Marcy Kaptur

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, last week when Pope Benedict XVI visited our Nation's Capital and then the United Nations, he inspired America and the world by invoking the moral imperatives of peace, justice and human rights. In greeting the Pope to America, President Bush dusted off his message of ``compassionate conservatism,'' which has lain dormant for 8 years since the Bush-Cheney campaigns of 2000. President Bush said as the Pope sat there, ``Here in America, you will find a Nation of compassion. Americans believe that the measure of a free society is how we treat the weakest and most vulnerable among us.'' The President said, ``So each day citizens across America answer the universal call to feed the hungry and comfort the sick and care for the infirm.'' The President might be correct that American citizens try to fulfill these moral obligations of feeding the hungry and comforting the sick, but they are doing it with no help from his administration. Surely his administration has been conservative, but not compassionate. The United States Government under George W. Bush has turned its back on the hungry. Ask any person who handles a food bank in this Nation. They took one program, the Commodity Supplemental Food Program, and totally eliminated it, a program that feeds our Nation's hungriest. And while food pantries across our Nation are short and donations way down, the President turns a blind eye and utters those false words before the Pope. The United States Government under George W. Bush has turned its back on the sick and the infirm. It was he who vetoed the children's health program and has since failed to provide health care for so many millions of our Nation's children whose families are working but still have no health insurance. If the measure of a President is how his administration has treated the weakest and most vulnerable among us, then George W. Bush has failed the test of that leadership. Here at home we have people converging on food pantries that are not able to cope with the demand. We have young people unable to find summer jobs, find it difficult to get student loans, and even more difficult to get a job to pay them off. We have families that lack health insurance. We have 10 seniors waiting for every one available affordable housing unit. And we have veterans in dilapidated facilities without the proper health care and support they need to rebuild their lives when they return home. This in a land where President Bush says, ``Each of us is willed and each of us is loved.'' Mortgage foreclosures have a death grip on our economy, yet Washington continues to drag its feet on a solution with real bite. An estimated 1.6 million foreclosures occurred in 2007, and as of December, 2.9 million loans were past due, signaling that the worst is in front of us. This means that more than 40 million homeowners are at risk of seeing their property values decline as a result. And by early 2009 as many as 12.5 million homeowners will have no equity in their homes or will owe more than their homes are worth. In fact, America today is experiencing something it never has before, negative net equity in home mortgages. The value of the home is less than what people owe. Where is the Bush administration? I invite the President to Ohio. Help us get these mortgage servicers to a table so we can do workouts. Where is HUD? Where is the Federal Reserve? Where are all these regulatory agencies? Where are they? Where is the President? States and localities are struggling because of the Federal Government's absence in this area of workouts, and municipalities' tax bases may drop as much as $356 billion over the next 2 years, further undermining their ability to provide vital services for strapped residents because their tax bases are going down as a result of declining property values. We have had the largest home equity washout in U.S. history. And what is the Bush response? To transfer $29 billion to bail out Bear Stearns, a Wall Street fast buck operation which is a Federal Reserve favorite and a primary dealer of U.S. Government securities. Yet nothing is done to help the States where these foreclosure crises are going on every day, to help America's families reposition so that they don't lose their major asset. Yes, the Bush administration is conservative, but it is not compassionate. In the Middle East, the Bush invasion of Iraq has yielded over 5 million refugees. The President has done nothing to help those displaced refugees have some semblance of a decent life. A million and a half Iraqis have fled to Syria alone. Mr. Speaker, justice demands more than individual charity. It demands justice of us as a rich and powerful Nation.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Speaker, I rise today, pleased to recognize a milestone anniversary for the Toledo Metropolitan Area Council of Governments, TMACOG, in northwestern Ohio and southeast Michigan. TMACOG celebrates its 40th anniversary this month. When in the early 1960s Federal funds began to go to local governments directly, local leaders from communities in northwest Ohio and southeast Michigan had been meeting informally as the Area Cooperation Committee and building a regional organization. In 1968 the group formally adopted bylaws and elected leadership as TMACOG. Andy Devine, who was then a member of Toledo City Council, was elected to be the first chair. The newly formed executive committee held its first meeting in the council chambers in the city of Oregon, Ohio. In celebration of TMACOG's 40th year, the April 16, 2008, meeting of the TMACOG executive committee will also be held in the city of Oregon. TMACOG's areas of concentration are transportation planning, environmental planning, and commuter services. Looking to the future, member concerns also include alternative energy and energy conservation measures, economic development, and more interest in freight transportation and logistics. TMACOG's vision statement, adopted in 2002, states that ``TMACOG will be the governmental partner of choice to coordinate regional assets, opportunities, and challenges.'' Over the course of four decades, local leaders have looked to the organization to lead the region forward. While we celebrate TMACOG's achievements the past 40 years. we join with the organization to promote a bright future of opportunity and growth.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Speaker, the world is beginning to understand what my constituents have known for far too long, higher food prices and higher commodity prices are destroying prosperity for millions and millions of people here at home and abroad. Whether there is a hungry person in Toledo, Ohio or in Haiti, the rising costs of basic food are really placing the world's marginalized and poor in even a tighter squeeze. Getting in the front of devastation that higher commodity prices can cause is a challenge to all of us. While I am pleased that the leaders of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank have called for half a billion dollars more to feed the poor of the world, I'm deeply troubled that these leaders have pointed to the same tired rhetoric in diagnosing the cause of these rising prices. It's been very interesting for me to hear them say they're blaming higher food prices on the production of ethanol and biodiesel in agricultural America, which is actually a new value-added market for our farmers. It's actually a new market that's taking land that is just laying fallow for years, where we have paid commodity payments and gotten nothing, now we are beginning to reuse some of that land again. The real culprit for rising food prices is rising oil prices. Our world is facing a crisis precipitated by the greater competition for dwindling supplies of world energy that has caused all the prices of basic goods to skyrocket. But instead of dealing with that reality of how oil is embedded in every aspect of life in this country and globally, they're trying to blame this on the new developing market of renewable energy. Yes, under current technology biofuels consume some food stocks for the production of fuel. Corn has been utilized by some ethanol producers, for example. But to claim that biofuels are the cause of rising food prices, that's disingenuous at best. Look to the rising oil prices at over $113 a barrel, and this oil-dependent economy must become energy independent here at home again. And renewable fuels based in agriculture are a part of the solution for this country in the world. Take a look at the rising cost of fertilizer that can be directly attributed to the increasing cost of natural gas and smaller crop sizes. According to the recent Texas A&M Agriculture and Food Policy Center analysis, rising fertilizer costs have led to a $3 million acre reduction in planted corn in the 2006, 2007 crop year. Let's look at another major cause globally of why food prices are going up: Drought. World food production has gone down because in Australia and eastern Europe, and because of poor weather in Canada and western Europe and Ukraine, we've seen overall production reduced. With such world stocks for wheat at 30-year lows, buyers are turning to the United States for supplies. Has the IMF offered suggestions to these nations for dealing with the drought that global warming is causing? No. They're just blaming America's farmers. Higher incomes around the world are boosting demand for processed foods in countries such as India and China. And this higher demand has skyrocketed the need for products produced across the supply chain. Now, has the IMF sought to better manage the uncontrolled growth in developing countries? No. They're just blaming America's farmers. With the U.S. dollar in free fall, American agricultural goods have become extremely attractive internationally and have placed great demand on foodstuff production domestically. With greater competition for food, with more U.S. exports, our weak dollar due to terrible economic policies here at home has decreased the power of Americans to purchase food produced right here in our country. Has the IMF identified the weak dollar as the challenge to millions of Americans faced with food shortages? Of course not. They just blame the U.S. farmer and the new developing market of biofuels. With the price of oil reaching over $110 a barrel, the world's addiction to oil is driving up the production costs of agricultural products. How much do you think it costs to haul a truckload of bell peppers from Salinas Valley in California to Cleveland, Ohio? I cannot accept IMF's wanton attack on the investment in rural America. If we follow their formula, we would not be growing any food domestically. If we were following IMF's advice, we would not be developing the infrastructure and capacity to produce our own renewable energy here at home and help lead the world in a real energy- independent transformation of this country. Madam Speaker, Americans simply must commit to cutting off our oil addiction and restoring energy independence here at home. [From IMF Survey Magazine, Apr. 10, 2008] Food Price Rises Threaten Efforts To Cut Poverty--Strauss-Kahn Higher food prices have particularly adverse effect on the poor. Projections show nearly all African countries suffering food price shocks. IMF Spring Meetings to discuss global strategy on food price crisis. A rise in food prices of 48 percent since end-2006 is a huge increase that may undermine gains the international community has made in reducing proverty, IMF Managing Director Dominique Strauss-Kahn warned. He told an April 10 news conference in Washington that policy responses to higher food prices have to be tailored to meet the needs of each country. Strauss-Kahn said the IMF could take four steps to help address higher food prices in the short term: Support countries in designing appropriate macroeconomic policies to deal with shocks; provide advice and technical assistance for countries where rising food prices are eroding terms of trade, through targeted income support for the poor--without jeopardizing hard-won gains on economic stabilization; in countries where price shocks are affecting the balance of payments, provide assistance through IMF lending facilities, and work, along with other agencies and donors, to help countries mitigate negative impacts. Open trade policies Longer-term answers to the problem of higher food prices centered on removing obstacles to increased supply, Strauss- Kahn said. The IMF cites increased trade as a policy option for mitigating the effects of higher commodity prices on national economies. IMF chief economist Simon Johnson told an April 9 World Economic Outlook briefing: ``As a way to reduce global pressure on food and energy prices, more open trade policies in those products would be a good start. Less insular biofuels policy in advanced economies would help relieve some pressure. At the same time, we encourage countries to avoid raising taxes or imposing quotas on their food exports. These reduce incentives for domestic producers and also increase international prices.'' Impact on inflation IMF research shows that higher prices for food pose new challenges for African policymakers and could have particularly adverse effects on the poor. Because food represents a larger share of what poorer consumers buy, a global increase in food prices has a bigger impact on inflation in poorer countries. IMF studies show the rise in food prices reflecting a mixture of longer-term factors such as food crops being diverted to biofuel production; higher food demand from emerging economies; and higher energy and fertilizer costs. Temporary factors, such as droughts, floods, and political instability, also contributed to higher food prices. Strauss-Kahn displayed a map at the press briefing that showed the impact of projected food price increases on global trade balances. ``Almost all African countries have a negative impact from these food prices,'' Strauss-Kahn told the briefing. A problem in trade balances meant problems in current accounts. Problems in current accounts meant problems that the IMF could help address, he said. New projections on the effects of higher food prices follow publication of a World Bank-IMF report warning that most countries will fall short on the Millennium Development Goals, a set of eight globally agreed development targets that the international community is aiming to achieve by 2015. The report said that though much of the world is set to cut extreme poverty in half by then, prospects are gravest for the goals of reducing child and maternal mortality, with serious shortfalls also likely in primary school completion, nutrition, and sanitation goals. New kind of imbalance In Africa and Asia the effect of higher food prices would have to be seen not only in terms of undermining the efforts to fight against poverty but also as representing a new kind of macroeconomic imbalance, Strauss-Kahn said. For a large part of Africa, a shock could be expected that was as big as, and maybe bigger than, previous shocks. Strauss-Kahn welcomed an initiative launched by U.K. Prime Minister Gordon Brown that urges the IMF, the World Bank, and the United Nations to develop a global strategy to address higher food prices. ``The initiative taken by Gordon Brown is perfectly timely, We need now to consider the rise in food prices as something which is not just happening for one or two months but as probably more structural,'' Strauss-Kahn said. The Brown proposal would probably be on the agenda of the IMF-World Bank Spring Meetings and of the ministerial meeting of the Group of Seven industrial countries, he added.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Speaker, the papers back home tell the story: 25 firefighter jobs advertised, thousands of applicants. Bass Pro Sporting Goods building a new store, 300 jobs, 13,000 applicants, and the applications keep coming in. Yet the Bush administration last week sent Congress another job-killing NAFTA-like trade pact, this time for the South American nation of Colombia. But why Colombia? And why now? The answer to both questions, in a word, is oil. Rather than paying attention to what is happening in this country, again, the Bush administration is focused to a new set of global oil deposits. Why Colombia? In the big picture of global trade, Colombia is relatively insignificant to the United States. So why would the Bush administration make it a top priority in the final year of his presidency? Because oil represents more than half of Colombia's exports to the United States. And nothing drives Bush administration policy more than oil. Ten years ago, Colombia wasn't even exporting oil. It was an oil- importing country. But with the Middle East in turmoil, the Bush administration, like the Clinton administration before it, is doing everything it can to make Colombia safe for oil exports to us. At a time when U.S. relations with Venezuela, South America's leading oil producer, have dropped to an all-time low, Colombia has emerged as the continent's fourth leading supplying supplier. A decade ago, as I mentioned, Colombia was an oil-importing nation. Now, multinational oil companies have made huge investments because of tax favorability in the area of a giant, crescent-shaped, underocean oil field that stretches from Colombia to Peru. This trade agreement is not about cocoa. It is not about coal. It is not about cut flowers. This is an agreement about oil. Buying oil from Colombia piles more oil trade deficit on top of the $800 billion overall trade deficit our Nation has wracked up with nations all over the world. We continue to export jobs at an accelerating rate and import more and more and more from abroad with oil leading the way by far the number one category in the red. As in Middle East, the United States government is pouring billions of dollars into Colombia in the form of military and foreign aid in order to protect the oil companies' investments. Why now? Because the United States is being forced by political realities to relocate its sole defense base in Latin America out of Ecuador, whose president wants it removed from there. And by contrast, the Uribe government in Colombia has welcomed U.S. military involvement, seeing an opportunity to court favor with the Bush administration and the military protection that aid provides for oil exports. Only Israel and Egypt receive more military assistance from the United States. According to Amnesty International, which opposes military aid to Colombia until human rights concerns are addressed, the U.S. contributes approximately $750 million, a quarter of $1 billion, each year. It is estimated that our country has sent Colombia more than $5 billion under the guise of Plan Colombia, with most of the assistance going to the military and police. These parallels with the Middle East are troubling. In both regions, the United States risks its reputation with the ``people on the street'' by mixing economic designs on resources not belonging to us, and then moving defense assets to protect that interest. Yes, average Americans are justifiably upset over rising prices at the pump. A gallon of gasoline now costs as much or more than a gallon of milk. Think about that. But surely the answer to this predicament is not to increase our oil dependence on Colombia. If our citizens saw how our America has dedicated its military assets to back up that oil flow owned by private interests, they would be really enraged. In Latin America, the United States is viewed as anything but the ``Sweet Land of Liberty.'' As in the Middle East, public opinion throughout Latin America has turned strongly negative toward the United States. People to our south view the Bush administration's policies as concerned only with the wealthiest segments of society or their American investment partners and essentially apathetic about democracy for the average person. To achieve the real Alliance For Progress envisioned by John F. Kennedy, our policies should promote democracy and cooperation, not resource exploitation. Why would our government tether itself to a regime that has tolerated the murder of thousands of labor leaders, more than the rest of the countries of the world combined? Already this year, 17 more labor leaders have been assassinated in Colombia. The Bush administration's failure to cure America's oil addiction is no reason to overlook the crimes of impunity that are being committed regularly against organized labor in Colombia. Once again, however, our foreign policy is being held hostage to the demands of an oil-based economy. Haven't we moved beyond the 20th century? The issue is not the U.S. trade relationship with Colombia, but the failure of the Bush administration to make our economy more stable at home by pursuing the important goal of energy independence. Our national leaders should wake up and move us to freedom from imported petroleum. This is a national imperative as serious as our Nation has ever faced. We don't need Colombian oil now. We need energy independence here at home.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, the Bush administration announced this week it will be sending to the Congress for approval the Colombia Free Trade Agreement. And the American people might ask, Colombia? Now? In 2008? What about the District of Columbia and getting gas prices lower here in our Nation's capital? Or what about more fairly priced student loans for the next generation who are attempting to improve their opportunities for the years ahead? Or what about dealing with mortgage foreclosures in the United States, which are at epidemic levels in places like Ohio and Michigan and Florida and California? No. The President sends us something to help another country. ``Colombia Free Trade,'' they call it. Well, I would like to say to the American people tear the veneer off the agreement and look below it, and what you will find is crude. Oil. What this agreement really is about is more imported petroleum from one of the most undemocratic places in the world. Colombia about 10 years ago was actually a net importer of oil. But today it is the fourth leading oil producer in South America. In fact, oil, rock/crude, has become Colombia's leading export product, and guess whom they send most of it to? You've got it right. The United States of America. So what this Colombia Free Trade deal is all about is more imported oil, more dirty crude, more carbon emissions, more dependency of the people of the United States for energy, more living back in the 20th Century than embracing the 21st with energy independence here at home. The oil picture in Colombia is clouded by rapidly declining production because of persistent attacks from people inside Colombia. What no one has mentioned, and the President didn't send it up here in his statement, is our country is already sending billions of dollars to Colombia to hold up the government. Why? To protect certain economic interests, including the rising export of petroleum. This is a graph showing production levels of petroleum in Colombia back since the late 1980s, then up through 2000, when all of a sudden they started to decline because of unrest inside the country itself. Now, it's no secret that there are 18 foreign oil companies in Colombia. Guess what. The majority of their headquarters is located right here in the United States. They have drilling operations in Colombia. California-based Occidental Petroleum launched an attempt to squeeze out of Colombia what oil remains with its discovery in 1983 of the Cano Limon field in the northeastern part of the country. The problem is that particular field produces less than a third of its total as recently as 4 years ago. Its production is going down. British Petroleum, not to be outdone, has been drilling in the eastern plains in the Andes Mountains in the largest field in the country. However, that production has fallen by about two-thirds, and rather than 400,000 barrels a day, they produce about 170,000 barrels. Faced with rapidly declining production, the Colombian Government has taken steps to improve the investment climate in Colombia and giving permission for foreign oil companies to own 100 percent stakes in oil ventures in Colombia. The Government of Colombia also established a lower sliding scale royalty fee, now at 8 percent on the smallest oil fields, and that set of actions have attracted an estimated $2 billion more in foreign investments since 2006. The oil industry is focusing heavily on this country. Entering into the picture is the geopolitical position of Colombia because if we look at the United States having nearly half of their exports, Venezuela is number two, and we all know the difficulties with Venezuela. So there's a little strategic problem here related to the U.S. perception across Latin America. But it's important to tear the veneer off something called ``Colombia Free Trade'' and look at what is actually being traded out of Colombia. While the United States continues to support the violent regime in Colombia, political unrest and political repression continue to cloud the discussion, and declining oil exports prove it. We can go back to 1988 when a car bomb outside of Occidental's nine-story Colombian headquarters in Bogota badly damaged that building. In October, 2000, a truck bomb nearly missed a bus filled with 40 Occidental secretaries and other company employees. And in April, 2001, rebels seized a bus filled with 100 Occidental oil workers. Mr. Speaker, I'm going to include in the Record lots of information about Occidental Petroleum, which is just one example of what's happening in Colombia, and also some of Occidental Petroleum's political influence here in Washington, in the Congress and in the White House. Occidental Petroleum Corporation Occidental Petroleum Corporation is one of the largest U.S.-based oil and gas multinationals, with exploration projects in three states and nine foreign countries, including Colombia. It has operated in Colombia for more than three decades; in 1983, Occidental discovered Cano Limon, Colombia's second-largest oil field and one of only 50 billion-barrel-class fields in the world. Occidental's investment in Cano Limon paid off long ago, with its share of production yielding hundreds of millions of dollars annually. Even through years of rebel attacks and pipeline closings, Cano Limon Field continues to be a profitable venture for Occidental. In recent years, Occidental has simplified its oil and gas operations by focusing its operations in the United States, the Middle East and Latin America. Despite drastic oil price declines in 2001, Occidental Petroleum had its second-best annual earnings ever. Annual sales: $14 billion Annual net income: $1.2 billion. CEO and annual executive salary: Ray Irani, $24 million (six-year average); Forbes Magazine ranked Irani the second- worst among executives who gave shareholders the least return on their investment compared with their own pay. In 2001, Irani's compensation package included free financial planning, country club dues and a $2.6 million bonus. Founded: 1920. Stock: Publicly traded (OXY) on the New York Stock Exchange. Corporate headquarters: Los Angeles. Employees: 8,235. Colombia operations: Occidental owns Cano Limon Field in the province of Aruaca, operates three exploration projects elsewhere in Colombia, and, in 1998, swapped its holdings in the Philippines and Malaysia for Shell Oil's interests in several producing blocks of Colombia. Worldwide holdings: Russia, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Qatar, Oman, Ecuador, the Gulf of Mexico, the United States (Texas, California and Alaska). Worldwide reserves: 2.17 billion barrels of oil. Worldwide annual production: 461,000 barrels of oil per day. Colombia annual production: 34,000 barrels of oil per day in 2002, up 79 percent from the year before. Labor Conditions In addition to sabotaging the physical structure of Occidental's Cano Limon Pipeline, Colombia's rebel groups have attacked, kidnapped and murdered company employees. Employees also have often been caught in the crossfire between the rebels and the military. Not unlike other multinationals in Colombia, Occidental makes it clear with its employees that it will not pay ransom in the event of their kidnapping. With few exceptions, the company hires Colombians from distant cities to work in the danger areas because they are less likely to be knowledgeable about military troop locations or security measures should they fall into the hands of guerrillas. Prospective contractors are rigorously screened by Occidental's psychologists to ferret out spies; workers must show identification cards at a half-dozen security checkpoints; and palm-reading devices restrict access to executive offices. Still, Colombia's rebels have succeeded in breaching the multinational's security on a number of occasions. Watchdog groups have ranked Occidental poorly on human rights after the company pursued a protested oil exploration project in Colombia's cloud forest, home to 5,000 members of the U'wa tribe. In 2000, three children were killed after Occidental called on the military to break up a nonviolent U'wa blockade of the road to the drill site. After years of public pressure protesting Occidental's exploration on ancestral lands, the company announced in May 2002 that it was canceling the project. The company blamed its withdrawal on technical and economic factors, but many believe Occidental caved to negative publicity. Occidental's stand on human rights in Colombia was also tainted after a 1998 air raid of the village of Santo Domingo near the Cano Limon Pipeline. That year, three American pilots of AirScan (a Florida-based security firm that Occidental uses to protect its oil interests from rebel attacks) marked hostile targets for the Colombian military in an antiguerilla operation. The pilots' assistance mistakenly led to the killing of 18 civilians, including nine children. Survivors from the village said the aircraft (U.S.-donated) attacked them as they ran out of their homes to a nearby road with their hands in the air. The Colombian government is still investigating. occidental influence on capitol hill not neutral Between 1996 and 2000, Occidental spent more than $8.6 million lobbying the U.S. government, including for U.S. military aid to Colombia. In the 2000 election cycle, the company gave hard and soft money totaling about $551,000, with about 60 percent going to Republican candidates and political action committees. The CEO of Occidental's chemical subsidiary, J. Roger Hirl, raised more than $100,000 in support of George W. Bush's bid for the presidency. Occidental also has maintained links to the Democratic Party for many years, primarily through former Vice President Al Gore's father, the late Al Gore Sr., who after leaving the Senate took a $500,000-a-year job with an Occidental subsidiary, then served on the company board for 28 years. When the younger Gore joined Clinton's ticket in 1992, Occidental loaned the Presidential Inauguration Committee $100,000 to help pay for the ceremony. And after Gore took office, the company gave nearly $500,000 in soft money to Democratic committees and causes. In late 1997, the former vice president championed a $3.65 billion sale to Occidental of the government's stake in Elk Hills Oil Field (California), representing the largest privatization of federal property in U.S. history. In 1998, when his father died, Gore inherited about $500,000 worth of Occidental stock.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, next week, the chief commander of U.S. forces in Iraq will be up here before Congress, General David Petraeus, and he will be reporting on the conduct of the war. I can remember about a year ago, quite a large delegation from our defense subcommittee spent some time with General Petraeus in Iraq; and one statement that he made at that time remains in my mind, and I have shared it with every audience I have gone before. He said, Victory equals one-third military and two-thirds good governance and diplomacy. The two-thirds is missing. Victory equals one-third military and two-thirds good governance and diplomacy and the two-thirds is missing in Iraq. So where does that place our soldiers? I have asked myself that every single minute of every single day since that discussion. The good governance and the diplomacy are nowhere. The President of our country says, Well, I'm going to listen to my commanders in theater. No, no. President Bush is the Commander in Chief. The military is doing their job, but they can only do one-third of the job. The other two-thirds rests on the top political leadership of this country, and they, and I would include every person in this room, and we have not done our jobs because the political equation, the good governance and diplomacy piece, is totally missing. And so more soldiers die, more Iraqis die, and what is the vision? What is the vision for ultimate victory and exit of our troops? There isn't any. The President said mission was accomplished. No, the mission was just begun, but there is no end game. Within Iraq, we have a corrupt and incapable state. They have billions of dollars in their budget unspent, our money, their money from oil. They're not spending it, yet the American people are going to be asked to appropriate another $170 billion here? Think about it, my friends. Within Iraq, we broke the State. In Iraq, 2\1/2\ million people thrown out of their homes within the country and another 2\1/2\ million fleeing for their lives to Syria, to Jordan. And you know what? They will never be citizens of those countries. They're guests. They're actually refugees. We saw what happened with the Palestinians post- World War II. 600,000 of them still a refugee population with no homeland. And look at the difficulty that has caused the world. So you say, Well, what is the mission? Are we winning the war on terrorism? Is America any more secure? Well, we are having trouble in Afghanistan. The President had to beg NATO for more forces in Afghanistan. We've now got over 40,000 troops there. The situation there is not getting any better. And Pakistan, at the provincial level, the worst elements are being elected. Maybe that isn't the right adjective. But those that are most anti-American are being elected. There's trouble between Afghanistan and Pakistan at the border in those provinces. We don't have a solution there. And Turkey, our closest ally in NATO for years. What is happening with elections at the provincial level there, mayors and so forth? The most anti-American individuals are being elected. That is true in Pakistan at the provincial level. So you can say all you want to say about winning this war on terrorism, but how do you win a war when the majority of the people turn against this country? And you say to our military, You fix it. You fix it. General Petraeus' testimony up here next week simply isn't enough. We need to hear from the President of the United States, not just passing the buck to, Well, let the generals tell me what to do. No. What is he going to do to accomplish this mission and bring our troops home and begin to repair the image of the United States across a vast growing region of the world where we are losing friends every day from North Africa, from Egypt, all the way through to Pakistan and Afghanistan? What are we going to do to correct the damage that is producing more terrorists, more anti-Americanism and less resolution? Don't just place this burden on the backs of our brilliant military. They have been asked to do everything this President has sent them to do. But as General Petraeus wisely told us a year ago, victory means one-third military and two-thirds good governance and diplomacy, and the two-thirds is missing and it has been missing and it is missing. What can we do? Why didn't the President take two of our exemplary ambassadors, people like Zbigniew Brzezinski and James Baker, put them on the same airplane, send them over to Iraq, work with the neighboring countries of Iraq, give us a date certain in order to begin redeploying forces to an over-the-horizon position? Give us a time: 6 months, 1 year, 1 year and 3 months? Let's have a plan. There is no plan. The only plan is to send more troops to keep extending deployments to put more burden on our military, to ask our Marines to become civilian officials within that country with the civilian workload when they're trying to be a strike force. What kind of solution is that? It's asking too much of our military. Let's give them the respect they're due but ask the person in charge as Commander in Chief to give America the plan for victory and ultimate redeployment from that region and building back the kind of friendships with adjoining nations that will not give our children and grandchildren the burden of fighting terrorism two decades or more down the road.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Speaker, The Politico, a newspaper that is published and distributed here in the Congress, has an article today about how hard the Democrats are working to address the housing stimulus plan that the American people are waiting for. In places like Ohio, the mortgage foreclosure rate is at all-time highs, and Washington seems to be frozen. There was a program passed here that I voted for for housing counseling to try to help workouts a few months ago; and then I learned that, in a community as hard struck as northern Ohio is, it yielded $60,000. $60,000 in a region where hundreds and hundreds of people are losing their homes. Washington doesn't seem to be able to match the reality of what is happening across this country. A newspaper today reports that Senator Chris Dodd from the other body stated that ``Congress needs cooperation. This is not a partisan issue. Our economy is in trouble. We need people to step up and recognize it is Americans that are at risk, and it is America that is at risk.'' The figures state that in another sign of distressed housing markets, home equity dipped below 50 percent, an historic low for our Nation. Home mortgage volume fell by 17.5 percent last quarter, and pending home sales also are reaching new lows. We know what the reality is. And yet today, all the major papers had lead stories about the resignation of the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, Mr. Alphonso Jackson. USA Today reports: ``HUD chief departure a blow to President. ``For the first time in President Bush's tenure, one of his Cabinet members is stepping down amid a criminal investigation.'' The article continues: ``The FBI has been investigating the ties between Mr. Jackson and a friend who was paid $392,000 by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development as a construction manager in New Orleans, according to the Associated Press.'' It is quite a long story about that resignation. And then in the Washington Post, the same sort of story, ``Jackson Resigns as HUD Secretary, Longtime Bush Friend is Facing Cronyism Investigation.'' Mr. Jackson announced his resignation yesterday, leaving the Bush administration without a top housing official in the midst of this vast mortgage crisis which has shaken not just the American economy but the global economy. The New York Times lead editorial today: ``Put the Housing Back in HUD.'' Boy, can we underline that. It talks about what a sad commentary it is on the Bush administration's low regard for HUD's mission that Mr. Jackson was permitted to remain in office for so long. And it points out in 2006, an inspector general's report found Mr. Jackson had urged his staff members to favor Mr. Bush's supporters when it awarded contracts. And more recently, the Philadelphia Housing Authority sued Mr. Jackson, charging he had threatened to take away $50 million from that authority because its president would not turn over valuable property to a developer with ties to Mr. Jackson. He has refused to answer the Senate's questions about the matter, and the Times ends with this admonition: ``Mr. Jackson's resignation clears the way for President Bush to name a top caliber successor, given the seriousness of the mortgage crisis.'' It should also be an occasion to reflect on the cost of appointing HUD secretaries whose priorities are politics and patronage rather than housing and urban development, which was the mission of HUD from the very beginning. We are celebrating the 40th anniversary of the Kerner Commission Report; and as we look at the disaster we are facing in housing across this country that demands a national response, to have the major official here in our Nation's capital have to step down under a cloud of wrongdoing, and to have no one in place, a team of people who can really reach out to the American people and help as many of them as possible hold onto their largest form of savings, which is their home, is an absolute national disgrace. It seems like the organizations that are here in our Nation's capital aren't really serious about helping the American people to hold onto their most prized possession after their family, their home, for heaven's sake. You really wonder what has been going on inside that administration, what has been going on on Wall Street with people walking away with tens of millions of dollars in fees, and the American people's equity just being washed down the drain. I recommend to the President that he go beyond appointing a person of high repute to the office of Secretary of HUD and have a strike team in the White House that can deal with every region of this country being so hard hit in this mortgage crisis. Madam Speaker, I will include the articles for the Record. [From the USA Today, Apr. 1, 2008] HUD Chief Departure a Blow to President (By David Jackson) Washington.--For the first time in President Bush's tenure, one of his Cabinet members is stepping down amid a criminal investigation. Housing Secretary Alphonso Jackson, a longtime Bush ally from Texas, said Monday he'll leave his post on April 18. He announced his departure on the fourth anniversary of his Senate confirmation. The FBI has been investigating the ties between Jackson and a friend who was paid $392,000 by the U.S. Housing and Urban Development Department as a construction manager in New Orleans, according to the Associated Press. Jackson's friend got the job after Jackson allegedly asked a HUD staffer to pass along his name to the Housing Authority of New Orleans. Other Bush Cabinet members, such as former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, have left office under political clouds. But Jackson, 62, is the highest ranking Bush official to depart in this manner. Last June, former deputy Interior secretary Steven Griles was convicted and sent to prison for lying to a congressional panel about the access and favors he gave to lobbyist Jack Abramoff. James Thurber, who directs the Center for Congressional and Presidential Studies at American University, said Jackson's resignation is not good news for Bush as he seeks political leverage with Congress and tries to stay relevant during an intense presidential campaign to succeed him. ``This is the last thing that he needs,'' Thurber said. Separately, Jackson and HUD still face a federal lawsuit by the Philadelphia Housing Authority, accusing Jackson of retaliating against that agency because it refused to turn over land to one of his developer friends. Carl Greene, executive director of the Philadelphia agency, told USA TODAY that Jackson ``orchestrated a series of procedural and enforcement actions'' designed to deprive his agency of federal funds. Greene said his lawyers still may want to question Jackson, but his main goal is to get the department ``to allow us to continue carrying out our mission.'' HUD official Mark Studdert said in a March 19 letter the federal government was not retaliating against the Philadelphia agency, but was citing it for not being in compliance with federal law on tenants with physical disabilities. Jackson did not mention the federal investigation or the lawsuit during his brief announcement. ``There comes a time when one must attend diligently to personal and family matters,'' said Jackson, without taking questions from reporters. The resignation came 10 days after Democratic Sens. Patty Murray of Washington and Chris Dodd of Connecticut urged Bush to remove Jackson, citing ``the clouds of justice Department investigations and reports of an empanelled grand jury'' at a time of nationwide mortgage failures. Bush, who flew early Monday to Kiev, Ukraine, issued a statement saying he accepted Jackson's resignation with regret. A friend of Jackson since they both lived in Dallas in the early 1990s, Bush said, ``I have known him to be a strong leader and a good man.'' In 2006, the Dallas Business Journal reported Jackson said that he rejected a contract with one man who told him he did not like Bush. That led to a report by the HUD inspector general that Jackson told employees to consider political affiliation when deciding contracts. The inspector general said there was no evidence that contracts were actually awarded on such a basis. Jackson told the inspector general that the report of his comments in Dallas was not true.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, the American people are desperately struggling to understand why our Federal Government is ignoring their economic plight. The average price of gasoline now sits at $3.28 and it is rising. Only a month ago, Americans paid $3.16. A year ago, they paid $2.67. Months away from the peak of the summer driving season, the American people can expect to see this trend get only worse. In 1996, the United States began its plunge into nearly total dependence on imported petroleum. With 10 years of oil deficits continuing to plague our economy, we have spent too much time talking and not enough time acting. Our lack of energy independence translates into a true loss of liberty. Since the Bush administration assumed office, our Nation is importing a billion more barrels of petroleum a year. A billion barrels more. By 2007, the trade deficit of oil imports had risen to $293 billion, accounting for a third, over a third, of the total $815 billion U.S. trade deficit. This last statistic is truly sobering. But for this year of 2008, 51 percent of the total U.S. trade deficit, over half, is now the result of imported oil. Over half of our structural trade deficit flows directly from the increasing cost of oil. Again, this equals dependence for America, not independence. It is an abrogation of our birthright as a Nation to allow us to continue in this position. Based on 2007 numbers, the United States is adding $808 million a day to the trade deficit just from our imbalance in oil. The rising cost of oil added an estimated $50 billion to the Nation's trade deficit in 2006 and, on top of that, another $28 billion in 2007. Our country imported 4.8 billion barrels of oil in total energy- related products in 2007 valued at $319 billion. Imagine if we would have been able to spend those dollars here at home what an injection that would be into this economy with the value of the dollar falling, so much related to imports, the economy tanking, the housing market in freefall and Americans feeling the true pinch of all of this. Our government here in Washington has not provided the leadership needed to end this plunge into national subservience. The solution is clear: energy independence now. First, we have to look to our natural resources and pass a good farm bill to unleash the power of the earth and nature as a key part of the solution. And while there has been plenty of talk from our President about energy independence, the insistence on vetoing a bill, that does not live within artificial budget limits that he has declared, is an absurdity that threatens to destroy our progress. A good farm bill invests in rural America, providing an investment in infrastructure and research, including the energy technologies of tomorrow. Second, we must continue to rely on the advanced research technology organized by the National Renewable Energy Lab and give this lab the resources to define and help redefine our new energy future. We need no less a commitment than we envisioned when we created NASA and space exploration. With that came security, and now we need energy security. It is that high a priority. This Congress, this President should be working to that end. And third, we must pass legislation to fund the energy bill that passed the House last year, and then again this year, and call on our brethren in the other body to take action. Unless we commit to providing leadership to transform our economy, this discussion remains the rhetoric of the last century really leaving us with a confused and unfulfilled daydream that has repeated itself for the last three decades. As the American people face $4 gasoline and see our wealth drained from us, we must take a new course. We are past the point of words. Real deeds are required. And we must stop our economic hemorrhaging and begin investing in our own Midwest, in our own country, not the Middle East, and pass on a free republic to our posterity worthy of the sacrifices of our founders and all those who gave their all in freedom's cause. Liberty's call in this new century demands energy independence now.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Continuing my reservation, most of the information that I have ever sought relating to intelligence, one can ask special permission. You can go up to the room in the Capitol and you can read anything. You can read for days. I really don't understand what the minority is doing here tonight. I am not comfortable with this at all. We had caucus meetings this week. This never came up. I understand under the rules you can ask for it and it can come up almost immediately, but I just am extraordinarily uncomfortable with being asked to hold this session tonight. I won't attend, and I think there is special responsibility on the gentleman for providing documentation in the regular channels in the Intelligence Committee and in the other committees that have oversight over intelligence for the information that you claim you are going to be presenting to this Chamber. I would just urge our leadership to not approve this. Madam Speaker, I withdraw my reservation for the moment.

Ms. KAPTUR. I yield to the gentleman from Missouri.

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Speaker, reserving the right to object, and I likely will object, in my 26th year in the House I guess first I look at the clock. It is Thursday night, almost 7 p.m. here in Washington. We have been in session all week long. We knew that FISA would be coming up. Now at this moment a secret session is requested. As a member of one of the key committees in the House, the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, whatever is so secret has never been discussed in our subcommittee. We have been having repeated meetings every day for the last several weeks. I don't know if this has come up before our Intelligence Committee. I notice that most of the people who are asking are not ranking members on some of our key committees dealing with the oversight of intelligence in our country, and that makes me wonder why on Thursday night, when people have had to change their plane reservations, this is coming up now. I ask myself, is there any imminent danger to our country that would require such a secret session now, and why is the gentleman asking and not the minority leader asking, if it is so imminent and it is so much a threat?

Ms. KAPTUR. I reserve the right to object, Madam Speaker.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Speaker, the attached article is submitted at the request of the American Center of Polish Culture. [Excerpts from The World of the Watchers by Edward Pinkowski] Introduction Almost a century after it was created, the equestrian statue of General Casimir Pulaski in Washington, D.C., has overshadowed discussion of many subjects, For example, very few are familiar with the Polish roots of Frank C. Watcher, who was elected in Baltimore, Maryland, as a Republican to the 56th Congress in 1898 and was reelected three successive times. None of the other congressmen then had a drop of Polish blood. When Abraham L. Brick, who came from South Bend, Indiana, to Washington at the same time as Watcher, introduced a bill for the erection of the monument to Pulaski, Watcher saw that it had little support. He realized that if he didn't speak out, none of his colleagues would pay attention to the bill to honor the Polish hero of the American Revolution. He was known as an efficacious man, with a cheerful smile, who easily won others to his side. ``On the last day of the session the Speaker of the House brought it up for consideration,'' he told a reporter of the Baltimore Sun in 1902. ``The bill passed.'' It took years after that for the federal government to set up a commission, find a site for the Pulaski monument in the nation's capital, and work out the rest of the details. The sculptor was Kazimierz Chodzinski, who had studied under the famous Matejko in Krakow, Poland, and was the one who carved the Kosciuszko statue before in Chicago. When his equestrian statue of Pulaski was unveiled in 1910, critics said it was the best they ever saw. City of Baltimore Frank Charles Watcher was born September 16, 1861, in South Baltimore, where the Baltimore and Ohio company built the largest railroad station in the world in 1852 and the stockyards butchered more hogs than any other city on the Atlantic coast. Built on the Patapsco River not far from the Watcher home, Fort McHenry, which Francis Scott Key immortalized in the Star Spangled Banner, was used in the 1860s to hold thousands of Confederate prisoners of war. When he was growing up, Frank Watcher dreamed of being a tailor like his father. Upon graduation from St. Paul's German English School, however, he got a job as a clerk for $1.50 a week in a clothing store. In time, because of his energy, determination, and brains, he managed a business. Political Career The first important campaign of his life came in 1898 when he received the Republican nomination for Congress. Nobody expected him to win. One of the issues in his favor was immigration. The Democratic Party, largely in Irish hands, was against new immigration because the immigrants who came mostly from Poland and Italy were taking the places of Irish workers in mines and factories and working for less money. In the coming election, the Polish citizens of Baltimore, most of whom previously supported Democrats, voted in large part for Watcher. He was elected to the Fifty-sixth Congress by a majority of 122 votes. Watcher ran again two years later and won by more than 2,071 votes. After three terms in Washington, he ran for mayor of Baltimore. He won in the primaries and lost in the general election by less than 500 votes. His family was at his bedside when he died on July 1, 1910. His body was followed to Loudon Park Cemetery by a long cortege of political and business associates. The honorary pall bearers included Speaker of the House Joseph G. Cannon.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize the Very Reverend Father Venseslav Dimitroff of Toledo, Ohio. The Very Reverend Father Venseslav Dimitroff, a wise and faithful servant who shepherded his family and his community around the world, departed this life on Wednesday, February 27, 2008. A beacon of hope and service to his Toledo community, he will be sincerely missed by all. He was born on July 12, 1923, in Bourgas, Bulgaria. He spent his early childhood in Edirne, Turkey where his late father, the Very Reverend Mihail Dimitroff was the principal of the former ``Peter Beron'' Bulgarian high school and his mother, the late Ekaterina, a teacher. His family moved to Plovdiv, Bulgaria, when he was 7 years old and he stayed there until 1944, few days before the Communist takeover of the country. He had to leave his homeland again and move to Istanbul, Turkey. He served in the Turkish Military for 4 years. He married Marina Veneziani on November 7, 1955, at Sveti Stefan Bulgarian Church where his father had become an Orthodox priest. He was ordained to the priesthood himself in March of 1961 by the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate of Constantinople. He was elevated to Cross-bearing Archpriest in May of 1973 by the Patriarch Maxim of Bulgaria. He served at St. John of Rila Church in the Bulgarian Exarchate in Istanbul until July of 1975. At the invitation of the late Archbishop Kyrill Yonchev and the late Mrs. Pena Evanoff, one of the founders of the St. George Bulgarian Church in Toledo, Ohio, he immigrated to the United States in August of 1975. He served the small immigrant church community until his retirement in August of 1995. Father Dimitroff was a very friendly person who enjoyed talking to people from all walks of life. He loved reading, especially Balkan history and politics, and was an avid soccer fan who loved watching all kinds of sports on television. He beautified his home and community by being a masterful gardener. His church housed a lush gorgeous garden full of flowers, especially tulips and roses. In the summer of 1992 he fulfilled a dream to return to Bulgaria for a visit to his brother after a 48-year separation. Four years later, in 1996, through the generous hospitality of Mr. and Mrs. George Lutikoff, he was able to revisit his family in his beloved Istanbul to spend a wonderful vacation among the members of the Bulgarian community residing there. It is with the deepest appreciation that I pay tribute to the long life of a good, patient and kind man, the Very Reverend Father Venseslav Dimitroff. He lived his years in service to his family, friends, and our Toledo community. May God welcome ``Ven'' home; a good and faithful servant. May He shower him royally with blessings into eternity and bestow upon him a loving peace.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Speaker, since 2000, our Nation has lost over 3,400,000 more manufacturing jobs. In fact, the job creation record of the Bush administration is the worst since the Hoover administration. The figures released by the U.S. Department of Labor last week posted the largest job loss in 5 years. The report was much weaker than expected, and, strangely, the unemployment rate declined because there were fewer people in the workforce. CNN's Moneyline reported that employers made their deepest cuts in staffing in almost 5 years in February. There was a net loss of 63,000 more jobs, which is the biggest decline since March 2003, and weaker than the revised 22,000 job loss reported for January. The job loss was widespread, reaching beyond the battered construction industry, which lost 39,000 jobs, and manufacturing, where job losses hit 52,000. Retailers cut 34,000 jobs while business and professional service cut 20,000 jobs. Temporary staffing firms cut nearly 28,000 jobs off their payrolls, another warning sign of employers pulling back, and hotels cut about 4,000 jobs, a sign that discretionary consumer spending could be on the wane. Overall, the private sector cut over 101,000 jobs according to the CNN Moneyline report. The widening recession in almost every sector, not just the goods- producing sector, is extraordinarily important. I wish to place those numbers in the Record and say, Madam Speaker, America needs to create more real wealth here at home and stop borrowing prosperity and piling on more debt. We need to create jobs leading to energy independence in this country. We need to do more than just sort of flash our hand at that and be serious about it. We need new transportation systems in our country. We need new bridges in the ground. We need people to be employed, those who now are idle labor, in helping to build back our economy from coast to coast. A real stimulus package would lead our Nation to invest here at home, not just to borrow more from abroad. These numbers are serious omens. They're warning signs to those who have responsibility here in Washington to do more than manipulate interest rates. They would engage this Congress in an effort to build forward again in those sectors that would leave future generations real wealth, the kind of wealth that our ancestors left us: libraries, schools, highways, bridges, new energy systems, clean water systems, new transportation systems, new high- speed rail, new air control towers; the kind of wealth that can't be outsourced that belongs to the American people for generations to come. Madam Speaker, I place in the Record the figures from the CNN Moneyline report about what happened with the biggest job loss in 5 years in this past quarter. Jobs Post Biggest Drop in 5 Years (By Chris Isidore) New York.--Employers made their deepest cut in staffing in almost five years in February, according to a closely watched government report Friday that showed the labor market far weaker than expected, fueling already building recession fears. There was a net loss of 63,000 jobs, according to the Labor Department, which is the biggest decline since March 2003 and weaker than the revised 22,000 job loss reported for January. Economists surveyed by Briefing.com had forecast a gain of 25,000 jobs in the most recent reading. The job loss was widespread, reaching beyond the battered construction sector, which lost 39,000 and manufacturing, where job losses hit 52,000. Retailers cut 34,000 jobs, while business and professional services cut 20,000 jobs. Temporary staffing firms cut nearly 28,000 jobs off their payrolls, another warning sign of employers pulling back, and hotels cut about 4,000 jobs, a sign that discretionary consumer spending could be on the wane. Overall the private sector cut 101,000 jobs, with only a gain in government employment limiting losses. Despite the job loss, the unemployment improved to 4.8% from the 4.9% reading in January. Economists had forecast the unemployment rate would rise to 5%. The rate fell because of a big jump in the number of people that the government counted as no longer in the labor force. The labor market has weakened significantly in recent months, prompting fears of recession along with a $170 billion economic stimulus package and a series of interest rate cuts from the Federal Reserve. The Fed is next set to meet March 18 to consider what to do with interest rates. Friday's report would seem to suggest more rate cuts are on the way, despite the improved unemployment rate.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I am delighted that yesterday Congress was able to pass the long overdue Paul Wellstone Mental Health and Addiction Equity Act, finally vowing to end the discrepancy of health care and treatment available to patients with mental illness and addiction disorders. I commend Mr. Kennedy and Mr. Ramstad for their steadfast and courageous efforts to bring this bill, and even more so, this issue, to the forefront of this Congress. This bill seeks to establish parity in coverage between mental health care and other forms of health care, ensuring greater access to treatment. There are countless stories of Americans, including my own constituents in Ohio's 9th District, who are struggling not only with their mental illness, but with the costs of trying to treat it. Our local jails are jammed with inmates who present with serious mental illness as our sheriffs become innkeepers for the untreated mentally ill. Mental illness affects the majority of homeless in our Nation. Treating those who suffer from these cruel illnesses is long overdue. Following are accounts that show a striking difference among my constituents (whose names have been changed for privacy reasons) who have the necessary health coverage to help mange their illness, with those who do not. Carol is a young woman not yet 30 years old, who had managed to hide her paranoid schizophrenia for several years with treatment until a recent breakdown exposed it in a very public way. She'd lost her job-- and thus her health insurance--and was struggling. She had no way to afford COBRA payments, and without health insurance, had to stop treatment. The voices in her head told her to eat bananas and drink beer, and then to drive. After following these instructions, she was picked up by the local police for driving under the influence. It was then that her parents became aware of her true condition. Because she had no health insurance, they could not find a place which would admit her for proper treatment. Her court case for the DUI was placed on suspension because, in her state of psychotic crisis, she could not participate in her own defense. Her parents finally found a counselor through the community mental health system, but her medical bills continue to mount. Mary's situation is similarly devastating. A single mother raising four children, Mary works in a job which does not offer health insurance. Although she has purchased a private policy, it is very limited and has additional restrictions on mental health care. Mary's teenage son began to experience severe mental health problems and was diagnosed with schizophrenia. She found care in a private facility, but reached her insurance limit quickly. Now without the ability to pay for his care, she has found it very difficult to successfully continue his treatment. He has since encountered legal difficulty, and has been placed in a juvenile justice center. With comprehensive health coverage, Bob's situation is much more fortunate, and a model for how things should be. Bob is a professional with a well-paying job and a young family. However, a crisis sent him into a downward spiral ending in depression. His full insurance coverage afforded him the ability to ``shop around'' as they struggled to find him proper treatment. Bob eventually sought help through a private inpatient treatment facility. Following his stay, he and his family have continued the intensive therapy he was prescribed, which has enabled him to return to a life of productivity and has restored a sense of normalcy in his family. The Paul Wellstone Mental Health and Addiction Equity Act will go a long way in ensuring that there are more success stories like Bob's, and fewer situations like that of Carol and Mary. And, by breaking down the barriers to treatment, this bill will also help erase the unfortunate stigma that prevents those in need of mental health and addiction treatment from seeking the care they need. The Wellstone bill moves America forward and brings hope to millions who know the scourge of mental illness.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, when asked about the possibility of gas going up to $4 a gallon, the President of the United States and leader of the free world said, ``That's interesting. I hadn't heard that.'' Yes, gas prices are predicted to top $4 a gallon, and the leader of the free world doesn't even know? Something is clearly wrong. Mr. Speaker, with an economy based on the fuel of yesterday, America needs new vision and leadership. We cannot rely on leaders who don't know what most Americans understand and are living every day, that our oil economy is based on borrowed time that is fast running out. Let's think about these numbers. A recent Congressional Research Service paper summarized the point clearly. Researchers predict that a 10 percent increase in oil prices lowers economic growth in our country by a quarter point to a little over a point over the next four quarters, compared to a flat growth rate for oil prices. When President Bush took office, gasoline cost 1.45 a gallon. Today gasoline averages $3.17 a gallon, with some analysts saying the price could reach $4 a gallon. Californians already know that. The American people don't need the Congressional Research Service to do the math to understand what this means, but let's run the numbers just for the sake of argument. During Bush's tenure in office, the average price of gasoline has increased over 218 percent; not 10 percent, 218 percent. With researchers predicting that a one quarter increase of 10 percent in oil prices leads to an economic contraction of a quarter percent to 1.1 percent for the following four quarters, the American people can only imagine what a 218 percent increase has meant for the American consumer over the last 7 years. It is profound. In rough terms, the Bush economic stewardship plan has driven our economy into a tailspin. Our economy is in trouble. It needs rescuing. And our top leader doesn't even know prices could reach $4 a gallon? We should have learned something from the first Arab oil embargo of the 1970s when the United States suffered both high unemployment and rampant inflation. President Reagan called it the misery index. Don't we remember that misery? It's being exacted on the American people again. The rising prices of oil imports in 2006 and 2007 alone accounted for over $70 billion of our mammoth trade deficit. The global savings glut is being driven largely by the transfer of wealth from our country and western democracies to the oil rich kingdoms of the Middle East, and this imbalance continues to grow, and our people continue to suffer more. The dollar declines. It's very clear what's happening. Gasoline prices are destroying the economic gains of our economy every day, pushing up our trade deficit and making America less competitive on the global market. Every paper you open up there are layoffs in community after community after community, coast to coast, and people are losing their homes at greater rates. Without a course correction, the next generation will never be able to compete. Energy legislation this House considered last week is a step in the right direction, and the other body ought to pass it quickly. But it is only a step. This is the time for America to redouble our efforts and invest in an energy-independent future that uses geothermal, wind, biomass, solar, advanced vehicle research, new fuels of all kinds and new vehicles, developing the technologies of tomorrow for this new century. America needs energy independence now, not in 2025, not even in 2015. We need every single elected official at the national level to be committed to energy independence now. We need a change in this Capitol city. We need a change in the White House, and we need people elected to this Congress who will save America from ruin because of the terrible toll that rising oil prices are having on the innards of this economy, in every borough, in every hamlet, in every city, in every town across this country. It is high time America moved from the carbon-based economy into the carbohydrate economy, and we can't do it fast enough. The sun waits to be captured. The wind across our plains needs to be put to new use, and it is renewable. It was given to us as a precious gift. We ought to use it. And we need to have elected officials who are committed to this great American quest in this new American century.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Speaker, the favorite question of political pollsters of late is the benchmark right direction/wrong direction question: ``Do you think our country is headed in the right direction or the wrong direction?'' This year, most people say ``wrong direction,'' and the reason is because our jobs are headed in the wrong direction. There is a new report out by AMTAC, the American Manufacturing Trade Action Coalition, that details the extent of the job loss in Ohio, the State I represent, just since 2000. The job washout in Ohio over the past 7 years is the worst since the Great Depression. The damage to Ohio's economy has been concentrated in the manufacturing sector. Our farmers are currently enjoying record high prices for corn, soybeans, wheat, and eggs. But manufacturing is a different story. It is the story of lost strength and of lost independence. It is the story of one of America's largest States teetering on the precipice. And the situation in Michigan is even more dire. Our Nation has lost 3.4 million jobs in manufacturing and another 700,000 in the information sector since the beginning of the Bush administration. In the past 7 years, total nonfarm employment in Ohio has declined by 3.7 percent, a loss of over 209,400 jobs, according to Dr. Charles McMillion, author of the report. In the manufacturing sector, Ohio has lost over 236,000 jobs, most of those good-paying jobs with good benefits. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, manufacturing employment in Ohio dropped from 1 million jobs at the end of 2000 to 777,200 jobs at the end of 2007. That loss of 236,000 manufacturing jobs represents a 23.3 percent drop in employment. Put another way, almost a quarter of the manufacturing jobs in Ohio have disappeared in the last 7 years. Only three of Ohio's metropolitan areas added jobs over the past 3 years, and none of them even matched the 4.3 percent overall U.S. job growth, which, by the way, is the weakest 7-year period since the mid-1940s demobilization after World War II. Akron has the best recent record in Ohio, adding 4.1 percent to its job base. Then came Cincinnati and Columbus at 2 percent or less. I am going to place in the Record the job casualties in Ohio by metropolitan statistical area, and I would invite all of the candidates running for President to get off of their high horses and all these stage crowd rallies and come to us, to travel with the delegation from Ohio to places like Cleveland, Elyria, and Mentor which have lost over 48,800 manufacturing jobs. Or to Youngstown/Warren that has lost over 14,000; or to Steubenville/Weirton, West Virginia, over 3,800 jobs; or to Sandusky, which I represent, having lost 3,500 manufacturing jobs. There you have it. That's why people in Ohio say the country is headed in the wrong direction. And why is this happening, why has Ohio lost more than a quarter of a million manufacturing jobs? The main reason, according to Auggie Tantillo, executive director of AMTAC, is the Bush administration's failed trade policies, and I might say the prior administration's as well, and the flood of imported products from everywhere in the world: China, Mexico, Indonesia, and Malaysia. The U.S. imported $1.37 trillion in manufactured goods in 2007 alone, and we incurred a trade deficit in manufacturing of half a trillion dollars. This is not the hallmark of a strong economy. This is not characteristic of an independent people. And Communist China accounted for more than 50 percent of that half-trillion-dollar deficit in manufactured goods. According to AMTAC, America can't keep running on its China credit card to buy foreign manufactured goods. We need to make things here. We need to be a production economy, not just a finance economy. We have to restart our manufacturing engine. According to Dr. McMillion, the author of the AMTAC report, the jobs data tell only one important part of Ohio's past-7-year economic story, yet these record job losses bear strong witness to the depressing effects of record trade deficits and the loss of U.S. production that they represent. Another key part of Ohio's past-7-year economic history is the unprecedented level of household and Federal debt that even in Ohio played a vital role in moderating the effects of import competition, outsourcing, and job loss. With the soaring engine of household debt now sputtering and debt service payments rising, strong industrial and trade policies seem urgently needed to halt Ohio's further decline. The candidates coming through Ohio keep wondering: What do Ohioans care about? They care about job creation in the United States of America. They care about exporting goods, not jobs. They care about independence for America and the future of good jobs with good wages. The favorite question of political pollsters is the benchmark right direction/wrong direction question. ``Do you think the country is headed in the right direction or wrong direction.'' This year, most people say ``wrong direction,'' and the reason is because our jobs are headed in the wrong direction. There's a new report out by the American Manufacturing Trade Action Coalition (AMTAC) that details the extent of the job loss in Ohio since 2000. The job washout in Ohio over the past 7 years is the worst since the Great Depression. The damage to Ohio's economy has been concentrated in the manufacturing sector. Our farmers are currently enjoying record high prices for corn, soybeans, wheat and eggs. But manufacturing is a different story. It's the story of lost strength and the loss of independence. It is the story of one of America's largest states, teetering on the precipice. (And the situation in Michigan is even more dire.) Our Nation has lost 3.4 million jobs in manufacturing and another 700,000 in the information sector since the beginning of the Bush administration. In the past 7 years, total non-farm employment in Ohio has declined by 3.7 percent, a loss of 209,400 jobs, according to Dr. Charles McMillion, author of the report. In the manufacturing sector, Ohio has lost 236,000 jobs--many of them good paying jobs with good benefits. According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, manufacturing employment in Ohio dropped from 1.01 million jobs at the end of 2000 to 777,200 at the end of 2007. That loss of 236,000 manufacturing jobs represents a 23.3 percent decline in employment. Put another way, almost a quarter of the manufacturing jobs in Ohio have disappeared in the past seven years. Only three of Ohio's metropolitan areas added jobs over the past 3 years and none of them even matched the 4.3 percent overall U.S. job growth (which, by the way, is the weakest 7-year period since the mid- 1940's demobilization from World War II). Akron has the best recent record in Ohio, adding 4.1 percent to its job base. Then came Cincinnati and Columbus (2 percent or less). Here are the job casualties in Ohio by Metropolitan Statistical Area: Cleveland/Elyria/Mentor: 48,800 manufacturing jobs; Cincinnati/ Middletown: 27,100 manufacturing jobs; Dayton: 25,100 manufacturing jobs--one of the worst hit cities; Columbus: 24,700 manufacturing jobs; Toledo: 14,100 manufacturing jobs; Youngstown/Warren: 14,000 manufacturing jobs; Canton/Massillon: 13,200 manufacturing jobs; Akron: 10,100 manufacturing jobs; Springfield: 6,000 manufacturing jobs--the hardest hit city in Ohio; Mansfield: 4,300 manufacturing jobs; Lima: 3,900 manufacturing jobs; Steubenville/Weirton, West Virginia: 3,800 manufacturing jobs; and Sandusky: 3,500 manufacturing jobs. There you have it. That's why people in Ohio say the country's headed in the wrong direction. And why is this happening? Why has Ohio lost more than a quarter of a million manufacturing jobs? The main reason, according to Auggie Tantillo, executive director of AMTAC, is the Bush administration's failed trade policies and a flood of imported products from China and other low-wage countries. The U.S. imported $1.37/trillion in manufactured goods in 2007, according to the report. The U.S. incurred a trade deficit in manufacturing of $499 billion. That is not the hallmark of a strong economy. That is not the characteristic of an independent people. And Communist China accounted for more than 50 percent of that half- trillion-dollar deficit in manufactured goods. According to AMTAC, America can't keep running up its `China credit card' to buy foreign manufactured goods. We need to make things here. We need to be a production economy, not just a finance economy. We have to restart our manufacturing engine. According to Dr. McMillion, author of the AMTAC report: The jobs data tell only one important part of Ohio's past seven year economic story. Yet these record job losses bare strong witness to the depressing effects of record trade deficits and the loss of US production that they represent. Another key part of Ohio's past seven year economic history is the unprecedented levels of household and federal debt stimulus that--even in Ohio--played a vital role in moderating the effects of import competition, outsourcing and job loss. With the soaring engine of household debt now sputtering and debt service payments rising, strong industrial and trade policies seem urgently needed to halt Ohio's further decline.''

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize Stanley Ronda, Jr., of Toledo, Ohio. It is with the deepest appreciation that I pay tribute to the long life of a good, patient, and kind man, Stanley Ronda, Jr. He lived his years in service to his family, friends, and our Toledo community. Coming from the working class and of Polish-American heritage, he graduated college in architecture in an era when that was a rare achievement for a family of their means. Stan was a path breaker. He was always generous with his company, his conversation and his artistic creations. He greeted every person with a broad smile and a laugh. He was an engaging conversationalist and a patient teacher, too. He labored to transfer his considerable skills in calligraphy, architectural drafting, and model building to all who expressed an interest. For decades, he worked for the City of Toledo in the Toledo Lucas County Planning Commissions, from where he retired. I can still see him bent over his light table in the Huron Building preparing the architectural and subdivision drawings for cases pending before the Commission. He reported to work every day, always wearing a white, long-sleeved shirt and held standards of military precision. Once, when we worked together on a project, we were assigned to field check and map all of Monclova Township, Ohio. That is 16,000 acres. Stan and I worked on that for days. I hold many precious memories of Stan during that laborious effort. Stan never asked anything for himself. He was always creating lovely- original works for others such as mailings at the holidays or special occasions. Each was carefully drawn and colored with his signature logo was at the lower left corner--a miniature version of him sitting at his drawing table. At Christmas, his logo would wear a tiny Santa hat. On his own initiative, Stan drew many beautiful renderings of landmark structures in Toledo. When I was elected to office, I commissioned Stan to do a rendering of historic churches of Toledo. He gladly accepted and this framed achievement always hangs in our Congressional office. Though Stan became more fragile with years, he never, ever complained. He always welcomed a visitor with that same open smile. Stan revered the time he witnessed developments of downtown Toledo like the Maumee River Crossing Bridge, the new Ferry Landing, the future Marina District and the Mud Hens. He was overjoyed that day to view his hometown, to which he had dedicated his working years, building forward. May God welcome Stan home; a good and faithful servant. May He shower him royally with blessings into eternity and bestow upon him a loving peace.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Speaker, this week, ExxonMobil reported it beat its own record for the highest annual profits ever recorded by any company with its net income rising to $40.6 billion in 2007, the highest record profits of any company in American history. Those profits are due to the surging oil and gasoline prices that we are all paying. Meanwhile, here in Washington, the establishment sits around the table in anticipation of the President's budget proposal. Lobbyists, advocates, lawmakers, and agency heads wait in anticipation. This year it seems that the President has outdone himself by pushing up our national debt to $9.2 trillion, nearly $10 trillion. When President Bush took office, gasoline cost $1.45 a gallon. When he took office, gasoline cost $1.45 and we were showing surpluses after the discipline we had exacted here during the 1990s, surpluses in our budget of $5.6 trillion. Now gasoline regularly rises above $3 a gallon and the annual budget is in the red, his latest budget as submitted by over $407 billion, and you know it is going to rise to over half a trillion dollars with the war costs. What a story. While the Nation goes deeper into the red with higher gas prices and bigger deficits, oil companies are making out like bandits. Compare a $407 billion budget deficit for our country with $40.6 billion in exorbitant profits taken in by ExxonMobil in 2007. ExxonMobil posted the largest profit in U.S. history, sucking those dollars from our people. While we are considering a stimulus package to jump-start our economy, imagine how solving our tremendous energy crisis could help every single American. We are talking about sending pennies to some Americans in this so-called stimulus package, while these giants are running off with billions and billions and billions of dollars. Where is the courage of this Congress to balance these accounts and to make sure that those who need help in our country actually get it? If you add up the President's budget request for the Army Corps of Engineers, the Small Business Administration, the Department of Labor, the National Science Foundation, the Department of Commerce, and the entire Environmental Protection Agency, it costs $2 billion less to run them all than ExxonMobil made in 2007. Think about that. Let's think about what it means for our Nation's priorities. It is more important for ExxonMobil to make billions than it is for us to conduct scientific research or to clean up the environment or to extend unemployment benefits or to help businesses in this economy, small businesses try to survive, to fix up our levees and our bridges and our roads? Think about the millions of Americans we could help who are facing a meltdown in the housing market and losing their most important form of savings. Think about the nearly 200,000 homeless veterans living on the streets of our country. What an embarrassment. Think about the 33.5 million Americans that are food insecure and regularly go to bed hungry as our food pantries run dry. It is often said that a budget is the real show of a nation's values. When President Bush complains about how America is addicted to oil in his State of the Union but then fails to move our Nation to energy independence, we sure know where his values fall. When our society allows our oil barons to make off with billions, skimmed away from the American people, we know where those loyalties lie. With oil prices continuing to rise, the high price of gasoline continues to fuel our trade deficits. With oil prices as high as $98 a barrel last year, the monthly trade deficit from oil rose to a level rarely seen, $24 billion just in November of 2007. We all know that this FY 2009 proposed Bush budget is an empty shell from a lame duck President, but somehow we had expected more. Congress should reject the President's proposed budget and rewrite it in a way that protects the American consumer, invests in energy independence, and provides a real stimulus for the American economy at a time when the American people are crying for it. Millions and millions of Americans are losing their homes, their most important form of savings. When is this Congress and when is this President going to wake up? Madam Speaker, I include the following for the Record. [From the Blade, Feb. 2, 2008] Surging Prices Pump Up Oil Giant's Record $40.6B Profit New York.--ExxonMobil reported yesterday that it beat its own record for the highest annual profits ever recorded by any company with net income rising to $40.6 billion in 2007 thanks to surging oil prices. The company's sales last year, more than $404 billion, exceeded the gross domestic product of 120 countries. ExxonMobil made more than $1,287 of profit for every second of 2007. The company also had its most profitable quarter ever. It said net income rose 14 percent, to $11.7 billion, or $2.13 a share, in the last three months of the year. Like most oil companies, Exxon benefited from a near doubling of oil prices, as well as higher demand for gasoline last year. Crude oil prices rose from a low of around $50 a barrel in early 2007 to almost $100 by the end of the year-- the biggest jump in oil prices in any one year. ``Exxon sets the gold standard for the industry,'' said Fadel Gheit, an oil analyst at Oppenheimer & Co. in New York. Oil companies all have reported strong profits in recent days. Chevron, the second-largest American oil company, said yesterday that its profits rose 9 percent last year, to $18.7 billion. The backlash against the oil industry, which periodically has intensified as gasoline prices have risen in recent years, was swift. One advocacy group, the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights, called the profits ``unjustifiable.'' Some politicians said Congress should rescind the tax breaks awarded two years ago to encourage oil companies to increase their investments in the United States and raise domestic production. ``Congratulations to ExxonMobil and Chevron--for reminding Americans why they cringe every time they pull into a gas station,'' Sen. Charles Schumer said (D., N.Y.). Exxon defended itself against claims that it was responsible for the rise in oil prices. Anticipating a backlash, Exxon has been running advertisements that highlight the size of the investments it makes to find and develop energy resources--more than $80 billion between 2002 and 2006, with an additional $20 billion planned for 2008. The company says that in the next two decades, energy demand is expected to grow by 40 percent. ``Our earnings reflect the size of our business,'' said Kenneth Cohen, Exxon's vice president for public affairs. ``We hope people will focus on the reality of the challenge we are facing.'' Given the darkening prospects for the American economy, some analysts said oil company profits soon might reach a peak. Oil prices could fall this year if an economic slowdown reduces energy consumption in the United States, the world's biggest oil consumer. Such concerns have pushed oil futures prices down about 10 percent since the beginning of the year. Oil fell 3 percent, to $88.96 a barrel, yesterday on the New York Mercantile Exchange. Exxon shares fell a half-percent, to $85.95. Some analysts said high oil prices, and the record profits they create, were masking growing difficulties at many of the major Western oil giants. Faced with resurgent national oil companies--like PetroChina, Petrobras in Brazil, or Gazprom in Russia--the Western companies are having a hard time increasing production and renewing reserves. As oil prices increase, countries like Russia and Venezuela have tightened the screws on foreign investors in recent years, limiting access to energy resources or demanding a bigger share of the oil revenues. At the same time, many of the traditional production regions, like the North Sea and Alaska, are slowly drying up. Western majors, which once dominated the global energy business, now control only about 6 percent of the world's oil reserves. Last year, PetroChina overtook Exxon as the world's largest publicly traded oil company. Excluding acquisitions, Exxon was the only major international oil company with a reserve replacement rate exceeding 100 percent between 2004 and 2006, meaning it found more than one barrel for each barrel it produced, according to a report by Moody's Investors Service, the rating agency. In a related development, the OPEC cartel, which met in Austria yesterday, left its production levels unchanged, resisting pressure from developing nations to pump more oil into the global economy. The Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries is set to meet again next month. The cartel signaled it would be ready to cut production to make up for a seasonal slowdown in demand in the second quarter. OPEC's actions mean the cartel is determined to keep prices from falling below $80 a barrel, according to energy experts. The U.S. response to OPEC's decision was measured. ``I think everyone is fully aware that having a reliable and steady and predictable supply of oil is a benefit to the global economy,'' White House spokesman Tony Fratto said. ``We hope that they understand that their decisions on oil production have a real impact on the economy.''

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, the recent shocks to the global economy and U.S. financial institutions have revealed a major new source of investment in the U.S. economy called Sovereign Wealth Funds. These funds are the surplus savings of our trading competitors from foreign countries and have been key in bailing out major U.S. corporations like CitiGroup, Merrill Lynch, Blackstone, and so many others that have made terrible decisions and played with the people's money to abandon. Three billion dollars was invested by the Chinese, for example, just in the Blackstone Group. Put into perspective, the Chinese Government, and I underline ``government,'' is projected to have more than $3 trillion by 2010 that can be used to buy our stocks, bonds, real estate, and entire corporations. They're just getting started. Put into context, the Government of China will soon have enough investment monies to buy 51 percent; that is absolute control of more than 40 percent of all the U.S.-based corporations whose stock is listed on the New York Stock Exchange. Think about that. The Government of China literally could buy half of all the stock listed on the New York Stock Exchange. And that's only China. Many people in this Nation and in this Congress would strongly oppose having the United States Government buy control of two out of every five companies listed there. It would be called socialism. But how will we react if the Chinese Government buys those same companies, which is, my friends, underway? Already we see China, Kuwait, Norway, and other nations buying major stakes in our banks and in investment houses, institutions that exert enormous political and economic influence in our Nation and world. Can we trust that those investments are purely for economic returns? Secretary of the Treasury Paulson has repeatedly stated that this administration has no interest in knowing the details of such investments by sovereign wealth funds. The present panic in our banks and financial institutions to secure capital to offset their mortgage and credit card debacles may induce the heads of those corporations to take bailouts on virtually any terms. But we must be wiser. A head-in- the-sand ostrich policy by the United States Government is simply not acceptable. Indeed, it is reckless, and it threatens national security. At a minimum, Congress and the American people need to know the details of those transactions. Thus, foreign governments investing in U.S. companies through these funds should be required to make public their activities here, just as we require of public companies in the United States. Sunshine, as always, is good public policy. And if disclosure turns away investment, then the obvious question is what was the real goal of those funds. Simultaneously, Congress needs to seriously consider whether limits should be placed on foreign investments in critical U.S. industries. Germany, Japan, Korea, and China all do. They understand that foreign economic control brings with it foreign political involvement in internal affairs. In sum, sovereign wealth funds are a large and growing influence in the global economy and inside the United States. They have the potential to buy absolute control of a significant portion of the United States' economy, and that is under way. For the present, we need full disclosure about their U.S. holdings and intentions. Simultaneously, we need to quickly and seriously think about what limits and controls the American people, through their government, should place on such investments. Strangely, last week, President Bush signed an executive order transferring his power to the Treasury Department to authorize or reject such foreign takeovers of American companies. But officials from the Department of Defense, Department of Justice, and Department of Homeland Security objected to the order over the past few months saying it served business interests over national security interests. It allows Wall Street to gain an edge at the expense of national security. This Congress should not allow that. Economic and national security should go hand in hand. We cannot allow lax regulation of foreign involvement in our economy, and we cannot allow our indebtedness to foreign interests to continue to mount. I would like to place two articles in the Record tonight, one from the Washington Times on January 24, entitled, ``Treasury Gets New CFIUS Authority.'' This is the entity at Treasury that reviews these deals. And it talks about how CFIUS is reviewing a proposed merger between the telecommunications equipment manufacturer 3Com and China's Huawei Technology Corporation, a company linked in the past to illegal international activities including violations of U.N. sanctions on Iraq and industrial espionage against the United States and Japanese firms. The Boston-based Bain Capital Partners would undermine U.S. national security, and this is one of the groups that's handling this. Interestingly, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson recused himself from this particular review because his former company, Goldman Sachs, is a paid advisor to 3Com. And also I wish to place in the Record and will end, Mr. Speaker, with a January 25 Wall Street Journal article, ``Lobbyists Smoothed the Way for a Spate of Foreign Deals,'' which goes into heavy analysis of the $37 billion of stakes in Wall Street financial institutions, the bedrock of our financial system, by selling these growing sovereign wealth funds. [From the Washington Times, Jan. 24, 2008] Treasury Gets New CFIUS Authority (By Bill Gertz) President Bush yesterday signed a new executive order on foreign investment that gives the Treasury secretary, instead of the president, key power to authorize or reject purchases of U.S. companies by foreign buyers. The president said the order bolsters recently passed legislation by ensuring the Treasury-led Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) ``will review carefully the national security concerns, if any, raised by certain foreign investments into the United States.'' At the same time, Mr. Bush said, the order recognizes ``that our openness is vital to our prosperity and security.'' Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said his agency is ``happy with the final order.'' ``I think it creates a process that will achieve the dual objectives of promoting investment but making sure we don't compromise our national security,'' Mr. Chertoff said from Switzerland. The legislation and order are a result of a bid in 2006 by United Arabs Emirates-based Dubai Ports World to take over operation of six U.S. ports. CFIUS approved the purchase but it later was canceled under pressure from Congress over concerns that terrorists might infiltrate U.S. ports through the company. Critics questioned the deal because two of the September 11, 2001, hijackers were UAE nationals, and the Persian Gulf state was used as a financial base for al Qaeda. Rep. Carolyn B. Maloney, New York Democrat and a key sponsor of the CFIUS-reform law, called the new order a positive step. ``I remain confident that the Treasury Department intends to follow the law as I wrote it, and have received assurances that the department is already adhering to the new reforms,'' she said. The order outlines more clearly the role of the director of national intelligence (DNI) in providing CFIUS with threat assessments posed by a foreign purchase and adds a requirement for the DNI to assess ``potential consequences'' of a foreign deal involving a U.S. company. However, a comparison of the new order with a draft order from October--which was opposed by U.S. national security officials--shows that CFIUS will continue to be dominated by pro-business elements of the government. As late as last month, national security officials from the Homeland Security, Justice and Defense departments expressed concern the order was being co-opted by pro-business officials at Treasury, Commerce and other trade agencies. A memorandum from the three national security agencies obtained by The Washington Times called for tightening the draft order's national security provisions to ``accurately reflect pro-security interests.'' The final order released by the White House yesterday removed a provision that would have required the committee to ``monitor the effects of foreign investment in the United States.'' One new authority in the order is a provision strengthening so-called ``mitigation agreements'' between companies. The agreements are designed to reduce the national security risks as a condition for committee or presidential approval. The order states that companies involved in a U.S.-foreign transaction ``in extraordinary circumstances'' can be required to state they will comply with a mitigation agreement. CFIUS currently is reviewing a proposed merger between the telecommunications equipment manufacturer 3Com and China's Huawei Technology, a company linked in the past to illegal international activities, including violations of U.N. sanctions on Iraq and industrial espionage against U.S. and Japanese firms. U.S. officials said a review by the DNI's office determined the Huawei purchase, through the Boston-based Bain Capital Partners, would undermine U.S. national security. 3Com manufacturers computer intrusion-detection equipment used by the Pentagon, whose networks are a frequent target of Chinese military computer attacks. Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson Jr. recused himself from CFIUS' 3Com-Huawei review because his former company, Goldman Sachs, is a paid adviser to 3Com.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, while the U.S. economy retrenches, the front page of the Wall Street Journal today reports that former President Bill Clinton could ``get a $20 million payout from a politically sensitive partnership tie to Dubai in the United Arab Emirates, made possible by his high profile business relationship with the investment firm of billionaire friend Ron Burkle. The last time I looked, Dubai is not part of the United States and it is not a democracy. As I read this article by John Emshwiller, I thought to myself, has any President in modern history, but for Jimmy Carter, not used the White House to cash in upon retirement? Further, has any modern President not used their White House connections to build themselves pyramid monuments upon leaving office in the form of presidential libraries where they milk their presidential contacts for millions and millions of dollars? How sad is it that former President George Bush and former President Bill Clinton took huge sums of money from foreign interests like Saudi Arabia to build their presidential libraries? Contrast this to our Nation's Founders, who pledged their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honors to the cause of freedom. Now it appears all is for sale. Today's story is but another example of where our Nation's highest elected officials are morphing campaign finance, governance, and their own personal aggrandizement in a tangled web. It raises to the highest levels the issue of influence peddling and what was done during those White House years to yield such super human rewards. I lament the condition in which we find our national politics. Until the American people hear and understand what is happening, nothing will change. It will only worsen. Look at the disgraceful sums of money being raised by presidential candidates in both political parties and, of course, waiting in the wings the latest batch of billionaire contenders who are just ready to put their oars in the water too. One of America's greatest President's was John Quincy Adams. After John Quincy Adams left the presidency, he did not immediately head out onto the lecture circuit. He did not sell his services to a rich foreign power. He did not set out to enrich himself on the fame that he had acquired by virtue of his service to the Nation. No, it was a different day and time. John Quincy Adams, after leaving the presidency, came back to Washington as a Member of this U.S. House of Representatives. To this day, he is the only President who did. He finished his life here, dying on the second floor of this Capitol. John Quincy Adams, instead of lining his own pockets, started his vaunted ``second political career'' by fighting against slave power. He made it the cause of his lifetime. Just as money power dominates the national political preoccupation today, so slave power dominated political life in the United States in the first half of the 19th century. It was as deeply entrenched as the neoliberal model of international trade is today. When Adams was President, Members from the Deep South had enacted a ``gag rule'' here in the People's House so that anti-slavery petitions would be summarily rejected, as if this parliamentary maneuvering could stop the discussion about slavery and the slow march to justice. Professor William Lee Miller has written about John Quincy Adams's commitment to fighting slave power here in Congress, a battle that some historians have described as the ``Pearl Harbor of the slave controversy.'' John Quincy Adams refused to give up the fight until at last the Nation had heard the message of the petitioners: that slavery was inimical to the American ideal, an assault on the Constitution, and a stain on the Nation's conscience. America must cleanse our political system today of the stains that even Presidents of the United States create as they enrich themselves. The Wall Street Journal article describes how Mr. Clinton is a partner of the Yucaipa Global Partnership Fund, which raised several hundred billion dollars from a range of investors. Who were these investors? How did any of them relate to the policies of the Clinton administration? These private funds do not have to disclose their activities as a normal business; so how do the American people know? The director of this fund is Mr. Ron Burkle, a major fundraiser and backer of the Clintons. To mix fundraising, undisclosed business interests, and the presidency is a combustible mix. The American people have a right to know. The article goes on to relate how Rudy Giuliani's consulting firm has interests in the government of Qatar. What are those interests? And how does he seek to personally benefit if elected President? Mr. Speaker, the American people want Washington to clean up its act. As the presidential races proceed this year, isn't it high time that the campaign finance reform question be a top one in all the debates? John Quincy Adams would not recognize the Republic as it stands today.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, America is embarking upon a Presidential election year. And what are these candidates offering? Some say hope. Others say change. Others say tax cuts. My fellow citizens, what we need for someone to say is we need action. America is being bought out from under us. What do the candidates have to say about that? Nothing. Not yet. All the while, their campaign coffers are brimming with money, more and more, from Wall Street's hallowed givers and offshoring artists. America, meanwhile, is falling deeper and deeper into recession with inflation rates the steepest in 17 years. All Wall Street wants to do is make more money. But at whose expense? These big bankers and fund managers will stop at nothing for profit, even at the price of our national security. They are selling out America. Wall Street's thirst for profit drove the subprime lending crisis to suck the equity away from ordinary homebuyers. It has raided your pension funds. And the latest gimmick is grabbing for foreign money to bail themselves out from bad decisions that are covering staggering losses. Citigroup, the largest institution in the country, has made headlines with its $10 billion fourth quarter losses. As a result, the bank is cutting thousands of jobs and turning to investors from where? China, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Kuwait, to bail the company out. An article I wish to place in the Record from the New York Times states, ``Other investors that are trying to pump money into Citigroup are Capital Research Global Investors.'' Well, who are they? Capital World Investors. I wonder who they are? It mentions the Kuwait Investment Authority, the New Jersey Division of Investment. New Jersey is going to bail out Citigroup? How can that be? Shareholder Prince Alwaleed bin Talal of Saudi Arabia and former chief executive Sanford Weill and his family foundation. The article goes on to say, ``Citigroup said it raised $12.5 billion in new cash from outside investors, including $6.88 billion from the Government of Singapore Investment Corporation.'' We're raising money from foreign governments to pump into U.S. banking institutions? Our entire financial sector is clawing at survival. J.P. Morgan Chase lost 34 percent in the fourth quarter, with $1.3 billion in write-downs attributed to the subprime crisis. Will Tony Blair be able to bail them out in his new advisory position? To which foreign interest will he turn for cash? Foreign capital indebts us more than the face value of the transaction. I thought we were a nation founded in independence. This kind of borrowing means America is no longer free. We owe and our children will owe, so will our grandchildren and our great grandchildren. And they won't owe Uncle Sam; they'll owe the Premier of Communist China, the King of Saudi Arabia, the Emir of the United Arab Emirates, the Bank of Singapore. Wake up, America. George Washington said beware of entangling foreign alliances. He said, ``How many opportunities do such alliances afford to tamper with domestic factions, to practice the arts of seduction, to mislead public opinion, to influence or awe the public councils.'' Wake up, America. Well, these creditors won't forget what we owe. They like the influence they are wielding. They will call in their favors to Wall Street as they are calling in their favors as our troops are staged all over this globe. And to those candidates who were elected with Wall Street's help and their enormous financial support, they will call. The problem is, the American people and the very principles to which this Republic is dedicated are compromised and eroded in the process. Wake up, America. It's a time for action and for the people of this country to rise to preserve their diminishing independence. Citigroup May Cut Thousands of Jobs New York.--Citigroup Inc. is expected to announce thousands of job cuts after posting dismal results for the fourth quarter, when the bank's mortgage-riddled portfolio lost billions of dollars in value. Citigroup swung to a loss of nearly $10 billion in the fourth quarter as it took a write down of $18.1 billion for bad bets related to the mortgage industry, the bank said on Tuesday. On the hunt for cash, the nation's largest bank said Tuesday it also got a $12.5 billion investment from outside investors, including $6.88 billion from the Government of Singapore Investment Corp. Other investors were Capital Research Global Investors, Capital World Investors, the Kuwait Investment Authority, the New Jersey Division of Investment, shareholder Prince Alwaleed bin Talal of Saudi Arabia and former chief executive Sanford Weill and his family foundation. Citigroup also took a net charge of $3.31 billion for loan- loss reserves in its U.S. consumer credit business--primarily for delinquencies on mortgages, credit cards and auto loans. A year earlier it reversed $127 million in loan-loss reserves. Citi cited increasing signs of weakness among the consumer--something many others have pointed to as a potential indicator of a recession. Fourth-quarter losses totaled $9.83 billion, or $1.99 per share, compared with earnings of $5.13 billion, or $1.03 per share, during the same quarter in 2006. Citigroup's revenue fell to $7.22 billion in the fourth quarter, down 70 percent from $23.83 billion generated during the final quarter of 2006. Analysts polled by Thomson Financial, on average, forecast a loss of $1.03 per share for the quarter on revenue of $10.64 billion. The biggest loss estimate for the quarter was for a loss of $1.43 per share, while the lowest revenue estimate was for $6.47 billion. Citigroup was hit hard for the second straight quarter by rising delinquencies and defaults in the mortgage market-- especially among subprime loans given to customers with poor credit history. The New York-based bank cut the value of bonds and debt backed by the troubled loans by $18.1 billion. During the third quarter, Citigroup took about $6 billion in write-downs. It was not all bad news for Citigroup, though, as the bank recorded record results in its international consumer, transaction services and wealth management segments. International consumer revenue increased 45 percent, due to a 21 percent year-over-year increase in average deposits and a 30 percent jump in loan volume. Citigroup's international consumer unit also benefited from a $507 million pretax gain on Visa Inc. shares and a $313 million gain on the sale of Nikko Cordial's Simplex Investment Advisors. Transaction services revenue increased to a record $2.29 billion, driven by growing customer volume. For the full year, Citigroup posted net income of $3.62 billion, or 72 cents per share. As part of a plan to boost capital on its balance sheet after the fourth-quarter losses, Citigroup said it raised $12.5 billion in new cash from outside investors, including $6.88 billion from the Government of Singapore Investment Corp. Citigroup also cut its quarterly dividend to 32 cents per share from 54 cents per share to save money. Shares of Citigroup fell 85 cents, or 2.9 percent, to $28.21 in premarket trading from a $29.06 close Monday.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize Joe Ann Cousino of Toledo, Ohio. A newspaper once headlined, ``Name any art media, and chances are good that Mrs. Cousino has had experience in it.'' Joe Ann Cousino blessed Toledo with her artistic talents, beautifying the world she touched. Mrs. Cousino passed from this life Wednesday, December 19, 2007 due to ailing health. She was one of the most eminent artists in the Toledo area for more than 50 years and a renowned sculptor. Mrs. Cousino's sculptures can be seen in public spaces, buildings, and private collections throughout northwest Ohio, in surrounding states, and as far away as Cairo and San Miguel de Allende, Mexico. Her figurative bronze pieces have won national acclaim and her work has appeared in more than 100 shows nationwide. Born Joe Ann Bux, she was the only child of Mr. and Mrs. George Carl Bux. She graduated from Scott High School in Toledo, Ohio and later the University of Toledo, where she majored in art and minored in English literature. To finance her education, she taught classes in mural painting and glass etching at Toledo's YMCA and YWCA. She was accepted to study at the prestigious Pratt Institute in New York, but chose to stay in Toledo with her fiance, Wayne Kenneth Cousino. Among her most visible sculpture projects are the 6-foot-tall ``Woman with the Birds'' at Toledo Botanical Garden, the 7-foot bronze Outreach of a ``Woman and a Dove'' at the University of Toledo Medical Center, the former Medical College of Ohio, and the 6-foot, 3-inch ``St. Clare'' at the Franciscan convent's gardens in Tiffin. ``She has been such a prominent figure in the Toledo art world, and a lot of that has to do with so many of her pieces being public art,'' said Greg Jones, former director of the School of Art and Design at the Toledo Museum of Art. Mrs. Cousino was a founding member and later a president of the Toledo Potters' Guild. She focused on sculpture but her work included interior decoration, fashion design, jewelry, ceramics, painting, and architecture. In the early 1950s she designed her family's Ottawa Hills home. Mrs. Cousino traveled the world to research art and cultures, going as far as a village in Egypt in search of tapestries made by Bedouin children. In March 2007 Mrs. Cousino presented her last major sculptural work in Bowling Green, Ohio: a stoneware bust of local silent film star Lillian Gish. It was a capstone achievement to a distinguished professional career that began to take shape in the late 1940s. Through the years she became known for her industrious work ethic, indomitable spirit, and outspoken nature--traits which availed her rise to prominence during the 1950s in what was then a largely male-dominated sculpture field. ``She was like a dynamo,'' said Tracey Ladd, one of Mrs. Cousino's art instructor colleagues. ``There just weren't a lot of female sculptors [in the 1950s], and she had to struggle a bit to make her artwork.'' The Toledo Blade interviewed Mrs. Cousino in 2000, providing a glimpse of her persona in which she explained her approach to instructing students. ``I'm fussy. I'm a taskmaster, and for myself too,'' she said. ``People run all over artists. You learn. I learned the hard way. I sometimes get on the case of these young artists because they just get abused.'' She taught sculpture for most of her life, and until a few months ago gave private lessons from home while teaching adult continuing education classes at the Toledo Museum of Art. ``She had the ability to teach them exactly what they need to sculpt a human figure, and to do that out of a lump of clay is very, very difficult,'' Mr. Jones said. The Toledo community deeply will miss the loss of this artistic treasure. Her talent and the generous nature of her public work remain irreplaceable. The Toledo community will remember her courage, skill, and spirit every time they pass by and view her momentous and beautiful creations.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to Col. Casimir I. Lenard AUS (Ret.) who passed from this life on December 7, 2007. At exactly the same moment, the Polish-American Congress was holding a recognition ceremony during which he was awarded with the first-ever Polish-American Congress Medal of Freedom. Casimir Lenard was born in Chicago, Illinois on March 10, 1918. Even though Chicago had an ever-expanding Polish population, at the age of 10 he journeyed to Poland, a country who regained its independence after more then a century of being ruled by its neighbors. He studied at the Jesuit Gimnazjum in Chyrow, Poland. Upon completion, he returned to the United States to attend Northwestern University where he received a Bachelor of Science degree in Economic History. In receipt of his degrees, he learned of the German-Nazi's invasion of Poland. Upon hearing this news, he immediately joined the Chicago Black Horse Troop, 106th Cavalry, Illinois National Guard. This commenced a meritorious and distinguished military career. When the United States was drawn into the conflict in Europe, in 1941, he became part of the first U.S. Army to go overseas as a commissioned 2nd Lieutenant, assigned to the 1st U.S. Infantry Division. As a member of the 1st Reconnaissance Troop, Lenard was engaged in overseas combat duty from 1942 to 1945. He participated in major operations in the European Theatre including the D-Day invasion. He also served as press and radio censor with the Supreme Headquarters of the Allied Expeditionary Forces. In 1945, he returned to the United States where he married Casimira (Myra) Lamot. He worked in the family restaurant business, known as ``Lenard's Little Poland'' in Chicago and ``Lenard's Casino'' Summer Resort in Beverly Shores, Indiana. However, when the United States engaged in the Korean War, he volunteered for active duty, serving from August 1951 to 1957, under special assignment with the Headquarters Berlin Command and later in Chicago. In 1962, he was selected for a 5-year tour of active duty with the General Staff at the Pentagon, where he became Chief of the Army Intelligence Reserve Office. And as the United States engaged in another military conflict in Vietnam, he again heeded the call to service in 1967. After his tour, he was a military intelligence research analyst at the U.S. Army Institute of Land Combat. In 1970, Col. Lenard retired after 30 years of distinguished military service. Col. Lenard gained numerous recognitions and awards during his extensive military career including: the Silver Star Medal with Cluster, the Legion of Merit, the Meritorious Service Medal, the Bronze Star Medal with ``V'' for Valor, the French Croix de Guerre with Palm, seven overseas campaign ribbons (Algeria-French Morocco, Tunisia, Sicily, Normandy, Northern France, Ardennes-Alsace and Rhineland) and numerous other, citations, the last being the Normandy Medal of the Jubilee of Liberty. Upon retirement from the military, he became the first executive director of the Polish-American Congress, Washington D.C. Office. After leaving that office in 1974, he became Project Manager of the U.S. Bicentennial Ethnic Racial Council. He organized nationwide conferences and coordinated local and national U.S. Bicentennial activities, providing many opportunities for Polonia participation. Together, with his wife Myra, Col. Lenard worked on many initiatives to support Polish independence, as the country once again suffered under the pervasive influence of its Soviet neighbor. He administered millions of dollars in grants at The National Endowment for Democracy through the Polish American Congress Charitable Foundation to support the budding Polish underground: Solidarity. He helped provide to Citizens' Committees with urgently needed technical resources and finances. Col. and Mrs. Lenard lead the march toward supporting Poland's membership in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). Col. Lenard served on the Board of Directors of the American Red Cross. Moreover, Col. Lenard was well-known for his advocacy of close relations between Poles and Jews, the two groups that suffered the most under German-Nazi rule. For his work with the Polish-American Community, the Polish-American Congress and the embitterment of Poland's position in the world, Colonel Lenard and his wife Myra, either jointly or as individuals, received many awards. These included the following: the Commander's Cross of the Order of Merit of the Republic of Poland with Star, Commander's Cross of the Order of Merit of the Republic of Poland, Polish Cavalry saber with inscription ``For Your Freedom and Ours From The Grateful Nation of Poland,'' the Polish-National Alliance's ``Gold Cross Legion of Honor,'' the Polish Apostolate ``Pride of Polish American Community Award, the Founders Award and the Grand Cross of the Order of Merit of the Republic of Poland. Myra Lenard passed from this life on May 1, 2000, later to be joined with her husband. They are survived by their three children: George, Antoinette and Elizabeth as well as their grandson Jeffrey Lenard. The Polish-American Congress Medal of Freedom was awarded to Col. Lenard on December 7, 2007. Since he was unable to obtain his award and the gratitude of Polish-Americans in person, it is a fitting to conclude this record of a remarkable man with the acceptance speech he wrote, but could not make upon receipt of this honor: Merry Christmas to all of my dear friends. This is the first time in many years that I will not be able to share with you the wonderful holiday celebration we all look forward to that is sponsored by the Washington office of the Polish-American Congress. Nonetheless, I am with you in spirit. I cherish the memories of our long association together, our common struggles in favor of a free and democratic Poland and in favor of Polish-American culture and the values that we all share.''