Sheila Jackson Lee

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Res. 875, Congratulating Spelman College on the occasion of its 125th anniversary. Spelman College was established by Sophia B. Packard and Harriet E. Giles, school teachers and Baptist missionaries, in 1881 in Atlanta, Georgia, in order to educate African American women and girls. The seminary conferred its first high school diplomas in 1887, and its first college degrees in 1901. In 1924, Spelman Seminary officially became Spelman College and grew to become a leading undergraduate institution for African American women. Spelman College has prepared more than six generations of African American women to reach the highest levels of academic, community, and professional achievement. Spelman College continues to pave the way for new generations of African American students. The college offers competitive and high quality academic programs in liberal arts, humanities, sciences, communications, and engineering, to name just a few. The Association of Medical Colleges ranks Spelman College fifth among undergraduate programs for Black students accepted to medical school, and Spelman is one of six institutions designated by the National Science Foundation and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration as a Model Institution for Excellence in undergraduate science and math education. I urge my colleagues to support the achievements of this institution, and support this resolution honoring the 125th anniversary of Spelman College. I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, further reserving the right to object, let me say that I applaud the gentleman. That is an important task, if you will. With that in mind, I will simply say, I hope that we will hear from the administration, and that this Congress will proceed in August to be able to provide direct humanitarian relief to Lebanon, and as well provide for the safe passage of those who are non- combatants innocent civilians trying to escape and to protect those structures which are not involved in this conflict. With that, I would ask the leadership of this House to support H. Res. 945 and to bring it up immediately. H. Res. 945 Whereas, since the commencement of hostilities, over 350 Lebanese civilians, one third of whom are children according to the United Nations Emergency Relief Coordinator, and 17 Israeli civilians, have been killed; Whereas vital infrastructure, including hospitals, power plants, bridges, roads, and food and milk factories in Lebanon have been destroyed; Whereas over 600,000 people in Lebanon and hundreds of thousands of people in Israel have been displaced; Whereas President George W. Bush has expressed great concern over the welfare of the people of Lebanon; Whereas United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan has called for an immediate cease-fire; Whereas the United Nations Emergency Relief Coordinator has warned of a humanitarian disaster in Lebanon; Whereas the Government of Lebanon has urgently appealed for an immediate cessation to hostilities; and Whereas the international community has expressed support for a humanitarian corridor to Lebanon to be opened immediately to get desperately-needed humanitarian supplies to the suffering people of Lebanon: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the House of Representatives-- (1) calls for the cessation of the targeting by any side of infrastructure vital to non-combatants, which also increases the likelihood of the loss of innocent civilian life; (2) calls for a secure humanitarian corridor to be opened immediately via the seaports and airports of Lebanon to alleviate the unnecessary suffering of the people of Lebanon; (3) calls for an immediate cease-fire in line with the urgent appeals of the Government of Lebanon and the United Nations Secretary General; and (4) urges a comprehensive and just solution to the Arab- Israeli conflict to ensure that the peoples of the Middle East can live in peace, freedom, and prosperity.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, though I may not object, just a few days ago, I filed H. Res. 945, the Lebanon Humanitarian Relief Act with a number of cosponsors. And I raise the question to the distinguished gentleman of whether or not what we are doing today will also include a cessation of targeting infrastructure of noncombatants, and whether or not it will also establish or give the Secretary of State the ability to, if you will, negotiate safe corridors for evacuees to be able to be evacuated. This is a crucial time in the history of our Nation, and as well in the issues dealing with the Mideast. And I am concerned that as we consider funding for the evacuation of innocent Lebanese citizens, as has been noted, several incidents have occurred where evacuees unfortunately suffered injury or death trying to escape, therefore we should instruct the Secretary of State to negotiate with the United Nations and the participants in this conflict safe corridors for the Lebanese evacuees and also a cessation of firing on noncombat structures such as airports, hospitals, schools and otherwise. I yield to the gentleman to know if there are any instructions in this UC with respect to any of those items.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation, hoping for debate on humanitarian aid directly to Lebanon.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I want on the record today because of the raucous debate that we just had. For those who voted ``no'' on this bill dealing with the minimum wage, in the clarity of the lateness of the night, let me be very clear. I have voted for the minimum wage many times. In fact, Democrats have pressed this issue over and over again. But what should be clear is that the vote that was taken today will be a minimum wage that will be delayed. Whereas the Democratic bill would have started in September, this will not start until January, and it will not be effectuated until 2009. This is bogus. This is insincere. This is not real. It can also be understood that I did not vote against the relief for my State of a sales tax, sales tax relief on Federal income tax. This bill will go nowhere. I will vote up or down on a minimum-wage increase and the sales tax relief for Texas. I wish we had been able to bring up H. Res. 945 to bring relief to the Lebanese and humanitarian aid but, of course, we end today and tonight without doing our job.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE

Ms. JACKSON-LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 5970, the Permanent Estate Tax, Minimum Wage, and Extenders Bill. But I would be remiss if I did not point out that it is clear that Republicans are playing politics with a pay raise for millions of American workers. We have had enough politics. It is time for a new direction. Mr. Speaker, the Republican leadership is ignoring the American people, holding a pay raise for American workers hostage for partisan purposes. H.R. 5970 contains ``poison pills'' that will prevent the minimum wage increase from becoming law, most importantly a costly tax cut for multi-millionaires. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 5970 is just a cynical, political ploy to defeat a minimum wage increase. It is a cruel hoax on the 6.6 million people who would get a raise with a minimum wage increase and would give a huge tax break to only 7,500 of the richest households in America. The cynicism behind this ridiculous bill is as obvious as the Republicans devotion to giving away tax breaks to the wealthy and a hard time to the middle and working class. The aim of the H.R. 5970 is to make it look like Republicans support a minimum wage increase, while ensuring its demise in the Senate by attaching ``poison pills.'' Republicans' poison pill will cost nearly $753 billion when fully in effect, and impact less than 1 percent of all Americans, and Republicans are using that to derail an increase in the minimum wage for 6.6 million Americans. Mr. Speaker, the only way to ensure that a minimum wage increase becomes law is to allow a straight up-or-down vote on H.R. 2429, the Fair Minimum Wage Act, which provides an increase to $7.25 an hour. Mr. Speaker, Democrats have a New Direction for America, which raises the minimum wage and brings economic opportunity and security to all Americans, not just the privileged few. oppose estate tax repeal Mr. Speaker, I have voted for estate tax relief before but I oppose this bill because it is irresponsible to cut taxes for the wealthy when the Nation is at war and the national debt is over $8 trillion. Indeed, Mr. Speaker, I think it is unconscionable to be considering voting another tax cut to the wealthiest 0.3 percent of Americans. The Joint Committee on Taxation estimates that this estate tax proposal will cost the Federal Government $602 billion, plus an extra $160 billion when interest is accounted for. Only 0.5 percent of the richest families in America currently pay estate taxes. Moreover, under current law in 2009, only 3 out of every 1,000 estates will pay a penny in estate taxes--all couples with estates up to $7 million--99.7 percent--will pass on their entire estates tax-free. Any compromise proposal which deviates from 2009 current law--such as the bill before us--is therefore crafted entirely to benefit this tiny sliver of the richest estates. Particularly since I have voted for a fair estate tax initiative but this bill is not it. According to recent polling data, nearly 60 percent of voters hold the initial, unaided view that estate tax should be left as is or reformed, and only 23 percent support repeal. When asked about the estate tax in the context of other budget priorities, voters rank repealing the estate tax as the last priority, and 55 percent of voters oppose repeal. This so-called compromise, nearly as regressive and costly as a full repeal, is no compromise at all. Passing even this compromise legislation would constitute one of the most regressive tax cuts in the history of the United States. Middle- and lower-class Americans will be forced to shoulder the burden of radically decreasing the estate tax-- both monetarily and through decreased public programs. In order to cover the monetary gap, the government will plunge further into debt, which will limit its ability to address the Social Security solvency gap and reduce the money available for public programs. It will also have to tap other tax sources, like payroll taxes, which will overwhelmingly hinder lower-income families. I urge my colleagues to uphold the core American values of fairness and belief in meritocracy by rejecting this tax cut. increase minimum wage If we really wish to help the most deserving American families, we should raise the minimum wage from $5.15 to $7.25 over 3 years. Mr. Speaker, did you know that today's minimum wage of $5.15 today is the equivalent of only $4.23 in 1995, which is even lower than the $4.25 minimum wage level before the 1996-97 increase? It is scandalous, Mr. Speaker, that a person can work full-time, 40 hours per week, for 52 weeks, earning the minimum wage would gross just $10,700, which is well below the poverty line. A minimum wage increase would raise the wages of millions of workers. An estimated 7.3 million workers--5.8 percent of the workforce--would receive an increase in their hourly wage rate if the minimum wage were raised from $5.15 to $7.25 by June 2007. Due to ``spillover effects,'' the 8.2 million workers--6.5 percent of the workforce--earning up to a dollar above the minimum would also be likely to benefit from an increase. Raising the minimum wage will benefit working families. The earnings of minimum wage workers are crucial to their families' well-being. Evidence from the 1996-97 minimum wage increase shows that the average minimum wage worker brings home more than half--54 percent--of his or her family's weekly earnings. An estimated 760,000 single mothers with children under 18 would benefit from a minimum wage increase to $7.25 by June 2007. Single mothers would benefit disproportionately from an increase--single mothers are 10.4 percent of workers affected by an increase, but they make up only 5.3 percent of the overall workforce. Approximately 1.8 million parents with children under 18 would benefit. Contrary to popular myths and urban legends, adults make up the largest share of workers who would benefit from a minimum wage increase. Seventy-two percent of workers whose wages would be raised by a minimum wage increase to $7.25 by June 2007 are adults--age 20 or older. Close to half--43.9 percent--of workers who would benefit from a minimum wage increase work full time and another third--34.5 percent-- work between 20 and 34 hours per week. Minimum wage increases benefit disadvantaged workers, and women are the largest group of beneficiaries from a minimum wage increase. 60.6 percent of workers who would benefit from an increase to $7.25 by 2007 are women. An estimated 7.3 percent of working women would benefit directly from that increase in the minimum wage. A disproportionate share of minorities would benefit from a minimum wage increase. African-Americans represent 11.1 percent of the total workforce, but are 15.3 percent of workers affected by an increase. Similarly, 13.4 percent of the total workforce is Hispanic, but Hispanics are 19.7 percent of workers affected by an increase. The benefits of the increase disproportionately help those working households at the bottom of the income scale. Although households in the bottom 20 percent received only 5.1 percent of national income, 38.1 percent of the benefits of a minimum wage increase to $7.25 would go to these workers. The majority of the benefits--58.5 percent--of an increase would go to families with working, prime-aged adults in the bottom 40 percent of the income distribution. Among families with children and a low-wage worker affected by a minimum wage increase to $7.25, the affected worker contributes, on average, half of the family's earnings. Thirty-six percent of such workers actually contribute 100 percent of their family's earnings. A minimum wage increase would help reverse the trend of declining real wages for low-wage workers. Between 1979 and 1989, the minimum wage lost 31 percent of its real value. By contrast, between 1989 and 1997--the year of the most recent increase--the minimum wage was raised four times and recovered about one-third of the value it lost in the 1980s. Income inequality has been increasing, in part, because of the declining real value of the minimum wage. Today, the minimum wage is 33 percent of the average hourly wage of American workers, the lowest level since 1949. A minimum wage increase is part of a broad strategy to end poverty. As welfare reform forces more poor families to rely on their earnings from low-paying jobs, a minimum wage increase is likely to have a greater impact on reducing poverty. Mr. Speaker, the opponents of the minimum wage often claim that increasing the wage will cost jobs and harm the economy. Of course, Mr. Speaker, there is no credible evidence to support such claims. In fact, a 1998 EPI study failed to find any systematic, significant job loss associated with the 1996-97 minimum wage increase. The truth is that following the most recent increase in the minimum wage in 1996-97, the low-wage labor market performed better than it had in decades. And after the minimum wage was increased, the country went on to enjoy the most sustained period of economic prosperity in history. We had historic low levels of unemployment rates, increased average hourly wages, increased family income, and decreased poverty rates. Studies have shown that the best performing small businesses are located in States with the highest minimum wages. Between 1998 and 2004, the job growth for small businesses in States with a minimum wage higher than the Federal level was 6.2 percent compared to a 4.1 percent growth in States where the Federal level prevailed. So much for the discredited notion that raising the minimum wage harms the economy. It does not. But it increases the purchasing power of those who most need the money, which is far more than can be said of the Republicans' devotion to cutting taxes for multimillionaires. conclusion Mr. Speaker, Americans overwhelmingly side with progressive principles of rewarding hard work with a liveable wage. In a recent poll conducted by the Pew Research Center, 86 percent of Americans favored raising the minimum wage. In the 2004 election, voters in Florida and Nevada, two States won by President Bush, overwhelmingly approved ballot measures to raise the minimum wage. Even in Nevada's richest county, Douglas, where Bush received 63.5 percent of the vote, 61.5 percent of voters supported raising the minimum wage. Forty-three percent of Americans consider raising the minimum wage to be a top priority. In contrast, only 34 percent considered making the recent Federal income tax cuts permanent and only 27 percent consider the passage of a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage as top priorities. Members of Congress have legislated a minimum salary for themselves and have seen fit to raise it eight times since they last raised the minimum wage. It is time we gave the Americans we represent a long overdue pay raise by increasing the minimum wage to $7.25 over 3 years. Even this amount does not keep pace with the cost of living. The minimum wage would have to be increased to $9.05 to equal the purchasing power it had in 1968. And if the minimum wage had increased at the same rate as the salary increase corporate CEOs have received, it would now be $23.03/hour. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It is time for a new direction. I urge my colleagues to reject H.R. 5970. Finally, I have supported and do support the sales tax relief for Texas; however, the Republican majority knows that their bill is going nowhere and will not be heard by the Senate. We need an up or down vote on the minimum wage and an independent vote on sales tax relief on Federal income taxes for Texas--I would vote ``yea'' on both those two bills--which would not be a budget buster and deficit builder. The Republicans are simply playing games.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I would love to make law with the distinguished chairman, Mr. Rangel, but it sure is tough. We have been 50 years in the desert, 50 years on an increase relevant to minimum wage. It is the lowest in 50 years. Rather than take the 250 Members of this body who are willing to have an up and down vote, and my good friend who is the chairman, and I do believe he is a good friend, knows that the Senate is not, the other body is not going to take this bill the way it is. This is a joke. Ten million people are going to be denied the minimum wage with this bill. This is a joke. No one is going to take this on the other side. So we do this in the midnight hour. We have a headline. We go home to campaign. You will. We will go home and tell the truth. Give us an up and down vote on a $7.25 minimum wage up or down vote. The joke is on you. This is an untruth and it makes no sense to put people who have been in the desert without getting any money for this joke, because you know your Senate Republicans are not taking this joke. Mr. Speaker, it is time to vote up or down. Give us the 250 Members who will vote on a minimum wage. Vote for it now and throw this bill out the window.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished gentleman for his leadership. Wars are raging on the borders of Israel and Lebanon; wars are raging in Iraq; our soldiers are being redeployed not once, not two times and three times. I met with a young lady just recently. She has relatives who have been redeployed three times or more. Funds for the war are increasing, and my good friends on the other side, rather than stay here and work on the issues of the day, will put forward legislation that will have no place and go nowhere in the other body. Frankly, the package that is being put through today under this martial rule will cost $800 billion. Right now, I filed legislation to provide humanitarian aid to Lebanon to help those who are noncombatants get out safely, to find a way to help Americans who are stranded in Lebanon to get safely home, and we are addressing legislation that makes no sense. I voted for a sales tax relief for the State of Texas. I am a Texan, and I sure believe in helping home and many other States that suffer under the burden of excessive taxes. But you cannot give an $800 billion tax relief that no one is going to address, in the Senate, in regular order. It has to pass in the Senate and then the President signs it. And at the same time, we fail to entertain livable wages for Americans, a minimum wage increase for Americans, while we, of course, have increases. So when you look at this package and you see this, this is going nowhere. This is to put Members on the line to be embarrassed or to go home and say why did you vote against the sales tax. I voted for it many times. I want it to pass, but it is not going to pass this way. It is going to have to pass in negotiation between the House and the Senate because Texas does deserve relief, but so do the millions of those who are not being able to make ends meet. What about your soldiers that are on food stamps, the very soldiers who are on the front lines in Iraq? The privates are on food stamps, and we have got $800 billion in tax relief to the richest of Americans who do not even need it. That is what the problem is with this legislation. We waited here all day. I do not have a problem. We can be here all night. We can be here until tomorrow. We can pass H.R. 945, the Lebanon Humanitarian Relief, so we can protect those noncombatants who are being bombed and who cannot even defend themselves. I am not concerned about protecting Hezbollah, but I am concerned about mothers and children and babies who cannot even get out because they are on the road and they are being bombed. We need a corridor that gives us that kind of separation. But Mr. Speaker, this is no explanation. Let us get an up-or-down vote on minimum wage. Let us try to address the crisis in the Mideast. Let us help by getting real pension reform. Let us speak to the American people. Let us not play jokes here in the Congress of the United States of America.

Mrs. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Mrs. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Miller/Rangel Motion to Recommit with Instructions to Conferees on H.R. 4, the ``Pension Protection Act of 2005.'' I support the Miller/Rangel motion for several reasons. Specifically, I agree that conferees should be instructed to agree to the Senate provisions: (1) protecting older workers' benefits in cash balance conversions; (2) ensuring that airline pilots do not see unfair cuts to their PBGC benefits because of the FAA's mandatory retirement rules and agree to the Senate provisions on airlines; (3) designed to prevent pension plan dumping; (4) on executive compensation and work to treat worker and executive pensions equally.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 4, the Pension Protection Act of 2005. I support the Miller/Rangel motion for several reasons. Specifically, I oppose the bill because I am not satisfied that it adequately protects older workers' benefits in cash balance conversions and ensures that airline pilots do not see unfair cuts to their PBGC benefits because of the FAA's mandatory retirement rules and agree to the Senate provisions on airlines. I believe the bill can be designed better to prevent pension plan dumping and to treat equally executive compensation and worker and executive pensions equally.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to revise my previous statement regarding H. Con. Res. 400. I rise in opposition to H. Con. Res. 400. While I believe the United States should address the issue of drug trafficking from Venezuela, this resolution is too harsh a condemnation of the Government of Venezuela. It should be the goal of the United States to work closely with Venezuela and the other nations of this region to combat the trafficking of narcotics and other controlled substances. It is not only out of concern for the welfare of our own Nation if illegal substances and laundered money are allowed safe passage here; we must also express our concern for the welfare of Venezuelans and others around the world. The control of harmful substances is an international effort in which we must all take an active and engaged role. I am deeply committed to fighting our international war on drugs. However, the United States diplomacy has been entirely too weak in this regard, and we must recognize that Venezuela is an ally, not an enemy. Our foreign policy must be governed by what is best for the American people rather than by what party is in power. Recent evidence shows a general lack of enforcement in Venezuela of the measures necessary to avoid the trafficking of narcotics and other controlled substances. However, instead of delivering a political attack to a nation for a lack of customs control in an international airport, we must be constructive and pragmatic in our call for stricter enforcement. I support the message of this resolution to ensure the compliance of the international community with the Organization of American States conventions and comprehensive treaties on narco-terrorism. However, we would benefit from more constructive engagement in diplomatic relations with our allies in the Western Hemisphere rather than simply issuing a reprimand. I urge my colleagues to vote against this resolution and support better diplomatic relations with the Government of Venezuela.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I am proud to offer this amendment, along with my distinguished colleague, Mr. Burton of Indiana. Might I say that I also add my support for the manager's amendment which draws upon the change that focuses on naming the bill after Chairman Hyde. I add my appreciation for his service as well. Mr. Chairman, I also rise to speak on behalf of H.R. 5682 as I offer my amendment and offer the amendment with Mr. Burton, and that is that this particular legislation, the United States and India Nuclear Cooperation Promotion Act, is an opportunity. It is an opportunity for further negotiation. It is an opportunity for friendship and the continuation of that friendship. It is a recognition that even though India has not signed the nonproliferation agreement, it has peacefully utilized nuclear energy for the many years of its utilization. It is a democracy. So my amendment speaks to the whole concept of the importance of South Asia; and it says that former President Clinton got it right when we traveled with him to that region, Members of Congress, a small delegation of eight. We went to India and we went to Pakistan because we believed in the cohesion and the importance of that particular region. Might I note that in particular, as it relates to this legislation, the Nuclear Supply Group, NSG, still is maintained in this bill, and the guidelines and consensus decisionmaking are upheld. So, again, I emphasize that it is an opportunity. My amendment builds on that opportunity. Its language is direct. What it says is that South Asia is an important region and that it is in our national interests to continue our policy of engagement, collaboration, exchanges with and between India and Pakistan, particularly since this has served the Nation well. It goes on to emphasize the importance of that relationship. Why is that relationship important? Because we have seen in these latter years the working relationship between them and the United States. Pakistan has been a loyal and unwavering ally in our global war on terror and has played a decisive role in helping to remove the Taliban regime from Pakistan and the capture of hundreds of wanted al Qaeda terrorists. Pakistan has suffered thousands of casualties and has been a victim of numerous terrorist acts. In addition, the founder of Pakistan, Dr. Jinnah, premised the basis of this country on democratic principles. The alliance of the United States with the nation in South Asia should continue and the U.S. should emphasize in its foreign policy the importance of the region, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh. South Asia is important to the United States and the amendment further supports the need for encouraging celloboration and engagement with and between India and Pakistan by the U.S. Mr. Chairman, I am happy to yield to the distinguished gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Burton).

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I thank the distinguished gentlemen. Just for the record, I know there has been mention of an arms race. We don't see an arms race with India. The recent comment of a spokesperson from Pakistan indicated they do not want an arms race in the region. So I would say that this is an important step. We need to engage. We need to work with India and Pakistan together. I ask my colleagues to support this amendment. Mr. Chairman, the United States' relationship with India and Pakistan is of paramount importance to our nations' political and economic future. With the receding of the Cold War's global divisions and the new realities of globalization and trans-national terrorism, we have embarked on a new era of promise, possibility and uncertainty. This means the United States, the world's only superpower, bears an especially heavy responsibility to remain engaged in all regions of the world, with all nation-states. Mr. Chairman, my amendment is simple. My amendment is important. My amendment is necessary. And my amendment is bipartisan. Due to the strategic political and economic importance of the South Asia region, it is imperative to our national interest to continue our policy of engagement collaboration, and exchanges with and between India and Pakistan, particularly since this has served the nation well in the past. My amendment, which is endorsed and co-sponsored by Congressman Burton, and which is not opposed by either the Majority or Minority of the Committee on International Relations, simply states that the ``South Asia region is so important that the United States should continue its policy of engagement, collaboration, and exchanges with and between India and Pakistan.'' Peaceful nuclear cooperation with India can serve multiple U.S. foreign policy objectives so long as it is undertaken in a manner that minimizes potential risks to the nonproliferation regime. This will be best achieved by sustained and active engagement and cooperation between India and the United States. Similarly, Pakistan has been a critical ally in the global war on terror. Pakistan has been a good friend to the people of the United States. Although H.R. 5682 signals no change in this country's relationship with Pakistan, it is not difficult to understand why it may give pause to some supporters of Pakistan. This is another reason why it is vital for the United States to continue to engage both Pakistan and India in ongoing political engagement, economic and technological collaborations, and personal exchanges, which will bring the United States closer to these two vitally important democracies in the South Asia region and will bring India and Pakistan closer to each other. As a founding Co-Chair of the Congressional Pakistan Caucus, I am wholeheartedly committed to the political, economic, and social amelioration of Pakistan for the Pakistani people and the ascendancy of Pakistan in the international community. Pakistan has been a loyal and unwavering ally in our global war on terror, which has played a decisive role in helping to remove the Taliban regime from Afghanistan and the capture of hundreds of wanted al-Qaeda terrorists. Pakistan has suffered thousands of casualties and has been a victim of numerous terrorist acts on their own soil because of their steadfast alliance with our nation in the global war on terror. In order to get a proper perspective on Pakistan, I believe we must take a look back at the luminary individual who is singularly responsible for its creation. Pakistan, one of the largest Muslim states in the world, is a living and exemplary monument of Muhammad Ali Jinnah. Becoming an architect of a dream first articulated by poet- philosopher Muhammed Allama Iqbal, a brilliant young lawyer named Muhammad Ali Jinnah valiantly dedicated his life to achieving an independent Pakistan for Indian Muslims. Revered as the father of Pakistan, Muhammad Ali Jinnah inspired the adulation of his people through his eloquence, perseverance and dauntless courage. For over 30 years, Muhammad Ali Jinnah was the prominent leader of Indian Muslims who articulately gave expression, coherence, and direction to their legitimate aspirations and transformed their dreams into a concrete reality. A visionary leader who was ahead of his time, Muhammad Ali Jinnah was a great constitutionalist and nation-builder who called for the equal rights of all Pakistani citizens without regard to their religion. In the past six decades, the people and nation of Pakistan has come a long way. The bonds of friendship which began with Muhammad Ali Jinnah continue today with President Musharraf. I am grateful to the people and government of Pakistan, who in the aftermath of the devastation and loss of innocent life which occurred on 9/11, and on the eve of the 5 year anniversary of 9/11, continue to support our efforts to stamp out international terrorism. Similarly, I think it is critical that we continue our policy of engagement, collaboration, and exchanges with and between the people and the governments of Pakistan and India. I urge my colleagues to support my amendment.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I yield to the gentleman from California.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I yield to the distinguished ranking member from California.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the United States and India Nuclear Cooperation Promotion Act of 2006. With the receding of the Cold War's global divisions and the new realities of globalization and trans-national terrorism, for more than a decade there has been increasing recognition in both countries of the significant benefits to be obtained from closer cooperation across a broad spectrum. To that end, on July 15, 2005 President Bush and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh issued a joint statement announcing a ``global partnership'' between the two countries that embraces cooperation across a wide range of subjects. I am in support of this bill because this legislation reflects broad agreement consensus among Members of Congress that peaceful nuclear cooperation with India can serve multiple U.S. foreign policy objectives, but must be approached in a manner that minimizes potential risks to the nonproliferation regime. Among the most important considerations are ensuring that Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) guidelines and consensus decision-making are upheld and that a U.S. nuclear cooperation agreement and subsequent U.S. nuclear exports are consistent with decisions, policies, and guidelines of the NSG. Equally important is the need to ensure that U.S. cooperation does not assist the Indian nuclear weapons program directly, or indirectly, in order to avoid contributing to a nuclear arms race in South Asia and because of U.S. obligations under the Nonproliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). There are two other noteworthy provisions in this bill which I consider very crucial in the United States' relationship with India regarding nuclear weapons. The bill contains reporting requirements and a provision that calls for termination of exports in the event of violations of certain commitments and seeks to uphold existing statutory Congressional oversight of U.S. nuclear cooperation and exports. At a time when the world appears to be considering nuclear energy as a viable and desirable alternative to carbon-based energy sources, oversight of its expansion is crucial. The President took a bold step by cutting a deal with India on nuclear cooperation and it is now up to Congress to make the necessary fixes without undermining the deal. India has proven itself deserving of an understanding of cooperation with the United States regarding nuclear weapons. India has been punished for the last thirty-two years, but over that time they have shown a responsible foreign policy, and a commitment to democracy and rule of law. This deal would also provide India with some of its energy needs to continue to grow her economy and lower the use of coal burning power plants. We cannot forget about our Indian American citizens during our talks of a nuclear cooperation with India. There are about two million Indian Americans living in the United States and the majority of them support this nuclear deal. We must let the Indian American community know that we hear them, we stand with them, and are both working towards the mutual goals of democracy. This deal will strengthen our long term relationship with India in hopes that they will continue to be one of our strongest allies in the War on Terrorism. This agreement will benefit the United States as well as India in monitoring nuclear weapons in helping to stabilize our world's economy and safety and I urge my colleagues to support this bill. I will be introducing an amendment that urges Congress to continue its policies of engagement, collaborations, and exchanges with India and Pakistan. My bipartisan amendment is consistent with many U.S. foreign policy objectives. It will also draw the United States closer to this vitally important and strategic democracy.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 5121. I hope that my colleagues will join me in voting for this bill to expand homeownership and the American Dream to our fellow Americans. In my district of Houston, Texas, the U.S. Census Bureau reports that approximately 46 percent of housing units are owned by their inhabitants. This needs to change and it is our job in Congress to extend the opportunities of homeownership and the American Dream to all within our Nation. I commend those of my colleagues that have brought this issue to the floor today and think it is fantastic that we are doing more to help those who wish to become homeowners by making the Federal Housing Administration more than a last resort. By including 100 percent financing for those wishing to purchase housing up to the median housing price, we address the needs of more Americans than before. In addition, giving attention to middle-income borrowers provides the FHA with additional funds to be able to help low-income borrowers as well. This bill puts money in the system while helping our Nation's citizens become homeowners and I thank my colleagues for working so hard on a comprehensive solution to the lack of homeownership in areas of our country. I look forward to seeing this bill passed and witnessing its positive impacts within my own community. I ask my colleagues to join me in supporting this important legislation to expand homeownership and extend the American Dream to all.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to support H.R. 2730, the United States-Israel Energy Cooperation Act, introduced by my colleagues Congressman Sherman and Congressman Shadegg. The bill uses two existing cooperative efforts, United States-Israel Binational Science Foundation (BSF) and the United States-Israel Binational Industrial Research and Development (BIRD) Foundation, to establish a $20 million/year grant program administered by the Department of Energy. This program is intended to encourage American and Israeli businessmen and academics to pursue projects that would reduce our dependence on current energy resources and explore ways to increase energy efficiency. Research by the Energy Information Administration of the Department of Energy has shown that the dependence of the United States on foreign oil will increase by 33 percent over the next 20 years. We are familiar with our Nation's ``addiction to oil,'' as President Bush phrased it in the State of the Union, and the need to wean ourselves off of foreign energy dependence and onto more efficient energy resources. As we watch the Middle East transform before our eyes once again, we must remember that in Israel we not only have a strategic ally. Israel is also a leader in technology innovation and research, a resilient and strong economic partner, and a nation that shares our interest in the development of energy alternatives development. Israel has the highest proportion in the world of scientists and engineers within the working population, as well as the highest proportion of published scientific papers and patents. The United States and Israel share an unease about depleting energy resources, as well as a concern of the environment, and the importance of conservation initiatives. Although our politics and diplomacy are clearly actively engaged on a different stage of history in the Middle East. We must explore opportunities to increase our energy security, and pursue scientific advancements with the American and Israeli private and public sectors. This venture is in our economic interest and our national security interest. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 5319, a bill that would amend the Communications Act of 1934 to require schools and libraries that receive universal service support to prohibit and block access to social networking websites and chat rooms. In doing so, H.R. 5319 will protect adolescents from communicating with potentially harmful strangers. The bill will prevent adolescents from accessing obscene or indecent material and also from illegal, online sexual advances from strangers. Thus, the bill will help to safeguard our children, and put simply, will prevent them from accessing any material that is potentially harmful. As many of you may know from watching ``Dateline'' NBC's ``To Catch a Predator,'' the United States has a countless number of sexual predators. It is very hard to profile a sexual predator, and it is also very hard to cure one. This is why H.R. 5319 is a necessity; it will tackle this mammoth issue by preventing any kind of potentially harmful communication with strangers in school networking sites and chat rooms. I believe that it is hard to keep sexual predators away from our children, but with this bill, it will be easy to keep our children away from sexual predators. I strongly support H.R. 5319, and I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting it.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 5865. The purpose of the bill is to increase the funds in the program aiding Americans currently fleeing the crisis in the Middle East from $1 million to $6 million. It is important to help these Americans get out of harm's way and to provide them with the assistance they need to return to their homes in the United States. However, when we considered this bill on the House floor, we learned that provisions within it allowed it to pass only on the condition that the program, established under the Social Security Act, is terminated. I thank my colleague Mr. McDermott for his comments on this matter and his criticism of this condition. I am pleased that the Senate added an amendment to allow this valuable program to continue after this year. This is absolutely essential to the well-being of all Americans who may find themselves in such a situation in the future and look to their government for help. The United States received enough criticism already for mobilizing less quickly to assist our citizens in leaving war-ravaged areas of Lebanon. It is our job to protect them and help them return home, and I am pleased to give my support to this new version of the bill. I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of H.R. 5685 to let the American people know that their representatives in Congress are concerned about their safety. Let us send a clear message that we will do all we can to help them get out of harm's way should they find themselves in such a crisis situation overseas.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Con. Res. 400, to express my concern that the government of Venezuela do what it can to secure its airport facilities from the trafficking of illegal goods. It is always essential to restrict the transport of these substances and the transport of laundered money from their sales. International certifications in airport facilities help to ensure that such restrictions are in place. Recent evidence shows a general lack of enforcement in Venezuela of the measures necessary to avoid the trafficking of narcotics and other controlled substances. Especially in light of the discovery in April of a Venezuelan plane filled with narcotics en route to Mexico, we must seriously question the compliance of Venezuela's airports with such standards. I ask that my colleagues join me in requesting that the government of Venezuela exercise more effort in the future to ensure the security of their airport facilities. This resolution would also express our wish to work closely with Venezuela and the other nations of this region that are so severely affected by this issue to combat the trafficking of narcotics and other controlled substances. It is not only out of concern for the welfare of our own Nation if illegal substances and laundered money are allowed safe passage here; we must also express our concern for the welfare of Venezuelans and others around the world. The control of harmful substances is an international effort in which we must all take part. It should be the policy of the United States to work with the international community in ensuring adherence to the Organization of American States conventions and comprehensive treaties on narco- terrorism. This concurrent resolution serves to respect this and to assist in a review of the Simon Bolivar International Airport in Caracas in particular, in light of recent events. I thank my colleagues on the Western Hemisphere Subcommittee of the Committee on International Relations for drafting this resolution and urge my other colleagues in the House to support this legislation.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise to congratulate the International AIDS Vaccine Initiative (IAVI) on their 10 years of hard work in searching for an HIV/AIDS vaccine. HIV/AIDS has taken the lives of over 250,000 people worldwide and poses a serious threat to the economic and political stability of the countries hit hardest by this terrible epidemic. The IAVI was founded 10 years ago as a public- private partnership with a mission to ensure the development of safe, effective, accessible, preventive HIV/AIDS vaccines for use throughout the world. The IAVI had a particular focus on developing countries, since their need is most urgent regarding care. Unfortunately, 10 years ago insufficient attention and resources were devoted to the need for, and advantages of, a vaccine to bring an end to this disease. Currently, we are armed with increasingly powerful knowledge and treatments, and yet we face an ever steeper climb toward victory. HIV/AIDS is no longer a scary, unknown entity. A diagnosis is no longer the sealing of fate, even if it means the beginning of a battle. We know enough to educate, even if we do not yet know enough to cure. The groundbreaking research and policy programs of the IAVI have galvanized scientific efforts and substantially increased financial and political support for this vital effort. Today, the majority of newly designed HIV/AIDS vaccine candidates are focused on preventing HIV/AIDS in the developing world, in large part due to the efforts of the International AIDS Vaccine Initiative. The IAVI has also received accolades from the G8 as being an important actor in the quest for a vaccine, after they became a founding member of the Global HIV/AIDS Vaccine Enterprise. Today over 42 million individuals are infected with HIV/AIDS globally and 1 million here in the United States. Fifty percent of these cases in the United States are in young adults between the ages of 15 and 24. Every year, 40,000 new cases are diagnosed. Thankfully, the IAVI has continued to work effortlessly to unite scientists, academics, nonprofit organizations, and governments from the north and south, including communities of faith, communities of color, and many others, in an effort to develop a vaccine to stop global HIV infection rates of 14,000 a day. We all admire the commitment of the IAVI in discovering a vaccine and I want to again express my support for the continued success of the International AIDS Vaccine Initiative.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of Mr. Miller's motion to call our colleagues' attention to provisions in the Senate bill S. 1783, provisions that aim to ensure the very best for our older workers. These provisions prohibit discrimination against older workers by eliminating the ``wearaway'' of older worker benefits. They also provide fair rules to protect workers' pensions in conversions of traditional pension plans to cash balance pension plans. In a recent study, the GAO found that, without these transition protections, almost all workers could lose up to 50 percent of their expected pension benefits in a cash balance conversion. The Senate provisions also entail language that will ensure that airline pilots are protected from unfair cuts to their pension benefits because of the FAA's mandatory retirement rules. Currently, FAA regulations require pilots to retire at age 60. The PBGC treats age 60 as an early retirement, and cuts pilots guaranteed benefits as a result. The Senate provisions would require the PBGC to treat age 60 as the normal retirement age for pilots and adjust their guaranteed benefits accordingly. Under the current House bill, workers see benefit restrictions when a pension plan falls below 80 percent funding. Executives, on the other hand, only see limited benefit restrictions much later--at less than 60 percent funding. The Senate bill achieves greater parity than the House bill in how workers and executives are treated. Over the last several years, we have seen repeated cases where executives have protected or even enhanced their own golden parachutes, while cutting or eliminating workers' pensions. It is time for these unfair practices to end. The provisions in the Senate bill will help see that this happens and ensure that America's older workers are treated fairly and with respect. There are few things worse than working hard for 40 years or more only to see one's well-being in retirement being compromised by inadequacies and inefficiencies in pension policy. We have some retirement-aged folks amongst us, and I encourage my colleagues to imagine it was our pension up for debate right now. Perhaps it should be if we do act to protect others'. I therefore urge all of my colleagues to join Mr. Miller and take the Senate provisions seriously and support them accordingly.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, although this esteemed body is filled with aura and history, I might imagine that today there is more history, more aura, more feeling, more acknowledgment of the struggles and the success of the Alpha Phi Alpha fraternity. How many can claim 100 years? And so today I rise to add my appreciation to the Members of Congress who are Alphas, in particular the men that are on this floor today, Mr. Scott of Georgia, Mr. Davis of Illinois, and Mr. Scott of Virginia, representing a wide array of men who are in the United States Congress who are Alpha brothers. Might I just for a moment claim to be a sister of their fraternity as a member of the Alpha Kappa Alpha sorority, but that is not why we rise today. It is worth noting Alpha brothers who are founding members of the Houston chapter and others who are part of that great chapter such as Gerald Womack, Prince Cartwright, Larry Green, James Ward and, yes, the former national President, Mr. Harry Johnson. Additionally, other such leaders are Horace William, Walter Criner, Lew Don Buney, Sr. and L.W. Garrett, and many, many other good brothers. I salute the Alphas who has been here for 100 years of life and liberty and freedom and salute them for understanding the first line of defense is an education in their Go-to-High-School, Go-to-College program, and of course, A Voteless People is a Hopeless People. Doing that for 100 years, 175,000 African American men have been educated in the fundamental role of developing character and education; but I think if we speak to the heart and soul of Alphas, I want to speak to their commitment to civil rights.