and I considered the merits of The Second Chance Act, and my amendment which I offered in the last Congress was included in the base bill this year. The Second Chance Act is designed to reduce recidivism, increase public safety, and help State and local governments better address the growing population of ex-offenders returning to their communities. The bill focuses on four areas: development and support of programs that provide alternatives to incarceration, expansion of the availability of substance abuse treatment, strengthening families and the expansion of comprehensive re-entry services. Nearly two-thirds of released state prisoners are expected to be re- arrested for a felony or serious misdemeanor within 3 years of their release. Such high recidivism rates translate into thousands of new crimes each year and wasted taxpayer dollars, which can be averted through improved prisoner reentry efforts. The ``Second Chance Act of 2007'' allocates funding towards a variety of reentry programs. One of the main components of the bill is the funding of demonstration projects that would provide ex-offenders with a coordinated continuum of housing, education, health, employment, and mentoring services. This broad array of services would provide stability and make the transition for ex-offenders easier, in turn reducing recidivism. Another reason why I strongly support this legislation is because it includes a provision contained in an amendment I offered during the Judiciary Committee markup of this bill in the 109th Congress. That amendment, incorporated in H.R. 1593 as Section 243 of the bill, requires that the: Attorney General shall collect data and develop best practices of State corrections departments and child protection agencies relating to the communication and cordination between such State departments and agencies to ensure the safety and support of children of incarcerated parents, including those in foster care and kinship care, and the support of parent-child relationships between incarcerated, and formerly incarcerated, parents and their children, as appropriate to the health and well-being of the children. My amendment provides for a systematic means of ensuring the safety and support of children of incarcerated parents and the support of children of release for non-violent offenders who have attained the age of at least 45 years of age, have never been convicted of a violent crime, have never escaped or attempted to escape from incarceration, and have not engaged in any violation, involving violent conduct, of institutional disciplinary regulations. The Second Chance Act seeks to ensure that in affording offenders a second chance to turn around their lives and contribute to society, ex- offenders are not too old to take advantage of a second chance to redeem themselves. A second benefit of the legislation is that it would relieve some of the strain on Federal, State, and local government budgets by reducing considerably government expenditures on warehousing prisoners. Mr. Speaker, some of those who are incarcerated face extremely long sentences, and this language would help to address this problem. Releasing rehabilitated, middle-aged, non-violent offenders from an already overcrowded prison population can be a win-win situation for society and the individual who, like the Jean Valjean made famous in Victor Hugo's Les Miserables, is redeemed by the grace of a second chance. The reentry of such individuals into the society will enable them to repay the community through community service and obtain or regain a sense of self-worth and accomplishment. It promises a reduction in burdens to the taxpayer, and an affirmation of the America value that no non-violent offender is beyond redemption. Mr. Speaker, the number of Federal inmates has grown from just over 24,000 in 1980 to 173,739 in 2004. The cost to incarcerate these individuals has risen from $330 million to $4.6 billion since 2004. At a time when tight budgets have forced many States to consider the early release of hundreds of inmates to conserve tax revenue, early release is a common-sense option to raise capital. The rate of incarceration and the length of sentence for first-time non-violent offenders have become extreme. Over the past two decades, no area of State government expenditures has increased as rapidly as prisons and jails. According to data collected by the Justice Department, the number of prisoners in America has more than tripled over the last two decades from 500,000 to 1.8 million, with States like California and Texas experiencing eightfold prison population increases during that time. Mr. Chairman, there are more people in the prisons of America than there are residents in States of Alaska, North Dakota, and Wyoming combined. Over 1 million people have been warehoused for nonviolent, often petty crimes. The European Union, with a population of 370 million, has one-sixth the number of incarcerated persons as we do, and that includes violent and nonviolent offenders. This is one-third the number of prisoners which America, a country with 70 million fewer people, incarcerates for nonviolent offenses. The 1.1 million nonviolent offenders we currently lock up represents 5 times the number of people held in India's entire prison system, even though its population is 4 times greater than the United States. As the number of individuals incarcerated for nonviolent offenses has steadily risen, African-Americans and Latinos have comprised a growing percentage of the overall number incarcerated. In the 1930s, 75 percent of the people entering State and Federal prison were white (roughly reflecting the demographics of the Nation). Today, minority communities represent 70 percent of all new admissions and more than half of all Americans behind bars. This is why for the last several years I have introduced the H.R. 261, the Federal Prison Bureau Nonviolent Offender Relief Act. H.R. 261 directs the Bureau of Prisons, pursuant to a good time policy, to release a prisoner who has served one-half or more of his or her term of imprisonment if that prisoner: (1) has attained age 45; (2) has never been convicted of a crime of violence; and (3) has not engaged in any violation, involving violent conduct, of institutional disciplinary regulations. Over 2 million offenders are incarcerated in the nation's prisons and jails. At midyear 2002, 665,475 inmates were held in the Nation's local jails, up from 631,240 at midyear 2001. Projections indicate that the inmate population will unfortunately continue to rise over the years to come. To illustrate the impact that The Second Chance Act will potentially have on Texas, the Federal prison population for the years 2000, 2001, and 2002 reached 39,679, 36,138 and 36,635 persons respectively; the State prison population for the same years reached 20,200, 20,898, and 23,561 persons. These numbers have grown since 2002, so the impact is indeed significant and the State of Texas is an important stakeholder. I am also concerned about the rehabilitation and treatment of juvenile offenders in my home State of Texas as it appears that the administrators of TYC have neglected their duties. The April 10, 2007 ``Dallas Morning News'', reported that ``two former Texas Youth Commission administrators were indicted on charges that they sexually abused teenage inmates at the state juvenile prison in Pyote''. The same article also cited the 2005 investigative report by Texas Rangers' Sgt Burzynski which found that the two indicted TYC administrators, Brookins and Hernandez, had repeatedly molested inmates in the Pyote prison. The report is cited as saying that Mr. Brookins, who during some periods was the top official, had shown sex toys and pornography in his office, while Mr. Hernandez molested inmates in classrooms and closets. I hope that all of my colleagues would join me in supporting the Second Chance Act. Passage of H.R. 1593 would be the start of a long overdue process to eliminate unnecessary costs that result from warehousing prisoners.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Res. 811, Condemning the November 6, 2007, terrorist bombing in Afghanistan and expressing condolences to the people of Afghanistan and the members of the Wolesi Jirga, introduced by my distinguished colleague from North Carolina, Representative David Price. As we all know, the situation in Afghanistan is critical, and it is essential that we maintain and strengthen our support of Afghanistan for the sake of the Afghan people and our own national security. Mr. Speaker, it was almost exactly 6 years ago that, in response to the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the United States launched a military operation against Afghanistan, with the intent to capture Osama bin Laden, to destroy the al-Qaeda terrorist network, and to remove the Taliban regime that had provided support and safe harbor for al-Qaeda. Though the Taliban has been removed from power, they have since regrouped and are an increasingly resurgent force, while al-Qaeda remains a significant threat and Osama bin Laden continues to evade capture. Meanwhile, Afghanistan continues to suffer from the chronic instability that has plagued the nation for much of its modern history. Its infrastructure and economy have been devastated by decades of conflict, the fledgling democratic government continues to face a very real threat from the resurgent Taliban, and the people of Afghanistan continue to live in a climate of ongoing turmoil, particularly in the southern regions of the country, where there are ongoing and dangerous clashes between coalition-led forces and insurgents. This most recent attack that occurred on November 6, 2007 was the deadliest suicide attack since the liberation of Afghanistan from the Taliban in 2001. This attack deliberately targeted the members of the Wolesi Jirga, the directly elected chamber of the National Assembly of Afghanistan, which transcended political, regional, and ethnic divisions within this war-torn nation. The suicide attack killed at least 6 members of the Wolesi Jirga as well as at least 50 Afghan citizens, including women and children, and wounded dozens of others. Mr. Speaker, it is essential that we provide considerable aid for Afghanistan, a region which we have consistently underfunded despite its critical needs. While we have thrown away billions of taxpayers' dollars in Iraq, the real security threat of Afghanistan, home to the al-Qaeda and the Taliban, has gone relatively unchecked. This is a problem not simply for the United States to handle, but for NATO. We must work with our NATO allies to put increased pressure on them to step up to the task of addressing the most serious security issues. Security is essential to not only economic growth but also makes it easier for humanitarian organizations to accomplish their tasks. Creating a stable security situation in Afghanistan is an international concern. Furthermore, trends of opium production in Afghanistan have changed. According to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), ``opium cultivation in Afghanistan is no longer associated with poverty.'' This is largely due to the fact that the poorer northern provinces are seeing a downward trend in poppy cultivation, while production and trafficking are growing in the eastern and southern provinces. As these are the areas of the, country currently experiencing the greatest amount of conflict, UNODC now associates the opiate trade with insurgency. According to UNODC, the Taliban have ``started to extract from the drug economy resources for arms, logistics, and militia pay.'' This horrific attack may be directly linked to poppy cultivation and opium production, which has as of late been used to directly ``support, sustain, and finance insurgents, militias, and terrorist organizations operating in Afghanistan.'' In the 110th Congress, we have already passed important legislation that, I believe, will help promote peace and freedom in Afghanistan. However, it is necessary for us to continue to work together with the Afghan government and other members of the international community to address the outstanding challenges that continue to threaten the nation. As stated in this legislation, the United States must reaffirm its long-term commitment to Afghanistan, ``to the establishment of security, the strengthening of democratic and civil institutions, and the promotion of economic opportunity as the basis for a stable, secure, and democratic Afghanistan. The security and stability of Afghanistan is crucial to the current war on terror. The United States must strengthen and sustain its support of Afghanistan, we must continue in our commitment to this nation at this critical turning point. I am proud cosponsor of this legislation and I strongly 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. 3315, to provide that the great hall of the Capitol Visitor Center shall be known as Emancipation Hall, and to commend the Slave Laborers Task Force, led by Congressman John Lewis, and its important work. As the Task Force concluded, H.R. 3315 helps to fill an important gap in the history of the Capitol. It is a fitting, albeit overdue, tribute to the slaves--gifted carpenters, skilled stone masons, woodworkers, clay makers and other craftsmen-- who built the Capitol that the Capitol Visitor Center be renamed Emancipation Hall and celebrate the freeing of all Americans from bondage, oppression, and restraint. The Capitol symbolizes our nation's core values of freedom and liberty and the basic rights of all humans. It symbolizes who we are as a nation. However, though countless visitors walk its halls each day, few know the important role slaves played in the construction of the Capitol. Many slaves worked in quarries, extracting the stone used to construct this building. Others were used as carpenters. Women and children often molded clay in kilns. District of Columbia financial records show that hundreds of local residents received payment for the work of slaves, recorded in the ledger as ``Negro hire.'' In all, hundreds of slaves helped build the Capitol from the late 1700s until the mid-1800s. Indeed, it was Philip Reid, a slave laborer who figured out how to take apart the plaster mold for the ``Freedom'' statue, which still crowns the dome, beneath which we toil, to allow it to be cast in bronze. What irony, what symbolism: Slaves built our monument to freedom; and the ``Freedom'' statue was cast in bronze by a man who was not free. Today we have an opportunity to celebrate freedom; to make sure that every person who visits the Capitol knows that it is for preserving and protecting freedom that we, as Members of Congress, gather in this building and work every day; and that it is for liberty, democracy and freedom--emancipation--that our nation stands. Emancipation Hall is an important reminder that the floors on which we walk, the walls that surround us and, yes, the ``Freedom'' statue atop the Capitol dome, were constructed in significant part by men and women who knew no liberty and were not free. We should never forget that.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 3485, the PROTECT Our Children Act of 2007, introduced by my distinguished colleague from Florida, Representative Wasserman Schultz. This important legislation will protect this Nation's most valuable resource, its children. As Chair of the Congressional Children's Caucus, I have been an outspoken advocate for the protection of our children against all predators, be it disease, natural disasters, or sexual deviants. While we may not be able to avoid natural disasters, there is nothing but a lack of political will and Congressional action that prevents us from protecting our children from known sexual predators. I am appalled that while the Department of Justice knows the location of hundreds of thousands of sexual predators that prey on our Nation's children within the U.S. at this very moment, the Department of Justice has consistently refused to take action or ask Congress for help despite the fact that law enforcement is investigating less than 2 percent of this criminal activity. I applaud this important piece of legislation for the accountability it will create by building the largest law enforcement army ever created for the protection of children. This issue is not one of obscenity or pornography but rather one of human rights and this Congress's dedication to protecting them. While surveillance by the Internet Crimes Against Children, ICAC, Data Network has provided the Department of Justice with the location of hundreds of thousands of sexual predators, far too little has been done. Child pornography must be considered an issue of human rights. These photos go beyond obscenity or pornography but rather must be acknowledged for what they are, ``crime scene photos, created by a thriving industry that uses children as sexual commodities.'' We must focus on the weapon of these predators, the internet, which has provided a multi-billion dollar network for child pornography and led to the additional exploitation of exponential amounts of children. While the child exploitation industry is global in scale, the majority of both supply and demand is based right here, within the United States. Due to the lack of attention to this issue by the Department of Justice, it is hard to quantify the number of child pornography traffickers that are involved in this gross violation of our children's rights; the best estimates are that this practice involves 485,000 perpetrators in the United States alone. A 2005 Justice Department study found that: 80 percent of child pornography possessors have images and videos depicting sexual penetration. 20 percent of child pornography possessors have images of bondage, sadistic abuse and torture. 83 percent of child pornography possessors have images of children aged 6-12. 19 percent of child pornography possessors have images of infants or toddlers. Only 1 percent of child pornography possessors restricted their ``collecting'' to images of nude children. Law enforcement reports of websites providing live ``pay-per-view'' rape of very young children. Mr. Speaker, we must act now to protect our children from these atrocities and this legislation is an important first step in doing so. This bill will increase funding for state and local task forces by tripling the size of the Internet Crimes Against Children, ICAC, program in the first year alone, which will support the 46 state and local task forces that ``have become the backbone of America's war on child exploitation.'' It further adds hundreds of new Federal agents to the FBI, ICE, and U.S. Postal Inspection Service who will be charged with the sole responsibility of working on crimes against children. This legislation also provides for the creation of new dedicated forensic crimes labs for America's overwhelmed child exploitation investigators and provides legal structure and funding for the ICAC Data Network, which has emerged as a critical asset in the fight against child pornography and exploitation. Perhaps most significantly, it will create a new Justice Department Special Prosecutor, a new high- level office within the Department with sole dedication to combating child exploitation and the oversight of ICAC Task Force Network. This legislation is imperative to ensuring the protection of our Nation's children and engaging in a much needed and long overdue national war on child pornography. As the Chair of the Congressional Children's Caucus, a Representative of the people of the United States, and a mother of two, I am proud to cosponsor this legislation and I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this legislation.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 3996, the Temporary Tax Relief Act of 2007, introduced by my distinguished colleague from New York, Representative Charles Rangel. I would like to thank Chairman Rangel for his extraordinary leadership on the Ways and Means Committee and for introducing this important legislation that promotes tax fairness and fiscal responsibility, a new fiscal direction that the American people have demanded and deserve. Mr. Speaker, the Bush administration has not done an adequate job in allocating this country's resources. However, this Congress remains committed to providing a fiscal new direction for the American people. This important legislation will protect some 23 million Americans from the Alternative Minimum Tax and will extend tax credits to those who need it most, our Nation's students, teachers, children and homeowners. The Alternative Minimum Tax is currently riddled with loopholes, and this legislation is a fiscally responsible alternative to the practice of borrowing tens of billions of dollars each year, in which the GOP has engaged. It closes the legislative loophole that has allowed a privileged few exceptions at the expense of other Americans. As Chair of the Congressional Children's Caucus, I particularly welcome this legislation for the assistance it will provide to our Nation's children. Today's bill will increase eligibility for the child tax credit, consequently helping an additional 12 million children in low-income families. This bill will lower the eligibility threshold in 2008 to $8,500. The National Women's Law Center recently released a statement detailing the organization's sincere support for this legislation, commenting that ``For a single mother working fulltime in a minimum wage job, the bill would mean a difference between a child tax credit of just $35 and a credit of $568.'' We must work to ensure that all of our Nation's children are provided for, and I feel this legislation is an important step toward reaching this crucial goal. In addition, Mr. Speaker, this legislation will benefit our Nation's teachers and students. It will help 3.4 million teachers by allowing them to save money through deductions for classroom expenses. It will further ensure that the future leaders of America will receive the education they deserve, by helping 4.5 million families afford college through tuition deductions. It will help our Nation's families by providing 30 million homeowners with property tax relief and benefit approximately 11 million families through State and local sales tax reduction. Mr. Speaker, these benefits cannot be ignored and this legislation would help those who truly deserve it. Furthermore, this fiscally-responsible bill will not cost American taxpayers any additional money. The Alternate Minimum Tax was established in 1969, and it has since then been used to exempt an exceptionally wealthy few from paying their share of this Nation's taxes. Instead of costing America additional funds to mend this antiquated tax, or borrowing heavily and exponentially increasing the national debt as my Republican colleagues have done, this legislation seeks to restore tax fairness. Instead of merely circumscribing the problem and providing a ``quick fix,'' this legislation will close tax loopholes that have persisted in allowing an extremely wealthy privileged few to pay a lower tax rate on their income than the billions of hard-working Americans who are just trying to get by. This legislation protects our future generations by not asking them to pay for the proposed tax cuts. This legislation goes beyond simply ensuring that future generations will not be forced to finance tax reductions today. This legislation will actually help the American economy grow. It will extend the R&D tax credit to promote innovation and high-paying jobs that make America one the world's leaders in innovation and technological progress. It will also ensure long-term economic growth by adhering to the ``pay-as- you-go'' budget rules that helped produce the record budget surpluses and robust economy of the 1990s by mandating no new deficit spending. Mr. Speaker, the American people elected this Congress because they wanted to see a new direction and a meaningful change. This legislation does precisely that and helps the most deserving American people while causing our economy to grow and breaking our reliance on deficit spending. It will ease the burden felt by millions of middle-class families, through tax cuts, while helping our economy grow without increasing the national debt. The benefits of the Temporary Tax Relief Act will be felt immediately by the 23 million middle-class families, who will be saved from paying higher taxes in April. It also closes unfair tax loopholes, requiring Wall Street millionaires to pay their share of taxes. I strongly urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this extremely important legislation.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I am very proud to have been one of those today to support the Temporary Tax Relief Act of 2007. Let me call the roll so we will understand what this bill does. First of all, I am gratified that 1.270 million projected AMT returns by the State of Texas, those who will file their returns will get a benefit in my State because this bill has been passed today. I am equally delighted that this bill looks out for a lot of America's taxpayers. Twelve million children will be helped by expanding the child tax credit. Eleven million families will be helped through the State and local sales tax deduction, and that is a bunch of families in the State of Texas. 3.4 million teachers will be able to deduct their classroom expenses, and that will help a lot of Texas teachers. And we will provide thousands of American troops in combat with tax relief under the earned income tax credit. In addition, some $8 billion will be utilized to help the real estate industry as well. The Temporary Tax Relief Act of 2007 is the right thing to do to help pay for the AMT reduction.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. How often do many Americans read the historic documents like the Declaration of Independence or our Constitution? The Declaration of Independence indicates that we hold these truths to be self-evident, that we all are created equal, with certain inalienable rights of life and liberty and the pursuit of happiness. In the opening words of the Constitution, it says that we have gathered to form a more perfect union. What better exhibit of a perfect union, of the opportunity for happiness, than the veterans and members of the United States military who serve us now on the front lines? So I rise today to pay special tribute to them. I look forward to returning to my district in Houston and joining the commemoration on this coming Sunday, and as well, marching with veterans, riding in military vehicles, getting the sense of their life and their dedication. I look forward to paying tribute to them in Houston's Freedom Fest and celebrating with some of the teary-eyed veterans, family members who have come to celebrate and to simply say thank you. My presence here today on this floor is an example of the free country in which we live. The discourse of democracy is protected by those who fight today and those who have fought in wars gone by. And so it is appropriate that I rise today and embrace all of our veterans from sea to shining sea, to be able to say to you, thank you, and thank you to your families for the sacrifice of being away from them, mothers and fathers, husbands and wives, children that you have missed because you have served our country. I rise in support of the homeless veterans. And today in Houston we have what we call a ``stand-down,'' where veterans come and celebrate those who walk the streets and are homeless. I look forward to the passage of the most timely and largest Veterans bill in the history of this Nation. Democrats were the leaders on this, and we will get it passed, and we will provide a thank you for our veterans. I rise also to acknowledge that there are those still fighting on the front lines, and in particular, in Iraq. I claim today, as I have done from the very day that this war was pronounced, I want our soldiers to come home. I want our heroes to come home. And I have a memory of the great excitement, through pictures, of course, of the celebration of the World War II veterans. Who could ever forget that famous kiss in Times Square in New York? But since that time, I have not been satisfied by the way we have honored our veterans, our soldiers who have come home. And so I have filed H.R. 4020, the Military Success Act of 2007, that calls on the Nation to welcome home our Iraqi soldiers with a proclamation and celebration, with funding going to local and State jurisdictions so that we can have a day of celebration. I want to see those kisses in the town square. I want to see those colorful ribbons. I want to make sure that we understand that when a soldier comes home, it should not be in the dark of night on a lonely airplane or a lonely bus going into a lonely town. So I ask my colleagues and Americans, veterans organizations, to support H.R. 4020 to celebrate the soldiers and to provide a celebration for each returning battle group that comes home from any war that they fight on behalf of America and they have lost lives and they have dedicated themselves to this Nation. And because of that, Mr. Speaker, I also stand today to beg President Musharraf in Pakistan to release former Prime Minister Bhutto from house arrest. I acknowledge the Pakistani Army for the work that they have done on the border, some having lost their life, along with our soldiers in Afghanistan, but I ask the President of Pakistan, an ally of the United States, to understand that if you have democracy, it is a painful experience. And even when there are those against you, you must stand for democratic principles in your own way. Pakistan is a Muslim country that promotes democracy. And so I ask President Musharraf to release the former Prime Minister Bhutto from house arrest, to release the lawyers from detention, and the political prisoners, to restore the constitution, to restore the democratic rule, and to release the emergency rule. No, I don't expect for us to invade Pakistan, I don't expect for us to invade Iran, but I do expect for this State Department and this President to take this seriously. In this legislation, H. Res. 810, I have asked for a diplomatic team of those from the Defense Department, those from the State Department to form a team, fly to Pakistan, sit down with our ally, and demand, yes demand, because of the $11 billion we've given them, the right for democracy to return to Pakistan. I believe that this is the way to run our foreign policy. Bring our soldiers home, and celebrate them in honor.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Chairman, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 3685, the Employment Non-Discrimination Act of 2007, introduced by my distinguished friend and colleague Representative Frank. This important legislation extends the basic civil rights that we, as Americans, enjoy and cherish, to millions of gay, lesbian, and bisexual citizens. This legislation also fulfills the vision and promise of our Founding Fathers who in the ``Declaration of Independence'' proclaimed: ``We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.'' This legislation ensures that all of America's citizens inalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are protected. The Employment Non-Discrimination Act of 2007 will make it illegal to fire, refuse to hire, or otherwise discriminate against employees simply based on their perceived or actual sexual orientation. I would like to thank my colleague, Mr. Frank, for introducing this important legislation, as well as for his ongoing leadership on this issue. I would also like to thank Chairman Miller, of the Education and Labor Committee, for bringing this legislation to the floor. Madam Speaker, today marks a historic occasion. This bill has been introduced in every Congress since 1975, and the October 18th vote in the Education and Labor Committee to report this legislation to the floor was the first vote ever taken on this legislation in the House of Representatives. Madam Chairman, we live in a Nation that has long prided itself on predicating success on merit and hard work. In recent decades, we have fought to create a level playing field, to allow women, African Americans, and other minorities to compete in the workplace. In addition to employment legislation, we have worked to eliminate discrimination against members of minority groups. Earlier this Congress, we passed a landmark piece of hate crimes legislation, which crucially included crimes motivated by prejudice of sexual orientation. H.R. 3685 speaks to our Nation's core values of equality and justice. There are currently no Federal laws prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. This means that in the 30 States that have not enacted State legislation to this effect, employers may make critical personnel decisions, including firing, refusing to hire, demoting, or refusing to promote employees solely based on the sexual orientation of the individual. Madam Chairman, I strongly believe that employees should be hired or fired on the basis of their merits. Their jobs should not be threatened because of sexual orientation. Many U.S. companies have recognized that it is in the interest of U.S. companies, as well as U.S. citizens, to make employment decisions based on qualifications and job performance. Ninety percent of Fortune 500 companies now include sexual orientation in their nondiscrimination policies. Many major American companies, including General Mills, Microsoft, Citibank, and Morgan Stanley, have expressed their strong support for legislation outlawing discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. In addition, a May 2007 Gallup poll clearly indicated that non-discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is broadly supported by the American people, with 89 percent of participants stating that they support equal treatment for gays and lesbians in determining employment opportunities. However, anti-gay discrimination persists in the workplace. According to a 2005 survey, a quarter of gay, lesbian, or bisexual individuals disagreed with a statement that most employers in their area would hire openly gay, lesbian, or bisexual people. A 2007 study found that 16 percent of gay and lesbian individuals reported being fired from or denied a job because of their sexual orientation. A study recently released by the Journal of Applied Psychology found that 37 percent of gay and lesbian workers, across the United States, have faced discrimination based on sexual orientation. 10 percent indicated they had been physically harassed, while 22 percent had been verbally harassed. Nearly 20 percent stated that they had resigned from a job or been fired as a result of discrimination based on sexual orientation. This is precisely why I believe that this Congress must act today, to protect the fundamental rights of all American workers. H.R. 3685, the Employment Non-Discrimination Act of 2007 (ENDA), contains many important provisions that will make important strides toward ensuring workplace equality for all Americans. This legislation prohibits employers, employment agencies, and labor unions from using the sexual orientation of an individual as the basis for employment decisions, including hiring, firing, promotion, and compensation. It extends Federal protections already guaranteed to individuals based on race, religion, sex, national origin, age, and disability to gay, lesbian, and bisexual works. This legislation applies to private sector employers with 15 or more employees, as well as employment agencies, labor organizations, joint labor-management committees, Congress, and federal, state, and local governments. It authorizes the same enforcement powers, procedures, and remedies provided under existing Federal employment discrimination laws such as Title VII and the Americans with Disabilities Act. Today's bill could go further. It could, and in my opinion should, also extend protections to individuals on the basis of gender identity. However, I believe that it is an important and significant step forward, and I look forward to working with my colleagues to enact fully inclusive legislation, to ensure that all Americans will ultimately be protected from workplace and employment discrimination. I am pleased to support the amendment offered by my colleague, Mr. George Miller. This amendment clarifies the religious exemption under ENDA, addressing concerns raised by some religious schools. It makes explicitly clear that religious organizations are given an identical exemption, under ENDA, to the one found in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This provision exempts religious corporations, schools, associations, and societies from religious discrimination claims. Mr. Miller's amendment clarifies that both denominational and non-denominational religious schools qualify for exemption from ENDA. I thank my colleagues who joined me in supporting this amendment. In addition, I would also like to express my support for the amendment offered by my colleague, Ms. Baldwin, and my disappointment that it was not adopted. This amendment would have expanded ENDA's protections to persons discriminated against based on gender identity, defined as the gender-related identity, appearance, or mannerisms or other gender-related characteristics of an individual, with or without regard to the individual's designated sex at birth. This amendment highlighted the activism and dedication of individuals such as Phyllis Randolph Frye, a lawyer in Houston who has struggled for the rights of transgender people for decades. Further, the language included in Representative Baldwin's amendment addresses concerns of shared facilities, dress, and grooming standards, stating explicitly that the construction of additional facilities is not required. If this legislation is to truly achieve its goals of equal treatment for all Americans, this amendment is tantamount to that success. I therefore strongly hope that my colleagues will join me in enacting this amendment in the future. Furthermore, I oppose the motion to recommit on the grounds that it was designed to either permanently derail or at least delay this historic legislation. In addition, the motion to recommit was regarding the definition of marriage, which is utterly separate from workplace discrimination. Madam Chairman, this non-discrimination legislation is good for America: it benefits American citizens and American companies. Non- discrimination protects the civil rights of individuals, and it has proven good for business in some of our nation's most successful businesses. Our nation is built on the ideals of hard-work and equality, key values that are enshrined in today's legislation. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this legislation, and in ensuring that all American workers enjoy basic employment protections.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 3688, the United States-Peru Trade Promotion Agreement Implementation Act, introduced by my distinguished colleague from Maryland, Representative Hoyer. This piece of legislation amends the antiquated Trade Agreements Act of 1979, and while it represents an attempt to incorporate workers' rights and environmental concerns into trade legislation, I believe that it does not contain strong enough guarantees against labor violations and other human rights abuses. Madam Speaker, we cannot ignore the gross violations of labor rights allowed to persist by the Peruvian government or the loss of American jobs this legislation might entail. The nation of Peru has made many strides forward in recent history. It has begun to move down the path of democracy, fighting off state- sponsored socialism, seen some government accountability to the judiciary, and entered into the global economy. However, Peru has a long way still to come. Peru has yet to adopt and apply the 1998 International Labor Organization's Declaration of Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work, an obligation that serves as a condition for the current legislation. While this is a step in the right direction, it is more advisory than binding, requiring FTA nations to ``refer only'' to ILO Declarations, and will be incredibly difficult to enforce. The Free Trade Agreement we are considering today calls on the Peruvian government to apply greater labor rights and environmental standards in order for the agreement to persist. Peru must adopt, maintain, and enforce laws relating to labor rights that meet ILO standards as stated in the ILO 1998 Declaration. This is a step forward, but to make it truly significant, the United States must adopt some sort of accountability mechanism in order to ensure compliance on the part of the Peruvian government. Until such accountability exists, I do not believe we should be approving this agreement. The Peru FTA agreement further obligates the government of Peru to implement and enforce various environmental multilateral agreements to which Peru is already a part. This too has the potential to lead to a precarious situation. Peru is already a party to the mentioned multilateral environmental agreements and has failed to apply or enforce their obligations outlined therein, why would they change now? We must create incentives for our trade partners to comply with international labor and environmental standards, and I fear there is much more to do in the case of Peru. The United States-Peru trade agreement as it stands today allows Peruvian products tariff free entry into the United States while products from the United States are taxed upon their entry to Peru. This trade practice has been deeply detrimental to American workers who are consistently undercut by cheaper, tax-free, foreign labor, services, and products. Under the proposed the Peru FTA, products and services from the United States will no longer be muddled by the protections policies of the past, with 80 percent of goods being allowed tax-free entry into the Peruvian market immediately, with the remaining 20 percent gaining free entry over time. While this may prove beneficial to corporations within the United States, we must be careful that this trade policy does not benefit the wealthy few at the cost of both American and Peruvian workers. A great deal of Americans worry about the effect this legislation will have on their job security. It is important to note that the Peru FTA does not pose a significant threat to American jobs, with trade from Peru not consisting of a heavy intensity and consequently not having any significant impact on the American economy. I acknowledge that we are engaged in a global economy and am eager to move forward in free trade agreements with nations throughout the world, however, I cannot overlook the threats this legislation poses. Since the era that began with the NAFTA agreement, over 3 million manufacturing jobs have been lost and while the Peruvian economy may not be large enough to have a ``significant'' impact upon the United States, I fear that the impact it will have will be enough to further harm the American worker who has already suffered a decrease in job security and wages. The American people elected this Congress to change the trajectory that the United States was on, and this legislation is more of the same foreign investment and procurement policy that the majority of American rejected after the inception of NAFTA and CAFTA. This bill provides security in the sense that it gives United States the authority to administrate dispute settlement proceedings, arbitrate certain claims made against the United States, and enact specific tariff modifications. This bill does not hold the Peruvian government accountable, the United States' authority to arbitrate disputes and claims made against the United States will not be sufficient to ensure the protection of the Peruvian and American workers that this legislation will harm. The ability to protect American companies does not equate to meaningful security to the parties involved. I applaud the efforts made by this legislation in ensuring worker rights within Peru, however, I believe it falls short of being comprehensive in a number of areas. Issues of worker rights abroad have been endemic within the United States since the signing of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) as reports emerge of the horrific conditions of workers within the countries with whom we engage in trade. Urging Peru to ``refer'' to ILO standards will not ensure that American trade policy is not meant merely to benefit the few multinational corporations and rather protects all our partners in today's globalized economy, including foreign laborers. The Peruvian people have been working hard to restore social justice and labor rights after the ruthless dictatorship of Former President Fujimori. We must be cautious not to undermine any organic social justice movements within Peru that has spent the last 6 years trying to get their Congress to pass the General Labor Law. Beyond my concerns with this piece of legislation itself is a further concern about the intentions of this Administration. I do not believe we can trust the Bush Administration to enforce the labor and environmental provisions of this or any other FTA. We are not in a position to enter into any new FTA's at this time, I believe we must ensure the security of American economic lives before we rush into any new agreements. Furthermore, only yesterday, Peru's Labor Ministry declared a national mining sector strike as illegal. This strike, headed by Peru's National Federation of Mining, Metallurgy, and Steel Workers, began Monday and was aimed at 7 pressuring the government to pass legislation ensuring increase rights and benefits of miners. Peru's Labor Ministry responded by ``ordering them back to work'' and declaring their strike illegal. No concessions have been made by the government and miners face being fired should they not return to work by the end of the week. This is not a government we can trust to uphold labor rights. The world is now immersed in a globalized economy. We cannot go back in time, nor do we want to. We must work with what we are given now. The U.S.-Peru Trade Promotion Agreement is an important first attempt, however, we must continue to work to ensure that labor rights are universally acknowledged and environmental standards systemically upheld on a larger scale than this legislation entails. I urge my colleagues to join me in opposing this legislation, and to call for still more to be done.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Just on the underlying bill, every American deserves to have a nondiscriminatory workplace, and that means whoever you are, whatever faith, whatever sexual orientation, you deserve a nondiscriminatory workplace. I rise to support this legislation and ask my statement to be put into the Record and to ensure that my constituents in Houston, Texas, can be free of discrimination in the workplace.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I ask my colleagues to vote against the President's veto and therefore override the veto. As I call the roll, Cedar Bayou, Texas, Port of Galveston, Houston Ship Channel, Bayport Cruise Channel, Jacinto Port, the Upper White Oak Bayou, Buffalo Bayou, and Halls Bayou, all impacting people's lives, all of them impacting residential areas and all are covered by their water bill. And in particular, we need to vote to override the veto because 1,500 homes in my congressional district are now being required, in essence, to leave their homes because they are in a floodplain, and part of the work that this water bill will do is to help to save the homes of these hardworking Houstonians and Americans. This is a good bill. This is a bill to give people back their lives and their property. This bill will contribute to improving America's failing water infrastructure and flood prone areas like Houston, Texas. I ask my colleagues to vote to override the President's veto.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, let me thank my dear friend, Mr. Danny Davis of Illinois, for organizing this special order on the very important subject addressing the prison warehousing crisis in this country. H.R. 1593, The Second Chance Act, a bill of which I am an original co-sponsor, addresses the very serious concerns about the compromised state of warehousing prisoners. Earlier this year the Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security, of which I am a member, held hearings to address the state of certain conditions within the United States prison system. In one of those hearings, my colleagues and I considered the merits of The Second Chance Act, and my amendment which I offered in the last Congress was included in the base bill this year. The Second Chance Act is designed to reduce recidivism, increase public safety, and help state and local governments better address the growing population of ex-offenders returning their communities. The bill focuses on four areas: development and support of programs that provide alternatives to incarceration, expansion of the availability of substance abuse treatment, strengthening families and the expansion of comprehensive re-entry services. The Subcommittee has held a series of hearings on issues relating to re-entry of prisoners and this legislation dating back to the 108th Congress. Our most recent hearing, on March 20, 2007, focused on re-entry best practices and the continuing need for Federal support of re-entry program development. Nearly two-thirds of released state prisoners are expected to be re- arrested for a felony or serious misdemeanor within 3 years of their release. Such high recidivism rates translate into thousands of new crimes each year and wasted taxpayer dollars, which can be averted through improved prisoner reentry efforts. The ``Second Chance Act of 2007'' allocates $36o million towards a variety of reentry programs. One of the main components of the bill is the funding of demonstration projects that would provide ex-offenders with a coordinated continuum of housing, education, health, employment, and mentoring services. This broad array of services would provide stability and make the transition for ex-offenders easier, in turn reducing recidivism. Another reason why I strongly support this legislation is because it includes a provision contained in an amendment I offered during the Judiciary Committee markup of this bill in the 109th Congress. That amendment, incorporated in H.R. 1593 as Section 243 of the bill, requires that the: Attorney General shall collect data and develop best practices of State corrections departments and child protection agencies relating to the communication and coordination between such State departments and agencies to ensure the safety and support of children of incarcerated parents (including those in foster care and kinship care), and the support of parent-child relationships between incarcerated (and formerly incarcerated) parents and their children, as appropriate to the health and well-being of the children. I also sponsored H.R. 261, the Federal Prison Bureau Nonviolent Offender Relief Act of 2007 which I introduced earlier this year. H.R. 261 directs the Bureau of Prisons, pursuant to a good time policy, to release a prisoner who has served one half or more of his or her term of imprisonment if that prisoner: (1) Has attained age 45; (2) has never been convicted of a crime of violence; and (3) has not engaged in any violation, involving violent conduct, of institutional disciplinary regulations. H.R. 261, would address the problem of warehousing in the Nation's Federal correction facilities non-violent offenders over the age of 45 who have served more than half of their sentences and pose no future danger to society. As I stated during the markup of H.R. 1593, the Second Chance Act of 2007, I strongly believe that in affording older offenders a second chance to turn around their lives and contribute to society, that ex-offenders not be too old to take full advantage of a second chance to redeem themselves in the eyes of their families, friends, and communities. I believe setting an eligibility age of 45 rather than 6o will better achieve the goal we all share. I am also concerned about the rehabilitation and treatment of juvenile offenders in my home state of Texas as it appears that the administrators of TYC have neglected their duties. The April 10, 2007 ``Dallas Morning News'', reported that ``two former Texas Youth Commission administrators were indicted on charges that they sexually abused teenage inmates at the state juvenile prison in Pyote''. The same article also cited the 2005 investigative report by Texas Rangers' Sgt. Burzynski which found that the two indicted TYC administrators, Brookins and Hernandez, had repeatedly molested inmates in the Pyote prison. The report is cited as saying that Mr. Brookins, who during some periods was the top official, had shown sex toys and pornography in his office, while Mr. Hernandez molested inmates in classrooms and closets. I hope that all of my colleagues would join me in supporting the Second Chance Act as well as my bill H.R. 261, the Federal Prison Bureau Nonviolent Offender Relief Act of 2007. It is time to make a change.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, all eyes are watching the nation of Pakistan. And I rise today to acknowledge that the people of Pakistan are friends of the United States. Over the last decade or so, they have been moving toward democracy, a growing middle class, a desire for education for the boys and girls of Pakistan, and a real commitment to fighting the Taliban and terrorists in the Afghanistan-Pakistan border. President Musharraf has shown leadership and commitment on these issues. But today we see a raging Pakistan, a collapse of democracy, the calling of emergency rule, and the complete lacking of sensitivity to the needs of the Pakistan people. So today I am calling on President Musharraf to lift the emergency rule, to restore constitutional order, and to put Pakistan back on track. There is a definitive need for free and honest elections, and he should make an announcement that the elections should be called as of November 15 and that they should be held on January 16, 2008. Why return Pakistan back to a period when democracy did not reign? It is a Muslim country. It is a democratic country. And it has flourished under the concept of democracy. Dissidents should be allowed to dissent. Political prisoners and the lawyers of Pakistan should be released. There should be an independent judiciary. And the United States should show its leadership by immediately dispatching a diplomatic team from the Defense Department and State Department in order to negotiate directly with President Musharraf. Pakistan has a great future if it will maintain civility and democracy and freedom of speech and association. It is important for President Musharraf to allow the judiciary to a decide his fate, to possibly seek another opportunity for election. But the most important part is that we, as an ally of Pakistan, must not abandon the people of Pakistan. It does have nuclear capacity. We must ensure that that nuclear capacity falls not in the wrong hands but is used only for civilian purposes and to provide the necessary energy resources. We can only do that if democracy is restored and if America insists that its friend Pakistan and the people of Pakistan fight and are protected in their fight to preserve democracy and the constitution. We hope over the next couple of days that we will begin that kind of approach and as well that the present funding that Pakistan receives, it should be made very clear that even though those moneys may not presently be in jeopardy that those moneys will be subject to the scrutiny of determining whether human rights, constitutional rights, and democracy and order are restored to Pakistan. This is the only way to save Pakistan for its people and to allow its people to flourish in democracy and to grow as a prosperous middle class and for the children of Pakistan to see a bright future.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

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

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support or H.R. 3495, the Kids in Disasters Well-Being, Safety, and Health Act of 2007, introduced by my distinguished colleague from Florida, Representative Corrine Brown. This important legislation ensures the protection of our nations most valuable assets, our children, during times of disasters. As the Chair of the Congressional Children's Caucus, I cannot stress enough the importance of this legislation. Children have specific needs in cases of emergency and this legislation is an important first step towards recognizing and addressing those needs. Special steps must be taken with regards to children before, after, and during all disasters and emergencies, including informing them what they should know in case of emergency and working to reunite them with their families. In the aftermath of the catastrophic events of Hurricane Katrina, some 5,192 children were missing or displaced and it was not until 6 months later that the final children were re-united with their families. This is simply unacceptable. Children are not merely small adults, they are children. They are much more vulnerable to the health and safety hazards that arise during states of emergency and disasters. The American Academy of Pediatric reports that in times of emergencies and disasters: Children are particularly vulnerable to aerosolized biological or chemical agents because they normally breathe more times per minute than do adults, meaning they would be exposed to larger doses in the same period of time. Also, because such agents (e.g. sarin and chlorine) are heavier than air, they accumulate close to the ground-- right in the breathing zone of children. Children are more vulnerable to agents that act on or through the skin because their skin is thinner and they have a larger skin surface- to-body mass ratio than adults. Children are more vulnerable to the effects of agents that produce vomiting or diarrhea because they have smaller body fluid reserves than adults, increasing the risk of rapid progression to dehydration or shock. Children have much smaller circulating blood volumes than adults, so without timely intervention, relatively small amounts of blood loss can quickly tip the physiological scale from reversible shock to profound, irreversible shock or death. Children have significant developmental vulnerabilities not shared by adults. Infants, toddlers and young children may not have the motor skills to escape from the site of a hazard or disaster. Even if they are able to walk, young children may not have the cognitive ability to know when to flee from danger, or when to follow directions from strangers such as in an evacuation, or to cooperate with decontamination. This legislation is an important and timely first step in addressing the specific needs of children by establishing the legislative branch the National Commission of Children and Disasters. This commission will better address the needs of children by identifying the specific causes and needs of children before, after, and during disasters as well as evaluating, and if necessary redressing, existing laws relevant to such needs. It further will evaluate lessons learned from the disasters of September 11th, Hurricane Rita, Hurricane Katrina, and most recently the California wild fires and report back to the President and Congress. Furthermore, this legislation directs the Secretary of Health and Human Services to establish a National Resource Center on Children and Disasters that will be responsible for creating, maintaining, and coordinating a database to store information relating to the needs of children and disseminating relevant information on such issues to all necessary parties. Madam Speaker, there is no one more valuable and more vulnerable than our children. As Members of the Congress, mothers, fathers, sisters, and brothers, it is our responsibility to ensure the protection and well-being of our children. This legislation is an important first step in ensuring the safety and protection of our nation's children in times of disasters. I strongly urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this extremely important legislation.