Marcy Kaptur

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Speaker, it is my honor to pay tribute to a fellow Ohioan, Charlie Vanik, who served honorably for 26 years in this House. Charlie passed away last month at the age of 94, and I thank the gentlewoman from Cleveland for organizing this special order in his memory. Charlie Vanik was a beautiful person. In many ways, he was the quintessential Clevelander--born of Czechoslovakian ancestry, he represented Cleveland's east side and eastern suburbs and did so with distinction and with class. He was learned and determined. As Dick Feigler, the well-known journalist in Cleveland said of Charlie, ``It was all about hard work and humility.'' Charlie Vanik was a showman, but he wasn't a showoff. He was charming and he was humble. He threw himself into public service with a style and gusto that his constituents enjoyed and appreciated. He took his responsibilities seriously, but he didn't take himself seriously. He rose to a position of prominence on the Ways and Means Committee. In fact, he became chairman of the trade subcommittee. But make no mistake: Charlie Vanik never sold out. He never succumbed to the seduction of what the pundits call ``Gucci Gulch.'' Charlie never forgot where he came from: 55th and Broadway had a different values set than Gucci Gulch. Still does. So Charlie Vanik fought tooth and nail against tax loopholes for big business. He never forgot where he came from. Charlie Vanik may have retired from Congress, but his heart and mind kept working for America everyday. On a regular basis, I would get phone calls from Charlie, just to say hello. He was never representing a client for monetary compensation--he always just kept working for America, and wanted to share his great ideas. He gave away his ideas--Marcy, he would say, Congress needs more strong voices to protect consumers in our nation, or on another occasion he would call to remind me to replace the sand on the public beaches of the Great Lakes that had either washed away or been used by construction companies over the years. Early on in my career, he advised me to visit many of the foreign embassies located in Washington to link to diplomats and scholars. He shared his love of life, and always called with an enthusiasm that revealed his joyful, encouraging and caring nature. His humanity was underscored by the manner in which he watched over his wife as she became ill. He never lost his way. His name was attached to one of the landmark pieces of legislation from the Cold War era: the Jackson-Vanik Amendment. In truth, Senator Henry Jackson and Representative Charlie Vanik were actually ahead of their time. In an era that predated Bill Clinton's decoupling of human rights and trade, Scoop Jackson and Charlie Vanik insisted that the Soviet Union respect human rights before it could receive most favored nation trading status. Because of Scoop Jackson's and Charlie Vanik's courage and commitment, hundreds of thousands of oppressed people--mainly Soviet Jews--were able to leave tyranny behind and start new lives as free people. Madam Speaker, it is no longer fashionable to talk about the linkage between human rights and trading privileges. But, if anything, the issue is even more relevant today than when Charlie Vanik stood up for oppressed people. That's why I say Charlie Vanik was ahead of his time. Just ask Wei Jing Sheng, who continues to fight for human rights for the millions of oppressed people in China. Ask the family and friends of Santiago Rafael Cruz, who was murdered earlier this year in Monterrey, Mexico, where he fought hard to get human rights for peasant workers. We see the trafficking in human beings from Mexico to the United States. But the proponents of free trade fundamentalism still deny any linkage between trade and human rights. We see the gross human rights abuses in China and the growing unrest among rural people there. Yet we're told there's no connection between trade and human rights. Despite all the abuses that perpetrated against poor people around the world in the name of globalization, the free trade crowd refuses to acknowledge any connection between trade and human rights. We see all these things and we can't help but wish for more Charlie Vaniks--for more Members like him--genial, compassionate and humble public servants who have the eyes to see injustice and the heart to do something about it.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Speaker, tonight I would like to discuss briefly another case of one of our very valiant soldiers who has returned to Ohio and numbers himself among the walking wounded. My question to the President of the United States, my question to Members of this Congress, is what is wrong with the government of this country when we cannot move the bill we passed in this House that increased veterans spending by 18 percent, get it through the other body and to the President of the United States to sign? What is wrong with the way we govern that the President of the United States cannot call the leader of the other body and say, ``Move the bill so we can take care of the over 100,000 wounded that are coming home to us''? The soldier I would like to talk about is only one of many that I met last Sunday who returned home from Iraq and is not being treated. This is a soldier who saw duty as a member of the 983rd Army Engineering Battalion, Combat, Heavy Duty, in Iraq, saw conflict, came home wounded, and is not getting treatment. Here is what happened. There was an accident involving a truck and IEDs over there in Iraq and this particular soldier had a severe spinal cord injury and injuries to his head. In addition to that, since returning home, has had grand mal seizures, epileptic seizures. He never had that before he went to Iraq. The military said, ``There is something wrong with him. We will give him a 60 percent disability. But we won't give him 100 percent disability, because maybe he got those injuries from playing football in high school.'' Football in high school? He never had seizures until he went to Iraq and got injured. So the military says, ``Well, we will try to fix your neck.'' He goes through an operation in a hospital several hours away. It is very difficult for him to return there, because he doesn't have regular employment at this time and he is dealing with PTSD on top of everything else. Now, why doesn't the government of the United States make it easy for wounded veterans, and we are not talking about 25 million people, we are talking about somewhere between 100,000 and 150,000 Americans to get cared for closest to home? Why can't we do that? Why can't the President of the United States, he is Commander-in-Chief of our Armed Forces, and this Congress, work together in the national interest to take care of all the soldiers that are coming home to us wounded? In that particular unit that I visited on Sunday, there are many, many, many, many servicemembers who have PTSD. Why are they being asked to go 2\1/2\ hours away from home, spend an entire day waiting in line at a hospital, and then maybe coming back home again and wasting a day when they don't get paid at work, if they have a job? Why can't we take care of them close to home? We are not talking about 25 million people. We are talking about a very discrete set of Americans who put their lives on the line for us, and yet we can't find a way to care for them? I hope the President of the United States has somebody listening to this tonight, because as Commander-in-Chief, it would be very easy to call over to that other body and to move our Department of Veterans Affairs bill out of this Congress, up Pennsylvania Avenue, get it signed, and with dispatch get the Secretary of Defense and Secretary of Veterans Affairs and say, ``Work with the Congress. Work with the individuals who are here. Let's get these ill veterans to the care they need.'' Why do we make it so hard? Why do we put the burden on the veteran? I had one veteran come up to me and say, ``Congresswoman, my knee is all messed up. I had an accident over there. Why did the DOD discharge me before fixing my knee?'' Now he has got to take weeks and weeks off of work, which he is unwilling to do, to try and go get an operation at a hospital very far from where he lives, and he doesn't have a support system in place. Why would we do that? Why would the DOD not find a way to take a valorous veteran who is part of a combat engineering battalion and take care of him? Why do we let him fall between the cracks between the DOD and the VA? It is our responsibilities and the President's responsibility to care for these veterans, and we had best get at it.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I rise this evening to say that some people in our Nation are taking notice of what is happening at the Kennedy Space Center with the stalled contract negotiations between USA Alliance, which is United Space Alliance, and the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, among the most talented and trained workers in our Nation. USA Space Alliance is a company that was formed from Boeing and Lockheed, major defense contractors for our Nation, which also have huge space contracts. Their executives are very well paid, and these are companies essential to our Nation's defense. But what is happening is that in these negotiations, strangely, the new demands that are being asked by these companies of the workers is that they have, the workers will have no pensions. Can you believe this, that workers who are involved in important NASA programs, particularly as we transition to Aries and Orion programs, that the conditions of work for people at the Kennedy Center will not be the same as they have been since we began the space program? NASA gets about $16 billion a year. Without question, the United States of America is the world leader in space exploration. And we are a leader because of the bravery of those who are involved in the work, as well as their intelligence and their fine workmanship and workwomanship. We shouldn't do anything to diminish this asset, this national asset, particularly when the Chinese are breathing down our necks and are able to hit targets in space already. And yet, what we see happening is that the workers and future workers that will be at NASA's subcontractors will not have pensions? This is very interesting, particularly because the individual running USA, United Space Alliance, Richard Covey, a very well-known American who's been an astronaut in many prior programs, gets about three retirement checks already, may be getting four. The first one is a public pension that comes from his work and his patriotism in the Air Force of our country. So he gets that check. He gets a government pension from his work in the NASA program. And he had been a part of Boeing Corporation prior to his movement over to USA, United Space Alliance, and he gets a retirement check from that plus all the stock bonuses. We have heard this before, that the people at the very top take enormous amounts? And the workers who are doing the actual work of retrieving the space launches, getting them ready are told, well, you won't get any retirement. What kind of attitude does that produce on the job in work that is truly dangerous, where lives are at stake, where America should seek the best and want the best and reward the best? I was thinking today of the Kennedy Space Center named after President John Kennedy, who did so very much to inspire the Nation to treat all people equally and to better themselves, would have this happening at the Kennedy Space Center. Defined benefit pension plans are the bedrock of retirement security, and over 40 million workers and retirees rely on them. And they give someone economic security to go to work every day and know that your life matters and that when it comes time for you to leave that position that you will have a retirement where you don't have economic worry. What is happening out at Kennedy now is a direct attack on Americans' retirement security. It sends a clear signal that this administration and its NASA administrator and all the subcontractors that it hires, including USA, support the elimination of secure guaranteed defined benefit pension plans, and for no workers, no pension plans. How's that for a deal? What are we going to do, go back to before 1940 again in this country? We built a great Nation when America had a system where workers could be confident that their wages would increase with increasing productivity and that their retirement years would be secure. I would just say that the Nation is taking very close notice of an agency that gets a $16 billion budget whose top executives all get their pensions and now who hire subcontractors who are telling the very people who have their hands on the equipment down at the Kennedy Space Center that, sorry, you don't get the same type of consideration by the Government of the United States. I would ask Mr. Covey and the folks at USA Space Alliance to pay close attention because Congress is paying close attention.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I think it's important for the President of the United States to pay attention to the over 100,000 Iraqi and Afghani veterans that are coming back to our country, U.S. citizens who have been wounded. 100,000. This House passed a bill that increases spending in the Department of Veterans Affairs by 18 percent, the largest increase in American history, which is deserved because we have injured soldiers coming back to us who are not being treated. That bill is log jammed in the Senate. I invite the President of the United States to call over to the leadership in the Senate to say he's going to sign that bill and to move that bill this week. Yesterday, I was out welcoming in an official ceremony the 983rd Combat Engineer Unit Heavy from the State of Ohio. It's a Reserve unit, over 1,000 soldiers who have been deployed to the theater in Iraq who came home, and this was the official welcome home ceremony to present them their warrior citizen flags and medals. It was a moving ceremony honoring their valor and their service to our country. I had the opportunity at that ceremony to talk to Mrs. Tiffany Eckhart, the widow of Andy Eckhart, who lost his life in Iraq. And he was on his second deployment to Iraq. She said several things to me. She said, Marcy, my husband never should have been deployed a second time because he had been injured in his first deployment. He had had a head injury, and she said, I want you to go back to Washington this week and tell the Congress and tell the Secretary of Defense and tell the President of the United States that every soldier who has been in combat in Iraq or in Afghanistan if they have had a head injury, before they are sent back again, they should be examined to make sure that there's nothing wrong, that there isn't a problem that affects their vision or in some way affects their functioning, which she claims is the reason for his death. Now, if we are rotating people through so quickly and we aren't paying attention to the soldiers who are in theatre, particularly the Guard and Reserve, which never get the attention that they should, shame on us. Shame on us. The impact of these head injuries on our soldiers is serious, and with the explosions that are occurring, we are losing 80 percent of those who have lost their lives, 80 percent of our soldiers have died from IEDs, which are explosive devices, or from sniper shots to the back of the head, 80 percent. So the individual soldier is receiving these wounds largely in the head area, or if they have heard the explosive devices going off, they have had damage sometimes inside the head that you can't see. You can't see. So the Department of Defense should have a policy not to redeploy unless that soldier is reexamined. It's almost like having shaking baby syndrome is what Mrs. Eckhart said to me, where after a baby has been damaged, unless they are really examined, sometimes you can't tell that there has been brain damage. It's no different for our soldiers. She begged me to change the policy of the Department of Defense in this regard. In addition to that, I met so many soldiers who had come home because the unit returned in 2005, who had other symptoms that are not being treated. There is PTSD inside this particular battalion, but are doctors easily available to them? No. And are they available locally? No. If they are forced to travel somewhere because they are Reserve members, they have got to take off work. Guess what. They have to lose their pay because they have to go to get taken care of at a hospital 2, 3, 4 hours away from them. That's wrong. Those services should be provided to our soldiers when they are ill, particularly if they have something like PTSD, which demands such careful attention from a neuropsychiatrist and the distribution of medicines and the kind of therapeutic care that is important for them. Another soldier came up to me. He had ripped cartilage and tendons in his knee. He has been home for over 1\1/2\ years. He said, Congresswoman, why didn't the DOD operate on me while I was in theater? He said, When I came home, they discharged me. He said, You know what? I came home. I am now in the Reserve. For me to get this taken care of, I will be off work for week. He said, I can't afford to do that. He said, Why didn't they tell me? Why didn't they tell me to take care of it while I was under the umbrella of the Department of Defense? The PTSD and neurological disorders just in that unit, now that people have been home, while we were at the ceremony, several F-16 jets which are based near a school overhead, you could just see the reaction of the soldiers. I would invite the President of the United States to urge the Senate of the United States to move that legislation so that we can move the resources we need into the Department of Veterans Affairs and take care of the veterans of this country, over 100,000 of whom have come home now who are injured.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Speaker, I rise to commemorate the distinguished career of Dr. Jeri A. Milstead, professor and dean of the College of Nursing at the University of Toledo in Ohio. Dr. Milstead is to be honored by her peers at the University of Toledo Medical Center with a Career Achievement Award. The Career Achievement Award is bestowed upon senior faculty who are well respected for exceptional academic achievements, strong leadership and who have established prominence in their area of expertise. Recipients are also recognized for outstanding citizenship and the tremendous impact they have had on the institution and the community throughout their career. Dr. Milstead epitomizes these criteria. Jeri Milstead is internationally known as an expert in public policy and the politics of health care and serves as a health policy expert to the International Council of Nurses in Geneva, Switzerland. She is the editor and senior author of Health Policy and Politics, A Nurse's Guide, 3rd ed. that is sold on three continents and Handbook of Nursing Leadership: Creative Skills for a Culture of Safety. Dr. Milstead was a policy advisor in the Washington, DC office of Senator Daniel K. Inouye, was president of the State Board of Nursing for South Carolina, and held leadership positions in the State Nurses Associations in Ohio, Pennsylvania and South Carolina. Her research focused on needle exchange programs in the United States and the Netherlands. She has published in national and international journals, is a reviewer for several refereed nursing journals and was editor-in-chief of The International Nurse from 1995 to 2006 when the publication was retired. Dr. Milstead holds a PhD in Political Science with majors in health policy and comparative politics from the University of Georgia, an MS and BS, cum laude, in nursing from The Ohio State University and a diploma from Mt. Carmel Hospital School of Nursing. She is a Fellow of the American Academy of Nursing (1600 invited members out of 2.9 million RNs). She is a member of Zeta Theta At-Large chapter of Sigma Theta Tau International (the international honor society of nursing) and in 2002 became a charter member of Rho Chi, the first European chapter. She also is a founding member of the Nightingale Policy Institute, a virtual gathering of experienced nurses in the U.S. policy arena. Dr. Milstead received the Gamma Mu Chapter Award for Excellence in Nursing. She also received the first Search for Excellence Award from the American Nurses Association/ South Carolina Nurses Association and was honored by the South Carolina General Assembly for her leadership and service. She was awarded a Duquesne University Creative Teaching Award in 1998 for her pioneering work in designing and implementing the first online course taught in the first PhD in Nursing program in the world that is offered completely online. Dr. Milstead served three terms on the AACN Government Affairs Committee, is serving a second term on the Health Policy Council of ONA, and is a member of the Expert Panel on Global Health for the American Academy of Nursing. She was appointed in 2005 to the Toledo-Lucas County Port Authority and was a member of a trade delegation to China in April 2006. She and a team of educators evaluated BSN programs in Jordan in November 2006. Many in our community have sought Dr. Milstead's counsel and leadership, particularly in nursing and psychiatric nursing, but also in matters of health care policy. She is a compassionate and gifted leader who guides people by her own example. She has a deep understanding of the nuances of health care delivery from all perspectives, and is skilled at negotiating the complex system. Her sterling talents, dedication to our community and its health, and commitment to health worldwide have earned her this well-deserved recognition. I am pleased to offer my personal congratulations.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished Member from Virginia (Mr. Scott) for yielding me this time, and on behalf of the people of the State of Ohio and myself, the senior woman in this House, I would like to express deepest condolences to the people of the Commonwealth of Virginia on the passing of Jo Ann Davis, our very, very respected colleague, from this life. To her husband, Chuck, to her two sons, to her granddaughter, we respected Jo Ann as a woman, as a Member, as a wife, as a mother, as a grandmother. We also respected her because she was an heroic Member of this Congress. There are some people in life who teach us how to live, and then there are those rare few who teach us how to die. Jo Ann Davis was such an individual. She held herself with great courage. As a woman, I might like to put on the Record that in the entire history of this institution there have been very few women that have actually served here. Out of a little over 11,000 Members of our Republic who have been elected to Congress, about 200 or so have been elected as women. And so we know that with every woman who is elected, a new page in history is written. It may seem easy, but it is very, very hard. Jo Ann Davis was a part of that new page in history of this Republic. Others have stated, of course, she was the first Republican woman to have been elected from Virginia, and so we know in having met her, we met a pioneering woman, a woman who truly is a first. That took great stamina; it took rare courage and great perseverance. She had other careers before she came here, as a Realtor, as a member of her own State legislature, and upon being elected here, she was then elected to some of the most weighty committees in this institution: to Defense, Foreign Affairs, Intelligence, always a woman who stood tall for those in the uniformed service of our country. She had a warm and radiant smile, and she held herself erect and with a stalwart stance that revealed the strength of character that represented Jo Ann Davis' entire life. You knew she would meet all of life's challenges, and she did. Her faith imbued her with that strength, and it also imbued the kindness that she demonstrated to every Member of this institution, a warm cordiality, and also in her closing days on Earth, great dignity in her heroic struggle. It was my privilege to know her and to be allowed to serve with her during the years that she gave to the people of this great Republic. May she rest in peace.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, what must our children think when they hear news reports about the upcoming Presidential race of 2008, and when they hear over and over and over again how much money all the candidates are raising, $27 million, $20 million, $18 million, and the ante is being raised every week. In just 6 months of campaigning, the 2008 Presidential candidates have already amassed more than $265 million. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, some analysts predict that the eventual nominees will need to raise a half a billion dollars apiece in order to compete, a half a billion dollars apiece. In the last 2004 Presidential election, the candidates, together, raised $880,500,000. The 2008 Presidential election will see the first billion-dollar race in American history. That's more than the gross domestic product of 25 nations. What must our children think about this out-of-control arms race? Don't they conclude only the rich have a chance, that the rich control, that to get ahead, you have to court the rich? What must our children think of our Nation, once founded with the high ideals of patriotism, sacrifice and rebellion against the entrenched view that has now fallen so sick, so sick. A majority of its candidates in both parties run to Wall Street and hedge funds and mega-buck donors and bundlers whose real motives often come to light as scandals. Former Member Shirley Chisholm described herself as unbought and unbossed. Those of us who knew her knew she wasn't kidding when she said that. It's hard to imagine a Presidential candidate staying unbought under such immense pressure to raise money. Inevitably, those candidates have to turn to the superrich or to bundlers, to special interests and unsavory characters who care only about themselves and their special interests and very little about our country. When we start looking under the rocks, it's hard to say what we will find: foreign influence in unregulated hedge funds, foreign contributions laundered through third parties, cronyism taken to the nth degree. Almost 100 years ago, a native son of Ohio, Warren Harding, won the White House. He ushered in a level of corruption that was unrivaled at that time. The dollar amounts being tossed around in the 2000 Presidential race make it only a matter of time before another giant scandal rocks our government and further undermines the confidence of our body politic and our very system of government. We all know what's going on is wrong, wrong, wrong. When I am asked who I am supporting for President, I say the one who has raised the least money. We should be asking ourselves what must our children think, before it's too late. We can act now to curb this out-of-control arms race. I have introduced a bill, H. Con. Res. 6, that reaffirms that the presence of unlimited amounts of money corrupts the political process in a fundamental manner. If money equals free speech, then lack of money equals lack of free speech. The bill expresses the need to preserve, through our Constitution, the integrity of a republican form of government, restore public confidence in election campaigns, and ensure all citizens an equal opportunity to participate in our political process. I encourage my colleagues to join me in cosponsoring this legislation and for Americans to pay attention and call this important issue to the attention of their Representatives. America needs a new revolution to take our politics back from the money handlers and telemarketers. Let's return our Republic to the American people and, importantly, a free Republic to our children.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, the proposed Bush NAFTA expansion to Peru provides no path to job growth in the United States or to correcting the growing U.S. trade deficit with Peru. The Bush proposal will yield the same result: more outsourced U.S. jobs, growing trade deficits, more landless Peruvian farmers, rising coca production, more illegal immigration, continued decline in the quality of life on both continents, and enrichment for a narrow band of political and multinational elites. The proposed Peru agreement keeps intact some of the most offensive NAFTA-CAFTA provisions, such as prohibiting Congress from passing legislation to promote ``buy American'' or to prevent the offshoring of more of our jobs. We keep asking ourselves: If you keep getting the same bad result, why keep enacting more of the same kinds of laws? The agreement even amplifies the CAFTA provisions regarding foreign investors being able to procure government contracts and settle disputes outside of U.S. courts. I find it unacceptable that the agreement handcuffs this Congress as it attempts to protect the interests of the people who send us to represent them. That's supposed to be our job. On a number of fronts, the Peru Free Trade Agreement stands to cause more harm than good. Take worker rights. The agreement merely commits Peru to hortatory, nonbinding language in the preamble to the ILO convention, and it does nothing to assure enforcement through the actual body of the conventions that provide the real protection for workers. There are no worker protections in this draft. In addition, the environmental provisions are equally inferior. All of the major environmental groups oppose the agreement, but for a couple who receive heavy corporate contributions. Would this have anything to do with the fact that the Andalusian pipeline that will bring more oil and gas out of Latin America might have something to do with this agreement? Importantly, in agriculture, as Oxfam points out, ``the agreement will harm many thousands of Peru's farmers,'' just as in Mexico millions of farmers have been harmed who then flock to the United States to find any kind of sustenance. Though some American farmers think they will stand to benefit from the zeroed-out tariffs, many don't understand that the MERCOSUR customs agreement between Peru and its neighbors will allow pork to flow in there from Argentinean and Brazilian imports. So I would think that our pork producers should be very skeptical that they're going to claim the largest share of that market. Now, where are these displaced Peruvian farmers supposed to turn? Perhaps, in their desperation for a profitable crop, they will help Peru reclaim its title as the world's number one coca producer. Or perhaps they will follow the same path as Mexico's abandoned corn and bean farmers and migrate to the overcrowded cities of the United States, legally or not. President Bush's Peru deal continues the bad trade policies that leave our consumers vulnerable to food safety catastrophes. Peru places second to China in its fisheries, and plenty of Peruvian seafood imports to our country are rejected due to filth, salmonella and equally disturbing criteria. Indeed, 27 percent, a third of all Peruvian antibiotic lines imported to this country already are found to be tainted and rejected. Why would we want more? Until now, Democrats have stood united against President Bush's plan to privatize Social Security in the United States; yet the proposed Peruvian agreement effectively endorses and solidifies Peru's privileged and privatized and severely flawed system. Giant multinational banks such as Citibank that invest in these private investor accounts would, under the Peru agreement, be entitled to compensation if privatization were reversed. Despite all of these concerns, instead of holding a formal hearing on such far-reaching legislation for a country of 28.7 million people, half of whom live below the severe poverty line, the Ways and Means Committee instead held what's called a mock markup session last week. There were no recorded votes. It was a mock session. No recorded votes. No Member outside of the committee was invited to testify or comment, and they kept the old fast track procedure where they're going to bring it up here and not allow any amendments. It's another inside deal, because if you really had a full deal, a square deal, a fair deal, the majority of Members of this Congress would not vote for it, so they have to put handcuffs on everybody in order to try to maneuver it through here. Had I been allowed to submit testimony on the record at the hearing, I would have voiced my strong opposition to this NAFTA-style agreement that is destined to further exploit the struggling working classes in Peru and the United States. Unless it results in new jobs for our country and growing trade balances, rather than more deficits, no Member should support it. Any trade agreement that passes here should have mutually beneficial approaches which yield trade balances and jobs in our country. I'd ask my colleagues to defeat this exploitative NAFTA expansion model for Peru.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, when our Nation was founded, its spirit of independence and liberty permeated its creation. Freedom, independence, and liberty are the core of the American spirit. But I fear that our priceless heritage is at risk as our Nation loses its way. We are $10 trillion in debt, dependent more and more on foreign borrowing every day to conduct wars not being paid for. We are energy dependent, not independent. We are dependent on foreign petroleum, 75 percent of which we import from foreign countries across the rest of the world. Most of those places are undemocratic regimes. We are dependent on that petroleum. We are dependent on importing capital because we are $10 trillion in debt. Now we have the highest home foreclosure rate since the Great Depression. The State that I represent, Ohio, which has lost so many jobs through outsourcing to foreign countries, is hard hit, as is our sister State north of us, the State of Michigan. Why? These are all the result of Wall Street draining people's accumulated equity from their largest form of savings, their home. When you have that amount of debt, you have to monetize it. You have to cover the gap. So what do you do? You send letters to the American people. The big banks are saying, ``Do you want to borrow against your home equity? Do you want to borrow $20,000 or $30,000 or $40,000?'' That happened across our country, and now many people are living in homes where they owe more on their mortgage than the basic value of the home itself. We are losing our independence. Families are losing their independence. In turn, the Nation is losing its independence. At some point, you might say, the chickens of profligacy have come home to roost. We witness parts of our Nation being pawned off every day. We see turnpikes that the States used to own and run being rented out to foreign countries for 99 years, and then the taxpayers of those States having to pay for them again with interest over 99 years. And the debt never ends. The latest fire sale, as was reported in the New York Times yesterday, is NASDAQ, one of the pillars of our stock market. The New York Times reported that an undemocratic country, the United Arab Emirates, which is a Middle Eastern fiefdom, intends to buy one-third of the NASDAQ. That is incredible. Let me ask, why would we sell any part of the heart of our economy to a foreign government or any undemocratic interest? Why we would do this, unless we were broke. And we are broke. We are only holding it together with borrowing. If our government tried to buy one-third of the NASDAQ, I could just hear the voices in here saying, ``socialism, socialism.'' It wouldn't be allowed. We would stop it. Why would we allow any foreign government or any foreign interest to purchase one- third of one of our pillars of capitalism in this country? The United Arab Emirates is notorious for human trafficking, for money laundering, including from terrorist networks. And we are going to allow them to buy one-third of the NASDAQ? The United Arab Emirates is a hub in the Middle East for recirculating petrodollars that are taken out of our pockets because we are energy dependent here at home rather than energy independent. Those countries have amassed billions and billions and billions of dollars to fuel their undemocratic oil dictatorships. The UAE has no democratic government, no democratically elected government. Its citizens have no right to freely change their government. We have laws that tell us how often we have to change our Government. There is no freedom of representation in the United Arab Emirates. Why would we allow them to buy one-third of our stock market? Mr. Speaker, I intend to introduce legislation to block this latest sellout of America.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I join with my colleague, Mr. Jordan, in extending deepest sympathy to the family of Specialist Neff, and thank him for his valorous service to our Nation. At the same time, today I would like to welcome to our Chamber and ask my colleagues to join me in welcoming the students from Christ the King School in Toledo, Ohio, 57 strong, who are here today, the future leaders of our country. We have sitting there future teachers, future astronauts, future Members of this House, future doctors, future military leaders, future librarians, future priests, future leaders in every sector. I'm just so pleased that they were able to visit our Nation's Capitol today. To see their enthusiasm and to know that America will be placed in their hands in a very short while gives me great hope for this 21st century. I know they will lead America to years of greater progress, greater opportunity and greater waves of peace for the people of our Nation and the people of the world. I'm so happy that they could visit today.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Speaker, I rise to recognize the life and spirit of Joyce Snowfeather Mahaney who, on June 23, 2006, passed from this life at the age of 59 years and ``started her westward journey.'' Joyce Mahaney was born January 31st, 1947 on the Turtle Mountain Reservation in North Dakota of Chippewa parents, Alexander and Mary Frederick. Joyce was given the Indian Name ``Snowfeather''' as she was born during a snowstorm. Her father died when she was a toddler and her mother and other tribal members raised her. Inquisitive and always proud of her American Indian heritage, Joyce was well-schooled in the Tribal Customs and Laws. After completing high school on the Reservation, she attended Minot State College where she completed a Baccalaureate Degree in Education with a Minor in Library Science and Sociology. While in college, she met Russell Mahaney whom she later married, and they eventually moved to Toledo, Ohio, where she remained for over 30 years and raised her family. Although Joyce moved from the Reservation, she didn't leave it. She continued to have close contact with elders, relatives and friends. Throughout her life she supported her Native American heritage, becoming a spokesperson for all tribes of Native Americans in the State of Ohio and in Michigan and Indiana, in preserving the culture and traditions. Joyce was designated as a Pipe Carrier from the Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians in North Dakota which gave her permission from the elders of the tribe to conduct special religious and cultural services, including praying with Native Americans on death row. It is one of the highest honors provided to a member of a tribe. In an effort to preserve all tribal cultures, Joyce established the American Indian Intertribal Association (AIIA) of Toledo in 1988. It was the first organization of its kind in Ohio and the Midwest, and she served as the Director until her death. Her daughter then assumed leadership. The primary mission of the organization is to preserve the Indian culture by conducting traditional pow-wows, presenting programs and educational opportunities, providing culturally sensitive awareness in drug and alcohol prevention and participating in cultural events within the community as well as training through workshops and seminars. A further goal is to educate the general public about Native American cultural traditions, the desecration of Indian burial sites, and the exploitation of sacred ceremonies and cultural identities. In addition, the AIIA provides workshops in the schools and with local community organizations to maintain open contact with social service agencies and participate in the community. Joyce worked with social service agencies in applying the Indian Child Welfare Act by ensuring that Indian children were placed in homes where they would be exposed to their culture. Joyce was later instrumental in assisting in the expansion of the American Indian Intertribal Association's branch office in Cleveland as well as other Indian centers in Akron, Michigan and Indiana. Although she was Chippewa, she was an advocate for all members of all Tribes and Nations. Throughout her life, Joyce served as an activist in the preservation of her cultural heritage and traditions. She was active in the preservation of sacred Indian burial grounds in Maumee, Ohio in the 1990's and frequently battled with archeologists and museums throughout Ohio regarding the application of NAGPRA (Native American Graves Repatriation Act) laws and the handling of Native American remains. Joyce was instrumental in the development of the 200th anniversary of the Battle of Fallen Timbers in which a stone monument was placed in remembrance of the warriors who lost their lives in the battle of 1794. There is currently activity underway by the City of Maumee to name a bridge in her honor at the sight of the Fallen Timbers Monument in which the Annual Summer Solstice Ceremony is held. Joyce is a published author of two books and was working on a third at the time of her death. She received an award for her poetry at the Multicultural Arts Show in Toledo in 1997. The books include Prairie Winds (1995) and Spirit of Dakota (1999), a collection of prose and poetry about Native American culture, spirituality, and life on an Indian reservation. Joyce was held in high esteem by community and elected leaders, and throughout the years her efforts were recognized. In 1989, she received a proclamation from Governor Celeste declaring May 1-7, 1989 as American Indian Week. Additional recognition came for her establishment of the American Indian Intertribal Association; assisting in the preservation of the Indian burial mounds, the lands and the culture; the assistance in the erection of a historical marker at the site of Fallen Timbers National Park site in which she was also instrumental in the purchase of the battle sight; and her service to the Native American Advisory Council. She was honored by the City of Maumee when she led the presentation as a Native American representative in the ``All American City'' competition in Anaheim California in June 2006, which was 2 weeks before her death. As a result of her work, Joyce has left a legacy for Ohio and the Midwest in the preservation of the Native Culture. The annual Pow Wow which will be celebrating it's 20th year this year, has attracted several thousand Native American and non-Native Americans to teach and remind us of the importance of the Native American heritage. It's 20th anniversary year with its theme ``Honoring the Elders'' seems a fitting time to memorialize its Founding Mother. Joyce Snowfeather Mahaney-- Activist, Teacher, Warrior, and Pioneer-- will long be remembered for the contributions and legacy she left. Throughout her life, she walked the Red Road. Her own words echo in fitting tribute to this extraordinary woman. Walk Beside Me You are the warrior and the hunter and I am the humble power behind the spear who will always guide your shield to defend you. And you are the sister I met near the stream. We sat on the rocks facing the morning sun and cleansed our garments together. When you look into my soul, you will find the existence of a very quiet and gentle spirit. Listen to my footsteps. If you hear the sound of refined pebbles falling softly on Mother Earth, it is I. My spirit can always be found traveling north and south. I follow Grandfather and travel the red road. The wind blows strong, but my steps never falter, as the sacred pipe protects me. Come--Walk beside me. Together we have the power to change the world. For I am not your enemy, I am your strength.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Speaker, Rev. Bishop, it is a privilege to be invited to honor and celebrate the life of Sadie Mae Grove at her homegoing today from Mt. Pilgrim Baptist Church, Toledo, Ohio, September 21, 2007. Thank you all for allowing me to participate. In this church, we can all feel the love she shared with us as we comfort one another at this time of great bereavement. Once in a while, human beings gain a glimpse of heaven in the people we meet. Sadie Grove was such a person. She was loving, joyful, strong, kind, generous. And she was wise. To her beloved daughter Louise, lifelong friend Ada Mae McQueen, chosen brothers Freddie and Booker, precious granddaughters Natasha and Cassandra, great-grandchildren Tyrin and Deiondre, blessed family, friends and colleagues--our community extends its deepest sympathy. Grief is such a heavy load. Believe me, as I know from personal experience, Sadie's strength will help carry you now. Rev. Bishop, Sadie drew enormous strength in knowing you would help carry her home today. She is grateful that we are all here at this moment. In life, some persons are of such strength and texture, the power of their personhood sets a standard of character, not just for their family, but for the broader community. Sadie was a woman of character. Our community has been shaped and imbued with her nature--smiling, caring, building, nurturing others, all of us--a woman of deep faith, abiding hope, and selfless charity. In some faiths, a smile is regarded as a charity. Surely, angels of all persuasions welcome Sadie today as we recall her welcoming smile, extending from ear to ear. She gave us her warm, encouraging hugs, and her gusto, guts, and grace. Sadie did not lead an easy life. Yet she took joy and gave joy in her journey. She was a woman from the working class of people who had to make her own way. Can you imagine the back-breaking discipline it took for a woman to work for 30 years in the old Jeep paint shop, not the new one . . . on her feet, day in and day out, many times working overtime, working with mainly men when she began. She had to be one of the few women with that experience. Then, due to her skills and personality, she moved to the UAW job training facility at the Jeep unit of the United Auto Workers Local 12. It was there I first met her with now Lucas County Commissioner Pete Gerken. Imagine all the lives she touched, helping people transition from auto manufacturing to other fields as the bad economy that has plagued us yielded more terminations and layoffs. She assisted her co-workers, day after day. How hard it must have been to draw the strength to touch each life, one after the other, to give people hope. She helped lead them to a new road forward. That is what Sadie did. Sadie effectively connected to the world beyond her family--she was a full citizen. She embraced local, state, and national politics. I can't remember a time when Sadie wasn't there--at NAACP, the Fraternal Order of Police, The Perry Burroughs Democratic Club, the United Auto Workers, the Elks, and as a steward of her cherished church, Mt. Pilgrim. She was a member of the Senior Usher Board #1. I thought number one meant she was the most senior, for we in Congress respect seniority, but in any case she was #1 to all of us. She was a pillar of this church. Where would our community be without this church community? Imagine Toledo without this church. There would be a huge vacuum here. She helped fill that space. I can still see her scurrying to greet me whenever I visited this church. For how many other visitors did she do that? She always waited for me in that back hall. It was there she first shared with me her dream for the housing development for this church and she lived to know it was completed. The treasurer of your church just told me that the $1.7 million addition the church accomplished was to have been paid in 15 years. Sadie headed the stewardship committee, and the loan was paid off in 5 years and 7 months. Yes, you and we, could depend on Sadie. Sadie made us strong just by being with us. How blessed we all have been to have known her and shared her life. May her family, friends, and our entire community be grateful for her life and, in her memory, may you be given Godspeed in the days and years ahead. A poem by Nancy Wood entitled ``Earth Prayers'' brings us comfort as we honor the life of Sadie Grove: A long time I have lived with you And now we must be going Separately to be together. Perhaps I shall be the wind To blur your smooth waters So that you do not see your face too much. Perhaps I shall be the star To guide your uncertain wings so that you have direction in the night. Perhaps I shall be the fire To separate your thoughts So that you do not give up. Perhaps I shall be the rain To open up the earth So that your seed may fall. Perhaps I shall be the stream To play a song on the rock So that you are not alone. Perhaps I shall be a new mountain So that you always have a home.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Speaker, I rise today in recognition of the achievements of Richard William Kazmaier, a native of Maumee, Ohio in the Ninth Congressional District and winner of the 1951 Heisman Trophy as the most outstanding player in college football. Mr. Kazmaier will be honored at a special dinner ceremony tomorrow evening at Maumee High School, where he will donate to his alma mater a replica of his Heisman Trophy for display in a specially-made trophy case. After graduating from Maumee High School in 1948, Mr. Kazmaier led Princeton University to back-to-back undefeated seasons in 1950 and 1951. He also led the Nation in total offense in 1951, operating as the lone back in the Tigers' single-wing formation. He received more Heisman votes than any other winner up to that time, and he finished more than 1,000 points ahead of the runnerup. He made the cover of Time Magazine. And then Richard Kazmaier made a life-changing decision. He turned down an offer to play professionally for the Chicago Bears and decided instead to enter Harvard Business School, choosing the Ivy League over the National Football League. After serving 3 years in the U.S. Navy, attaining the rank of lieutenant, Mr. Kazmaier went into business as president of Kazmaier and Associates, a sports marketing and financial services company. He was inducted into the College Football Hall of Fame in 1966. He later served on the board of trustees at Princeton University. He was a director of the Knight Foundation on Intercollegiate Athletics. He was appointed by President Ronald Reagan to the President's Council on Physical Fitness, and served as its chairman. Richard Kazmaier never forgot his hometown, either. The Richard Kazmaier Scholarship Program at Maumee High School has awarded more than $153,000 in scholarships to student athletes over the past 17 years. Madam Speaker, it is entirely appropriate that Richard Kazmaier, a two-time All-America at Princeton, will be feted in his hometown, because just last year Maumee gained acclaim as an All-America City. Congratulations are in order for Richard Kazmaier and also for the city of Maumee.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the distinguished career of Larry Weiss upon his retirement following nearly forty years of service to build and advance Bowling Green State University. Most recently, Larry has served as Bowling Green's Vice President for University Relations and Governmental Affairs. He has worked closely with the university's presidents, including its current President, Dr. Sidney Ribeau, always demonstrating honesty, skill, and integrity. During his career, Larry met notables such as Bob Hope, Red Skelton, and Doc Severinsen, but never failed to treat all people with equanimity--affording respect to students, university staff, families, and visitors alike. A native of Canton, Ohio, Larry graduated from Bowling Green State University in 1967 with a Bachelor of Science Degree in Journalism and a specialization in public relations. Following graduation, he began his business career in the Press Relations Department of Libbey-Owens- Ford Glass Company in Toledo. In 1973, Larry returned to his alma mater as Assistant Director of Alumni Affairs where he undertook a $2.2 million campaign to build an alumni center on campus. Five years later, he was promoted to Director of Alumni Affairs. In 1998, Larry incorporated state government relations into his job responsibilities while still serving as alumni director. In August, 2000, he moved to the President's Office where he continued to serve the President and the community. During his tenure in the Alumni Office, Larry served as chair of the University's 7th Anniversary celebration. He was one of three alumni administrators in the United States selected by the Asian Institute of Management for travel to Manila, Philippines to train Filipino educators. He also served as host of a weekly television show called ``Time Out'' on the local PBS affiliate. In addition to his responsibilities at BGSU, Larry served on the boards of trustees for the Bowling Green Chamber of Commerce, the Bowling Green Community Development Foundation and the United Way of Greater Toledo. He is also a University representative on the Toledo Symphony Board. One of Larry's avocations is baseball. As an 18-year-old standout, he had a scheduled tryout for the Baltimore Orioles organization. It appeared as though Larry was destined to be a professional baseball player. However, the week before his tryout, he broke his wrist and was unable to tryout. With a broken wrist, his life path changed and he decided to go to college at Bowling Green State University. At BGSU he fell in love and married Frances Greiger and also fell in love with BGSU. Not only has the marriage thrived in 42 years, but Larry's love for baseball still continues. Since 1995 Larry has played in an adult baseball league and annually plays in the Legends of Baseball League in Cooperstown, New York. This past August, Larry was inducted into the Legends of Baseball Hall of Fame. His family jokes that while on family vacations in other states people would recognize Larry--``Larry Weiss, Bowling Green State University'' and his relationship with Bowling Green State University will continue. He will lead the University's 100th anniversary celebration. Upon Larry Weiss' official retirement from Bowling Green State University, I wish him time to spend with family and friends doing that which he most enjoys as he travels this new road of life. We know that his lifetime of dedication to building Bowling Green State University into one of the largest recognized universities in the state will not end with retirement. Let us express to Larry and his family our sincerest gratitude and Godspeed in the years ahead.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, the Government of Iraq today took the extraordinary step of revoking the operating license of Blackwater U.S.A. in light of accusations that Blackwater employees killed eight Iraqi civilians. Blackwater is a North Carolina-based firm providing private security forces inside Iraq. This incident has caused another international uproar about the role of the United States in Iraq. Here at home, it is bringing long overdue attention to the role of the so-called contractors. Some call them mercenaries, as many of them are paid more than five times what our regular forces are paid. The role of private contractors is an issue about which I have been ringing the alarm bell in this House and in the House Appropriations Defense Subcommittee for a long time. Now the Government of Iraq has been compelled to pull the plug on Blackwater U.S.A. The company claims its employees were acting in self- defense. Many people in Iraq claim the company committed atrocities. Who knows the truth? Who has the authority to investigate? Where is the accountability when it comes to private contractors? How many such hired guns are operating in Iraq? Some say 25,000. Some say more. How many contractors totally are operating in Iraq? Some have estimated the number at 180,000, which is more than the U.S. military we have based in Iraq. Here in Washington, Congress and the President are debating the proper troop levels for U.S. forces. But, meanwhile, there seem to be more and more contractors operating in Iraq. Due to the unpopularity of this war, I have little doubt that the Bush-Cheney plan is to replace our military forces with paid mercenaries. This would be the first time in U.S. history that our Nation will act as an occupying force by contracted mercenaries. Indeed, the contracting out process of the U.S. military started in a small way back in the 1980s when Vice President Cheney was Secretary of Defense. It expanded greatly under the first President Bush, and now it has exploded in this administration. America, pay attention. Make no mistake: private contractors are also very much the face of the West in the Middle East. They might be accountable only to their bosses and shareholders, but they are Americans in the eyes of Iraqis. Blackwater's eviction from Iraq comes as no surprise to those of us who have followed the now well- established, usually irresponsible use of defense contractors as mercenary forces. In fact, I believe that you cannot win in an engagement through the use of mercenary forces. Blackwater is not the only defense contracting firm operating irresponsibly in lieu of our well-trained and well-respected military. Unlike our government, the Iraqi Government seems to recognize this. Today, The New York Times reported that the Iraqi Government said it would review the status of all foreign and local security companies working in Iraq. According to the Private Security Company Association of Iraq, the Iraqi Government has suspended the licenses of two other security companies, but they were reinstated after a review. Problems with private contractors are not a new phenomenon. In December, a Blackwater employee killed one of the Iraqi Vice President's guards but was never charged under Iraqi or American law because private contractors enjoy immunity, thanks to a law imposed by the United States. On July 12, 2005, I delivered a floor statement after Iraqis cheered the brutal death of four Blackwater contractors in Fallujah. I pointed out that those soldiers of fortune are not bound by the same values of duty and honor like those brave young men and women serving in our regular forces, and those contracted forces are paid astronomically more than our regular forces. There aren't just problems in theater. There are problems right here in Washington, like the opaque and often unfair process of awarding no- bid contracts. In fact, Blackwater has won over $505 million in publicly identifiable contracts since 2000 and in 2003 was awarded a $21 million no-bid contract to guard the Director of the Office for Reconstruction and Humanitarian Assistance, Mr. Bremer. Why aren't our regular forces doing that? I have raised questions before about these contractors and their behavior in Iraq and Afghanistan, but to no avail, in a Congress still not focused on upholding the great traditions of the U.S. military, and that means regular force, not mercenary force, not contracted force. Mr. Speaker, the private contractors in Iraq all too often are rogue elephants, operating beyond the command and control system of our U.S. military. It is time to restore the time-heralded tradition of regular forces of this U.S. military, committed to duty, honor and country, not bounty.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I would like to follow on Mr. Hare's remarks this evening and also oppose the pending Peru Free Trade Agreement, which we think is scheduled to come up on this floor in early October. My question really is: With the United States trade deficit galloping out of control, this year it is likely to hit a trillion dollars in the red, as we continue to outsource jobs across this country. Recently, Ford Mazda in Monroe, Michigan, just north of our district, announced another 2,000 to 3,000 jobs gone. Those are not counting all the supplier jobs outsourced. So why would we be considering another NAFTA- like trade agreement here in this Congress? The trade deficit with Mexico after NAFTA's passage has gotten worse every single year, going deeper and deeper and deeper into debt, more of our jobs outsourced to that country. Right before NAFTA's passage, there was a positive balance and they tried to make it look good to convince Congress it is getting better. Then we fell into heavy deficit every single year. We are already in deficit with Peru. In fact, every year it has been getting worse and worse and worse with that nation. So we are even in worse shape with Peru than we were with NAFTA when that was signed. Why would we want more of the same based on that trade model? Now, one can ask what is happening down there that we have to do this now, with the communities across this country, some of them like my own with over 8 percent unemployment, and why should we sacrifice more U.S. jobs to these flawed trade agreements. I think I put my finger on it with Peru. There is something called the Camisea Natural Gas Project. In 2004, that country started exporting through this mega gas project exports to our country and other places in the world. Two pipelines started to deliver natural gas from the Amazon River basin at that time. One of the problems with this project is the number of spills and the environmental degradation that is occurring in that region due to this pipeline. With America so energy dependent, rather than using our power to become energy independent here at home, we are getting ourselves involved in these trade agreements to try to bring more and import more power to this country rather than investing those dollars here. The price of that import of power is a loss of more of our jobs. That is not a trade-off this Member is willing to make. In addition to that, the Peru Trade Agreement, as we understand it, has several really terrible provisions in it. First of all, the privatization of social security. In Peru, under their system, the agreement would allow private companies like Citibank or other U.S. investors to sue Peruvian taxpayers if Peru itself tries to reverse the partial privatization of the social security system that occurred in that country in the last decade. What a terrible, terrible provision to have for the people of Peru. We believe in the integrity of our Social Security system. Why should we impact theirs? In addition to that, the Peru agreement as proposed would affect the access to generic medicines to people who live in a very impoverished country like Peru where over half of the people are poor. A number of nongovernmental organizations based in the United States and Latin America have confirmed that this agreement would reduce access to essential medicines by the poor population of Peru and that the agreement's provisions far exceed international standards established by the WTO. Why would we want to do that to the people of Peru? Moving on to food safety, why would we want to harm the people of our country, because the agreement does not address serious food safety issues that currently plague our relationship with Peru. Indeed, it is one of the 20 top exporters of shrimp to the United States market, and FDA inspectors have consistently rejected seafood from Peru for numerous reasons, including filth, adulteration, misbranding, and presence of various dangerous food pathogens. There has been poisonous swordfish, salmonella in shrimp, dangerous histamines in mahi-mahi. Shipment after shipment of dried, canned, frozen and fresh fish products from Peru have proven to be damaged. Why would we want to encourage more of that? Let me also say one of my concerns about this Peru agreement, as with Mexico, it has no adjustment policies for the poorest of the poor. In other words, the Peru Free Trade Agreement does not take into account many farmers in Peru who are going to be displaced because, as other First World agricultural products flood in there, there are no provisions in the agreement to take care of the poor farmers who will be displaced. Why would we do this to our continent? Mr. Speaker, there are many other reasons to oppose the Peru Free Trade Agreement which I will put in the Record and come to the floor in future days to discuss.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman very much for yielding. As I said with Issa's choice, it is either being shot with a pistol or a rifle. It does not guarantee that once the patent is granted that that person can keep their intellectual property, can opt out and not have it published for that 18-month period. So we are taking away that intellectual property protection.

Ms. KAPTUR. And how many months or years do you have to wait before you get that opt-out provision? Can you do it immediately?

Ms. KAPTUR. Does your amendment preserve the opt-out provision of existing law?

Ms. KAPTUR. Would the gentleman kindly yield to me?

Ms. KAPTUR. I just would point out, in the area of biology and microbiology, the average amount of time for patent approval is over 40 months. So, in other words, your invention is out there, and you have no way to protect it globally.

Ms. KAPTUR. Will the gentleman yield further?

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I just want to place on the record that Issa's amendment, Issa's choice, is would you rather have the inventor shot with a pistol or a rifle? In either case, he or she ends up dead. Now, why is that? Because the 1999 Patent Act required the Patent Office to publish on the Internet a patent application 18 months from the date of filing. But the issue really is, it takes an average of 31 months for patent review. Mr. Issa, I think, brings it up to 24 months. Thus, what happens is there's a gap between when it's filed and when it's approved, and you have to go up on the Internet. Under current law, you can opt out of that so you can protect your invention and not have some pirate in China or Japan or somewhere else take it from you. That is not in this bill. The elimination of the opt-out provision is a terrible, terrible omission and a major change from existing law, and the Issa amendment does not make it better.

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I thank my good friend from the great State of Michigan, the chairman of the committee, for yielding. Unfortunately, I have to disagree with him on this bill and urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on H.R. 1908 because we don't want to weaken the U.S. patent system. This is surely not the time with a trillion- dollar trade deficit to do more selling out of America and to try to harmonize our standards down to some of the worst intellectual property pirates like China. This bill essentially makes it easier for infringers to steal U.S. inventions, and it is truly sad that we are only given a few seconds to talk about this. That alone should tell our colleagues, vote ``no,'' give us a chance to open this up and talk about how this is going to affect jobs in America. This bill affects two-thirds to 80 percent of the asset value of all U.S. firms. Most industrial companies in this country oppose it. Over 200 organizations across this country oppose it, including the electronics industry, pharmaceuticals, small inventors, and universities. And, yet, we just get a few seconds here. Let me tell you what is going on. Mr. Emanuel was down here earlier reading a list of the big semiconductor companies, the high-tech firms. This bill does heavily benefit them because they are some of the worst intellectual property infringers. What this bill does is it supports those large transnational corporations that repeatedly infringe on the patents of others, and they are looking to reduce what they have to pay in the courts. Now, they have had to pay about $3.5 billion in fines over the last couple of years, and it was deserved. But that represents less than 1 percent of their revenues. What they are trying to do is use this bill to make it harder for small inventors and others to file. What does this bill change? It says to an inventor, unlike since 1709 in this country, when we say if you are first to invent, that patent belongs to us, they want to change it to first-to-file. In other words, they can file it anywhere else in the world and someone else can take that and infringe on that invention. It is not first-invention anymore, it is first-to-file. Boy, there is a lot more to say and our time should not be squashed in this House on an issue of such vital importance to the industrial and the commercial base of this country.