Ric Keller

Mr. KELLER

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 491, I voted ``aye'' and I was here. Apparently, there was a card malfunction and it did not record my vote. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye''.

Mr. KELLER

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 6138) to temporarily extend the programs under the Higher Education Act of 1965, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on H.R. 6138.

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume, and I rise in support of H.R. 6138, the Third Higher Education Extension Act of 2006. Some of the most important programs in the Higher Education Act, such as Pell Grants and Perkins student loans, are set to expire on September 30, 2006. Pell Grants and Perkins loans are the passports out of poverty for millions of worthy young people, and they deserve to be reauthorized. H.R. 6138 ensures that these provisions will not expire at the end of this fiscal year by extending them for another 9 months, through June 30, 2007. While the House acted on permanent reauthorization of the Higher Education Act by passing H.R. 609, the College Access and Opportunity Act, in March of this year, the Senate has not yet acted. The Senate should soon act to pass their reauthorization bill so we can negotiate a final bill and have these important higher education reforms signed into law. In the meantime, Mr. Speaker, this extension will allow the important programs of the Higher Education Act to continue past their current September 30, 2006, expiration date. In addition to extending the programs under the Higher Education Act, H.R. 6138 includes additional provisions to benefit students and institutions. Specifically, it reduces red tape for Hispanic-serving institutions by eliminating the 2-year wait-out period between grant applications. The extension repeals an outdated and burdensome requirement that Hispanic-serving institutions document the percentage of low-income students enrolled at the institution. H.R. 6138 also eliminates the ability of schools to circumvent the new school-as-lender restrictions by forming an eligible lender-trustee relationship. And, finally, it provides loan forgiveness to spouses and parents of those who died or became disabled in the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on H.R. 6138 because we must not break our commitment to America's students. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from California (Mr. McKeon), the chairman of the full Education and Workforce Committee and author of the higher education reauthorization bill.

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I will continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, let me address a couple of things. First let me address some of the comments by the gentlewoman from Florida, my friend and colleague, Ms. Wasserman Schultz. I appreciate the fact that she is going to vote for the ultimate bill here. Just to address some of the School as Lender issues. All schools in the School as Lender program may continue to operate as they have been. All schools that have an Eligible Lender Trustee agreement in place may continue to operate, but they must comply with the School as Lender program requirements. It is only fair that schools that make loans to their students under the Federal student loan programs comply with the same rules, whether they provide the loans directly or through a trustee. No student's loan is in jeopardy, every eligible student will get a loan, and it will now be a low-cost loan because of the fierce competition in the student loan market. In fact, because all schools must use the funds earned on these loans for need-based grants, students are the big winners under these rules. Indeed, Senator Ted Kennedy has written a letter to Secretary Spellings on August 1 demanding that this loophole under the School as Lender provision for those Eligible Lender Trustee agreements be eliminated. Shame on those schools who don't want to use these funds for need- based grants for their students, but instead on their inflated administrative budgets. Finally, let me just comment on the work that we have done on Pell Grants. Since I was elected in 2000, I can tell you, I am pretty proud of the record of this Congress, Republicans and Democrats, in terms of increasing Pell Grant funding. Since 2000, we have increased Pell Grants by 71 percent, from $7.6 billion a year to $13 billion a year. The maximum award since 2000 has gone up from $3,300 per student to $4,050 per student. Since 2000, we have had an increase in enrollment of 36 percent, from 3.9 million students to 5.3 million students. And under the underlying Higher Education Act, we have even strengthened the Pell Grant program further. We have provided for year-round Pell Grants for the first time. We increased the authorization level to $6,000, the highest amount in history. We have also had Pell-Plus initiatives, to say if you are a high achieving low-income student, you will get an extra $1,000 your first 2 years; and in your third and fourth year, if you are a high achieving student who is Pell-eligible and you have a 3.0 GPA and you agree to major in math, science or foreign languages, you will get an additional $4,000 per year. So we have the strongest, most vibrant Pell Grant program in history. It is one that we can all be proud of. I urge all of my colleagues to vote for this extension because truly Pell Grants and Perkins loans are the passport out of poverty for young people.

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. KELLER

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I have remained in Orlando, Florida, with my wife as she prepares to give birth to our new baby daughter. If I had been present today, I would have voted in the following manner: rollcall 441: ``No''; rollcall 442: ``No''; rollcall 443; ``Yea''; rollcall 444: ``Yea''; rollcall 445: ``Nay''; rollcall 446: ``Aye''; rollcall 447: ``Yea''; rollcall 448: ``Yea''; rollcall 449: ``Aye''; rollcall 450: ``Yea.''

Mr. KELLER

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the rule and of the underlying tax bill. Mr. Speaker, if I was listening to this debate at home, I would think that we were discussing something super controversial. I would wonder if we were putting a nuclear waste site on a school playground or something to that effect. Well, nothing could be further from the truth. A lot of the criticism we are hearing today is election-year demagoguery. Here is some straight talk. This legislation increases the minimum wage, expands the deductions for college tuition and repeals the death tax for most family-owned small businesses. That is it. That is the heart of this legislation, and let me be real specific. The minimum wage will go from $5.15 to $7.25 an hour. College tuition will be expanded, and you can deduct up to $4,000 per year. The death tax will be repealed for those people with estates of $5 million or less. After that, it will be taxed at 15 percent. Now, most of the controversy, supposed controversy, is addressed towards this minimum wage increase being linked to the death tax repeal for most people. Now, why do we do that? Seventy percent of all new jobs in this country are created by small business people. If we are going to increase the minimum wage, we do not want these employees to be laid off. We do not want the small businessman to be forced with an increased payroll to have no choice but to lay folks off. We want, on the other hand, these small businesses to be successful and continue to operate. It always mystifies me why some people on the other side pretend to love jobs, yet they hate the employers who provide these jobs. Now, how does this help? One-third of family-owned small businesses are forced to liquidate because of the death tax. We want, on the other hand, these businesses to continue to operate from one generation to the next. This is the current law if we do nothing. In the year 2010, the death tax will be zero. In the year 2011, it will go back up to a 55 percent tax rate, 55 percent, even though the money has been taxed once at the income level. Unfortunately, the only family-owned business in America that knows for sure that their patriarch will die in 2010 is the Sopranos. Now, I have been listening to some other comments the other side has made. They said that we are fooling our constituents; that these are just tax cuts for the wealthy like Paris Hilton; that we must be in the hip pocket of the special interests. Well, let me tell you what they did not say. Forty-three Democrats voted for this same exact death tax repeal. Are those Democrats fooling their constituents? Are they only caring about tax cuts for Paris Hilton? Are they in the hip pocket of special interests? Or are they a few people that decided to stand up to the liberal leadership and say I am an American first and I want to do what is best for small businesspeople? We need less demagoguery, less political shenanigans, less pessimism, and what we need is more straight talk, more commonsense and more optimism. I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' for the rule and ``yes'' for the bill.

Mr. KELLER

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to give the American people some straight talk about our economy. In 1992 Bill Clinton ran for President with the slogan: ``It's the economy, stupid.'' Yesterday his wife, Hillary, reminded us of that slogan in her speech to the Democratic Leadership Council. Well, our economy is very strong and growing. We have created 5.4 million new jobs in the last 3 years. Our unemployment rate is better than the average unemployment rate of the 1960s, 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s. We have had 18 straight quarters of economic growth. Homeownership is now at 69 percent, the largest in history. And our revenues are coming in so high that we will be able to meet our goal of cutting the deficit in half by 2008, a full year ahead of schedule. This time let's take the Clintons at their word. If it is ``the economy, stupid,'' then let's be smart and reelect those Congressmen who gave us this strong economy in the first place by lowering the taxes.

Mr. KELLER

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to give the American people some straight talk about our economy. In 1992, Bill Clinton ran for president with the slogan ``It's is the economy, stupid.'' Today, his wife, Hillary, reminded us of that slogan in her speech to the Democratic Leadership Council. Well, our economy is very strong and growing. We have created 5.4 million new jobs in the last 3 years. Our unemployment rate is better than the average of the 1960s, 1970s, 1980s and 1990s. We have had 18 straight quarters of economic growth. Homeownership is now at 69 percent, the largest in history. And our revenues are coming in so high we will be able to meet our goal of cutting the deficit in half by 2008, a year ahead of schedule. This time, let's take the Clintons at their word. If it is the economy, stupid, then let's be smart and reelect those Congressmen who gave us this strong economy by lowering the taxes in the first place.

Mr. KELLER

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to give the American people an update regarding what the House has done to implement the Small Business Bill of Rights. Small businesses create 70 percent of all new jobs. In April of 2005, the House passed the Small Business Bill of Rights which provided a blueprint for Congress to help small businesses create new jobs. As the author of this legislation, I am pleased to report that the House has done its job in 2005. In April, the House passed legislation repealing the death tax to allow family-owned small businesses to survive. In July, the House passed association health plans to help small businesses with the skyrocketing cost of health insurance. Also in July, the House passed four OSHA reform bills to help small businesses with red tape relief. In October, the House cracked down on frivolous lawsuits by passing the Lawsuit Abuse Reduction Act and the Personal Responsibility in Food Consumption Act, which I authored. Currently, all of these bills are stuck in the Senate and time is running out. I urge the Senate to act now to help small businesses by passing these legislative initiatives.

Mr. KELLER

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, the bureaucrats are at it again. First, they came up with the idea of selling off 300,000 acres of our precious national forest lands, including 1,000 acres of the Ocala National Forest in my district. They made this reckless budget proposal without any input whatsoever from Members of Congress or the American public. After the fact, 130,000 Americans wrote in to oppose this proposal. This week, the United States Department of Agriculture bureaucrats arrogantly told the press they want to move forward anyway, despite Congress and the American public. The pathetic attempt of the Department of Agriculture bureaucrats to sell our national forests is financially short-sighted and environmentally reckless. You can lead a bureaucrat to water, but you can't make him think. Well, we are going to do the thinking for you and reject this insane proposal.

Mr. KELLER

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from West Virginia for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the rule and the legislation. I represent Orlando, Florida, the world's number one vacation destination. It would devastate our tourism-based economy if gas prices ever reached $4 a gallon. Similarly, it would also hurt tourism if there was an oil spill right next to our beautiful beaches. This legislation strikes the appropriate balance of protecting Florida's beaches with a 100-mile buffer while also reducing our dependence on foreign oil. That is why it is supported by Governor Jeb Bush and The Washington Post editorial board. The most significant aspect of this bill is that it gives Florida home court advantage on all future decisions regarding offshore drilling. For the first time in history, there will be a 100-mile buffer around the entire State of Florida, controlled by Floridians. Here is the math: Floridians make up 100 percent of the State legislature, but only 5 percent of the U.S. Congress. Would you rather have Florida offshore drilling decisions made by a Florida State representative from Clearwater or by a drill-happy U.S. Congressman from Texas? Mr. Speaker, it is easy to demagogue this issue by saying we should do nothing if the bill isn't perfect. Well, here is some straight talk. We don't have the luxury of doing nothing. If we don't act, drilling will be allowed only 3 miles off Florida's east coast beaches. On the other hand, if we do act, we will get 100 miles of protection for all of Florida's beaches and put future decisions about drilling in the hands of Floridians. Mr. Speaker, opposition to this bill on environmental grounds is not justified. First, the industry's safety record for exploration is impressive. For example, oil rigs in the western half of the Gulf of Mexico endured Hurricane Katrina without any spills. Second, according to the Washington Post editorial board, not allowing any drilling whatsoever past the 100 mile mark may increase the danger of oil spills because it means more incoming traffic from oil tankers, which are riskier than oil rigs. As you recall, the Exxon- Valdez accident was an oil tanker, not an oil rig. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the rule and on the bill, and I commend Congressmen Putnam and Richard Pombo for getting this bill in the strike zone.

Mr. KELLER

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of this bill. Mr. Chairman, opposition to this bill on environmental grounds cannot be justified. First, the industry safety record for exploration is impressive. For example, oil rigs in the western half of the Gulf of Mexico endured Hurricane Katrina without any spills. Second, according to the Washington Post editorial board, not allowing any drilling whatsoever past the 100-mile mark may increase the danger of oil spills, because it means more incoming traffic from oil tankers, which are riskier than oil rigs. As you recall, the Exxon Valdez accident was an oil tanker, not an oil rig. It is for these reasons, among others, that Governor Jeb Bush of Florida has endorsed this bill, as has the Washington Post editorial board. I urge my colleagues to vote yes on this legislation.

Mr. KELLER

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, the more people learn about Ted Kennedy's immigration bill, the less they like it. Let me give you four examples. First, before we build a border security fence on our own U.S. property, we must first consult with the Mexican Government to make sure it is okay with them. Second, using a fake Social Security card is a felony in this country. If an American citizen does it, he goes to jail. If an illegal alien does it, he gets to collect Social Security benefits based on past illegal conduct, and even gets a chance at citizenship. Third, when it comes to in-state college tuition, illegal aliens get it, but U.S. citizens from out of State pay higher tuition rates. Fourth, illegals who become so-called guest workers would get the higher union-level prevailing wage on private construction contracts, something even U.S. citizens don't get. Mr. Speaker, we should first secure our borders and enforce the law, not appease the liberal constituency of Ted Kennedy by accepting his pathetic bill.

Mr. KELLER

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 5603) to temporarily extend the programs under the Higher Education Act of 1965, and for other purposes.

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 5603.

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 5603, the Second Higher Education Extension Act of 2006. This bill will provide a clean extension of the Higher Education Act for 3 months. This bill enjoys bipartisan support and is cosponsored by the chairman and ranking members of the full Education Committee and the Higher Education Subcommittee. On March 30, 2006, the House of Representatives completed its work and passed the College Access and Opportunity Act to fully reauthorize the Higher Education Act. We strengthened Pell Grants, improved the Perkins Loan program, and expanded access for millions of American students. However, the Senate has not yet acted to reauthorize the Higher Education Act. The Senate should soon act to pass the reauthorization bill so we can have these important higher education reforms signed into law during this session of Congress. Mr. Speaker, this is a clean extension that will allow the important programs of the Higher Education Act to continue past their current June 30, 2006, expiration date until September 30, 2006. Programs like Pell Grants and Perkins Loans are the passports out of poverty for millions of American students. We must not break our commitment to higher education. I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on H.R. 5603. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield as much time as he may consume to the gentleman from California, the chairman of the full Education and Workforce Committee, Mr. McKeon.

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I also yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. KELLER

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 5293, the Senior Independence Act of 2006. This bipartisan legislation would renew the Older Americans Act, which is our Nation's primary Federal program overseeing the delivery of services to our Nation's elderly. As chairman of the Subcommittee on 21st Century Competitiveness, I am particularly supportive of the assistance the act provides to our seniors seeking employment. This act includes the Senior Community Service Employment Program, a community-oriented employment-based training program for low-income older Americans. It provides work experience and training opportunities to older individuals to help them prepare for unsubsidized employment. Program participants receive experience through job placements in a wide variety of occupations and industries. In a nutshell, this legislation helps seniors to help themselves by providing them with valuable job training and placement assistance to get jobs. I urge my colleagues to support the passage of H.R. 5293.

Mr. KELLER

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to give the American people some straight talk on why we need to permanently repeal the death tax. The death tax causes one-third of all family-owned small businesses to liquidate after the death of the owner. It is also an unfair tax because the assets have already been taxed once at their income level. If Congress doesn't act to fix this problem, then in the year 2010 the death tax will be zero. But in 2011 the death tax will go back up to 55 percent in tax rates. The only family-owned business in America that knows for sure whether their leader will die in 2010 is The Sopranos. The uncertainty of the death tax makes it impossible for people to write their wills or do their estate planning. On April 13, 2005, the House acted to permanently repeal the death tax. On June 8, 2006, the Senate fell just three votes short. I urge the Senate to try again to develop a permanent solution to the death tax so we can fix this problem once and for all this year.