Sheila Jackson Lee

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise to raise and voice my concern on this resolution to express support for conditioning an institution of higher education's receipt of certain Federal funds on its actions to provide military recruiters with the same access to its campus and students as it provides to any other employer. I am very proud of our military and of the courage and bravery of our military personnel. I believe in the importance of outreach, and of the ability of employers to utilize the resources of our colleges and universities. I know that the talent found at our institutions of higher education across the country is important to the success of our defenses, and that every month many of our best and brightest make the decision to defend our homeland. I would like to caution my colleagues, however, and remind them that this is not a military issue. We value a higher education because of the learned abilities to think critically, to comprehend complex problems and issues, to analyze research and information, to evaluate the choices at hand, and to gain enough wisdom to arrive at a solution. I am hesitant to condition Federal funding for these institutions on a situation which may be their way to express a point of view and to disagree with the status quo. To be able to freely oppose the politics of any administration is a right given to us in our own Constitution. To be able to express these opinions is, again, a right given to us in our own Constitution. Likewise, the dignity of a military career is inherent and desirable. However, I have concerns about resolutions such as this that seem to limit the ability of one party without a perceived benefit for another. I urge my colleagues to consider this matter carefully, and to join me in celebrating both our Armed Forces and our institutions of higher education.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the resolution to express the sense of the House that all Americans should participate in a moment of silence to reflect upon the service and sacrifice of members of the United States Armed Forces both at home and abroad. Words fly in this Chamber, in the city, on a rainbow of subjects and issues, with any number of ideas and opinions. Sometimes the rhetoric can seem overpowering, even confusing, particularly when action and change is so desperately needed. The moment of silence, however, is an arresting and poignant pause. It is a beautiful way to express respect, and pride, and honor, without the discoloration of politics. Around the world, moments of silence are often called to mourn a national tragedy, or honor a historical benchmark. We are familiar with the visual gesture of lowering the American flag to half mast. I support the complementary gesture of pausing for a moment to reflect, to think, and to appreciate everything that our armed forces do for us around the world. Thank you to them, our soldiers who are our children, our fathers and mothers, our brothers and sisters, our friends and protectors. I know all of my colleagues in Congress will join me in supporting this resolution.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Con. Res. 190, expressing the sense of the Congress that the Russian Federation should fully protect the freedoms of all religious communities without distinction, whether registered and unregistered, as stipulated by the Russian Constitution and international standards. This resolution is an essential demonstration of our continued commitment to protecting religious freedom for all human beings throughout the world. Mr. Speaker, this nation was built by those who escaped persecution in their own homelands. Today we continue to see people throughout the world who still can not freely practice their faith. It is vital in order to protect the principles of freedom that this nation was founded on, that we protect the ability of each person in the United States to freely observe their religious practices. This also means that we as a nation must push other countries throughout the world to meet this same ideal standard on religious freedom. Religious freedom is a fundamental human right as affirmed by numerous international declarations and covenants, as well as by the United Nations General Assembly. I remain hopeful that we will continue with further efforts to fight religious intolerance. I applaud today's measure with enthusiasm and reverence.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Chairman, let me just join Mr. Brady in his analysis. What we are talking about is people, not places, and that is that the funds be able to support the people wherever they are. And Texas is certainly not in any way rejecting the role that we have had the opportunity to play. In fact, we welcome it. But, frankly, it is quite necessary to provide the resources. I will have a subsequent amendment on this very question; and I rise in support of Mr. Brady's amendment so we can provide the resources where the people are until they return home, of which we are certainly supporting their desire to return home, but while they are where they are we believe these funds on education and housing are crucial.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Chairman, I thank Mr. Brady very much. Let me just share with my colleagues, you have heard it before, but within hours of when we got the call to open the Astrodome in Houston for the survivors, the Astrodome was opened with full medical care, volunteers and local resources. We would do it over and over again, because we know our neighbors would do it for us. But, at the same time, as we have integrated our Katrina survivors into our community, waiting to return home, we have opened schools. We have added a new mental health unit to the existing mental health facilities in Harris County; and, in fact, we know that right after that, as Mr. Brady has indicated, Hurricane Rita came through and devastated a large part of East Texas. So the combination of East Texas devastation and the impact in Houston and Dallas and other cities around the State, these dollars specifically would go to help the impacted States like Texas in helping to educate, provide health care and other resources. So I support the gentleman's amendment. Again, his words are accurate. We would do it over and over again, but we have already done the necessary facilities and staffing without asking. We are simply asking now to help us as we continue the burden that we willingly accept. Point of Order

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I want to congratulate the gentleman for the approach he has taken. This is an amendment that covers schools across the Nation. I want to remind my colleagues that the Katrina survivors were evacuated to 44 States. Mr. Brady is right. We share contiguous districts, with school districts that have willingly taken in students. But as I said in the earlier debate, we have opened schools actually. We actually have new schools that welcomed children, Katrina survivors. We provided enhanced resources, counselors to assist as well, and we do it willingly. What we are saying is that we are already suffering as it relates to public education in America. This instance provides added support for a particularly fragile situation and a necessary situation, and I support the gentleman's amendment.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Chairman, I thank the Chairwoman very much. This is an amendment that really, I would ask my colleagues in another time and another day, to waive the point of order. But I rise to make the point on the amendment. I really believe that this Congress should join together and admonish the Small Business Administration and make it work for the people it was intended to work for. A lot of the people who are impacted by the hurricane are now living in Houston, Texas. Of course, the actions of the SBA not only impact them, but impact my constituents. We are finding that there has been an almost 80 percent rejection rate of those individuals requesting a small business disaster loan. I stood and listened to a gentleman by the name of Alvin, who before the hurricane had a business in his home. He was doing what he thought well and beginning to have a very effective small business. He obviously lost everything, including his home and his equipment for his business. He now comes and lives in Houston, comes to Houston and lives there in Houston. In order to get on his feet, he applied for a small business loan and was denied. In a report we have determined just recently, that will be released today, that business and home loan approval rates average about 60 percent after Hurricane Andrew devastated much of South Florida in 1992, the trend continued through the rest of this administration and into the present administration, or the first George Bush administration, and into the Clinton administration. But, however, we have seen these numbers go decidedly down, in terms of the ability for individuals to have small business loans. In Louisiana, for example, nearly three in five applicants could not meet credit standards, the SBA said. Another one in four said they couldn't replay the loans. One in ten didn't make enough money. The question is, what are these small business loans for if other than to allow small business persons to get on their feet and to be able to establish their business and to repay the loans back. Over and over again, individuals have applied for the loans and been denied. The SBA has drawn the ire of many lawmakers last month when it announced it was almost out of disaster loan money. Lawmakers gave the green light to the SBA to spend $100 million in early February. Late in the month, the Senate approved additional monies. But, frankly, the moneys are not getting to large numbers of small business owners. So this amendment simply asks that the approval rate during this time not be lower than 70 percent; that small business owners have the right to be able to be reviewed in a fashion that acknowledges that they have lost all that they have had, and that this loan gives them the opportunity to regenerate their business, become independent, and pay the loan back. It is silly in the interpretation of the various SBA statutes to insist that someone show themselves creditworthy when they have lost everything. So the amendment really points out to the failures of the SBA at this time, and I think it is appropriate that Congress makes notice of this and asks for a consideration of the many people who have applied and who have been denied. That is the only way we are going to allow people to get on their feet. Madam Chairman, let me just say that this amendment is to make a very pointed statement on this floor: The SBA is not working as relates to disaster loans and the people that it most needs to help. I would hope we would have intense oversight to begin to insist that the loan process works fairly to restore people to their feet. Madam Chairman, as of February, months the Small Business Administration had issued $4.12 billion in disaster assistance loans to homeowners and businesses in declared disaster areas, processing 214,000 applications. It has approved approximately $1 billion in loans to businesses surviving the destructive attacks by hurricanes in 2005. In my district of Houston: 55 disaster home loans approved for $727,000; 27 disaster business loans approved for $1,750,800; 17 disaster economic injury loans approved for $750,100; and 99 total disaster loans approved for $3,227,900. If one just looks at the agency's performance on the surface it would appear that agency is performing well. However, upon closer inspection, citing Louisiana as a case study, reports indicate that of the roughly 185,000 applications made on behalf of homeowners, a shocking 60,000 were denied. The SBA is distributing a large amount of aid, but that aid is not reaching all of those in serious need. This is evident by the House Minority Small Business Committee's statement that 80 percent of overall disaster loans have been denied. My amendment requires of the Small Business Agency that no funds prohibit the approval of disaster loans at a rate of at least 70 percent. The destruction caused by the hurricanes occurred on an unprecedented scale, and the SBA should be approving disaster loans with unprecedented efficiency. SBA disaster loans offer people who have lost everything a chance to rebuild their life. It gives the survivors of Rita, Katrina and Wilma the hope that one day they can be contributing members of society. Madam Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment, and continue to work on this matter to ensure that small business loans go to small business persons for them to be able to rebuild their lives throughout the gulf region, including the State of Texas.

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

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise to discuss the amendment that I hope my colleagues will give adequate consideration. The amendment is a simple one. It simply intends to add $800 million to the amount of moneys to be utilized for the repair and construction and rehabilitation of rental properties in the impacted areas. I am hoping that as my colleagues listen to some of the, if you will, concerns that we have regarding housing assistance in the region and the flexibility we are asking for they would see the legitimacy of increasing the $1 billion to $1.8 billion. Rental housing impacts people, and people are what are left in the gulf region, not structures, not apartment buildings, but people. People who are without trailers and, in many instances, without rental properties. Many people would like to get into and repair their homes, but the easier property to repair and reconstruct would be the rental properties controlled by HUD. The impacted areas cover Mississippi, Louisiana and Texas. For those of us who have been in the region, we know that the region can be declared a war zone. The damage is expansive. I have walked along the streets of HUD projects, housing developments in disrepair, empty, needing repair so people could return. This is so in East Texas, Port Arthur, Beaumont and areas where Hurricane Rita traveled, and it certainly has risen its face in the Gulf region and in Mississippi. I want to say to my colleagues that I appreciate the generosity and the, if you will, insight of the ranking member and chairman of the full committee and of the subcommittee dealing with housing and the $4.2 billion and the ceiling, if you will, or the floor of $1 billion. But this amendment goes to the expansiveness of the devastation and the need for rental assistance and reconstruction. Frankly, I think it is important to note that the $1.8 billion is not too much and does not disallow flexibility of the remaining dollars. I would hope if it was not necessary to use $1.8 billion, this particular dollar amount would not need to be utilized, and that is because the language says ``not less than.'' I hope that my colleagues would support this amendment. Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time. Madam Speaker, I appreciate the spirit in which the gentleman has offered his rebuttal. I realize these dollars go specifically to reconstruction repair, but might I just use an anecdotal story to show that housing reconstruction repair and rental assistance is really a large chunk of the need in the gulf coast because people do not have housing. Frankly, just as anecdotal story, for the City of Houston, even in apartments that we have been able to utilize, isn't it interesting that we cannot even get moneys paid to landowners, apartment owners, for the renters who are on the premises who are Hurricane Katrina survivors. It is a slightly different issue, but it shows the magnitude of the housing need. The 200,000 individuals that are in the Houston area are mostly in rental property, and much of it would be subject at some point to repair and reconstruction. The point of this increase is to highlight the need for rental housing in the devastated areas and to somehow seek some flexibility to be able to use dollars for rental assistance. I would ask Mr. Knollenberg and certainly the chairman of the committee to recognize that this should be the beginning of our work and not the end. Frankly, my plea is to provide rental assistance dollars, because we are getting inadequate response from FEMA. My amendment was offered to provide the increase because rental housing overall is needed, but the specific need obviously is rental assistance and its payments. Madam Chairman, I seek to withdraw the amendment; and I look forward to further opportunity to ensure that the City of Houston and other cities similarly situated would allow for us to be able to get rental assistance and payment for those 200,000 who are living in rental properties through our city and throughout East Texas and other areas. Madam Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw the amendment.

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

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Chairman, let me suggest that I respect the good intentions of this waiver language. I understand that it addresses the question of flexibility, but, frankly, I believe that it should be the other way around. That, in fact, if the Secretary believes that there needs to be more dollars to be utilized for other income levels other than low and moderate, then the Secretary needs to make a compelling need request. These moneys were designated for low and moderate income. That is the bulk of the impact in the gulf coast region where the dollars are needed. My fear is, with the ability to waive utilization of these funds for low and moderate income, we will find these funds being utilized for economic development projects, putting in various extraneous matters that do not address the question of human needs. This amendment simply says, let us get ourselves focused, let us get back on the point, let us realize that the devastating impact is impacting mostly people who have lost everything and fall into the category of low and moderate. Therefore, I feel there would be little reason to have to seek a waiver in the first place because the need is pointed. It points to a certain income, and those were the most devastated. We realize there are other issues dealing with insurance where those individuals who had insurance are now in conflict with insurance companies who are denying them their insurance recovery. That is one issue. But people who have lost everything mostly have fallen into the category of low and moderate income. These dollars should be directed toward that body of people and not directed elsewhere, therefore, taking away important dollars for helping to rebuild the gulf coast. Just walk down in the area, travel through the areas of Mississippi and Louisiana, visit some of the eastern parts of Texas, and you will find that the language that exists that deals with low and moderate income is the appropriate language that will serve the housing and other infrastructure needs of those who have been devastated along the gulf coast. To allow waiver opportunity for the Secretary to change that formula and to begin to use it for many, many other aspects will take it away from the rebuilding and reconstruction of that area. I ask my colleagues to support my amendment. Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Chairman, I offer an amendment and ask unanimous consent that it be considered out of order.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Chairman, I thank my colleague and I ask my colleagues to support the amendment. Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Chairman, I yield myself such time as I might consume. We can see that we are having enormously genteel dialogue here, Madam Chairman. Again, I respect the argument of the flexibility being offered by way of the States. I guess I speak very passionately from what I have seen day-to-day in our local communities, our cities, and the impact that they have experienced in not getting the dollars that are necessary to provide the engine to their local economy as they play host, willingly, of course, to thousands of survivors, including those who are impacted by Rita. I believe those dollars should be focused on low and moderate income and frankly, when necessary, then the waiver should be from the ground up, rather than top down. And so I would ask my colleagues to support this amendment. Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Chairman, I thank the distinguished Chair. I thank also the chairman of the subcommittee, Mr. Wolf, for his generosity. Let me just be brief, but also be very pointed. We have a number of difficulties in the gulf region, for many of us who serve on the Homeland Security Committee had the opportunity to travel on several occasions to the region, most recently, with Speaker Hastert and Leader Pelosi, and heard a number of concerns. One of the major concerns, of course, was the pending election in New Orleans, Louisiana, on April 22, dealing with a number of challenges to ensure, one vote, one person. This amendment simply argues against any Federal dollars being used to prohibit the legal voting of any displaced persons. I hope in the course of this amendment passing through, that we will find at least support in the Department of Justice to assist with the number of issues deal with absentee balloting, dealing with satellite voting, dealing with making sure that the precincts are in place and also making sure that many of the thousands of individuals living in Houston, Texas, who claim Louisiana as a residence and New Orleans as their residence, are facilitated in their right to vote. I would hope that no dollars be utilized by the State, by the local authorities and FEMA to thwart or prohibit anyone from voting on that day or any days after in Alabama, Mississippi, Texas and Louisiana and other impacted States. With that, let me ask my colleagues to support this amendment to ensure one person, one vote, and to ensure the utilization of the Voter Rights Act in protecting the rights of individuals to vote. Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Let me if I might, join and just reaffirm, Mr. Jefferson, what you said one of the reasons, because I come from the gulf coast region. And I really think that as we work in this caucus, Mr. Melancon, we really should focus on the educating of our Congress on the problems or the distinctiveness of the gulf region, which I think America should be proud of its regional diversity. Tragically, this past weekend we had a number of tornados, I believe, or windstorms throughout the Midwest, loss of life, a loss of property. These are regional climatic issues that come about. And so I suffered too. Houston is 50 feet underwater. We were almost in the eye of Hurricane Rita. And we don't have exactly levees, but we have bayous and our bayous have tended to overflow, and we have needed the reconstruction of our bayous. So I think it is important that as we look at the other social needs, the housing and electricity, that we really need to have a separate massive agenda, infrastructure, Army Corps, Department of Transportation, Homeland Security, all the elements that deal with the infrastructure of helping to safely secure the gulf region, all along. And Florida is likewise included, having suffered so many of the hurricanes. We really need that agenda. And let me finish on this point that I indicated I would make clear. We discussed earlier about the voting, just or in a moment, and this goes directly to the April 22 voting. And I don't want my colleagues and others to think, you know what? They are going to let those people who live in New York and Utah and Houston, they are going to let them vote twice. They are living there and then they are trying to get them to vote in New Orleans. Well, I don't want, if I might use this terminology, for anyone to apply to us the okey-doke. We are not here standing talking about any fraudulent activities or any suggestion that anyone is voting twice or in two different places. We know under the law that you can choose your residency, and where you choose your residency to be, that is where you will be allowed to vote. When you pool the thousands of individuals in Houston, and I would imagine elsewhere, they will say to you that they are residents of Louisiana and that is where they want to vote. And that is why, as I yield back, our argument is to have the voting rights protection, to allow residents of Louisiana where they might live, one, to have satellite voting where they might live, but also to ensure them the right to vote, one vote, one person.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for this hour, along with Mr. Gene Taylor and Mr. Bill Jefferson. Sitting and listening to Mr. Melancon and Mr. Bill Jefferson, I believe they have appropriately set the tone for why we are here tonight. I beg the indulgence of my colleagues, because we are obviously concerned about both what we have seen, who has been impacted, and what we can do better. For many of us who are members of the Gulf Coast Disaster Recovery Caucus, this has become a cause, a passion, and a desire to ensure that there is a final resolution for the people who are in need. Let me just take a moment to acknowledge that this is Congressman Bill Jefferson's birthday. And of course we all know that the good news about birthdays is we have an opportunity to give back, and you have just seen Congressman Jefferson on the floor talking about the needs of his community. I want to spend just a moment to thank Mr. Melancon, Mr. Bill Jefferson and Gene Taylor. I have never seen more collegiate Members under the auspices or under the umbrella or under the pain of devastation. Certainly there are other colleagues throughout Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama, but in our caucus we have seen this unified team, and certainly Mr. Thompson, who is the ranking member of the Homeland Security Committee, has been very helpful to this team, but you all have been the voices of reason and strength, the voices who have refused to back down, yet trying to bring along Members from both sides of the aisle. I want to thank them, particularly as a Member from Texas where many of their constituents are, and seeing how hardworking and diligent so many of the survivors are in our community, wanting nothing more than to return to the quality of life, the love of their community, the service they have given to their community, more than anything. Many are mourning the loss of loved ones, and still having to toil finding work, maybe temporary work, making sure their children are in school, seeking to get the necessary benefits, benefits for elderly parents and relatives that they are taking care of. And many have had to funeralize relatives. Madam Speaker, 1,100, possibly more, had to be funeralized. How many of us saw or was able to glean what kind of place New Orleans was by having to bury and funeralize 1,100-plus individuals, and there are those who never found their loved ones. I want to tip my hat to Mr. Melancon, Mr. Jefferson and Mr. Taylor for continuing to press forward even in spite of the fact that there are many agenda items that take up the time of Members of Congress, but you are saying to us that the lives of our fellow Americans must be premier in our concern, and I am forever grateful. Texans are ever certainly grateful because as we fight for resources in the Gulf region, not in conflict and not in fist fight, but certainly in coordination and in collaboration. So I rise today to sort of weave into this debate the needs of Louisiana and Mississippi, certainly Alabama to a lesser extent, but also to join with the State of Texas as a partner in the efforts that are necessary to be made. Madam Speaker, just about 2 weeks ago, we joined with the delegation of 34 Members of Congress who saw fit to meticulously travel through three States and a number of different cities, and of course, we had the hospitality of Mr. Melancon, Mr. Jefferson and Mr. Taylor. We were able to see and hear firsthand not only local officials but real people. One of the key elements that I want to raise tonight that really brought me to a degree of almost frustration, because when hardworking people do the right thing, when you follow the law, when you provide for your family, when you make sure you have insurance, when you pay your mortgages and pay your taxes and get up every morning and go to work, you should be able to rely on your local, State and certainly your Federal Government. May I present my frustration in the context of visiting New Orleans and Mississippi and bending down and picking up a family picture, a mother holding her baby. When you go throughout these areas, you find the debris of life scattered about. A picture, teapot, a pink dress of a little girl blowing in a displaced closet, having been blown out of a house and sitting on the side of a road. This is the scene of broken hearts and broken lives for people who have tried to do everything that they thought was right. One issue that brought great pain was at a stop by the side of a road where a family was in a trailer in Mississippi. It happened to be one of the law enforcement, our first responders of whom we are so proud. To hear him tell the story how he paid his insurance, how he gets a busy signal or no signal or a hang up, and how the insurance company tells him, almost like in the biblical times in the birth of Jesus Christ when Mary and Joseph were looking for places to give birth, and there was no room at the inn and they wound up in a manger. This man could find no relief. None of his insurance policies, or the main one that he thought he had appropriately paid for and applied to, would provide him recovery. I hope, Mr. Melancon, in the Disaster Recovery Caucus, one of the main issues will be to confront this catastrophe, this crisis that impacted Hurricane Rita victims as well, to be able to rely upon paying insurance and not having to read the fine print to be able to find out whether or not I am going to be covered or denied. In fact, in going throughout the region, I did not find one person that said, oh, yes, my insurance has covered me. There was one denial after another, one lawsuit after another. Two women that I spoke to said they were still waiting for recovery. This issue needs to be confronted by Congress. Democrats are taking the lead on this issue. We welcome the joining of our colleagues on the other side of the aisle because we rise today to focus on the needs of people, and we need to rush toward victory by helping individuals who are suffering. Let me also say that today we stood together to speak against this question of the eviction of almost 40,000 families, we believe, tomorrow. If the Secretary of Homeland Security, the Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security can hear our voices on the floor tonight, we are pleading with an extension of that eviction date. What will be said is we have extended it. In fact, I am looking at a time line hear that talks about October 25, November 15, December 15, November 23, December 12, January 9, and it says FEMA requires all evacuees staying in hotels and motels register for an authorization code by January 30, and then they went on to February 7 and then January 13. They were going to be kicked out, and now it has been extended. Let me say one simple sentence. Why don't we extend the time to remain in place, if necessary, until the anniversary of the Hurricane Katrina and Hurricane Rita tragedies. Why not just do that. I want to conclude by mentioning these items, and I see we are joined by Ms. Lee, who has been very helpful on these issues, particularly on the Financial Services Committee, where we have gathered to try to work with that committee on the housing issue. So eviction from a place where you have no place else to go, where countless trailers are lost in Hope, Arkansas, but they are going to evict people from places where they have no place to go. I am asking America, does that make any sense to you? I am standing here making a plea that even in the midnight hour, that we can get an early morning accountability or response from the Secretary of Homeland Security to extend for a couple more months the idea of those last individuals being able to live. And I want to make sure that we have a response to the insurance debacle that has opened up a searing wound in America: Pay your dues, and you get smacked in the face. And then I would like to ensure that we have accountability. What does that mean? I heard Mr. Melancon say, and he was very astute in teaching us when we went down and met with a number of his constituents in his parishes and other areas where the local elected officials said: I just wanted to put our community to work. That is what I asked for. In fact, I went out front to ask the Army Corps of Engineers to ask whether we could put our community to work. They said if you want anything done quickly, you better go the route we are taking and if you go that route, you will get things done quickly. But lo and behold, we did not know that our contractors would not get paid, our small contractors and minority-owned contractors would not get paid. We did not know that the large contractors would bill and bill and bill and bill, and have excessive amounts of dollars, using of tax dollars, and none of that generating down to those who obviously are in need of those dollars. So this is a plea for help to this Congress. It is also a plea to recognize that we do have a vehicle that I think will be enormously helpful. So I close by just counting these points on the omnibus bill H.R. 4197, the Congressional Black Caucus bill, that I hope we will see all Members of Congress use as the vehicle to bring relief to the gulf region. It has a one-time payment, like 9/11, to all of the survivors; down payment assistance for your new house or rebuilding; bankruptcy protection for individuals who are being asked to pay mortgages and pay taxes and being asked to pay credit cards when they have no money; and voting protection, so that we have satellite voting and the Voter Rights Act is implemented in the April 22 election, particularly in Louisiana. Environmental cleanup, the opening of hospitals and clinics and mental health coverage for those who are suffering. I, Mr. Melancon, appreciate you bringing us here to, if you will, vocalize or, more importantly, galvanize our efforts, and our promise to those of you in the gulf region is certainly to continue to work. And as a Texan who will be addressing the supplemental, as we all will, to ensure that there is fair compensation for much of the work that we are doing in education and security in Texas, we are not going to stand against you. We are going to stand alongside of you, and we are going to make sure that our efforts are a unified voice because the relief of the gulf coast is unified not divided, and we can do this together. We can do better. We can do it for Americans, our fellow brothers and sisters.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Will the gentleman yield?

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I want to acknowledge again Mr. Souder and Mr. Cummings and certainly the members of the full committee, ranking member Waxman and Chairman Davis. We can all have our approaches to dealing with this fast-moving drug crisis in America, and it would seem that in 2006 we might be using other language other than ``drug crisis,'' because I recall the Select Committee on Narcotics. I was not a Member of this body, but it had a very high profile. That committee, of course, chaired by Congressman Rangel, was at a time when drug use in urban centers of America was at a fast-moving pace. My amendment is one that seeks to be a tool for intervention, a guidepost for the right kinds of programs that can affect our youth. This is an amendment that in its simplicity says that we know that drug use among the ages of 12 to 17, and in many instances girls, is going up. The data is clear. We also know that there are many programs, a lot funded by this agency, of course, but we also need to have a complete understanding of the assessment of these programs, how they can be effective in local, State, and Federal governments. Mr. Chairman, a recent Washington Post article from this past February describes how girls are trying alcohol and drugs at higher rates than boys. The National Survey on Drug Use and Health found that 730,000 girls between the ages of 12 and 17 started smoking cigarettes in 2004, compared with 565,000 boys; and 675,000 girls started using marijuana, compared with 577,000 boys; 14.4 percent of girls and 12.5 percent of boys in this study reported misusing prescription drugs; 1.5 million girls started drinking alcohol in 2004, compared to 1.28 million boys. We also know that our particular communities have seen that at least, if it has not increased, it is still the same. There were 20,692 drug- related arrests in Houston, Texas, in 2003. In their lifetime, 32.9 percent of female and 48.9 percent of male Houston-area high school students will have a lifetime use of marijuana. In 2000 there were 115,589 Federal arrests made, 28 percent for drug offenses; 10.8 percent of youth 12 to 17 years old have used drugs in the past month alone. Among State prisoners, 83.9 percent were involved in alcohol or drugs at the time of their offenses; 53 percent of high school seniors reported using an illicit drug at least once in their lives. These numbers are good for the record, but they impact people's lives. And frankly I believe that we have an opportunity to assess and report back to Congress on the programs that have been effective in preventing or responding to drug and alcohol use, the extent to which chronic use occurs in children, the extent to which schools and public institutions play a role in these programs, and the role of the Federal Government in these programs and the role of the criminal justice system. Let me say that I am very grateful that this bill is silent on the issue dealing with scholarships because, unfortunately, we know that children and young people have used drugs but have straightened their lives up because of these intervention programs, and we want to make sure that they are not then thwarted and stopped from being able to finish their education. This, however, is a program that assesses the right kind of intervention. Certainly we know that we have drug courts. We want to know how effective they are. We know there is an amendment that has focused on that. This focuses on, really, the kinds of programs that may be offered by nonprofits, the faith community, local governments so that funding can be both direct, correct, and effective. Our children are our greatest resource. We are finding that they are victims, but also they are ripe for the target. They are ripe for amphetamines. They are ripe for over-the-counter drugs such as cough medicine. They are ripe for raiding their parents' prescription drugs in their medicine cabinet at home. So I am hoping that we can join together and understand the usage of these drugs, the alcohol in particular. Now, let me make note of the fact that we know that smoking cigarettes or cigarettes and alcohol are legal aspects of potential addiction, but we believe that still the programs that deal with those elements, cigarette smoking, alcohol, are likewise equally involved in the idea of intervention and assessment of what programs work. Let me conclude by simply saying a life saved, a life off the beaten path put on the straight path, is an investment in America's future. I believe this amendment helps us understand how to invest in America's future.

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

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, just this past week I held a press conference at the port in Houston, Texas, the Houston Port Authority, discussing the overall issue of comprehensive security at the Nation's ports. I want to remind the administration that even if you are operating at the ports, you are also privy to security. So I rise today to comment on the so-called brokered deal that suggests that we are now going to allow an American entity to operate the particular purchases that are being made by Dubai Ports. I started out this week by saying this is not to stigmatize the Mideast or the Arab world, it is to question our confidence and commitment to security at our ports. I question this deal. I would like to see how transparent it is. I want a complete transparency or a firewall between any foreign entity and the security of the Nation's ports. It is crucial that we do a study and assessment of how secure our ports are, and I will introduce legislation next week that calls for immediately an assessment of the Nation's ports and how secure they are.